tonydee

Welcome Dave. I'll have to find out what Pasaryu is now... I'll keep an eye out for your posts in the other forums. Cheers, Tony

I haven't read it actually... I guess I should get it, as I'd probably enjoy it in a poisonous kind of way . Will dig around amazon later, thanks Cheers, Tony

Very welcome. YMMV of course, and I'm not expecting everyone to agree with all the pro/con analysis I've sprouted, but great to be discussing this and will very much welcome more contributitions whether textual or links to youtube or other sites - great to contrast them and talk it around. So true! This was the one I avoided for the first 10 years of my martial arts experience, despite being the prescribed kick for the taekwondo hyung/patterns/kata/tul that I practiced (and still do). Feels very strange at first. Was Hapkido GM/Co-founder Bong Soo Han's use of this variant that finally persuaded me to give it a chance, and consider it not as simply inferior, but rather something that could be a better tool in certain limited but real situations: particular a less telegraphed front leg kick into a charging opponent, or a less energetic back leg kick after stepping diagonally to avoid an attack. It requires perfect distancing when you start the kick, as the focal depth is small and it's hard to vary the distance at which the kick extends without ruining the power generation or unbalancing yourself on impact. Yes - it does look very wide from the body in those shots - think it's partly the camera angle, partly exaggerating that deliberately to encourage that big swing, as it's better for a beginner to learn to loosen up and cultivate that swing then tighten it up a year or so later, than try to start tight and never get a solid contribution from the "swing" and related buttock/hip movements. As you can see in the video frame of full-speed delivery, the kicking foot does actually stay in line, though it still won't really feel like it is. Reverse punch is a great way to cover while twisting the body to help raise the kicking leg across quickly: exactly what I'd recommend for combination/sparring drills (well, with a front jab, reverse). For thrusting, I do not chambed like a front kick. Instead, I pick the leg up straight into the chambered position: it basically arcs up off the ground to chamber at the side with buttocks and hips down/backwards relaxing into a stretch, then they all contract and sling forwards with the thigh contraction. For piercing kick, the front leg and back leg actions are more similar: to get familiar with the action, you still lift it into the side-cocked position in "step 2" and kick from there as the hips/supporting-foot rotate. Again, with increasing experience the move is tightened with an awareness of whether the power is being retained (even increased) properly. Regards, Tony

Hi Joe, That Tang Soo Do World link really shows me what they're aiming at, thanks. Definitely not either of the kicks I was documenting, and while the leg isn't ever tucked towards the supporting knee or groin as in some traditional karate systems, and the kicking knee is more to the side than forwards, I'd hazard that it's still fair to put it into the side snap kick category, as the forwards lower-leg rotation that swings it up towards the target is done as late as possible in the kicking action. The TSDW link reminded me of these videos: first second. This guy does seem to angle the foot rather than have it hanging vertically at the side - I assume that's what you're saying you also like to do. The "advanced version" described in the former seems very close to TSDW's illustrations, while the second suggests a covering jab that might make it easier to use in sparring. Regarding use in sparring.... A side kicks isn't ideal as an opening move against a waiting opponent. Rather, practice any stepping versions you know until you're very comfortable with it, then just consider using the kick when you happen to be performing the same set-up step during sparring. That way, it won't be a case of trying to make that kick work in an arbitrary and largely incompatible situations, but "oh, I'm taking this familar setup step and I could easily throw a side kick - would it be useful?". As usual when stepping, feed out front-hand attack or feints to cover, sometimes feint or vary the timing and size of the steps themselves. Practice combinations like jab, stepping front kick, and stepping side kick. In sparring, if the opponent has retreated from the front kick fast enough without actively trying to remain ready to counter, then they won't be ready to suddenly stop their backwards motion and change direction or make a really solid foundation for blocking, so a stepping side kick should be safe: even if they see it coming they should still have to do considerable work to avoid/block it and someone around your own grade shouldn't find it so easy that they consistently manage an effective counter-attack too. Similarly, if an opponent is rushing towards you too fast to stop easily, meeting them with a front leg or stepping side kick can work well. (I feel use in sparring is easier with a thrusting hip mechanics, the movement can easily be changed into a hooking kick, after the threat of the side kick has forced the guard down to protect the ribs.) This video demonstrates slow/friendly sparring, and a few things you may find useful: - using footwork and hand techniques to set up kicks - using front and inward crescent kicks to set up side and hooking kicks - delaying the kick just long enough to see which height's not protected - using the threat of side thrusting kick to set up a hooking kick - grasping block of knee-height side kick (rare), and - distancing and attacking purposefully to score a useful hit in almost each attack sequence Things will be a little different with your side snap kick variant, but could be food for thought. Regards, Tony

I tried out a karate class at the YMCA on a school holidays program. I loved it, and the instructor was very encouraging, so I said to my parents that I wanted to find a karate school. Somehow mum ended up mentioning it to the librarian at her office, who turned out to be a TKD instructor, so I tried the closest dojang in that school and was hooked. Year later, I moved city and looked around for a while. I tried some Bagua Chang for six months: think I'd just seen the training hall when walking past, and they had lots of newspaper and magazine interviews posted up to read - all sorts of interesting things about the master's background in China, university degree in martial arts, travelling meeting and interviewing masters for a martial arts publication over there, other stuff. Sounded worth a try, even though there was no free lesson, and each lesson cost more than 2 weeks unrestricted training in my old school. The senior master was great technically, and the style has lots to offer, but the training centre just wasn't geared up for the intensity I wanted, and the most senior students were making terribly slow progress despite additional and very expensive private lessons. Too many Chinese families sending their young children, or older men wanting to keep in touch with some traditional arts more as a cultural leisure activity, without really having fighting spirit, and I think the master had relaxed into that, enjoying his standing in the Chinese community - a regular honoured guest performing a few minutes demo at social banquets - and losing some of the drive evident in some of the interviews done when he first established his training centre and hoped to make it an international centre of martial arts excellence and research. I tried a nominally shaolin school for a while, but it was pretty much kickboxing and I wasn't learning anything. I visited various taekwondo schools but found nothing captivating. I got into hapkido because I called a taekwondo grandmaster wondering about private classes, but he only did group classes and recommended I visit his head master first. I went along and found it was a hapkido class that night - not what I was expecting at all. Being swept and thrown so many times wasn't a lot of fun, given I had only minimal knowledge of breakfalls. The strikes and kicks were ok, but I liked the stronger versions in my taekwondo training, and by the end of the class I was thinking it was going to be a one-off, but the master was so friendly I didn't feel like saying no when he asked if I'd return, and pretty soon I was finding lots to like about hapkido too. The same master taught me some Modern Yang Tai Chi. When I moved to London, I trained with a 7th dan ITF guy who I'd seen at a sports centre where I happened to play badminton, but it was too sports orientated for my tastes. I trained under a more old-school TKD master for a while, but an out-of-control 1st dan was encouraged because he was seen as useful to send to national events to knock around other dojang's students in a bit of political point scoring, despite injuring or scaring off a couple of the local colour belt students, and I lost respect for the master's priorities. I visited a few other places - something like Hapkido that was a bit too hippy to be useful for self defense (they thought wanting something useful for real fighting was crass). A wing chun school advertising themselves as a 'think you know how to fight, come try sparring us'... I did exactly that and didn't find it educational. The master carried on with some completely non-sensical attempts to explain the physics of why a front-facing stance could close the gap to attack quicker than a side facing one, without any consideration for the angle from rear-of-heel to centre of mass. I'd quite like to learn wing chun one day, but need it to be from someone who really understands the pros and cons of things. Various other experiences... a year of aikido, but the 8th dan was too absurd for me... instructors falling over themselves in a great display of the power of suggestion, but nothing to do with martial arts. I trained under Ueshiba, who is much more practical, but felt the Aikido I'd seen was too watered down - I'm not at all convinced that the undoubtedly brilliant insights and abilities of Morihei Ueshiba are sufficiently conveyed and honed through the training curriculum to produce more people of his ability. Almost a topic for another thread: "a martial art only stays as good as the exercises and training mechanisms make it". There've been a few other schools here and there but these days I just train myself, sometimes with some ad-hoc friends from various styles. I'll probably open a dojang now I've moved out of central Tokyo and the rent's more sane. Finding a good school is tough - doing it that first time when you don't know anything much about martial arts, so much more so. Cheers, Tony

I'm still trying to get to the heart of your thoughts on this matter. I think there's some overlap with mine, such that: - an instructor has a responsibility to his or her students because that student is investing time, effort, trust, AND money - and probably taking some risk to their short-term physical safety - in their training with the instructor... (the CUSTOMER bit just emphasised money over the rest, which worried me) - an instructor can't necessarily stop a new student being a bit scared of them, or other people there, but the instructor should ensure the student can quickly realise they're able to train their safely (enough) if they do their very best to follow instructions and fit in harmoniously, respecting that the instructor is there to teach them and others martial arts, and making a sincere effort to receive that transmission Should an instructor be a bit scary sometimes? If it's needed: yes. If a student isn't paying enough attention, putting themselves, or - worse - others at risk of injury, then an angry, scary instructor might be the right "face" to show. From the philosophical perspective I take (Buddhist), we're responsible for attempting to optimise outcomes, and need to make ourselves into whatever is needed to keep moving the other person (student) in the right direction, towards surpassing us as martial artists and people, inside and outside the dojang. Very rarely, momentarily, that's not what's normally considered "nice", or the person we generally like other people to see us as. Sometimes shock, stress, threat, short-term classification as failure is a necessary catalyst to larger progress, getting them both tougher and more compassionate, less fearful and less needy, more energetic and responsible. Requires a lot of wisdom to strike the right balances. Cheers, Tony

I'm still not doing a great job following this. If you have a video camera of some kind, a five second clip would be immeasurably useful. (BTW, you may be able to upload directly from webcam to some sites like twitvid.io, then paste a link here, which makes it pretty easy with minimum hardware and software requirements.) My understanding of what most martial artists call a side snap kick: you might move into this position from another stance, but the kicking action begins with a line through both hips facing towards the target, and the knee extended towards the target, while the kicking foot is kept near the supporting knee or groin, instep rotated skywards, then the kicking knee remains relatively still while the kicking leg pivots around it to extend. I haven't tried to document this kick in my posts on this forum... it's very different indeed and I rarely practice or use it. If this is anything like what you're actually doing, then maybe trying to relate it to the other kicks I documented is a square peg round hole trick.... Italicised the points I'm considering most below.... It is (just?) possible to move through a front-kick chambering position into the side snap kick documented above, so I can't discount it yet, but it feels very contrived to me - a bit like the hooking kick thread describing execution from a front stance (which I do do by the way, but then that's due to the strategic utility and I don't see any in this preparation of side kick). Took me a while to realise "pointing 170-180 degrees to the target" is ambiguous, I thought it simply must be wrong, but I assume you mean it's rotated 170-180 degrees from the starting position, and is no "to"=towards the target, rather than being at "170-180 degrees to line from itself to the target", which would still be facing away from the target. Using this for comparison, is the position you describe like "step 3" with the supporting foot already turned 90 degrees? And her's like step 5? Both could be stages in what I'm calling a thrusting kick. And the 45 degree thing you've mentioned wanting to do a few times, is that like step 4? The crucial element to effectiveness in the thrusting kick is the relaxed "bounce" to get the hips moving back and forward and engage more muscle groups, but the general stages you've described sound like it could be a thrusting kick, waiting for you to get the feel for that subtle extra aspect. Not saying you are, but generally it's important not to be confused by someone telling you to snap a kick out or back, thinking that means the kick must be a "snap" kick in a classification sense. Even a thrusting kick can be delivered in a fashion that has - in the general English sense of the word - lots of snap in that the leg can thrust out and be pulled back very quickly, i.e. "snappishly". If I've followed you at all - which I think unlikely - then the highlighted horizontal above would be a typo, and you meant vertical, as you did talk about a front-kick like vertical chamber above? At the point where you're chambered, would the target be able to see your back, chest, or only the shoulder? I assume from what you say about the heels being parallel and the supporting foot having rotated past ninety degrees that your back is at least partially visible to the target... which seems to mesh with thusting kick step 4 in the photos above. Just wondering, could it be that you're lifting your leg using the muscles on the "outside" of the hip? That would be slow and frustrating. If you lean back a bit more while kicking, and use the hips to raise the leg, does the kick feel more natural? You could try that with a stepping motion, a bit like and see if it helps, though it then takes a lot of practice to perfect getting the same feeling and speed from a back leg kick. Yes - that video bothered me for the same reason. Leaving the foot unrotated (ala piercing kick) while trying to get that kind of line on the leg extension (ala thrusting kick) is just mixing things that don't combine well. Could be good to tell her it's feeling awkward, and ask her to have a look and offer a tip or two, or some different exercises to target whatever is wrong.... Cheers, Tony

I don't have a lot of experience with gangs, but there's definitely a stereotype of a loud-mouthed frontman who's trying to impress the rest - especially the dominant guy at the back - by being in there first and either acting the clown or being incredibly vicious when the fighting does start, reasoning that if some attack fails they can rush back into the group for safety, or have the group come to their aid. Someone might put themselves in this position precisely because they're smaller than you and the "bravery" - as much as the term can be used when backed up by a gang and facing a single person - is therefore more likely to improve their standing within the gang. The others might actually be sitting back waiting to see whether he's taken out... it won't deter them at all... the display is more for their amusement anyway, and if he is taken out they'll feel more justified (if they ever had any inhibition) in a concerted retaliation.... More generally, I agree with everyone that it's good - perhaps even essential in order to end things - to get to the "alpha" guy, but may not be practical initially... you do what ever seems statistically optimal. I heard somewhere (now, how reliable does that sound) that a core strategy of legendary samurai Musashi was to draw a couple enemies away from their group at a time, dispatch them then return to lure a couple more...? If you have time, chipping away at whatever's available is increasing the long term odds. If you have limited room and time, more risk is called for. Cheers, Tony

Just to offer up a twist to the discussion... I was once attacked in what might be termed a "hate" crime, singled out for being different from the attacker. Such crimes can be based on myriad things: social status, apparent wealth, sexuality, dress sense, race, age etc., but the psychology of it was simple: the aggressor was about 10cm taller and 20 or 30kgs heavier, and when I dared to question his behaviour in throwing food towards me, took it for granted he could charge me and level me with a haymaker. Not likely. My gentle gliding side kick - deliberately slowed down with flat-of-the-foot contact spread across his chest to avoid serious damage - picked him up and threw him back several meters through the air, where he spent a few minutes on his back - sometimes releasing a torrent of hateful abuse - before tentatively regaining his feet. I stood in a guarding stance which he mimicked, but after a minute of waiting he dropped that, and we returned to a normal standing position. When he looked down at the kebab somehow still in his hand, I warned him that if continued to throw food I'd really let him have it (not my exact words, to be honest). He dropped it on the ground, swore at me a little more, then said he was a little drunk and there was no need for me to go hitting him. I said he should do himself a favour and leave (the latter not my exact phrasing either). He did. I do hope that in obviously using less force than I easily could have, and not backing down or appearing weak where he expected it, he might reconsider his attitudes. That's probably optimistic, but fighting hatred with hatred or violence can be too, and some display of dignity and an ability to command respect might hopefully have broken a negative cycle somewhere in his dim little mind. Cheers, Tony

Some good points in here about familiarity / comfort levels etc.. I also appreciate this point... In my thankfully few street brawls, of kicks I've found gliding side kicks very useful as they allowed me to close the gap unexpectedly and stop a closing opponent. It's probably my best kick, and often used in sparring, so I'm familiar with the potential outcomes. At close quarters I've used my hands. But, I've never felt even vaguely threatened during a street fight: endorphines are wonderful - even the threat of a knife seems so ho-hum - and compared to sparring a senior it's been so terribly easy, seemingly slow motion. I've not felt the need to do anything particularly vicious, just countering the immediate threat (at most by knocking them down for a minute or two with a dull thudding impact over a large surface area like the chest, not breaking anything or causing any bleeding), waiting around to see if the opponent really wants to keep going (not recommended, but retreating from an unprovoked attack isn't really in my nature any more than viciousness is), and after a while they've invariably decided it's not in their best interests to pursue the matter. Generally though, in the spirit of the thread, I'd feel most comfortable with front thrusting kick with the ball of the foot, striking the shin or knee from further away, or the floating rib or solar plexus when closer. It requires very little space to deliver, and can be used from a front-facing or side-on stance. It should not be delivered while the opponent is still too far away and an over-commitment would be required: patience and distancing is important when kicking. Compared to a roundhouse, front kick can be delivered more directly with less telegraphing or hip wind up, as the kicking leg gains power by moving away from the existing centre of mass: always faster than beginning a rotation. From a casual frontal stance with feet parallel, it is the least telegraphed kick, requiring no leaning of the torso to deliver at that height. With a back leg turning/roundhouse, you're also more vulnerable to counter attack during the crucial mid-kick moment when you've put energy into squaring your body. Linear movements are harder to block or catch than rotational movements: it takes timing in moving something across the line of the attack, and the right distance and direction to deflect, rather than just lifting something into the line at any point in time prior to impact. A roundhouse can be neutered by very minimal movements - moving weight off the target leg, raising it, twisting it to ensure contact with a less sensitive part than the common peroneal or side of knee. Note that a linear thrusting action is different from an upward kick to the groin, which is a rotational movement and more liable to being caught... even if you "score" to some extent, the person may squeeze their legs around yours and you're more likely to end up on the ground or otherwise compromised. Rather, the linear movement raises the knee higher and moves the ball of the foot out in a near-straight line. A low to mid-height front kick is also excellent in that it is easy to keep both hands ready for follow up. If you don't overcommit, you can quickly shift enough weight over the kicking leg to counter any grabbing attempt, while feeding in hand techniques. Cheers, Tony

from Taekwondo Times, Jan 2000: --- TKDTimes: You and Mas Oyama once worked together trying to develop Taekwon-Do, but this partnership was not successful. Choi Hong Hi: In 1966, returning from a visit to the United States, I stopped in Tokyo. A friend of mine told me that Mas Oyama was in the process of becoming a Japanese citizen. As you know, Mas Oyama was born in Korea. He left his home at an early age and spent most of his life in Japan as a Korean National. I decide to see him to try to stop him from becoming a Japanese citizen. First, I praised his achievements in Karate and then told of the life of his brother in Korea. I told him that Korea needed men like him and that he should come back to Korea. We should work together to promote Taekwon-Do. And that if he did so, his name would be known Korean history. Master Oyama told me he understood what I had told him and then he went home, promising to see me tomorrow. The next morning, I heard from Mr Lee, Sung Woo, a good friend of Master Oyama. Master Oyama had visited Mr Lee after we had talked the previous evening. And he told Mr Lee, "I was born in Korea, but came to Japan at an early age. And with the help of Prime Minister Sato, I achieve the success I have today. The Prime Minister has encouraged me to become a Japanese citizen." After speaking with Mr Lee, I thought that Master Oyama was wavering about his decision to become a Japanese citizen. So, I invited Master Oyama to Korea. We visited Seoul and the DMZ. I arranged for a Taekwon-Do demonstration for him. Later we went to his hometown where he was reunited with his brothers and relatives. I also arranged for him to be interviewed on KBS TV. Before returning to Japan, he told me at the Kimpo Airport, "As a simpleminded man, I don't think that I can survive in this kind of environment." And then he left Korea. Even though we went our separate ways, we vowed to become blood brothers. I am the elder brother and Mas Oyama is my younger brother. ---- To my mind, much of this - and that last and completely unnecessary comment in particular - speaks volumes about the humility, dignity and sense of Master Oyama, and the ego and political point scoring of Choi Hong Hi. Cheers, Tony

That I didn't know! Cheers, Tony

Hi Joe, I know you've noticed the posts about side kick in another thread. I can't quite imagine what you're doing - so much depends on whether you're leg's hanging down at 45 degrees before or after a rotation of the supporting foot and/or hips, whether it's pointing sideways or forwards, and whether you're delivering a side thrusting kick or a side piercing kick. Perhaps you can relate it to the two techniques I outline in the other thread, or the side snap kick I link to from there...? I can understand you wanting to know, but I do think regardless of what you happen to conclude is better based on information from here or elsewhere, you've got to accept what your instructor tells you when you're in her class. That you're so impressed with her performance also suggests that either you're not ready to judge her, or she's right! Sometimes we have to consider the totality of things too, our instructor might not be the best at everything, but getting bogged down on one detail can keep your focus off learning what is there and worthwhile. This is especially true when learning a new art as an advanced practitioner of another, but I still find it hard to swallow. So, if the side kick doesn't feel right in a couple years when you're all over the general curriculum, you can revisit the issue. As I mention in my other thread too, there can be differences between the idealised way a technique is practised slowly and the proper full-speed execution, so think about what you're being asked to do as an exercise if it helps. Note: my audio's not working right now - so haven't listened to the explanations - only critiquing the performance. Her in-air performance looked a bit like the "piercing kick" described in the other thread I linked above, delivered at a target perhaps 30 degrees forward of perpendicular to the camera's line of sight (i.e. forward of sideways for her). But, she kicks directly sideways using a very different motion when she breaks the board, and if you watch the knot of her belt you'll see it doesn't rotate into the kick at all - not good. Only her thigh and, to a useful but far from optimal extent her general body weight, were contributing. Her supporting foot is not shown by the camera. It's interesting to note that the board is being held loosely at the sides, whereas - for side kick - a board would normally be held at top and bottom (with the grain still horizontal)... she broke it anyway, but it was a thin board. His supporting foot and hip movement is that I recommend for a side piercing kick: both rotating during the extension of the kicking leg. This is at odds with the positioning of the kicking leg, as he brings it across the body to the point where the hip rotation doesn't push the kicking leg through the target. It's kind of twisted on itself in the middle, failing to drive the leg in with full power, and leaving room for some reaction from impact to return through the leg and out the side of his hips, unbalancing him, rather than having the body weight and hip motion fully behind and supportive of the kick. I critiqued this one in the linked thread. I doubt that it's a traditional vs evolutionary difference, but can't be certain without seeing video of your kick and your instructor's. It's part of many traditional training systems to try to break a kick down into set steps so they can be easily practised. Given the final movement may be seamless, exactly where the steps are places can be somewhat arbitrary. I'm not sure if the difference you're concerned about is as simple as that: that you like pivoting a bit more in anticipation of the kick to come, or whether you're genuinely following a different path through the whole movement. Interesting point. More true in traditional schools, precisely because they do break the technique down into small steps and expect everyone to do them the same way. In many modern schools, people just kick however they first felt comfortable doing, and their instructor has only an incidental influence. Especially common for kicks like turning/roundhouse kick: one of the reasons so many martial sports only retain these kicks is that it doesn't take as much skill or effort to teach them, and they rely a lot of brute strength and speed, which the student knows they can develop through hard work alone - rather than taxing the instructor's ability to discern issues and find useful tips to prevent the student getting frustrated. If your school is internally consistent - even between your instructor and her's - then it suggests higher standards than average. Requiring someone to learn the textbook form is generally a good idea, as different technique can have consequences re counter-attacks, stability when blocked or grasped, recovery time, and ability to flow into subsequent techniques. These implications might be hard to grasp for a beginner. And, if you learn the technique as suggested, then revert to you're own form afterwards, it will mean a lot more for having come from an informed perspective. Cheers, Tony

I agree with your interpretation of the thrust of Bruce's approach. I disagree with his conclusions. I think the problem is that too often instructors don't know, let alone teach, the core skills that enable a family of movements to be mastered, and an optimal selection made based on a momentary situation. They get so caught up in enumerating a few points on the outside of the circle, while keeping the crucial inner area opaque. This is so unnecessary! But, it's nothing to do with using set forms versus ad-hoc freeform drills. It's just that - in some systems - the set forms weren't addressing the training needs squarely. For example, most people learning TKD employ no significant use of body mechanics while executing patterns. Given I think anyone posting themselves on youtube is inviting critique, positive or otherwise, take this for an example: a 5th dan from Poland - where I know ITF is very strong with many North Korean instructors, and I know from personal experience there are some savagely powerful and fast kickers produced - executing a yellow belt pattern, but if you watch the knot on his belt carefully as he executes movements you'll see it barely rotates with the movements. It's pretty obvious that he's not employing sine wave technique to any meaningful degree. How can his training exercises not have developed him past that stage? How can it go uncorrected by his seniors after so many years of training? I'm so sick of it, I have moved the core hip rotation movement down to white belt level. That required distilling the essence into a simple movement. The way I make them practice it is by standing in a forward/walking stance, keeping the hips level, back foot facing nearly forwards, rotating the hips as the back knee bends and straightens. It's demonstrated perfectly here. As well as this hands-on-hips version, I use a "swinging arms" version as it encourages the student to relax and turn further in both directions, getting more explosive force, as well as giving them more direct feedback on the extent of explosiveness in the way the arms are ripped around by the hip movement. A similar arm movement is used to train fa jing explosiveness in some tai chi and chi gung systems. I'm not saying the ITF should do this exact exercise - for better or worse they have their own mechanics - but I'm saying that if traditional arts don't teach the core essence of whatever they do have, at least in a reasonable timeframe (by black belt), then they deserve to have people give up on them. As for the thread topic, I think 99.5% of the people creating their own styles shouldn't consider them a new style per se, just tell students they're teaching a mix of whatever it happens to be. If they've integrated the arts is some profound new way, changing each at strategic and technical levels to help set up the other, and assuming there's no existing martial art that doesn't already do as well or better at the same kind of hybrid space, then it becomes vaguely reasonable, but there's no need for them to call themselves a 10th dan grandmaster at 30 years of age, as many do. There are also a few people who train in some style, then find issues with it, evolve it but aren't allowed to teach their modifications within their organisation, and in branching out are forced to take a new name for legal or political reasons. Again, if they don't have an attitude problem about it represent themselves as the new Einstein of martial arts, it doesn't bother me. There are also people like me who don't have a good name for what they do, don't have anyone to grade them, and are vaguely frustrated but don't care that much. I've met precisely one person who had actually done the leg work (with master level credentials from top masters in about five diverse arts and black belts in a few more) and research (e.g. a comprehensive technique by technique, point by point critique of scores of core techniques as executed by each of the (3?) major international hapkido federations, and their equivalents in tai chi, shaolin chin na, various jujitsu systems and aikido). Obsessive. And, realising he believed the hapkido he was teaching had to evolve to be practical and that he couldn't do it from within his international parent organisation, he created his own style. His Hapkido grandmaster supported him in doing this. His new style is genuinely and fundamentally different from any other art I've ever seen, in guarding stances, strategies and tactics: a bit like wing chun in having frontal stances and simultaneous use of both hands, mixed with hapkido/chin-na joint locks and JKDish interception principals. I personally think it needed a bit of rough-and-tumble maturing and pruning, but entirely credible as a new martial art. Cheers, Tony

Personally, I found one or two of my old instructors pretty scary, but that doesn't mean they weren't great instructors or were uncaring or vicious in any way... it was more like feeding the tiger at the zoo... you know it won't hurt you from the other side of the bars, but it's just a really obviously dangerous thing and the sheer physicality and competence radiated is profound and initially unfamiliar. But, the real reason I responded was the "instructors MUST respect students because they're CUSTOMERS" bit. I don't buy into that at all, and make no compromises. I think if an instructor treats students that way, other students that don't abuse that financial consideration will lose respect for the instructor. But, I've never needed martial arts as my primary income source, and I think the public's understanding of deeper-than-financial service providers and mutual obligations is healthier in some countries/cultures than others, so each to their own reality. Cheers, Tony

Quoting this as it's a good point of departure. Quite agree about the importance of seeing if their will to fight can be broken, but if not... I don't think the amount of physical effort matters as much as the certainty of the outcome: movements should be chosen to effectively exploit weaknesses in the most statistically safe and effective fashion, even if that's through brute force. So perhaps less mental effort, as you look to exploit the weaknesses that are there even if it takes a bit more physical effort, as long as that's well within your capabilities. For me, perhaps the core skill in martial arts is being able to move towards a waiting opponent, having sized up his/her guard and any movements he/she is making, and consistently penetrate that guard to place a decisive strike. This is crucial for fighting multiple opponents - you must be able to change directions unexpectedly and plough through the people in your way, moving towards them in a way that covers all their potential avenues of attack while creating one of your own. As you close, whether you have to use an unbalancing tap to their front leg, grasp their front hand to pull them out of position or keep them in position, feint, block or dodge just doesn't matter, as long as by the time you get to them the path is clear for that incapacitating strike, break, sweep or throw. It must be a seamless flow that doesn't compromise your footwork and mobility, as maintaining that is essential for avoiding other opponents who may be trying to close in from behind. It's easy in sparring to sit back and take your time, picking off an opponent as they make mistakes. It's harder to attack them decisively at times that are largely predictable to them (though with multiple-opponents your footwork should be used to try to catch them unexpectedly), but it's something martial artists really should force themselves to attempt, despite the risks of coping a few extra blows while learning the craft. As for the strike itself, I see no big issue in whether a single strike can be sufficient for the job. Many strikes have enormous power and should be sufficient, but when/if they're not you keep fighting. I train my strikes to maximise the power, consciously checking all aspects of their power generation, testing them on various targets. There is nothing more I can do, and I don't lose any sleep over it. Is this what ikken hissatsu means/meant to those that employ the phrase? I've no idea, but it's all that's important to me in considering how to deliver a decisive strike. To talk of striking without talking of neutralising and penetrating the guard is meaningless. Cheers, Tony

I don't think it's practical to expect an average journalist to dig down to the truth of the origins of taekwondo, or understand how significant the changes have been since it forked from karate. It is interesting to hear that karate is used generically in the USA, and if that's true the mistake is understandable. It's also true that different schools change at different paces - my TKD style has moved closer to traditional karate the longer I've trained, to the point where I dislike using the term TKD as it's less widely communicative of what I do, but feel I can't use karate as it's presumptuous and unfair to the karate establishment. I should join an actual karate school, learn some traditional kata, and get over the whole thing, but my habits are so ingrained and I'm stubborn, so it's hard to "empty the cup" for a closely-related style, and I'd only do it if I believed it superior to what I already know. Given that the taekwondo has an ancient connection with Chinese arts, hundreds of years of Okinawan practice, 30-odd in Japan, then for my branch - 10 or 20 in Korea, then 20 in Australia before I started learning, all the significant people who directly taught me taekwondo were not Korean, and I've lived and taught in London and Japan for 10 years, it's hard to see why the Korean aspect should be singled out as characterising the art. I personally believe stripping the Okinawan kata and removing the hip mechanics were the biggest changes Korea contributed, and both very negative ones, although I think there are numerous more subtle changes that were beneficial. I also feel very annoyed that so many taekwondo schools lie about the origins of the art... I've put in my years of blindly defending the "taekwondo is not karate" line, believing what I'd been told about connections to hwarangdo and taekkyon. It's also worth pointing out that - as nominally Korean stylists - we're complaining about TKD being mistermed Karate on "karateforums.com" ;-P. To answer the question: I used to be bothered about semantics, but I'm not any more. I think the implications of the phrase "martial arts" is more pervasive and important in shaping public opinion about what we do, and our own prejudices about what we ought to be doing, than the taekwondo vs karate distinction, and I've gotten over that too. Regards, Tony

Old thread, so probably too late to help the OP, but thought I'd add my thoughts. The taekwondo community is a huge sprawling mess of schools with such varied backgrounds and emphasis, teaching just about every variation of even the art/sport's core techniques: not just the strikes and blocks, even the body mechanics and stances. To taekwondo, Hosin Sul is an afterthought - both defence against grabs and weapons - where a few instructors who generally cross-trained in Hapkido were asked to demo some stuff to make taekwondo seem more complete. It's like the average taekwondo master trying to teach meditation, nutrition, philosophy, grappling, chi/ki exercises, weapons, or reiki-like healing - there's no particular reason to think they'll know as much as a beginner who's spent a few months in a system specialised in those things. But, a few "masters" feel it adds to their mystique to be dispensing advice about such things, sometimes to all the students, other times exclusively to the higher dan grades who've already seen whatever technical aspects the master had to teach. Similarly, some taekwondo instructors advertise that they use western boxing techniques to make up for the lack of hand techniques in the system they learned from their instructors, but it's overwhelmingly likely - if they've degenerated to that - you'd be better of learning the kicking from them and going to a dedicated boxing class as well (or just finding a less watered-down TKD school, or another art). My belief is simple: TKD schools that teach you how to block effectively - so you can invite someone to try to hit you and stand there and block every attack, and teach you how to punch and/or "chop" strongly, are practical for self defence. Whether or not they teach Hosin Sul isn't likely to make a big difference. From another angle, joint locking is of limited practicality in a street fight: yes it can work when applied perfectly, or against a completely unaware opponent, or once the opponent is softened up, but students increase their practical capabilities much more quickly by learning a basic strike (palm's good - less likely to injure unconditioned knuckles), elbow, a little stance/footwork and distancing, basic blocking/smothering, turning kick and front kick. Escape from a few core positions where striking is difficult, like a head lock or someone sitting on your chest and pinning your arms, is useful - especially for kids in school brawls, but for general street situations you can strike your way out of most grab attempts, as long as you keep focused on balance, keeping your elbows down, and thinking which limb's free to use and where your opponent can be hit. I think this youtube video is a useful illustration. I think one of my TKD instructors put it pretty well when he said Hosin Sul was what you did when a relative who knew you trained grabbed you at the family Christmas Party, and you needed to break out without hurting them. So, if you're going to train the non-striking side of things, and want short- to medium-term results, you're probably better off getting into a more full on ju-jitsu or grappling system. I have to agree that the martial arts of the Philippines and Indonesia are - with or without a knife or stick - probably a better option than most TKD schools. Cheers, Tony

Generally, I'm in agreement with JusticeZero: very nice summary of the issues. Hopefully BB of C will chip in sometime, but meanwhile... Yang style tai chi (which I also practice) seems pretty soft generally - I've honestly no idea how to generate useful power following it's mechanics... I'm not even sure what the mechanics are supposed to be. I've watched videos of Ching Man Cheng - founder of the branch I've studied - but nothing I've seen threw any light into my dim little mind. In Chen style there's a more direct emphasis on spontaneous high-speed twitches, similar to the one inch punch mechanics, that's actively encouraged both generally and in forms practice. The twitches are supposed to start appearing naturally as a master practices the forms for enough decades. (Cynics claim at least some of the masters just feel like they've had enough of waiting and everyone not seeing them do it, especially if some of their peers start, so they do do it themselves.) The term is "fa jing". An obviously consciously deliberate demonstration appears here. Some of the movements are small - e.g. shoulder shrugs - some aren't. FWIW, I do similar exercises to develop this kind of explosiveness in my normal practice routine. I don't see that they necessarily have anything at all to do with chi/ki, and indeed I factor them in to the body mechanics I use for "external" striking. For me at least, it's just training the body to get the kind of explosive twitches produced naturally after touching something hot, or when almost asleep and realising it's an inappropriate place/time to sleep, then coordinating them under your own control. That's all about going from relaxation to instantaneous movement in the blink of an eye. Unlike a hand twitching from flame, for martial arts things typically start with an extremely sudden contraction of a hamstring and thigh, generating a hip rotation, chaining that upwards through the shoulders to be released in a hand technique or even kick. When practicing, I often tell myself some technique should be finished in one moment. Certain techniques are well suited to this exercise: spinning back thrusting kick, spinning hooking kick, reverse ridge hand strike, step ping forward to jab with the back hand, back leg turning kick (emphasising such speed reduces power, so it's most useful as a low-section kick to unbalance an opponent), back leg side piercing kick. I use this same mental attitude of going from complete stillness to completed movement, consciously allowing no transition between the two. Of course that's impossible, but it's amazing how close you can come when you've spent a lot of time removing all that's unnecessary from your techniques, and ensuring your preparatory position is suitable (I use the same guarding stance for all the above attacks, and others). Be very careful if you try - it can place great strains on the body and requires appropriate technique: e.g. front kicks at that intensity are prone to straining your knees. Cheers, Tony

There can be a few stages/levels: - any prior contact with person - any interaction while it's still unclear whether the person is friendly or not - any interaction while it's clear the person is unfriendly, but unclear whether they're violent - any interaction while they're clearly violent, but it's unclear that they may extend to serious assault or rape - once it's clearly a life or death situation. As martial artists, it's good to consider each level of situation, and educate yourself (or your students) about being observant & aware, warning signs, behaviours that could increase the risk of ending up in these situations, as well as actions - verbal, psychological, physical - that might escalate or deescalate the situation. As per any potentially violent encounter, any pre-violence interaction is itself an enormously complicated "art" form in itself, and someone who understands psychology and thinks creatively can sometimes turn a situation around just as effectively as a good kick or chop. Of course, there are times when an attacker has already decided everything and it's virtually impossible to change the course of things, but surprising often they're more malleable than they'd ever imagine, when something unexpected comes up. For example, a lady walking through a park at night realised three young men were converging on her. She modified her behaviour as if mentally ill, talking to herself, twitching a bit as she moved, walking a little funny... subtly enough that they didn't question whether she'd been like that before they approached. Coming in from different directions, they didn't have the chance to discuss it amongst themselves and decide whether to proceed, so simply stopped and watched her move off. Another example: a friend walking home in a light rain was stopped by a couple guys and "asked" for change. He said "if I had any money I'd have got a taxi instead of walking in this rain". Just enough doubt for them to wonder if it was worth attacking him, and which one of them would make the decision, which gave him time to move past them. I'm not saying a premeditated rape is this simple to deflect - the maniacs who do things like that are probably more psyched up about it and harder to distract. If it's a stranger, you have little background information to go on when constructing a diversion, and they may be more confident of being untraceable, but then they know less about you too. When the rapist is a family member or social contact, it's more complicated too - but there may be other forms of verbal threat or leverage that can be applied. Something as simple as a preemptive "I was telling X that there was something wrong with the way you acted around me" might make them worry about X connecting them to the crime, and divert them from it. Once it's seems clear that the person is a rapist, then given the typical size and strength difference between the sexes, and the consequence that even a single strike, hold, or lost opportunitity could tip the balance permanently against her, it's simply too risky for a lady to extend any consideration to the assailant. So, not only should she fight without concern for him or waiting to escalate, but she should consider a pre-emptive action if she gets the chance and her instincts are that he is planning an attack. If you don't fight then that's statistically a worse choice, but understandable too... nobody else has been in that exact situation and nobody - including yourself - should judge you for a decision taken under such immense pressures. If you do fight, definitely go for the most effective techniques you can, but also consider starting with some damage that's very hard to disguise. Rake your fingernails across his face, so anyone who sees him for weeks afterwards will have some idea what might have happened, and he'll immediately know the chances of getting away with a rape are dramatically reduced. With luck, he may decide to leave it at assault and leave. But most of the above (including prior responses) presupposes it's evident that someone is intending rape. That period where it may be unclear, particularly in a dating situation, is a gray area. It terrible for a lady to hold back and lose the opportunity to fight effectively, but also bad for a guy to be seriously injured or killed due to a misunderstanding. Good reason for a lady not to drink too much when dating, so her judgement is clear and her fighting skills undiminished. I'd be very gratified to see a systematic exploration of the statistical success of different responses to [would be] rapists, but I haven't seen a lot of hard factual information in the past. Some of the above is offered more as a basis for exploration rather than any manner of firm recommendation. Wishing for a world where this isn't needed, Tony

Not formally teaching over here, but occasionally help out some friends I've made from a government sports centre's bi-weekly open dojo sessions. Last drill I gave them was just to stand quite close in fighting stance, and take turns attacking. When doing so, try to deliver an attack with sufficient speed, power and placement to show you could have hit the defender, preferably by bypassing, trapping or drawing their guard out of position as you close to strike. The defender had to try to avoid retreating, block/smother or dodge sideways/forwards and - if and only if they succeeded in effectively defending against the attack - they should try to counter attack cleanly in a way that the attacker's commitment to their attack prevented or frustrated them countering. For example, the attacker might reach for the defenders front arm with their front hand, trapping it while they attempt to punch over/past/around it with their back hand. Very simple and fast. The defender should try to make sure their back hand is ready to block, or bring the elbow of the trapped front hand up and block with it, or use a front-leg front kick to stop the attacker's advance (after which the attacker should consider covering that with an instep stomping action), or predict the grab at the front hand and avoid it, or use the grabbed arm to pull both themselves and their attacker diagonally forwards and rotate the attacker's attacking arm away from them. Then they might find a spot to kick or punch from whatever angle they've ended up at. Similarly, if both side have the same leg forward and the defender's guard is too low, or they're too side on, an attacker might simply explode into an untelegraphed inward ridge-hand (reverse knife hand - bone from index knuckle to base of thumb) strike with their back hand - attacking the side of the jaw or neck, or the temple. It's a shockingly strong attack that goes straight through most people's defence, even when they know it's coming. But, it can also be delivered extremely quickly: much like a hooking kick, extending out straight and reconnecting to the hip movement to rip it sideways powerfully.... I picked this exercise because the two people tended to trade blows from a distance, without committing to attacks, delivering them with an expectation of actually being able to hit the other person decisively, or blocking properly. By simplifying things to a close in but controlled one-for-one exchange, where only an effective block that set up a counter attacking opportunity was "satisfying", people are encouraged to develop their medium-range defense to the point where they really trust it and use it in a strategic fashion. Similarly, the attacks had to penetrate the guard first time, with at most a dodge or grasp set up. On both sides, this makes it necessary to stop and think about the implications of the opponent's position before you bother to move. You want to out-position them with the angles and distances of arms, legs and stances even before anyone attempts a technique. It's necessary to notice the opponent's focus and predict their intent, and have your mind relaxed and ready to respond, simultaneously aware of all the tools and tactics at your disposal to do so. This was an attempt to move them past the long-distance blow-for-blow brawling - a competition of brute strength, stamina, reflex and speed - that their sparring verged on. Couple questions/comments... What do you call a "side cut"? In my old Hapkido school, the term would probably be used to refer to a kind of turning kick motion where the blade/foot-sword cuts along a sensitive area such as around the knee cap, doing damage as it's dragged across... but not sure if we're on the same page...? Yes, bad habit... from students to instructor, it's a dangerous thing to do! Just for the sake of a yarn: had a recent encounter going the other way, sparring someone much less able, where I was the one holding the techniques out. He's teaching some hybrid judo/jujitsu/karate style, and wanted to do some "slow" sparring. I pushed some techniques out where there were gross holes in his guard, met no attempt at defense or avoidance, and stopped the techniques beside or in front of his head so he might understand I'd been able to hit him. Was that ever optimistic! When I eventually saw recognition dawn, it was only and invariably "oh, now I can grab him and take him down". Yes, well, if you're holding your leg up at someone's temple height for half a second hoping they'll notice it, you are in a position where you can be taken down. Or another time, I stopped a punch in front of his nose, then he flicked a fast punched around it collecting me in the lip then dived at me. Four or five such exchanges, after which his nose wasn't spared and bled all over the tatami and my uniform . Persistent though, wanted another go, but it invariably degraded to fast sparring on the verge of getting nasty, and in the end I just refused. The sport centre staff asked that I wear gloves when sparring there in future, not that that would have made any difference. Still came back at the end of the session and I agreed to do some grappling with him. How can someone teaching grappling go 2 minutes against a non-grappler and only make one abortive attempt to lift one of my legs - no throws or sweeps. How someone can be an instructor without understanding the basic courtesies and recognition needed for cooperative sparring that includes strikes is completely beyond my understanding. I'm concerned about the way forms competitions seem to encourage this. Showing the strength and flexibility to hold the leg up high seems to be more valued than actual correctness of technique. That's dance, not martial arts! I've seen lots of students come in who thought they could kick well just because they were especially flexible, and they don't tend to have the stomache for the hard work and introspection required to develop the correct techniques, as they're more concerned about keeping their leg up as high as they can, regardless of where the opponent actually is. Still, in forms practice I'm guilty of giving leg extension infinitely more priority than withdrawal, even if I don't hold the leg out/up just for the sake of it. I do my forms with a firm focus on speed between movements, power generation / body mechanics, and arguably over commiting without worrying about withdrawal. My forms are a large part of my conditioning and activity-specific fitness training. Given the forms are overly stylised, and many stances unsuitable for sparring, there doesn't seem a lot of point in doing a half-hearted job to make them otherwise. But, my sparring is very different, much more fluid and minimal. It's partly because my forms develop power that I have the confidence in my techniques to deliver them minimally during sparring, knowing that the power absorbtion from blocking will be dispersed through my arms into the torso and legs properly, and strikes even from shorter distances and backswings can still connect to a viciously explosive twitch of the hips. Cheers, Tony

Bit of ramble below... just food for thought / experiences to share... The school I spent most of my time training with took a zero-tolerance approach. Anyone walking in to the dojang for the first time would instantly know it wasn't a place to play around. The instructor would be seated at his desk, or loosening up quietly behind it, briefcase on the desk, there was no social chatter. Training cards were collected and kept on the desk for his signature (there were no female instructors of adult classes). Students who needed to speak to the instructor would line up and wait silently until invited to approach, conducting their business quietly and efficiently then returning to their warm up. It was very formal, yes sir this, no sir that, no talking unless asked a question. It was rare for any two students to practice sparring or other exercises inside the dojang itself, though sometimes they may have done some in an outside area before the instructor arrived. The senior-most students would call the class to lineup and stand at attention while the instructor move to the front, then coordinate the bowing in. Students not participating in an exercise ran quickly to sit crosslegged along the back or sides of the dojang while observing, jumping up and falling into place at a run when called back. The seriousness and expectations were all reinforced from various angles: you couldn't help but be aware of the efforts of those around you. Students younger than 12 were not generally accepted (until separate kids classes, with different instructors, were established years later). Instructors generally excelled at motivating the class to make their best effort however bad individuals might have felt when they arrived. I still think that's a key and largely overlooked skill of an instructor... just making you want to train hard and be glad you went, even if they didn't teach you anything. One of my instructors was largely like that (given I absorbed most of my knowledge from my primary instructor, who was very much his senior and later technical head of school), but I still enjoyed the classes tremendously. In such an environment, any attitudinal problems would stand out like a sore thumb, and things largely took care of themselves with students feeling the pressure but also the excitement, focus and energy from the environment, as well as their peers, immediate seniors, and the few most senior people training that day. Having instructors actually training under their senior instructors would really up the energy levels for other students. Occasionally, instructors would have to step in to lower the effort levels, as young black belts' idea of "taking it easy" on say green belts might still be a bit of a shock for them, but I can't think of anyone that survived in that environment while obviously/openly carrying an attitude problem or any lack of concern for their juniors. In all my years there, I can only think of two people who were sneaky enough to pick on juniors weaker than them very occasionally when they thought nobody would notice, but in a school with 500-600 students and ~20 instructors at any point in time that's, perhaps sadly inevitable, and it can be hard to prove (even to yourself) and stamp out when the perpetrators are clever and sly. When I was one of the ranks, if I saw a junior messing around, they'd find out how I felt about it next time we were sparring, not in a vicious way, but in a "hey, wake up, you've got to be focused" kind of way, maybe like a roller-coaster ride to get some blood pumping. All those hormones - endorphines, adrenaline - if the class is geared up to get you working hard enough to kick them off then it all hangs together. Even step sparring is an opportunity to show a bit of fire and seriousness and shock someone a bit, just by the seriousness and intensity of attitude. Although talking was generally prohibited, a couple quiet words of encouragement and/or critique from the most senior students present during free sparring was generally acceptable, and would generally have a large effect. Any back-and-forth discussion would be done after class, but it was rare for this to be discipline related. Instructors would often address comments to the group rather than singling someone out, but phrase them in such a way that it was always an invitation to introspection and new levels of effort, rather than a criticism. That way, it didn't matter if you were already excellent, you were encouraged not to take it for granted but think carefully about how to improve. Very rarely, more targetted feedback on attitude would be provided, generally outside the shared class time. Suspension or removal of belts is a huge step: students would normally drop out themselves if their issues were that large and beyond help. I think that works well for a large school, but when running my own small school in London I had no particular desire to go this extreme. It was a small enough group that I could assess everyone's personality individually, and they were all mature and perceptive enough to understand my background and expectations, each other's behaviours, and work in cooperatively in a way I was satisfied with. As you might guess, when it comes to martial arts I take a much more talkative approach, and prefer two-way communication to try to bring the student's skills up in a more targetted way. That's only practical in a smaller school. Cheers, Tony

Yes, I think I'm with you. It sounds a lot like the preparation for a thrusting kick, just not taking that bit extra time to let the hips and kicking knee bounce backwards then sling forwards, getting that extra power in the kick. For comparison, I've dug out the pictures / diagrams I made about 10 years ago of the two variations I've been describing, available here. Included: - 6 frames showing stages in the thrusting kick variation - 5 frames showing stages in the jamming kick variation - one diagram of the thrusting kick - one diagram of the jamming kick Each diagram is superimposed on a frame of video of a full-speed and full-power back leg kick. The position shown reflects the reality of the timing when the kick is well drilled. The other images are static poses I've held for a timed shutter release, and represent idealised and slightly exaggerated positions to help learn the kick, suitable for slower practice. (Sorry about the big "titles" hereafter... just trying to structure this a bit so it's easier to read and comment on...) THRUSTING KICK The crucial thing here is that the thrusting kick pivots over and the knee is brought backwards momentarily (at least relative to the overall forwards movements of the kick)... - stretching the muscles in the buttocks and back much as they stretch when you lie flat on your back, bend the leg so the calf is up against the hamstrings, and pull the knee towards your shoulder, and - stretching the muscles throughout the torso that allow the hips to twist relative to the shoulders, such that the top/kicking hip dips downwards and backwards After relaxing into both stretches, a kind of plyometric contraction is generated by thrusting the supporting leg against the ground - pushing the lower/non-kicking hip forwards and increasing those stretches. The resultant contraction through all these muscles thrusts the leg forwards, and is combined with a thrust from the other/kicking thigh. PIERCING KICK Note in the slow practice version of the piercing kick the kicking leg is brought up dramatically to the side of the body. The hips are not rotated until the leg is extending, and the foot turns as they close and jam in behind the kick. This was the motion I likened to a turning/roundhouse kick, as the foot reaches the target in an arc, with the hips and upper body weight engaged to generate the twisting motion stabbing the kicking foot through the target. DISCUSSION - DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLOW AND FAST EXECUTION There will be no conscious shift away from the illustrated movements used for slow practice... it's just that when you've done it a lot the timing and movements tighten up where they can, and the importance of momentary momentums, inertias, and relative speeds and distances involved in the muscular contractions is accentuated, forcing the movements to combine/overlap slightly differently, though the subjective feeling is the same. For instance, to practice a thrusting kick, it's good to aim the knee to heel line at the target before extending the kick, which would make it slant in towards the target from the side (compared to a line from centre of mass to target). This is practical and desirable for a stepping/gliding front leg kick, a long-range flying side thrusting kick, or the "spinning" side/back kick, but in full speed execution for a back leg side thrusting kick you don't have the luxury of taking the time to do so, and the foot follows a more linearly line from in front of the hips into the target. The essential thing though is that there's been the relaxation across the hips to let the top/kicking hip roll over, and the muscles through the buttocks to stretch, so that when the supporting foot's snap against the ground pushes the supporting hip forward both these backwards movements finish and a whipping forward movement results. It's a lot like plyometric theory: let these things go to full stretch and the body kicks in to contract the muscles. All fine tuning, but it's essential to train the muscles to rotate and lock in the simpler stepping or spinning kick versions so that the same mechanisms can be "reconnected to" in the more complicated back leg kick. That there should be a disparity between slow execution and fast, between one's subjective impression of movement and the video-taped reality, is a very important insight, especially for an instructor who needs to recognise correct and incorrect technique at any speed. Another example of this is reverse vs obverse hand thrusting techniques: practicing an idealised reverse punch in a forward/walking stance develops the hip rotation that, once the body has mastered, you can "reconnect to" from a wide variety of stances with either leg forward. Getting the body used to "twitching" and chaining the contractions up from the legs through the hips and torso and out the arm is the core skill, best developed in deep walking stance with reverse (back arm) thrusting technique, makes other variations powerful, even if they involve some compromise compared to the deep stance.... Cheers, Tony

I hadn't heard of them before, but if that video's any indication it must be a fun crowd That all rings true. If the supporting-foot-to-be crosses in front of the kicking foot, then a piercing kick is easy; if it goes behind then thrusting is easy. Lifting the leg like a front kick would prevent the full hip rotation for a piercing kick, so if it's not a thrusting kick either, then I guess it slips in between the two. My belief is that that means it's probably not maximising power - some more comments about that below.... My original school never discussed the difference either, which is why I practiced thrusting kicks exclusively for many years. Choi does mention both, which ties in with... It's really hard to know for sure, as the ITF is a huge organisation and these differences sadly aren't made clear in the encyclopaedia or any other standard reference of which I'm aware, so understandings may vary depending on the particular instructors you've been exposed to. I never found these terms commonly understood in the ITF, but when I've spoken to ITF instructors who understood that there are two directions of hip movement and consequent kicking actions, they have always related them to piercing and thrusting movements, saying they differ in this way. The ball of the foot was indeed recommended for the thrusting kick, but I believe that was orthogonal to the classification of the kick itself, much as say a middle-knuckle fist might be recommended for a crescent punch, but is still a crescent punch if executed with a normal fist. Re the recommendation: kicking with the ball extends the reach slightly, arguably useful as the gliding (step behind) thrusting kick has the longest reach of all the single-step grounded TKD movements, so it's often used to chase a retreating opponent, or close ground unexpectedly on a charging opponent. Personally, I think extending the ball makes it harder to achieve a strong locking action, and I'm more worried about the ankle being damaged, so I prefer not to follow that recommendation. If I'm right about the ball vs foot-sword vs heel all being legitimate choices for thrusting kicks, then the distinction with piercing kicks boils down to where you've said "and thrusts rather than pierces through the target", but that makes the difference one of unexplained terminology... what is thrusting vs piercing? In the context of a side kick, I believe the terminology reflects the two different hip movements I've listed above. If you have some other definition in mind, please share it . If you have specific experiences with the ITF that make it clear I am wrong about the above, or just more circumstantial insight, please be blunt in correcting me and explaining. I have never been a member of the ITF - though I've trained with and taught for 8th dan Master DeSilva in London for a short while and attended all of one Rhee Ki Ha seminar (he did ask why I didn't wear an ITF uniform ). Master Rhee, Chong Chul - under whom I started my training - was one of Choi, Hong Hi's 12 original masters sent by the KTA to disseminate taekwondo worldwide, so the terminology and my experience is largely similar though (to pre sine-wave days). Not sure that would solve the terminology problem, as the thrusting kick I mention can be executed from front- or back-leg without spinning.... Terminology is such a pain. I definitely don't want to abuse ITF terminology and confuse ITF students or misrepresent ITF. Still, whatever they might be called and whether or not they're practiced in ITF, I believe that the distinction re direction of hip rotation is core to mastering the side kick, and once you start actively and carefully looking to get a motion that both generates maximum hip movement and delivers it efficiently to the target, you almost inevitably end up with variants very similar to what I've described above. I consider most of the variations in the youtube videos discussed to fall into a thigh-power-only middle ground. I can't say a side kick is wrong if it doesn't employ stronger hip power - in some situation you may not need that much power - but it's still my belief that side kick should be based upon hip power so it's there in reserve for when needed, especially as it doesn't seem to involve compromises re telegraphing, vulnerability to counters, recovery etc., and if anything using the hip power helps prevent muscles like the thigh getting fatigued during a fight, and allows frailer people to lift the leg higher more easily, and kick powerfully and comfortably. Cheers, Tony

The clue you've given me re your back leg side kick is that your foot has the heel towards the target, which by itself sounds more like a thrusting kick, but if you think it might be a piercing kick, then the checklist is: - are you rotating the supporting foot only as the kick is extended [piercing], or beforehand [thrusting]? - when you start to thrust with the kicking leg, is the foot coming from the back side (i.e. right of the line to target for a right leg kick) [piercing] or chest side (left) [thrusting]? - are the hips rotating anti-clockwise [piecing] or clockwise [thrusting]? It is possible you're just rotating the supporting foot a bit further than I usually do, emphasising stretching out into the kick more than the power from the hip rotation. I wish my HD camcorder's firewire port was compatible with Vista / Windows 7, but as is I can't upload any new video. I might have something lying around... will have a look later. Do consider posting some video of your kick if you have it. Actually, I've been thinking that having some ability to capture video from webcams might really add life to this board, as this stuff is hard to talk about in words. I also frequent a photography forum, and actually being able to see the things you're discussing, and post examples of possible alternatives, makes a world of difference. Separately, we're almost certainly on the same page with the thrusting kick resembling a spinning side kick: it flows very naturally after a spin, wheras the piercing version would be incredibly awkward. It's easy to imagine it being like a horse kicking. I actually found a : the explanation is excellent (it takes a while before he actually shows anything) but his normal-speed execution is a bit stiff (which prevents fuller hip movement). I particularly like that video because it illustrates how to reconnect to the same thrusting direction of hip movement from a back leg kick: very powerful, but doing it at full speed does take excellent timing and control. One of those kicks that sports styles tend to abandon because people don't want to wait a few years to get a kick working well: wanting to avoid getting pummelled in the next fight encourages a short term focus.Something I should have mentioned earlier for thrusting kick, as it's an important safety issue. As the leg extends, do not leave your back towards the target, arching the spine. This mistake leaves the leg extension pushing the thigh into a ballistic stretch, tugging and pinching all the muscles and connective tissues down the spine. Not only does that hurt and do damage, but the extension will be fought by the nervous system's protective instincts, reducing power. Instead, the upper body should not arch forwards or backwards, but turn sideways and tilt backwards, with the head sighting the target across the pectoral (not over the shoulder) during the leg extension. Cheers, Tony