WhiteBelt

Yes, learning how to kill through vital points is of limited value. And the practice of grabbing your opponent's larynx and testies wouldn't make you popular. I was just wondering what the more experienced might have found.

Sounds like JKD philosophy. Here's an interesting thought, is one collection of techniques 'better' than another collection? Or perhaps, is one application of a technique always 'better' than the rest? Obviously something cannot remain the best, as MTFighter says time and time again. Also, the ability of the practioner greatly influences the effectiveness.

I would never tolerate racism/ethnicism in any dojo I participate in. Many of my closest friends were of different ethnic origin than myself, and so is my girlfriend. My current dojo has a bit of every colour right now.

Maybe you doubt yourself? I mean no disrespect. Perhaps the karate training will help you when you begin sparring again.

Try looking for hip flexor stretches. That would be my first choice. But then just look for stretching in general on this board and you'll find a lot of useful info.

You might even find red after black...

I was wondering if anybody here has studied this ancient text. I liked the history of karate even more now. I'm still trying to understand the vital points and that bit about the fighting techniques (if somebody tries to grab your legs, mash their head/ears/any vital point on the head, etc.) Have you found anything that works from it? I've only recently been reading.

Roll it up one way and then the other? Tie it into a knot, and then different knots? My belts were never stiff.

At my dojo, attitude is part of the marking scheme used for gradings. At a certain point you even need to pass an interview. I believe every MA needs this sort of screening, so that we don't have to fill out MA registration forms before we can learn.

But then what really differentiates the striking styles other than a name. If the practitioner wanted s/he could simply learn other techniques or train differently when not in school. Then are they learning the school's style still? ... In the end I guess there are no styles, only schools. A punch is a punch is a punch, you just need the imagination to see all the possibilities.

I started for many of the above mentioned things. But certainly not for my ego, or to hurt others. I have been in many fights, and even when I was a kid the outcome (broken bones, concussions, revenge, etc.) was never worth the fight. Control is the keyword here people.

For some reason people always feel the need to argue over which style is the BEST. At first I felt insulted that anybody could say that my style was the worst, but then it got me thinking about styles in general. I wanted to look into what makes each unique. I'm talking in general here; I'm not comparing. First I thought of the techniques used. Some styles focus on grappling, some on striking, some on internal power, and some say they know it all and do it all. And sometimes, the techniques look very similar and yet aren't. Second I thought of the training methods that each 'style' uses. I put style in quotes because I believe that this is up to the individual, and the schools. Third I thought of how quickly it takes a student to learn the style. Some take a lifetime of dedicated work to master, some you learn quite a bit quicker, and some you can buy. Now an example of what I'm trying to look into here is this. In Karate you learn a large number of techniques which have a huge number of applications. Your training consists of kata, various sparring, self defense situations, and a light amount of physical conditioning when compared to some styles. It with maybe five years of dedicated study you will 'master' karate. But what if we remove a lot of the techniques, keeping only the 'best of the best' and train those even harder than before. Then we focus mainly on sparring, and exercises that will benefit fighting in general. We don't cut any of the old training we just focus more on one area. Is this still karate? All we did was teach fewer techniques, and changed the training a bit.

There are a lot of books available that can help you with choosing a school. Most have a list of things to look out for, and things to ask about.

I currently train only in karate. Our school brings in teachers of other MAs so that we can "try before we buy". I know that later on I'm going to look for into other arts, and have nothing against cross training. But thanks to my school's seminars I have a better idea of what arts I like. Incidentaly, one of the seminars I've attended was a for kali. It seems very simple, along the lines of the thai stuff.

The karate student needs guidance to interpret the kata because everything was meant to be hidden. That's just the way it was done "back in the day". Once you see some of it unlocked you can see other things yourself.

Note, I have never done any shadow boxing and am going on other's descriptions. I would say that kata are a blueprint for self defense. There are an almost unlimited number of applications to each, but it is up for you, or your teacher, to show you them. Kata are also useful for learning how to move, and make the various stances work for you. Now I'm not suggesting that you stand in any stance for a long time, but that there are times when they would be useful. Finally kata can be a great way to work out if you do them properly, and with speed. The black belts at my dojo usually can finish 20 different kata within 10 minutes. Now as for shadow boxing, I would think that this is an effective training technique for more advanced students. What is the point in letting a beginner practice their own combinations when they don't even know what works? But, for an advanced student it would let them work on what they know. It sounds great for agility, endurance, and possibly technique. Though I would prefer to have a teacher judge the technique. Sounds like I might look into this stuff in the future. So I'd say that kata and shadow boxing are effective for what they're designed to do. You can't say one is better than the other, because they don't do the same thing.

Think chemistry. Think silly joke.

The most effective style? ... Aren't we taught to avoid conflict where possible? Meh. I have been in fights, but I try and avoid them now. You never know if you'll be looking at a gun, and no style can teach you to dodge a bullet. Besides, physical conflict is not as necessary as it may have been many years ago (except at school when us boys are around ). Personally, I train so that if I ever truely needed to defend myself, or another, that I might be prepare. And, because I have a passion for this stuff. My most effective style is my mind and my spirit.

I was thinking of getting a heavy bag to practice my kicks at home, but setting it up is going to be a problem. I checked out the link KickChick provided, and I guess I'll be waiting for a while ($$$).

I just had a whole glass of the stuff... that's more than a teaspoon! Does that mean I'm going to die?

Yep, another quick question. I have a problem with my left knee which causes me to over use my right leg from time to time. One doctor suggested that the problem is caused by cartilage that may, or may not, be worn down. Another doctor, which was a sports physician, suggested that my knee cap is not alligning properly when I flex my leg. He said that it is probably due to a muscle imbalance, and tight quads and hip flexors. One exercise he wanted me to do was to stand against a door with my feet about 8 inches from it and pointing straight forward. Then to sit down a little, and flex the inner thighs. However I haven't noticed much improvement from that exercise. What kinds of light exercises can I do to improve the muscle imbalance in my legs? Squats and lunges sometimes irritate my knee... I can do them but my knee complains later. I might have to build up to them.

I voted other. We are told the basis for our style is Shotokan, but then we learn weapons and ground fighting as well. Some of our kata are modified slightly as well.

I don't know if this has been asked before, so sorry in advance. I have recently been looking into the whole bodyweight only workouts. One of the biggest advantages that I can see in using such a workout is the great endurance you gain. Proponents of weight lifting suggest that to get the same endurance you only need to run, cycle, and swim. Is that true or do you need to work specific muscles to increase their endurance? How does one accomplish this with weight lifting? I'm assuming it will be something along the lines of a lower intesity with a lot more sets & reps.

Thanks, both of you, for the info. I doubt I can afford a personal trainer though.