brickshooter

An athletic 145lbs is borderline weight to knock most people out with bare knuckles. You just need to incorporate impact training (punching bag, punching blocks, makiwara, etc) into your training.

Ethics aside, he should call it "MMA wrestling." When it comes to marketing, the trend is your friend.

When I say competing as professional boxers, I mean actually doing it at a high level. I don't consider having 4 professional matches like Pulver, or serving as a sparing partner for MMA fighters as doing professional boxing at a high level.

Water is better. If one expects the student to go 100%, then give them breaks & water. Otherwise, they're going to waltz through the class while conserving their energy & water. IMO, having students perform at 100% is better at building endurance than any water deprivation test.

Best MMA hands I've ever seen was a guy named Lightning Lee Murray (who's serving a 20 year sentenced on armed bank robbery). He's the only MMA guy who I think could have competed in professional boxing. BTW, according to Randy Couture, Murry and Ortiz got in a heated argument in a club. In a flash, Murry dropped Ortiz with a 1-2-3. Then kicked Ortiz a couple of times after Ortiz was out cold. That Murray. Not a nice chap.

Two main schools of thoughts in Karate. The Shurite & the Nahate. Shurite is linear karate. The emphasize is on generating singular knockout power with the maximum use of weight transfer. Imagine running full speed at someone and punching him at the last second. This school includes Shotokan, Shito Ryu, etc. under its umbrella. Pros - knock out power. Cons - what to do when you're in grappling range? Nahate is more circular. It emphasizes close in fighting with strikes to weak points on a body to wear the attacker down before finishing him off. There are some similarities with White Crane Kung Fu. Under this umbrella, you'll find Goju, etc. Pro - nasty hockey fighting. Cons - lightweights will have difficulty generating knock out power. Then there are combo systems that combine the Shurite & Nahate schools in theory. Under this umbrella you'll find Wado, etc. And the last systems are more sports oriented one-on-one fighting. Under this umbrella you'll find Kyokushin & TDK. BTW, sports doesn't mean that they're ineffective. It means that you need to be more athletic and pain resistant since they often mean full contact. Pros - a lot of contact training. Cons - some techniques are too risky for self-defense use such as over-reliance on head kicks.

Rather than pick a named style, I think that the OP should pick a school based on the reputation of the organization that the style belonged to. The reason is that any clown can open a school and name their own style. More reputable organizations will at the very least, certify their instructors so that the risk of being instructed by a fool is lessen.

I think that it's a big mistake to not assign students homework regardless of their age. Something that students can do in a short 20 minutes session in their living room. Students come to the dojo to train. But they're there also for directions and guidance. I don't think it's enough to say "I suggest that you students practice if you want to get better." I think that instructors have to be more specific with "Joe, every night I want you to do 100 perfect oi-zuki 20 minutes before dinner, because this is your weakness." Instructors can keep a tally of what individual students need to work on and give them a monthly progress report. Instructors often complain that students drop out too fast. Well, one of the main reasons is that students don't see themselves improving. So they blame the instructors - by quitting. Instructors - don't stop instructing when students leave the dojo... And they won't drop out.

I'm afraid that a large number of young men 18-27 are in the gym to work on their number 1 priority. Improve their physical appearance so that they can get laid. Those who are interested in combat sports are already at the MMA gyms, traditional martial arts dojo, or in the military. Therefore, the only way that one can bring those weight lifting guys back under the MMA umbrella is to somehow convince them that MMA training can improve their sex appeal. ...which is beyond my field of knowledge.

According to most, I still do Pinan/Heian Shodan wrong after 2-3 decades as I still pivot on the ball of my feet rather than the heel. And while acknowleding that it is improper technique, I still do it because the wrong way is more effective for me.

Assuming that there's 6 training days in a week, I'd say that 3 is the maximum. The reason is that I don't see how one can be effective training less than 2 times per week in anything.

I almost exclusively use the rear leg kick. And only after another strike lands.

Unsu have always been an enigma to me. Never figured it out. Alsmost feels as though it's training a person to fight in the dark & by "feel" rather than by sight.

And therein lies the biggest challange. So many karate schools and styles, 90% of which are family and mcdojos. But I am searching. Go find a Japanese cultural center if you could. Classes are generally dirt cheap. Generally taught by mid-high ranked Japanese instructors with very high standards. But be careful for what you ask for. The first time an instructor punches you in the face because he thinks that your blocks are weak, you may have 2nd thoughts.

Just finished another class tonight, which is my 3rd. Apparently, Aikidokas are constantly in motion in their effort to remove themselves from the line of attack. We were introduced to Atemi (Aikido strikes) today. It's interesting. I just kept my opinion to myself since I understood that Atemi was intended to force the attacker to block, thereby exposing his limb for manipulation. From a Karateka's point of view. Atemi by itself was not intended to incapacitate anyone. If any Akidoka tells you any difference, he is delusional. However, Aikidokas really raised the level of sophistication regarding attacking a wrist or shoulder. What people see in demos are very polite demos. In reality, I could see how fast it is to break someone's wrist or elbow while using Aikido.

Its not so much a question of 'dont work' or even 'cant work'. We can always find examples of where they have worked for people in self-defence. The question is, are they the safest, most reliable thing you can do under the circumstances? Imagine the Kyokushinkai fighter being shoved from behind by his opponent's mate just as he's throwing a kick. How much more disruptive to his balance would it be if he's throwing a high kick at the time rather than a low kick? Imagine that, instead of fighting on a clean flat mat, he's in a bar in which the floor is wet in patches with spilt beer and occasional bits of broken glass? Imagine that the penalty for going down on your posterior is not that the fight is momentarily stopped by the ref, or even that the opponent wins the match, but that the assailant and his mates close in and kick you unconscious or worse. And so on and so on. The gist of it is that the requirements of self-defence are very different from those of the sporting arena. The two scenarios require very different tactics. Mike True. Your safety-reward model does explain it well. But at the same time, it does leave room for person to take more risk should the situtation require more risk.

Since I'm not familiar with the rules of that tournament, let me ask you. 1. Do they allow full power groin techniques? 2. Do they allow full power kicks to the knee? 3. Do they allow sweeps to the supporting leg? Basically, are there rules? If so, then they negate the premise that the martial arts are based upon. That being no rules for selfdefense purposes. 1. Not Kyokushin. But I've also trained with Kempo Karatekas on occasions. They teach the "how to groin kick" very well. Yet their fighters still do high kicks when the opportunity arises. 2. No the knees. But they allow full power kicks to the septic nerve which incapacitates the entire leg when it lands. So the danger is still there. 3. Yes to sweeps. But they're not very good at it. They prefer to kick the leg out, but the result is often the same.

I hear the same thing over the last 20 years. But every time I finish watching a Kyokushin tournament, I do question the conventional wisdom that high kicks don't work.

IMO, Karate brought in high kicks from TKD, which actually evolved from Karate. Yes, this is a bit like the question of whether the egg came before the chicken. Anyways, in the West we prize innovation. In the East they prize perfection. They could care less on who invented it and have zero issues at bringing in techniques from other styles.

I think that JKD was designed to be a concept. It was intended to be Mix Martial Arts. Techniques taught were supposed to only create a base to which practicioners would continuously add techniques from other styles depending on their individual needs. I think Bruce even shut down his schools several times when he was frustrated that people tend to be a little stupid and sheepish, refusing to think for themselves.

I don't remember an orange belt. But it's been a while. I recalled ust 5 belts. White in the beginning. Black on the end. And a combo of 3 colors in the middle.

Last year I spent about 4 weeks in Aikido and quit. The reason was that I couldn't get pass al the theories about "Ki" and "Energy." I tried to understand Aikido from a mystical viewpoint and it was dissappointing. However, I just started up Aikido again with the mindset of a Karateka and it really helped me understand Aikido. Essentially, the attacker makes his attack by increasing his speed towards you. You the Aikidoka get out of his line of attack. Instead of a hardblock, you soft block and pull him off balance a little more to increase his acceleration. When you sense that he's off balance, you quickly reverse his momentum and attack his small joint (elbow, wrist, etc.) with your entire body weight. The result is that he is thrown. Or his small joint breaks. I'll update you guys if I learn more about "Ki, energy, and harmony."

Just started Aikido last week. My impression is that Aikidokas like to keep their center of gravity under them (controlled) at all times. This explains whey they look a bit "stiff" with a straight back even when they're running around. I believe that they need to control their center of gravity so that they can maximize their body weight into every technique. But it's different from Karate. In Karate, we like to get "grounded." In Aikido, they see attacks coming in a straight line. Their intent is to get out of the way, then redirect the attacker's momentum to create unbalance, so that they can apply their wrist/arm locks. Therefore, even if Aikidokas like to control their center of gravity, they have more motion than the Karatekas. Just my 2 cents for a guy with about 4 Aikido lessons.

It's interesting that no one uses the basic front kick in MMA where fighters like to hold their hands in the vertical to defend agaist high round kicks. Last time I saw a front kick like that was a Pride fight where Machita KO Rich Franklin. Machita needed to follow up with a couple of punches to finish it, but one can clearly see Rich's head rock backwards from taking a front kick on the chin. Poor Rich clearly didn't see it coming. I wonder whether we'll see more kicks using the ball of the foot as a striking surface. It does so much more damage with less effort.

IMO, the majority of this kata is about arm-locks, arm-bars and wrist-locks, supplemented by a couple of punches. I think I even see a throw at the end followed by two arm locks just before the shuto uke. Most of this kata is meant to defend a shoulder grab, by attacking the attacker's elbow & shoulder joint. The wrist lock was done incorrectly by the way. One attacks the wrist an an angle, otherwise one has zero leverage. This is how Aikido is trained. And the thrusting side kick to the knee has to impact at an angle to the knee to damage it. So the technique should be at a 45 degree angle rather than linear as shown. Just my 2 cents.