Kirves

Black belt is shodan. Sho = first, dan = stage. In Japan it is quite common for people to study karate in school for three years as their phys. ed. course and achieve black belt (shodan, 1st dan). That doesn't mean people graduating from comprehensive school in Japan are Budo Masters , they just know the basics.

A style is something that can be defined to it's technical curriculum and details to a standard. You can define Shotokan karate. You can define Kickboxing. You can define Tai Shin Mun Kungfu. You can not define a street brawler's techincal details with any standard method.

I saw too many Chuck Norris movies and Honk Kong kungfu movies as a kid. And I was hooked on all the computer beat'em up games like Way of Exploding Fist and Karateka.

Yes, I also think solo training at your own time is one of the best ways to balance the training that is given in class. That way you can focus on your own weaknesses.

Doesn't everybody take pleasure in that?

Yes because TKD guys ripped them off of karate.

In the style I studied, you had to know kihon (the basic techniques) for white belt. Then after that you had to learn a kata and it's bunkai for each color.

Remember that the WC guy knew wrestling too. And that the WC style was WT which has its infamous "anti-grappling". And that the video clip seen was a promo-demo.

Most of what is called ninjutsu is actually koryu jujutsu. For example, the Bujinkan curriculum teaches a mixture of taijutsu. The mixture is composed of three ninjutsu and six jujutsu schools, with jujutsu making up pretty much most of all the unarmed fighting techniques.

Welcome. The people who ask will be wiser than those who only tell.

superfigher: nobody was asking about it's effectiveness. Just if it is a martial art or a martial sport. Yes, it is very effective even without striking techniques, but is that how you prepare for war? By intentionally limiting that the opposition can strike but you cannot because of sport rules? No that is not how you prepare for war. So, it is not a martial art, just a martial sport. But an effective one at that. Read my first post on this thread again.

I have explained my partner what the martial arts mean to me. Okay, it wasn't that simple. It took a year and a half for her to understand it. I took it light at first, but kept my head. She said "c'mon, come there with me" and I just said "no, this is important to me, I've been doing this for ten years and I have been really looking forward to this event'". Then eventually she's become more interested in the thing I am so passionate about and I've told her what it's all about. PS. I do sometimes say "Okay, If I can go to this event, I'll watch the kid so you can go somewhere too on some night", so I do bribe her occacionally, but she knows how important the stuff is to me so she is quite flexible on these issues.

Loren W. Christensen: ability to explain his experiences in a simple manner so it matters to you. Mas Oyama: created the strongest karate style. Chuck Norris: thought he could make his dreams come true by holding on to them, did it, and teaches you to do the same.

Well, if you know you are sparring the same opponent for a long time (several minutes), try the rule of three: 1. Attack with something and let him counter. 2. After some time doing other stuff, attack with #1 again and let him counter. 3. Start with what you did in #1 but only as a fake, when he starts his counter, you hit him. This "rule of three" was written by Bruce Lee though it is known by many people, just not written as such.

Yeah. Telsun, you got it right. All the belt system is, is a way to structure teaching. Too many people think it is a measure of a warrior. A true warrior looks beyond the color of the belt.

Exactly! There is Gendai Budo Karate, and then there is the old karate (a.k.a. Toudi, Tode, Uchinadi and so on). They have different methods and most importantly: different philosophies. You wrote it better than I ever could have.

It is your forum rank. The more you post, the higher your rank will be.

My take on this is this: Evolution is critical. But before that can happen, you must understand your grounding. You must not change a thing if you don't know why it is that way. Does your style use 45 degree angled fist? Does it use horizontal fist? Before you change it, ask why it is the way it is. After you understand what the "master" thought, then you can change it. But if you don't understand what you are changing, you risk doing something terribly wrong. Remember, if you study a decent martial art, then your master had some combat experience. Why would someone with less combat experience change it? Change it only after you understand what you are changing. Then change it so it works better. That is the spirit of budo.

In my mind (that is: a personal view): something "martial" means something meant for war. I don't personally consider an Olympic game or a tournament of any kind to be categorized as "war". If all techniques are practiced under sport rules, then the whole art (in my view point) is meant for sport. If there are techniques taught that are meant for war and not applicaple in sport, then it is a martial (=a war) art. Judo, in my mind, does not fit that requirement. All of it's techniques are taught with the sport rules at mind. None are taught with war rules at mind.

Well, the other thread on this issue was closed by the mods, even though there remained an open question, so please, could someone post a link to the official Shotokan/JKA (not any AAU or their kin) tournament kumite rules? Please?

Make sure it's natural rope (like hemp or wool) instead of plastic.

Good, join the club. Okay. I often do. That is why I spark up so many arguments around here. Haha! Very true. This is where I respectfully disagree. Why? Because that would mean all arts and styles would have to have equally comparable techniques. But they don't. That is what makes an art or style; different mehtods. And you can't compare them belt-to-belt. There is no need to transfer rank from style to style. We are all equal. And their ranking systems... A ranking system does not exist for the reason of comparing with other styles. It exists because of the need to organize teaching. Some styles think their system is best taught in three phases. Some styles think theirs is best taught in six phases. Some believe theirs is best taught in ten phases. That is how a ranking structure is formed. Some arts give different color t-shirts for the ranks, others different badges on the jacket, others a different color belt. It is just about their instructional phasing, nothing more or less. There's nothing wrong with your ideal. Just add this: we would all train together, no matter the rank/style. That is not because of some ranking systems. It is because of some events that make karate look bad, as karate can't send good competitors to their events who can win by their rules. Let's not worry about that, let's just do what we love to do.

In the style(s) you are familiar with. Don't assume that you know all systems and styles. White is only a color. There are styles where white is the instructor rank, similar to black in many other styles. It is only a color and what it means is up to the particular art or style. (You know, in many styles red comes before black, some styles red means 10th dan master... and in some styles 10th dan is not a master yet, some styles have 15 dans... And some styles don't have any dan ranks after 5... So it is allways up to the art/style.) In the style where I trained, before white belt you were a novice. Then when you knew enough techniques you tested for white belt. In the style I trained in, you wore jogging pants and a t-shirt. In other styles you wear a gi and a few colored belts before ranking white belt. Then why not add just another color? This is where people get mixed these things up badly. They think one color means something and another one doesn't. White is just a color. Some people got the idea that everyone goes the same routine, white, yellow, orange, blah blah. You know what, Kyokushin Karate has a 10 kyu system. You know where yellow is in that system? It is the 6th kyu! When you see a Kyokushin yellow belt you'll probably think he's a beginner, but in reality he's past blue already! It is just a color and different arts have different systems. What I find a decline is the fact that people no longer can think for themselves. They feel every art should have the same system they use. And if they don't then the other people are "dishonorable" or whatever. You know, In Kyokushin (the style I practice) we have 10 kyu ranks. When I earlier studied Gensei-ryu, they only had 6. So which one is the wrong system in your all-knowing mind? Is it dishonourable that Gensei-ryu has no yellow or orange belts? Is it dishonorable that Kyokushin has blue before yellow? Is it dishonorable that the style I studied that has the white belt (Sukunaihayashi Shorin-ryu, the exact art taught by Chotoku Kyan) as one of the tested ranks, actually is the oldest extant belt rank syllabus of Okinawan karate? No other Okinawan style had a color rank syllabus before them (on Okinawa that is, the mainland Japan styles had first)! So you say they are dishonorable?

Yes, if you have a slow internet-connection, you'll have to just sit back and wait. Your media player will kick in eventually.

If you study the old Kodokan style (no longer taught in Kodokan style, but some people outside it still teach it) where the kata contain striking methods, then I'd personally consider it a martial art. If you study the modern Kodokan style (without any punching) I'd personally consider it a martial sport.