Kirves

You've been given some good advice here! The posture that is okay for a green belt is noway okay for a brown belt and so on. The higher ranked you get, the more nitpicky your technique detail must be.

Hehe... I'd love to be able to express myself without having to type so much (ouch, my fingers and wrists!). English is not my first language and that adds to the trouble of trying explain things that I would find difficult to explain even in my first language!

Personally, I don't feel paper is a direct link. If it were, then I could start telling people I'm teaching Koga ryu ninjutsu because the instruction scrolls of Koga ryu are available for all to see in a museum. A direct link would be to have hands-on instruction from the source. But this is not important. Pankration as is, remains a highly effective combat sport and there's no denying that. Nah, it's not that important. I just responded to correct some mistakes in RAZOR's post, that's all.

Why don't you continue Kyokushin somwhere else? Rent some space if have to? Or train outdoors? Keep up a training group, join the nearest dojo even if it's far away (attend class when you can - once a week or once a month, whatever) and attend camps at other locations. Continue progress and when you get graded enough, you can open your own dojo and keep it up.

Well, the difference is that the modern teachers of karate got it from the teachers that were themselves taught by the masters in direct descent. It was not like the karate masters died and nobody did karate for 500 years, then some people started fighting and called it karate because they used the same rules and similar techniques as the masters 500 years ago. But as I said, I may not know all there is to Pankration, maybe there is a line of instructors who have been doing it for all the centuries from ancient Greek, via Roman people, all the way up till today? My intention was never to put Pankration down in any way - I know it is a good fighting style. I was just talking about direct descent from a person to a person to a person beginning in ancient Greek and going unbroken until today. Because such a link doesn't exist (that I'm aware of), the people who train in Pankration make the style up from what's available today, i.e. MT, SW and so on. I was informing RAZOR here on the points that I thought he got wrong.

What people call Pankration today doesn't have a direct historical lineage to the ancient Pankration. Pankration is just used as a general term of fighting in the same spirit as the Greeks did, but usually the people training in Pankration today are just MMA fighters with certain rule set. Or am I wrong, is there someone actually teaching an art that has a direct link of teachers reaching to the old fighters of ancient Greece? The pancrece people I've met have all been just MT+BJJ+SW+SF+etc mixers. Here's a quote from the 2Shoot website:

The right/left stance is about the tactics you use. Many arts prefer the dominant side to be forward (Bruce Lee's JKD being a good example) but that is because they use slightly different tactic. They use the rear/weak hand for deflecting and checking the oncoming attack, while they use the lead hand as a quick counter-attack weapon. The arts that keep the strong side back, use the lead hand as the defencive (usually blocking) hand and use the rear hand as a powerful counter-attack weapon: Main tactic for leading with the weaker side: - block and create opening with the lead hand - counter-attack with a powerful strike from the rear hand - continue attacking so you remain in control of the situation Main tactic for leading with the stronger side: - deflect and control with the weak rear hand while - counter-attacking with a quick strike from the lead hand at the same time - continue attacking so you remain in control of the situation

There are more effective ways to build the muscles. And so you could do better drills to enhance your kicking skills instead of just standing there for two minutes sweating to hold the leg up. IMO. Kicking is not just getting the leg up there. You have to do it fast. You have to retract the leg fast. You have to do it while moving with good footwork. In combination with hand techniques, fakes and all that stuff. And maybe kick some bag too. There's so much effective stuff you could do instead of standing there with your foot in the air... If you want strong leg muscles for powerful kicks, do some kind of squatting exercise (whatever style, some swear to the power of hindu squats, I prefer normal parallel squats while performing various kicks while rising from the bottom position, weighted squats help build muscle if the legs are thin/weak).

Good point about training. I firmly believe that many arts have good techniques but the problem is in the training methods. What is so different between say Kyokushin Karate and Shotokan Karate (a lot of KK os based on SK)? The difference is in the training methods and attitude. Matt Thornton (you can get his videos at http://www.straightblastgym.com/ ) preaches the need for "alive" training. You can make a lot of arts work if your training is "alive" as he calls it.

Best MMA: JKD, Shootfighting Best stand-up: Ashihara Karate, Kyokushin, Muay Thai Best grappling: BJJ, SW

Bujinkan has nine.

Women are free to go to the army if they choose to. Few do though. And I'd recommend a martial arts class for them anyway. But you are right, the male population do have that advantage. Luckily, it also means that any guy happening to be around to help, has also gotten similar training. But, usually Finns do their service around the age of 20 (19 being the "standard" age of starting) and if one doesn't train anything after the service, the skills will diminish eventually. And if someone is really serious about doing something that evil, he can just as well bring a knife...

2nd kyu in Kyokushin is hardly a newcomer. True, it's no expert either, but it's already 8 kyus ahead from white belt so I wouldn't consider him a newcomer.

My choice would be the MT/BJJ/Kali school.

Train both seriously and it's no problem. When you are asked to kick a roundhouse kick with the ball of the foot, do you accidentally kick with the shin because you have trained both ways? No you won't. Same thing with any other technique. You can learn any technique in several ways, details or series, and not mix them up if you concentrate. Problems arise, if you try to mix two arts that are based on contradicting strategies and tactics, but just training two different karate styles - no big deal. Remember, in the old times, one kata contained the methods of one style. If you can learn several kata without going nuts about them, you can also learn several versions of the kata.

My last post became quite long and still it isn't very clear in it's explanations. It is quite difficult to explain these things about karate techniques when people have gotten so much misinformation from the modern styles that are no longer "in touch with their roots" and use kata only as some aerobic exercise and learn a completely different technique set for fighting because they have no idea how the kata is to be studied in the first place. These styles really should do what some styles (like Ashihara Karate) have done: drop the kata altogether. If you can't use it, don't drag it along. The same thing that happened to Tai Chi Chuan (a martial art with lots of full contact training) has happened to Karate. About 70-90% of schools are teaching a modern version of the art that is technically very different from the old version. Then they still drag along some of the old art with them but as the rest of the art is different or trained differently, they can't use what little of the old they are dragging along. It takes some time to find a TaiChiChuan school that teaches it the old way - as an effective MA. As it takes some effort to find a good karate school too. BTW: I myself study a style that doesn't really teach kata bunkai at all, so this is not a rant saying "I do it right and everyone else does it wrong". I have dabbled in some old-school Okinawan styles and know enough about how they do it. But currently I practice a modern style where kata is taught just as a solo aerobic exercise. I don't mind as long as I know this is the issue. I'm there for the full contact sparring anyway. I would like to join the local Ashihara Karate club as they have dropped the old style kata completely from their curriculum, but their schedule doesn't fit with my work shifts, so I take another style with full contact sparring but also the kata that aren't really explained or drilled as meaningful self defence.

As I already said: Actually, when one speaks of kata training on Okinawa, one means the whole package. To study a kata, one must read it, train it and apply it. It is a modern misconception that one only performs the kata as a solo form and calls it "kata training". That is called aerobics. Well, as I already said: Okay, you got me interested. Explain to me how you were taught to use the punch during the 12 years you trained karate? My guess is, that you were taught it just the way I told And here it comes! You have no idea how the punch is to be used. When you use it like it is explained in the kata or by your instructor if he is teaching good karate, you won't be open. As I already pointed out, you won't use the punch the way a boxer uses his cross. Okay... Now I see your point. The standard misconception. I try to explain but feel free to disagree: The reason why it is not used in sparring is because in the styles you don't see it actually forbid grappling during sparring. The punch from the waist is always done while grappling (stand-up). It is not to be used as a punch only. For example, several katas teach it as a finishing punch to the back of the neck, when you are already controlling the opponent with your other hand, from behind or his side. For example: he grabbed (or tried to) you and you broke his elbow with gedan barai. Now you are holding his wrist with your left hand and just broke his elbow with your right forearm. Now comes the punch from the waist: You grab his wrist with your right hand keeping the lock on his wrist, turning him away from you and now you punch with your left hand as directly as possible (without any chambering of the hand) into the back of his neck. Voila - you punched from the waist while pulling the opposite hand to the other waist - just like in the kata. And he's toast. The reason you won't see this in karate sparring is that they don't allow grabbing or punching to the neck or punching from behind. And when he's in the lock facing away from you, you aren't going to be that open when you punch him as directly as possible, unless he knows a counter to the hold - but hey that's how it is with any holds. PS. It is also a misconception that you don't see these punches in NHB matches. I've seen some. Now I don't have any vids so I can't give you exact matches but you do see them occasionally. Usually from fighters who don't do karate at all. I have seen a couple of situations when one fighter has been going down while the other guy has been holding him first with the other hand, then switched to the other hand and punched with the hand that was first holding the guy. There it is, a "reverse punch from the waist" but they even don't notice it themselves because people have been conditioned by these modern no-grappling tournament-karate styles that the punch is done in sparring like a boxing punch. In karate you have two principles that make the punch from the waist logical: Principle #1: When you take a hold of the opponent (a wristlock, grab his sleeve, whatever) you keep it close to your body as your hold is stronger that way - this is why your hand is brought to the waist in the first place. Princeple #2: When you punch, you don't beat around the bush, but your fist travels the shortest, most direct route to the target. Now when you have just held his hand close to you (i.e. your hand is near your waist, ribs or torso) and you decide to release the hold to strike him, your hand is not raised and chambered up near your chin for some boxing type punch but you are to punch directly from where your hand is to the target. Thus, when you incorporate those two principles to fighting where grabbing and holding is allowed, you begin to see several "karate punches from the waist". But if grabbing and holding is not allowed, you won't see this kind of punches at all, just like you had observed yourself.

Earlier there was a thread here discussing how come young children could be granted black belts. That thread was locked, so I'll start a new one here. Do you guys really think the three guys mentioned in http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=54704 are really the kind of martial arts masters that make up a black belt? Should they be allowed to open their own dojos and start teaching adults how to defend themselves against rapists, muggers and robbers?

If it was all about where your toes are pointed at, we wouldn't have different styles. Lots of the differences in the stances today are due to them having all been taught by old generation masters (like Kyan Chotoku as a good example) in different ways to different students. Now the students teach it verbatim to their students not understanding that the reason they got different instruction was because back then it was normal to tailor the methods and tactics to suit the person (you know, some are tall and thin, others small, some chubby and so on, the stances are tailored for mobility, stability, speed, strength, etc). In Okinawan styles this tailoring is still done, but the Japanese styles are often very rigid about doing everything exactly as taught. But there are exceptions both ways.

Especially when one has no idea how it's supposed to be used. I have used it several times in self defence and it works when used appropriately. That's why there's kata in karate, kata is the book that tells you how it is used. But most modern styles can't read the kata and think it is used similar to boxing's cross punch and then they wonder why they got smoked. And this establishes it further: you have no idea what constitutes kata training. Kata training also contains partner drills (yakusoku kumite) and free sparring (jiy kumite). If you didn't know that, then you got your kata/karate instruction from a source who didn't know what they were doing.

Two points here: 1. Tai Chi Chuan didn't use to take that long. Age old motto of Tai Chi Quan is "50% health, 50% combat" and it describes how much of your training time should be taking solo exercise and how much should take up your actual combat exercise. The latter part has been discarded in the most popular styles almost completely. There still are schools that teach Tai Chi Quan the old way, meaning every class also includes full contact drills and sparring. I have been to such class and it was a revelation. Tai Chi Chuan is a real self defence oriented kung fu style, when you go to a real kwoon (the training hall of Chinese kungfu styles, like dojo in Japanese) instead of joining the local "Chinese Morning Exercise group". 2. The answer to your "Why" guestion: the people who join the Morning Exercise -groups are not insterested in self defence or fighting but health. The modern Taiji health exercise schools are as far away from real Tai Chi Quan - The Martial Art as Tae-bo is from real American Kickboxing. People seem to forget that fact all the time.

16

Only applies to styles which want to keep the weak side forward. Lots of styles prefer strong side forward.

It's a myth that karate was designed for fighting against the samurai. Basically karate is a mixture of Okinawan uchinadi and Chinese kung-fu (kempo or whatever you want to call it) and was studied just for self defence like we do. These "Samurai-legends" are only told in some very modern organizations and books written by the modern instructors. Read books by the older generation and you get a different view.

Styles have different focuses. Some focus on sparring, others on studying kata bunkai for self defence. Training methods vary also from noncontact sparring, to full contact sparring, to mostly kata bunkai drilling. *)Kata bunkai means taking a part of a kata and drilling the move (usually a block followed by punch, followed by a takedown and finished with a control hold) with a partner.