Wastelander

As I recall, when Kano Jigoro originally instituted it the black belt was intended to indicate when a student was knowledgeable enough and skilled enough for new students to learn from them. I believe that this would have meant those students knew how to perform all of the kata, as well as all of the throwing, pinning, locking and choking techniques of judo well enough to teach to beginners, and could demonstrate them against a resisting opponent. The idea of black belt being "the beginning" of your training was technically still true, because just knowing how to perform all of the techniques in judo didn't mean you had mastered it, but it did mean that you could explore and personalize it for the rest of your life because you had all of the fundamentals. If we carry this concept over into other arts, then the black belt should be given when a student knows how to perform all of the kata and techniques of the art well enough to teach them to beginners and demonstrate them against a resisting opponent. How long this takes depends entirely upon the size and complexity of the curriculum, the skill/talent/dedication of the student and the skill/talent/dedication of the teacher. I do think that the black belt has been over-emphasized over time, but I actually think that was done for the very reason that you are suggesting we de-emphasize it, OP--to keep people training. Training is hard work and requires a lot of dedication, so the black belt was over-emphasized as a hard-to-reach goal that would keep people coming to the dojo to try and achieve that coveted piece of fabric in the hopes that by the time they reached it they would have developed a love for the art that would keep them coming after that. What you seem to be proposing is that we give students a black belt more easily to try to accomplish, essentially, the same thing, but I think that what we have discovered by the original over-emphasis of the black belt to try to keep people training, and the subsequent prevalence of post-shodan dropouts, is that you cannot use the belt system to build your students' love for the art. They will either love it or they won't, and they will only keep training if it fulfills their personal desires and meets their goals. An instructor can try to meet the student's needs, but if the development of the art, itself, isn't the student's goal then the instructor can only do so much.

To be honest, I suspect that this WAS a power-trip for that Godan. There has been nothing keeping him out of the dojo or off the mat--the only difference between the situation you describe and your normal classes where he sits out is the absence of your head instructor. This tells me that the head instructor may be the reason that the Godan in question doesn't train or teach at the dojo anymore. My guess is that he resents the instructor for taking the dojo in a different direction, and he saw his absence as an opportunity to make his disapproval known and "prove his superiority" to you all, so to speak, by showing you how things used to be, although he probably exaggerated the severity, intensity and difficulty of it to boost his ego. I would talk to your head instructor about the incident immediately, because I suspect that the Godan may try to tell the head instructor about how "disrespectful," "rude" and "ungrateful" you are, and you will want to explain your side.

Goju-Ryu, particularly any branch that practices iri kumi, will give you the in-close fighting and hard contact that you want, but you will also get a strong tradition and history, powerful technique and effective self defense applications for your forms. Traditional Okinawan karate really only has low-level kicks, and those are largely limited to stomps, toe-kicks, front kicks, side kicks and heel kicks, so you aren't likely to get much new kicking material after already receiving a black belt in Taekwondo. That said, a lot of traditional Okinawan styles have been "modernized" a bit so that they include more kicks (still nothing you wouldn't have already picked up in Taekwondo, though) and some of that modernization has also led to the exclusive use of non-contact point sparring. You will really just have to look around your area, see what is available, watch a class, try a class and research it.

I typically practice my kata, go through kata application if I have a partner, and do bagwork and makiwara training. I also like to throw a heavybag on the ground to work ground strikes and transitions, and I will usually do some extra conditioning exercises like pushups, crunches, dips, pull-ups, lunges, medicine ball slams, wrist rollers, etc.

We have a tiered pay structure, so you pay less if you go to fewer classes, and pay more if you go to more classes. $79 a month for 8 classes, $89 for 12, $99 for 16, and $119 for unlimited classes.

To be fair, I think there is some speculation as to whether Matsumura taught his family differently than he taught his other students (Kyan, Itosu, Tawada, etc.), and I think it is fairly likely that this was the case. We see similar trends in other family styles, after all. It is possible that Matsumura, himself, could have "dumbed down" the Passai he passed on to his public students and taught the "original" version to his family, or he could have taught the "original" version to his public students but a personal variation to his family. We really have no way of knowing! I wouldn't say that Hohan Soken's version of Passai is less effective--whether it is the "original" or a personalized version, it should still be effective if it came (mostly) unaltered from Matsumura--but I don't practice it so for the purpose of this thread I chose the Tawada version of Matsumura's Passai.

In my system we teach both Itosu's Passai (we call it Passai Sho) and the Matsumura Passai (we call it Passai Dai) that Chibana learned from Tawada. Of the two, I would say that the Matsumura Passai that Chibana learned from Tawada is better. We know that Itosu changed the kata to fit his new school-safe curriculum, and in pursuit of that I feel that some of his kata lost their originally intended applications and became less useful. The Passai that came from Tawada, who was a contemporary of Itosu and student of Matsumura, seems as though it may be closer to the original kata as it was taught by Matsumura. I will also note that Chibana thought it was better, and his opinion carries some weight with me.

I would say that your only real options are to teach, yourself, or call martial arts schools around the area and see if they have any instructor-level students that would be good options. If you do hire an instructor from another dojo, though, you should probably expect them to want to get something more than just a wage for the instructor--advertising or referrals, for instance.

We can argue semantics all we want but, honestly, the general martial arts public uses "traditional" as a classification without much in the way of actual criteria. Some arts that are labelled "traditional" are karate, judo, taekwondo, kung fu, and silat, and they are generally classified as such regardless of style or personal methods. The only thing I can see for saying that these are traditional arts is that they all wear non-Western clothing and use terminology that isn't necessarily native to where they are being practiced. For example, in karate and judo you wear a gi and use Japanese terminology, even though you may not be Japanese or live in Japan. On the flipside, martial arts like Muay Thai, boxing and wrestling are generally considered "modern", and they all tend to use Western clothing and mostly native language terminology. BJJ is a different one because it is considered a modern art, but it uses a gi and uses a mixture of non-native terminology (Japanese and Portuguese), although there is also a lot of no-gi BJJ that uses native terminology as well. I have heard of it being called "traditional BJJ" (with a gi and Japanese/Portuguese) and "modern BJJ" (without a gi and using native terminology). My own personal definition of a traditional martial art is fairly simple: a martial art that has has its methods and practices passed from one generation to another, which then passes it on without much change, if any. For karate, that started happening in the 1930's when styles started to really solidify and cross-training started to become less common. For boxing, that happened a very, very, very long time ago and really only changed when boxing gloves and Queensbury Rules were introduced, and now it is traditional again, by my definition. BJJ is a traditional art when done in the manner of the Gracies, but only starting to become a traditional art in the realm of no-gi BJJ. MMA isn't a traditional art by my definition, and really can't be simply because there are so many methods and practices involved that it can't form one cohesive tradition.

A karate instructor should promote a healthy lifestyle and, ideally, live a healthy lifestyle. That said, even those with healthy lifestyles don't always look healthy, and those with unhealthy lifestyles don't always look unhealthy. Take a look at this list: Motobu Choki, Higaonna Morio, Masutatsu Oyama, Kinjo Masakazu, Patrick McCarthy, Iain Abernethy, Wullie Roger, Jeff Speakman. All of these men are well-known in their respective realms of martial arts, and they are all considered to be skilled, knowledgeable martial artists and, by all accounts, great instructors. They are (or were, in the case of those that have passed away) also all overweight, to varying degrees. Does being overweight negate everything else about them? Going along with that, I have personally known some great instructors who are overweight, and I know people who are overweight despite living a healthy lifestyle because of medical conditions. Calling such medical conditions "excuses" is the same as saying that a person with a compromised immune system due to chemotherapy or HIV is making "excuses" for why they get sick so easily. Are there martial artists out there who preach a healthy lifestyle, but don't live it, and are therefor overweight even though they could be trim and fit? Of course there are. But regardless of that fact, I don't see the need to demonize overweight instructors, or to question the quality of their teaching. My instructor happens to be thin and in great shape, and he promotes and lives a healthy lifestyle. He is also very skilled, very knowledgeable, and a great teacher. A Godan that trains with us is a big, barrel-chested, overweight man who promotes and lives a healthy lifestyle, but is overweight anyway. He is also very skilled, very knowledgeable, and a great teacher. I, personally, am thin and in good shape, and promote a healthy lifestyle, but I also eat an awful lot of fast food and way too many desserts. Appearances can be deceiving, but regardless of that fact, they do not impact an instructor's ability to be a good instructor.

Very interesting, albeit morbid, topic! As it turns out, I am currently reading a book that I got for Christmas called The Katas: The Meaning Behind the Movements, that goes over this very thing. I may be way off base with my assessment, or the author may be way off base with his descriptions, but I'll give it a shot. As I understand it, the act (and art) of seppuku has value in Japan because of their reliance on ritual and form as a way of life. This is largely because of the period of isolationism that Japan locked itself into, which forced it to develop culturally within its own borders without input from other cultures. This development saw the rise of strict codes of conduct in order to make everything run smoothly, and everyone was encouraged to follow their respective codes of conduct or face consequences. Everything in Japan has a kata, from getting dressed, to making tea, to speaking with others, to ending your life. Part of the kata of life for a samurai was the kata of seppuku, which was used as a motivator in the quest for perfection as well as a desensitization technique to the concept of dying. To the samurai, to fail at something in your life essentially meant that you had no more reason to live, because you would not be able to achieve perfection in life, but the act of taking your own life in such a painful way without fear or acknowledgment of that pain was a way to cleanse yourself of your failure and dishonor. To the warrior class, this idea was instilled in them from birth, so they would not be shocked or horrified by death, whether it be the death of those they kill in battle, the death of their friends and loved ones, or the death of themselves. The rest of the world, having developed largely through open trade and travel between regions, rarely formulated such stringent codes of conduct because people from different cultures were constantly mingling. Since we had much looser ideas of how people should behave and act, we never developed such extreme acts as seppuku in order to repent for misdeeds, although we still developed apologies, procedures and punishments that our cultures felt fit those misdeeds. If someone were to suggest seppuku as a viable method of repentance in most civilized nations, it would be reacted to with horror, fear and disgust because it is not a concept that fits with our societal norms. Personally (and I know this is a bit harsh for some people) I see no honor in killing yourself unless you have done something completely unforgivable and, even then, you won't be forgiven, but at least it can be said that you saw the evil of what you had done and saved the world the trouble of your existence.

My instructor is my friend, but he has "modes" that make it fairly obvious what role he is taking--sometimes he is a teacher, sometimes he is a big brother figure, and sometimes he is a friend. It depends on the situation and what he has to do, and I feel that it works out quite well.

As I mentioned, I am not an evolutionary biologist. That said, the martial artist/university scientist I mentioned DOES happen to be an evolutionary biologist. He also happens to believe that most scientists, let along the general public, do not understand how evolution works. I'm not really qualified to argue for him, but this whole mess caused him to write up his own response. For those who would like to read the counter-argument, here is the link: http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2012/12/another-just-so-story-this-time-about-fists/

Assuming that blocking/deflecting/trapping aren't included, I would definitely pick elbows!

There are some things that we do that don't work for me--my instructor can make them work, but he has been training for as long as I have been alive and has a lot of natural skill. I do work on the more complex techniques, even though I have a hard time getting them to work, in the hopes that one day I can add them to my arsenal. As it stands, though, I tend to drill my more basic, known-effective techniques when put under pressure.

I am not an evolutionary biologist, but I do not agree with the idea that fist-fighting was so prevalent in our ancestral history that we had to evolve hands specifically for that purpose. In my mind, it is more likely that our ancestors fought more like chimps do, as the video linked in that article shows, which would lead to palms suited for impact rather than fists, which are complex and built of small bones and a linkage of joints that makes it a naturally poor tool for striking unless properly conditioned. I think that the hand is much more suited to fine motor skills that allow us to use more complex tools than other primates are able to use. I suppose that fighting could, perhaps, have played some part in making the fist a slightly stronger tool for fighting, but I doubt that was the primary influence on its development. I brought it up to my brother, who is going to school to be a biology teacher, as well as to a martial artist I know who is a university scientist, and neither of them give this "study" any credibility. My brother thinks it is an interesting "what if?" story, but has no real evidence to support it, and the scientist just thinks it is a load of manure, basically

We have gotten some new students thanks to the MMA craze. People who want to do MMA do not typically seek out traditional martial arts, regardless of how those arts are trained--instead, they look for MMA gyms, BJJ schools or Muay Thai schools. People who just want to train in martial arts, and MMA just gave them the idea or inspired them, are not usually as picky and will look into everything, and some of them end up with us. We can provide all of the skills necessary for MMA at my dojo, but we don't market that too much at the moment.

Shoulder and knee injuries are simply the reality in judo unless you only train kata-style throws onto crash mats. By its nature, judo is intended to be trained live against a resisting opponent, and that means you are going to have a lot of torque being generated, bodies colliding together and into mats at odd angles, and an unpredictability that all come together to make it dangerous. You could only work throws on stationary, non-resisting opponents in the same way they are performed in judo kata, and you could only throw those people onto crash mats, and you would dramatically reduce the number of injuries, but you would also dramatically reduce the art's effectiveness.

Does "Naihanchi application" count as one thing? I would love to spend 3 months just breaking down Naihanchi, and drilling its applications until they become engrained in my muscle memory.

Don't worry too much about organization affiliations with the Goju-Ryu dojo. As with almost all martial arts organizations, politics eventually cause fractures that result in some people starting their own organizations, and some people just choose to stop being involved entirely. That said, he has a Meibukan patch on his gi in his photo, so I would assume that he has remained affiliated with them. ETA: Just checked on the Meibukan's website and confirmed that his instructor's dojo is listed as a Member Dojo, and he is listed as a Blackbelt under his instructor. That, to me, does indicate that he is in good standing with the organization, particularly since his dojo uses the same name (CMMA) and logo as his instructor's dojo.

Good on you for doing your research! Definitely be sure to watch a regular class (one that you would be attending if you joined) at both schools, that way you can get a better feel for it. The Goju-Ryu instructor's bio says he has been under his current instructor for 8 years, but it's entirely possible that he was training under a different instructor prior to that. Regardless of rank or experience level, though, both instructors will have sufficient knowledge to teach you, and if they are continuing their education they should be able to continue teaching you for a long time. Also, don't forget that experience and rank don't necessarily make someone a good teacher. As far as contact goes, you will most likely prefer the Goju-Ryu training if you want hard contact and sparring. Their iri kumi go is rough, realistic and intense!

The level of contact in the dojo should be appropriate to the individual, but gender and age are two factors that people constantly try to use to gauge what is appropriate instead of asking and testing. We have a 14 year old girl at my dojo that can take a hit just as well as any boy her age, if not better. We have some people of both genders and different ages that are new to sparring and contact and need to be eased into it. We have some people with injuries or medical/psychological conditions to address. I have trained with girls from other schools who are tough as nails and girls from other schools who will forever give me the evil eye because I actually applied a joint lock to them. I have trained with guys who want to hit as hard as possible all the time and I have trained with guys who complain about a broken blood vessel in their finger from parrying a punch and want to stop. Unless otherwise specified by the instructor (no contact, light contact only, etc.) the level of intensity and contact should suit the individual. Ask first, and then test by working your way up from no contact to the highest level their are comfortable with. Communication with your partners is key to fostering a safe and effective training environment!

There have been studies done on the "bystander effect" where the more people there are around a situation, the less likely someone is to help because they feel someone else will help. I actually saw a story earlier this year where an investigative news show had a little girl walk down a street with hidden cameras over and over again and they had an actor "kidnap" her. Despite her struggling and screaming, even trying saying different things, it took them something like 6 attempts before anyone helped. Once two men dropped what they were doing and ran to help, all of a sudden several other people started making calls to the police or moving to help as well.

My personal martial arts goals for the coming year are: 1. Compete in my first amateur MMA bout 2. Test for Ikkyu (and pass, ideally! ) 3. Make it to more seminars

I'll be one of those that promotes kata practice, but I say that kumite should be part of your kata practice. Kumite, as we know it today, is not the way it was originally done and while it can be fun and an effective way of learning how to fight competitively, I don't think it is the most effective way to train for self defense. Ideally, I think that kumite should be role playing--one person is the defender and one person is the attacker--where the attacker does any real-world attack, typically based on habitual acts of violence, and the defender does whatever they need to--ideally utilizing techniques and concepts from kata--in order to end the threat. During this, the attacker does not throw one attack and freeze, but rather should react as they think an attacker really would and continue trying to accomplish their goal until they have been "defeated". As has been said, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth, and this provides you with the opportunity to experience getting hit and reacting to it, but in a self-defense specific context. That's just my own view on it, though, and keep in mind that I still do MMA-style sparring on a fairly regular basis