cross

I totally agree. The most effective range is the one your are in at that moment in time.

A few things come into play here. Firstly, getting hit hard in the head alot is not good for you.... common sense. Secondly, a pro boxer is likely to get hit ALOT harder and more often than the average person sparring with 16oz gloves and headgear. Thirdly, dehydration is a big concern. Most of the damage is done in the later rounds of boxing matches due to the fact most fighters are suffering some level of dehydration at that point, which means less fluid to protect the brain, and more likelyhood of doing serious damage. Is sparring safe? It certainly can be, depending on how safe you and your partners make it. Usually common sense will prevail and getting hit in the head for the sake of getting hit in the head shouldnt be your reason for undertaking the sparring in the first place.

Im interested to hear the zen answer also, but ill add some thoughts for now: Its been mentioned by Zanshin already that it would take a very skilled/accurate/lucky shooter to shoot you in a vital target(let alone shoot you at all) from that distance, depending on the type of gun they have. And short of running in the opposite direction as fast as possible, there isnt a great deal you can do physically to defend yourself. Unless you are within range to touch the person holding the gun, you dont really have any physical options other than running, if you are close enough to talk to them you can draw them closer using psychological tactics, but from a distance of 1km you would likely not even be able to see the person clearly. So more importantly(in my opinion) is to find out how you got into this position to start with? Is there a contract out on you because you messed with the wrong person?(in which case you are as good as dead if the person is a skilled shooter, you likely wouldnt see them, or the bullet coming until its to late). Is the person mentally unstable and you are just a random target?

If you want to teach someone to defend themselves in a short period of time, I dont think forms training is where you will find the best results. Your limited time would be much more productively spent learning about conflict de-escalation, signs of aggression, pre fight posturing, pre emptive strikes, legal implications, dealing with police interviews, your rights in terms of defending yourself, dealing with post traumatic stress, the possibility of revenge attacks etc. All of which can be taught on a basic level in a relatively short period of time. Rather than looking at how animals use their bodies to fight and catch prey etc, isnt it far more logical to look at what we have at our disposal and focus on human conflict?

May be of some interest: http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2005/09/09/urban-legends-of-karate-belts/

Just some thoughts. Having the presence of mind, accuracy, timing etc to strike specific pressure points is generally difficult, and the level of difficulty increases with the resistance offered by the opponent. I believe its important to understand that some points on the body are anatomically weaker than others, and targeting these will benefit you. But you shouldnt have an over reliance on these. You will be much better served to hit hard in general and if you happen to catch a sensitive point then all the better.

To me its a natural evolution. Take the most appropriate methods for your goals from the most appropriate sources(weather its martial arts related or not). There has been a fair bit of discussion previously on why having an attachment to 1 specific style can have a negative effect on your progress. I think looking at a variety of systems helps avoid this problem.

I think one of the main connections between JKD and MMA is bruce lee's famous quote: "absorb what is useful, discard what is useless, and add what is essentially your own" In basic terms... "use what works". This is exactly what we found out with MMA, what works and what doesnt in a 1 on 1 situation. Also JKD isnt bound by any specific style, the most effective methods are used, regardless of where the come from. Just like in MMA. It seems like common sense to seek the best information and use what is most functional, but alot of martial artists still dont seem to grasp the concept.

uraken = backfist shomen = front uchi = strike backfist strike, to the front?

Good stuff Rainbow_Warrior. You learn the most from training and sparring people who are more skilled than yourself.

Seiken(punch with 2 knuckles) refers to the type of fist formation you strike with and has nothing to do with any other aspect of the punch. Gyaku-tsuki(zuki)(reverse punch) refers to a punch coming from your rear hand. So a seiken gyaku-tsuki is a reverse punch hitting with the 2 main knuckles of your hand. To the best of my knowledge anyway.

In football you either win or lose. In martial arts(competition excluded), those are not really the 2 options you have. Think of college, you dont "win" or "lose", if you understand the material and can prove you have an understanding of it i.e. pass the exams, then you get your diploma. Martial arts is similar. Also keep in mind that a black belt from one style doesnt necessarily equal a black belt in another style. It just means the person has reached that pre-defined level within the system/organisation they are studying.

Black belt means you have an understanding and ability to perform what is required by the particular system to obtain that rank.

Any specific ways to develop strength in the fingers? I have to admit im a little skeptical about striking with the finger tips, unless its a flick to the eyes.

Martial arts tend to have a set curriculum that is taught to everyone, and then its up to the practitioners to make the information relevant to reality. In self defense systems, we find out what we need first and then base the curriculum around the most common threats and our goals.

I agree. If the system you are learning relies on very specific details in terms how techniques are to be performed, this can be difficult to learn from a book or dvd. Not impossible, just more difficult. But for systems(particularly those focused on self defense) where the focus isnt on "perfect" technique, you can learn a great deal from dvd's and books if you dont have access to an instructor in your area.

Any weapon that isnt found in everyday situations, or carried by the majority of armed criminals. The reason why bo, tonfa, nunchaku, sai etc worked well, in the time and country they were used, was because they were found in everyday situations. The reason why swords worked well, in the time and country they were used, was because they were carried by the majority of armed criminals. Today, the threats have changed, and the weapons you are likely to find in everyday life have changed.

Im interested to know how you would be able to determine all this about another person effectively? The main thing to avoid, is a match fight type situation. Rarely will you see 2 people square off and get ready to fight unless, both people agree to it. The idea is to not let yourself be placed in this type of "dueling" situation with the use of dialog and adopting a non-threatening position. From there you have a pretty good chance of avoiding the situation altogether, and if not you have access to pre-emptive strikes which will give you an advantage right off the bat. Or worst case scenario defensive techniques that will hopefully get you back in the fight.

Grossman it is buddy. And a good quote.

Hock?

The school i used to attend did a few demonstrations now and then. We never added anything new that we wouldnt do in a normal class. Because if you are trying to attract students, show them what they can expect, not what fancy tricks you know. So we just took a normal class an compressed it into about a 10-15 min demo.

Your tactics should be similar regardless of the other person, because you wont really know anything about their skill until it is already being applied on you. The only difference is the level of force you use, which will be determined by the level of the threat at the time.

Im wondering if most people prefer to use japanese, or if that what most people already have to do has a matter of fact in class?? There is a trend in the martial arts where people will do has they are told and then do whatever they can to rationalise what they are already doing. Something to consider in this whole discussion: If you follow the fairly standard lineage of "karate" has a martial art, most say something along the lines of: Originated in china, made its way to okinawa, then to japan, and finally to the rest of the world. You will notice that the okinawan's got rid of most of the chinese terminology, the japanese created there own NON okinawan names for the techniques, yet we for some reason wont adapt the system to our culture and use our own language for everything. Where is the sense in that? No, its not completely useless, but that doesnt mean its what we should be doing. Im trying to fight the temptation.

Saves time but is it really that much extra effort to complete the name in Japanese (or Korean)? Fair enough you save yourself that little bit extra breath but I still think the pros outweigh the cons. Call it whatever you want, but if you want to learn more about it than what it physically looks like and how to mirror what it looks like, then you should hope you can speak the language of the person teaching you.

Thanks for the clarification.