Maestro

::Edit::

I didn't say you wouldn't be able to break without refined technique, just that it would hurt to do so, as you can see it did. Hopefully you learned something to help you refine your technique from that first break. That Blackbelt must have been a Masterful martial artist! that's a funny story!

well, I am about 6'3 or a little over and 195lbs, I have been very happy in TKD, I think it suits me very well. The only problem for some tall people with the long-range arts I've seen is that there is a lot more body to put out there, and so can get tired faster and maybe be a bit slower on the techniques. Myself, I have not had that problem and I've found the height to be a great advantage. But, whatever art you choose, you will adapt to that art, so I wouldn't worry about it.

my club's stance is that you shouldn't be washing the belt all the time, but if it looks downright dirty, then that is disrespectful too, so you better wash it. It's recommended not to wash the colored belts much (or with other clothes) because I guess some of them don't have real high quality dyes or something. I dunno, maybe not true, but I do know a guy who washes he belt about once a month and it looks pretty faded.

Yes, that one works, though I must admit I didn't find it that funny. Now, if there had been video, WELL, that woulda been a different story.

Yes, it is a test for power too, but again, without proper technique, that power will just make it hurt more. I think it's not the breaking itself that developed that power, it's what you did inbetween breaking that made you more powerful. Well, Stold, even the instrictor may not notice an inch in the wrong direction, (mine didn't! ) or a couple degrees mis-allignment in your foot when you are bashing a big leather target or a punching bag. You don't have to learn this way, but I would say it is darn effective. No better way to be sure that you do it right in the future than to remember what happened the last time you did it wrong. We had a couple big whitebelt guys in my school that believed that their strength would be enough to easily get them through breaking techniques, so, they didn't dedicate as much time to their form as they should have. Well, they were sorry. I mean, ahem, that's not funny.

I'm not saying it's the only way to perfect a technique, 'cause yes, it would be very impractical to do a ridiculous amount of breaking, but IMO, it does help in fine tuning once your technique is fairly good. It is indeed a way to demonstrate how effective your technique has become, but the very fact that it is a very hard object will help you to perfect it further. Let's say you broke a board with what you believed to be excellent technique, but you somehow injured yourself in the process--as you may very well do without near-perfect technique. The nature of the injury should tell you something about your technique that you may not otherwise have noticed on a softer target. I.E, you do a break with a instep-roundhouse kick. Especially with this particular kick, you may very well bruise your foot if you don't have it alligned properly, but you would probably not notice the problem against a punching bag. I remember back at my whitebelt test I had to do a break with a knifehand. I thought my knifehand technique was fine from other target work I did, but I found during the breaking that I was really alligning my target about an inch further from my fingers than I really should, as a result, I bruised my wrist. But now I know, and have not had that problem since.

Hmmm, won't work for me says file does not exist. And yes, you can post links so long as they are not advertisements, copywrited files, or to your personal benifit.

What are the funniest bumper stickers you have seen? I think we should make one for the merchandise shop here that says: KARATE FORUMS; Our forum could beat up your forum. I've seen.. "If you can read this, I'm about to jam on the brakes."(in very small print) "Horn broken, watch for finger."

Sure it's generally more productive to fight with a sparring partner, but let's face it: If you do some techniques full strength at a sparring partner, you might put them in the hospital or kill them. (Man, would that be bad for morale! ) While I would agree with you guys that breaking really isn't going to directly help you on the streets, it does help perfect techniques--no way anyone's gonna convince me otherwise on that--and martial arts are not only about what will work in a real fight, they're about technique too. (very cool video Kickchick! )

Yes, I would agree. I would by no means be the best anyone has ever seen, but I already feel that way. Just about everyone I know at a high level of skill has that outlook.

Maybe I am not a true addict (though I do 24 of 'em) but I've never really had a problem with MA movies. Darned if I'm not bowing left and right though. In the past year, I don't think my hands have been in a pocket except to drop something in or take something out!

Well, If TKD was allowed in, then it wouldn't be fair to the others who thought it would be an easy tourny. No, just kidding, I dunno, that doesn't make a lot of sense, but I suppose you've gotta draw the line somewhere, otherwise you'll be admitting every style ever known to the tournament, you know?

I do not remember ecxactly what it is called or if it even still exists, but somewhere in China they held a Kumite with no restrictions on style. This would be the same one that Frank Dux competed on and that was portrayed in bloodsport. But like I said, I don't know if it still goes on.

well, there's another long and heated thread about that here: http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=5756 Basicly the conclusion there was that nobody really knows how the top ten were choosen, and it is impossible to agree on what they should be, so I'm not gonna go there again and I would suggest nobody else does either. As you can see from the old post, it just breeds argument really.

All of Jet Li's too. I would definitly not say that it is because it is a superior style (A guy could get killed on this forum for that man, don't even think it! ). I think that the reason people like it is that it is a more flowing, more circular art. Karate arts and TKD stlyes emphasize directness, getting to the target in a straight line with as much speed and power as possible. Gung Fu MA's generally have more circular arm movements, and many of the stances and movements are more eccentric, while a Karate or TKD stance generally wouldn't look a whole lot different then your average Joe. I'm a loyal TKDist myself, but I'll be the first to admit that there are a good number of Wushu stances and forms I wouldn't mind learning, just 'cause they look so cool. I think that the average movie-goer likes to see this "flair," if you will, that is more inherent in the Gung Fu styles than it is in most others.

No! It's magic! my computer reads minds...

I do not say things just to say them, and it is quite uncivil and un-american of you to continue to say that you cannot respect my opinion and that I am saying things just to say them. If you cannot focus on refuting a view and only the view, please refrain from replying. There are consequences to going it alone! Even in the context of war only with Iraq there are consequences. The very fact that our Government--who sure as heck knows more about Foriegn Policy than any of us do--is trying so hard to gain international support should prove that to you. More than ever, the community we live in is a global one, and while you are right that we are the most powerful country ever, we cannot just do whatever we wish. Maybe you are right and we will never have support from the U.N (though I think we will), but I think that international support is important enough to wait longer for. As for the history, it is hardly "moot", I think it is extremely relevant. It is called legitamacy and IMO that history sure destroys a lot of ours in the case of Iraq. I suspect that a lot of people think of consider Saddam's invasion of Kuwait too when they consider what kind of person he is and whether or not we should go to war with him, and I think people should know the real facts before they make a decision. That doesn't mean that I think he is a great guy, he certainly is not, but I think it is dangerous to not have people know the facts behind the situations.

First of all, I would like to point out that there are two sides to every story: The United States is very far from being blameless in this whole fiasco. Saddam came to power in 1979. In 1980, Iraq invaded Iran with U.S sanction and the financial support from many other neighboring countries. In '83, we (the United States) gave them tanks, helicopters, intelligence support, as well as equiptment for their Atomic Energy Commission, and the bacteria, fungi, and protazoa to make the Bio-weapons we are now so concerned about. During the rest of the Iran/Iraq war ('till 1988), they used these weapons against Iran, again, with our knowledge and support. Also, many people seem to think that the invasion of Kuwait was just an act of Agression on Saddam's part. The truth is, Kuwait was stealing oil from Iraq. The Basra oil field lays 90 and 10 percent under Iraq and Kuwait, respectivly, and Kuwait was taking more than the agreed upon amount of the oil. Kuwait refused to make reparations to Iraq, and in 1990, Iraq invaded, with U.S support. The reasons for the United States' reversal of thier stance on the Iran/Kuwait war is not fully known. Many suspect that it has to do with the fact that at the same time, with the loss of the stabilizing influence of having both U.S and U.S.S.R allies in the middle east, Margaret Thatcher (Britain) told Bush that we need to make an example of someone before nations started letting out all their pent-up aggression. So, some suspect that we chose Iraq as that example. Heel Hook, I do not see how you can love america as much as you seem to and still say that you are ashamed when you hear people speak against our own nation. It is this very ability to speak out that makes America what it is today. Nowhere in the world, not even in Britain, do people and the press have the same ability to speak out against whatever they please as they do here. In some countries I could not have even given the history that I gave above. James Maddison wrote over two centuries ago of the importance of creating a large union, in which we have factions, many, many factions in our population that will serve to moderate our viewpoints and keep us from narrowing our vision and seeing all sides of issues. Well, what good would all these moderating viewpoints be if those who had them were unallowed to voice them? It is extremely unfair of you to call other people's viewpoints ignorant just because you do not agree with them. As Saifight said when he re-opened this, you must respect other's opinions, not agree with them, but respect them. While I do think that Saddam has to go, I do not think that it is time for war yet, especially not without support of the U.N. Let's say we do go to war, and we win. Two things can happen in reconstructing a country after regime displacing war. We could inherit the arab version of Germany--an inheritly strong nation with enormous talent and resources that will practically rebuild itself. Or, we could inherit the arab version of Yugoslavia--an artificial country divided among Shiites, Nasserites, Sunnis, Kurds, leftists, and all sorts of clans and tribes that can only be hald together by the iron fist of someone like Saddam. Well, let's face it, Iraq would be the second option. Iraq will take a tremendous amount of time to heal itself and become a progressive and truly accountable, self-sustaining government. It will be a many-year effort in which we would definitly want the greatest amount of international and U.N support possible. The task of getting rid of Saddam will be nothing compared to the task of rebuilding the country after we tear it down. The war on terror is World War III, and we should definitly not refrain from fighting it, but it is a world war, and I don't believe anyone has ever won one of those without lots of allies?

I'm a college student, double majoring in English and Creative Writing, so that keeps me pretty darn busy, Also... Acoustic Guitar--playing and writing Pool Running and weightlifting Drawing Reading Walking in woods for days w/o gear (my only weird thing, I swear) Poetry--writing and reading

If you do the math right, you'll never "beat" it, I'll PM you how it works so's not to ruin it for anyone else.

Try this: http://www.cyberglass.co.uk/assets/Flash/psychic.swf (if your browser asks you to install "flash Player," do it!)

I would agree with kickchick--I'd say you probably should not be satirizing the Columbia at this point, especially as I suspect you don't have a lot of experience in satirical productions. Satire can be extremely effective, but if not done very well and carefully it will simply appear distasteful and insensitive. https://www.nytimes.com is the online New York Times paper. It has an advanced search engine that should help you find what you're looking for. All the new articles are free, those 7 days or older cost money, but even the old ones you can access the abstracts for free, which is probably all you need, but in any case I'm sure you can find a recent one, there's TONS of news on this site.

I have a version translated by Thomas Cleary that I think is quite good. He is a Ph.D translator of lots of buddhist and Toaist texts. Mine was a gift, and has both the direct translation and interpretation. I just skip over the interpretations, I would rather have the version with just the translation, but you can't argue with a gift right? Anyway, the translation itself strikes me as very good, but not reading ancient chinese I guess I can't be sure. I have browsed through other versions of TAoW and they have not seemed as objectivly translated as this one. This guy keeps his interpretive "garbage" separate from the text, so you get the text as it was.