Luther unleashed

That's funny, well the thing that is best about full contact is that you don't pull your punches. I often pull punches so I will need serious focus to "unleash" (sorry I had to) on an attacker in a real situation. My first notion is to not fight at all, and I teach this so in my mind I suppose I don't need to be the best fighter to be a great martial artist. If I want to simply be the best fighter I'd pick a direct system like Muai Thai and pound away with fighting drills. Full contact is with ought a doubt the most street like imho

Montana I hear you. The video of me and my youngan is NOT a good example as I was not very aggressive with her, for obvious reasons although it does show a more "real fight" energy, I find the fact that many students tend to get overly aggressive. It helps some to understand the pressure of a fight, although it's "shortcoming" as you stated is that sometimes students don't slow down enough to practice solid learned technuiqe. I literally have thought about making them do some point sparring to get them in a different state of mind, and to learn technuiqe more effectively. My kid in the video DOES show more of this though. She's very used to being tough and aggressive, I try to spar with my students to show them the rythme that I'd like to see, some defense, some moving away and blocking and so on, not just attack mode. I'll update if I change things up lol.

I suppose so ITF likes to be different lol. You stillage the point that it is, in general a matter of rank, which is like education in this sense. As far as getting hung up on it, what I'm trying to say is I never really met a Korean practitioner that does get hung up on it so again you made my point LOL. It just seems to be perceived differently and is very common, so that was my point. The article is still a very good read and I can absolutely understand his view his view for the most part was one of the biggest respects to martial arts is humility and calling oneself a master is not humble, I can really understand his perspective however it's never been an issue for me and it's just a title

Well as I said in Korean martial arts I think there is a more solid tone or "standard" for the word. I, as well as many other Tang Soo Do or Tae Kwon Do students commonly refer to their chief instructors as master so and so. It's so common I don't think most of us think about it, I certainly was so used to it I found that the name meant very little, or at least it didn't stand out or feel strange. As I stated, in Korean martial arts this is typically awarded to anybody about 4th degree or sometimes 5th degree black belt and I think it's more so seen as almost an educational standpoint. On that note there is a really great article from Michael Jai White, and I really enjoyed reading it, check it out... http://bzfilm.com/articles-notes/michael-jai-white-on-m-word/

Great posts. Bushido_man short but sweet. I'm a loyalist by nature. My last place I was very loyal to, and pushed his Buisness like I was a dealer. Sadly there came a point where we didn't see eye to eye and I had to move on. No hard feelings, and I'd recommend him if there was something he could offer in which i couldn't, and there are things like Haidong Gumdo "Korean swordsmanship"! To me loyalty looks like respect and even if I disagree with somebody and move on, it's still there.... That's what it looks like to me.

I thought it would be fun to have a place where all of us from different backgrounds and different though Joe's post videos or even just have conversations about the style of sparring they do. I have only done a small amount of point sparring, most of my sparring has been something called " continuous " sparring. Basically, you should spar for a certain amount of time without stopping, it is based on more of a self-defense type of situation and less of a sport, although sports can be fun and work to help students with self-defense aspects as well so I'm not knocking point sparring. The general rule of thumb is you can go light or medium contact, depending on what your partner and you agree on. Here is a video of me and my 13-year-old stepdaughter. It was a fun session and pretty much just playing around. http://youtu.be/aWtewmS6938

This is a very smart (devils advocate) thought process and I can't say enough how glad I am you said it. My response has a different approach though. I teach mostly children and it's very difficult to teach kids to move gracefully, to have solid technique and so on. It's very much about the mental training for them at this point. I find the topic of the "standard" so intriguing. Here's why... If I set my standard to how I want my students to look then I'd be bored because people would leave due to a lack of instant gratification or "frequent testings"! If I set the bar too low then I keep students happy BUT I have lowered the quality of each and every belt my students wear. As a person Wanting to teach, I want the bar high, but as a Head instructor who owns my Buisness and needs to make a living I am cautious of how high I set it because I want to remain open. The standard we hold reflects on us, but also is a very delicate line to our success. Balance is so important here. As to students getting bored doing the same thing to get better, and instructors not teaching in-depth enough because of fear of boredom and losing students... I work by this way of thinking, I trick them into the same techniques by selling them a different drill. Here's what I mean. To avoid boredom I change how I not only rotate and come back to things to keep a fresh feeling, but I change how I teach it, this is what I think the key is to keep people interested, let me explain... If I'm teaching a small kicking combination, such as rear leg roundhouse, set kicking foot down in front, rear leg axe kick, I may ha e them in the back of the class room moving across the gym until they reach the end (kicking drills as I call them)! A few weeks later I will teach the same combination, except I have them stay in their spots and do them with kick paddle or focus mits. Gives them different while practicing the same. For kids, occasionally I even do a relay race, running to the front wall and back to me, when back they need to execute the same combination before they tag the next person. There are three very different methods of teaching the same kicks, and keeping them interesting. I find that it makes a big difference. In the end each person has a standard of their own, and it may change like the day, and that's ok, this is about you teaching what you want. If your happy with the product and the students happy with the product then it's a good product.

That's good reading there, thanks for posting that here. I think it's important to have a lot of accurate history, as well as a lot of current experiences in a thread like this, that is supposed to be all about the art.

Hey there, welcome to the forum. I'm not sure I understand your post, are you trying to get people to physically meet you for training?

Don't you have something better to do? Haha, I'm totally kidding, nice job and a plethora of knowlage and experience in your posts. A valuable part of the forum. Take care.

This topic has come up before and rightfully so, it's an interesting one especially for us Americans. My primary background is in Korean martial arts. I have ventured into Chinese martial arts and Japanese but at any rate, I only count in Korean if you get what I'm saying lol. In Korean martial arts it's still very much common practice to use the term, in this aspect it's used as a certain rank marker of you will. At 4th Dan, rarely but sometimes 5th, a martial artist is called master. I guess it isn't much of a big deal to me or perhaps Korean martial artists because it's so common and seen (I feel anyway) like almost a level of education, like a masters degree. It's in this way I feel it's more educational and less "your my master" type of thing. It's interesting to see how different cultures and martial arts do things that are perceived so differently. I'm with you on the politics and stuff that comes with it all, this is why I have been open to any style I find interesting. Politics are usually to blame in decision making that says not to blend styles it seems. Take care

Actually chuck Norris did study Tae kwon do truejim, so it's possible it was meant in that way. I'm a fan of the best of the best I'll have to look at that one, been a while. Tae kwon do is karate with more emphasis on kicking to me. Iv said before as a person who has studied very different arts like hung gar king fu and things like that, it's hard to not see that Tae kwon do does come from karate. The second response, that's terrible, I'll have to check out "my way" it sounds interesting. Thanks. Dwx I suppose there's a version of Tae Kwon Do I'm not farmiliar with? I began in ITF in 94 when I was 17 but transitioned over to WTF later on. I moved a lot so pretty much changed arts a lot but I never studied atae kwon do version that relates to tang Soo do, at least that I can remember. Weird. It's clear that the way they throw blocks and such are similar, but to karate in general, I can't see a similarity to TSD outside of basic style. Of course your kicking out dates that pre-date me by a huge margin haha Iv never been huge on the history of things. I find more interest in the mechanics and technical side so I'm glad you guys are posting this stuff.

Awesome to hear this. Good stuff.

I was thinking of something like these: http://www.blackbeltshop.com/adidas_low_cut_white_sneaker.htm Casual street wear, but still with enough flex for kicking............. Those look good. I have used similar looking pairs though and they lack the same grippy bottom and soft sole for pulling toes back and such. The ones I wear allow me to move my toes easily and the shoe just rolls with it lol. Also, they are more grippy like I said, which matters more for me because I'm in a gym on hard and sometimes slippery floor. I use these.. http://www.amazon.com/Tiger-Claw-Feiyue-Martial-Shoes/dp/B00MH2QMWO Fun fact: That brand has been out since 1920 in China and used for Kung fu purposes since.

Completely agreed. I genuinely wonder why most traditional striking arts still practice without shoes. I understand the Japanese/Asian culture of no shoes in the house. We don't have that custom engrained in us here. Wearing shoes while kicking changes a ton of things. The front kick using the ball of the foot becomes quite different in a pair of sneakers. Pivoting becomes different. I think we should wear shoes that are only worn in the dojo. Possibly wrestling shoes. I'm not trying to break tradition, but some traditions shouldn't be done for the sole sake of tradition when there's a more logical and beneficial approach. Not sure about ground fighting heavy systems. Wrestling shoes make sense too, but that's my former wrestling background. Back to my original thought for this post - if you can't pull off a technique in a no gi/t-shirt situation, how functional is that technique truly? If a t-shirt is too light to be able to grab it as part of a throw or choke, how would you use that technique when a t-shirt wearing attacker comes at you? How many attackers are wearing something that a gi would approximate on the 4th of July (or New Year's Day in the Southern Hemisphere)? I have no judo nor jujitsu experience, so don't take that the wrong way; just trying to learn. Check out my feet man, I almost always wear kung fu shoes in the dojo, no other shoes allowed. My last place did it this way as do I now. They are very flexible and soft. You can still use the ball of your foot for front kicks and such. http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Tbj0RhRqXJ4/Ve_hV_zkREI/AAAAAAABAQI/6Wz6mSQw_Bc/s1024-no/IMG_0508.JPG

I feel that stikes are one of the most effective self defense approaches. Also, the more simple the technuiqes the more easily you can perform it under stress, and with adrenaline flowing and what not. As for traditional martial arts and it's place in real self defense? Some schools will focus on this more then others as many schools have different goals such as tournament/sport based schools, mental discipline or health as the focus and so on. I sought out martial arts for self defense reasons, so I always approached my training with this in mind. Traditional martial arts can get very complex and many technuiqes take years to really "get it". However, you can use the technuiqes you learn on a way that adapts easily to real world defense in many cases, and you will fair better to remember the statement above, the easier the technuiqes are, the better chance you have to make them actually work.

as for chun kuk do, Norris built his art around tang Soo do, and added the other arts he learned. For politically correct reasons we should call it by its name chun kuk do, in essence it's more TSD then anything though. I use a good deal of chun kuk do technuiqes and combinations in my teaching, it's fits nicely. As to taekwondo being called Tang Soo do iv never heard this. They are very different arts. I think it's pretty universal that they are different. I think a great deal of people write stuff and don't know what their really talking about from experience. In the end the history doesn't always reflect what is today, it's just steps taken to get here. Reading can lead to a good deal of ideas that make sense on paper but in a martial arts studio they are different. The Korean men being drafted, never heard that one but I'm sure that's a valid piece of history. Thanks for that.

No sensei8, I don't think we a think differently. I agreed with things people said. I just had my idea of what was the biggest things, and a few other said similar things. I think your right though as to us all having different experiences. I think most of us would agree if we were in a class or at a seminar, on weather the instructor was good or not, for the most part I think so anyways.

Very simplistic but well written. I agree. I have always been very self defense minded so for me it's easy to take something from another art/style if it fits into my karate curriculum. You really hit the nail on the head because if I was not as interested in teaching things that work really well for self-defense, then I may not care as much and I may stick with just karate.

So 9 months ago I started my own program. Prior to that I was at a studio where I worked very hard to "learn to teach"! Was something my teacher saw in me as he approached me to be on the "CIT" or certified instructor program. I had a dream to teach since I was 17, so it was a great honor for me and very exciting. I had trained in quite a few martial arts but never really learned to teach. I took my class as a student on Tuesdays and Thursday's, and taught for 3 hours a night on Mondays and Wednesday's. I also went to monthly CIT classes on Saturdays or Sunday's to practice teaching and teaching alone. At the meetings there were times I had to do things I didn't like, such as role play. Teaching a technique or group of technics front of the other instructors and CIT members. Was embarrassing and nerve racking. I also learned how to handle different situations in a professional manner, things like parents that have attitude problems, or students that have the same. I watched my instructor teach with an incredible amount of professionalism. So, after a very hard caught year to become an instructor, I was running full classes, and next thing you know, I opened my own program at a recreation center. I have gone from 7 students (in month one) to 37 students (in month 9). Certainly some type of measure of my success. Financially I still struggle because it's a low income area and I'm pretty cheap, but finances are starting to get better, through it all I still teach though. I nEver let finances determine my drive to become a great teacher, and never let it become part of class. They are an after thought and a positive side effect, this is my mind frame. Now, as much as I don't want to talk all about myself there's a reason I am. My story is 100 percent true and still happening but most would have to acknowledge my successful journey to become a teacher. I believe I am a bit of a natural, i believe I'm a confident person and that comes across to people, BUT do you know the secret to my success??? DEDICATION, COMMITTMENT, PUTTING IN THE TIME ON THE MATS, SACRIFICE, and the willingness to learn weather I feel I'm a natural or not. "What is a good teacher"? Somebody willing to be open to learning to teach. Somebody who has the martial arts skills, but more importantly the In-depth knowlage and comprehension of technuiqe, and most of all, somebody with a very high level of commitment to growing and reaching for more. I leave every class feeling I could have done better, and believe it's why my program gets better as time goes by. This is because I reach for perfection each and every night on the floor, because if I reach for perfection, I hope to achieve greatness. My personal feelings about the topic, thanks for reading.

Another fun fact, in my most recent place of study Tang Soo Do was commonly called (on paper as well) the Korean variant of shotokan karate. I'm not for copying and paste my novels on the history but the Koreans openly admit to learning this art while the Japanese occupied Korea. Some say it was taught to them by a few Japanese soldiers when nobody was around, others say they watched the soldiers study it and practiced on their own. Fact is that it derives from Shotokan karate.

And to take it a step further, Tang Soo Do is really the Korean variant of Shotokan karate. In fact the history of Tang Soo Do is said to have been developed when Japan occupied Korea and they openly learned the art from the Japanese. It really very clearly is karate in this manner. It has developed differences like the way Koreans seem to always add skilled kicking into the mix, but it really is a derivative of Shotokan. Taekwondo is harder to pinpoint in this way because it has different styles within the style on a large scale. TSD does not differ from do-jang to do-jang in this way.

Tang Soo do is called karate in almost every tang Soo do do-jang. I have never personally hear TKD called karate but it essentially is. As a person who studies tang Soo do, and taekwondo along with other arts like hung gar Kung fu, I can say hung gar is grossly different and is NOT like karate in that respect. TKD is clearly very similar. TSD is commonly referred to as "Korean karate" however. I mix things together and call it karate, as you referred to. I do this because the primary art is karate (TSD)!

Thanks Patrick, and sensei8. I'm working hard to make it work well see what happens.

I understand. It's like somebody trying to find a good school, most of us may recommend a place BUT we wouldn't recommend them all. there are many instructors that don't teach well, and many that just don't have the abilities, or the understanding. In this way I don't personally fear where martial arts are going, because this is how the world is. There are many mechanics that I used to call "Hacks" when I was a mechanic myself. They thought they were good sometimes but hacked things up. It's the same as martial arts instructors. There are hacks for sure. As I see it though as long as there are good instructors/schools then things will even out. There will be "good karate" and "bad karate"! As for the art specifically being passed on. I don't personally believe it's of a great deal of importance. Good karate doesn't revolve around what one may see as authentic because all styles change over time. There can be bad karate even teaching a pure style, and good karate teaching a freestyle version of karate.