Luther unleashed

Not sure I understand the basis for the original post? From what I gather, everything described seems like carrying on a tradition. It also sounds like structure. Martial arts has always held a structure much like the military, even in the concepts of rank IMHO! Is it necessary? No, and there are soma styles out there that generally are t as structured like freestyle karate, or many places mixing styles. A little story, once I had a students grandfather tell me his grandson couldn’t bow to the flag, as it’s a symbol of war. I told him it of course isn’t, that it was paying respect to our country, and bowing to the instructor was a sign of respect to the instructor and so on. A woman once went pretty crazy on me in social media because of this story, she claimed I was breaking the law and that I couldn’t make somebody bow to the flag. Clearly this sort of thing is a trend lately which I’m sure fired her up, but I explained that I DIDNT make him bow, but I told him he had to perform the customs of the dojo or he couldn’t participate. That’s not trying to force him. I suggested it’s the same is if he wouldn’t bow to me, or wouldn’t say “yes sir”! I have rights as a business owner to make those the rules and not allow anybody to participate. To me it’s not about making people fall in line to order them around, it’s about traditions but also respect, I see many things we do as a way of effectively teaching in a respectful atmosphere. It’s worth mentioning that i have taught easily a few hundred students in the Phoenix area, and this has only happened one. The question was “is it necessary”? No I don’t feel it is, but those traditions are important to me because I deviate from many traditional aspect, as an example I don’t yeah one style, I teach multiple around a foundational style but it’s blended. Those other traditions are what separates, IMHO, us from any old MMA place, these things are why I still refer to us as a traditional school. We teach traditional arts in a non “traditional” way, but the outline of class structure is surly “traditional”! In essence they aren’t needed, but some may have their reasons for their importance as do I!

Isn:t it also true that AKB later started to roundhouse kick with the shin, influence by the effectiveness of Muay Thai, having originally used the instep? This is completely true because originally karate and tae kwon do practitioners would learn some boxing and compete in American kickboxing, the’s meeting that their kicks were from those styles which of course used the instep and not the shin.

I think there are positives and negatives to each approach. Step sparring is a useful format for developing tactics and practising responses but its no good as you say just learning to react to half speed punches. The one step format should be expanded upon to include other types of attacks and less regimented attacks (e.g. haymakers vs oi-zuki). Few blackbelts in our school, the next level of practice is for the attacker to attack with an undetermined technique and for the defender to react on the fly. Free sparring provides that live format, but for self defence you'd also need to practice with non-traditional attacks. Not every would-be assailant grew up at the Cobra-kai. I agree with Danielle. I think that one-steps are a good starting point for low ranks, but they must be adapted as students increase in rank. They should go from being static to more interactive, and from beginning in ready positions and started with kihaps to being done as impromptu attacks that must be defended. Performing sparring like fighting can lead to problems. One has to consider the contact levels, the target areas, and whether protective gear will be worn or not. I much prefer my sparring to have rules in place to prevent injuries and allow students to as much of it as possible in a training period. In general The main thing I was trying to say is that I do not see enough self-defense being handled at an appropriate speed. Even black belts are moving at a good speed when defending but if you really watch the person attacking it is slow in a manner that a full-fledged fight with adrenaline will not move. This is mybossues with what I referred to as the “average school” meaning mostly what I see. As for sparring when I say treated less like some type of sport or specific art itself and more like completely free sparring, I do not mean the level of contact because that doesn’t mean a whole lot to me. I also do not mean changing the strike zone matters at all. I have never sustained a serious injury in sparring and we have always sparred in the manner I am referring to. What I am saying is there was no set stance, or the way I see most karate practitioners spar is they both bounce in the same exact manner on both feet at the same time. Their hands typically do almost the exact same things and their attacks no matter how nicely performed, are almost identical. I can certainly say the same thing for taekwondo. What I am suggesting which is what I have always done and been a part of is that students develop their own stance, their own rhythm and movement, and their own techniques, not techniques that were specifically type just for sparring but anything they have learned from class as long as it is in a controlled manner to the proper strike so should be encouraged in my opinion. In short I do not believe that something like one step self-defense or what have you is ineffective if it is practiced with a high level of aggression from the attacker, and I do not believe the cookie-cutter sparring is best using spiring’s potential to teach how to fight, I believe that everybody has their own natural way and that should be encouraged in my opinion inspiring, treating spiring like a fight does not mean you have to treat it with a high level o I do not believe the cookie cutter spiring is best using spiring’s potential to teach how to fight, I believe that everybody has their own natural way and that should be encouraged in my opinion inspiring, treating spiring like a fight does not mean you have to treat it with lack of regard for control or strike zone‘s, I just mean when I watch sparring it never really looks like a fight, because it looks as though each practitioner has been trained with a specific set of movements and weapons and it’s all they’re allowed to use, because that’s basically what it is in most cases. Watch guys like superfoot Bill Wallace, these guys get in there and fight and it looks more natural the way that two people would fight, not like the cookie cutter sparring I’m referring to.

I hear what your saying. Martial arts should certainly be taught in stages. This topic has been difficult for me to convey exactly what I’m trying to say however to your point I definitely am not saying there’s no value in drills and I certainly believe that any type of self-defense should be slow at first, I always look at that stuff like training wheels for a fight. I don’t disagree. I like the drills you referred to at free sparring speed, that sounds fun!

I agree with you in that all too often schools will err on the side of caution and keep things slow so that no one gets hurt. Fighting is unpredictable and I can see why you do not agree with the way some train. Having said that I can only comment based on my training and experience and will allow others to comment for Karate as a whole. In the beginning phases we show the students how to defend against a set attack. Basically offender punches and the defender moves/deflects and counters. This is done at a slow speed so that the student can learn the technique/application and start to build muscle memory. However this is not a stagnant thing. This training should transition into training against a resistive opponent. Meaning that they no longer throw the strike slow or at the same height or angle. This then progresses into more of a free form of practice where as the opponent might throw any number of combinations until the student stops the attack by effecting a viable strike/throw/submission/etc. that ends the fight. This is done at full speed. The concept is building upon their knowledge. They start learning a few techniques and applications and these are built upon. The training should go from compliant to resistive so that the student can assess it's effectiveness and suitability to them. This can only be done through pressure testing against a non-compliant opponent. Each application and technique is done in this fashion and is built upon until the student has an endless amount of techniques and applications to draw upon. The problem I have with sparring (Kumite) in most modern schools is everything the student is taught goes right out the window the minute they step on the floor. I also find issue with modern practice of kumite in that it is applied as a long distance method of fighting. This is not practical as 99.99% of fights are close quarters. You should practice as you will fight in a real conflict. If you do not, muscle memory will revert the student back to the way they fight in class and this never ends well. The training should be real in that how you practice will be how you will fight in a real confrontation. Good points for sure. The thing about sparring is when I said I think it’s more effective, I meant if don’t the right way, and by right way I mean to be a lesson in fighting. As it stands the common school teaches a “sport” style of sparring, not because of how hard the contact is or isn’t, but more by the set techniques and way they learn which isn’t free like a fight. An interesting point which relates is that I feel martial arts that fight their opponent t in the same style tend to get unrealistic outcomes. Meaning, learning to defend yourself against a guy that is stepping in with a reverse punch in a front stance is not practicing for real self defense in most cases. Of course an attacker could know martial arts, but make no mistake that most wont. They will attack you quickly in many cases and aggressively, not at all leaving their hand out for you. They will feint a great deal and feel things out, Sparring is the same way, if you spar a guy that fights like every other guy your not really learning to defend yourself in the common situation. That’s why I said we trained using any techniques we learned and no set way of doing it. Being free is so overlooked and it is often met forcefully with traditional. In many cases tradition is beautiful, but it is the double edged sword of traditional Arts, as freedoms to think, and create is vital to the fighter.

Then this leads me to ask... Just what, if anything else, is "average"?? This answer, I can only surmise, from any KF member, might be wider than the skies, in which, there might not be one satisfying response. Is being labeled "average" a good or bad thing?? And just who, what, where, when, why, and how does this give that individual and/or group the power to pass said judgement?? Judgment? I’m afraid it’s a topic of discussion that I am expressing my opinion on the matter that I find interesting. By “average” I felt it was obvious but I suppose that’s because I was writing it. I mean most I have seen. The average to me means most that I see. I see them in person, on the internet, and so on. No intention of a label, just saying many schools I come across spend too much (in my opinion) time drilling with non resistant partners at half speed. Throw them in sparring with an opponents hands up swinging and give them a real paced taste of it. Thanks all! My opinion is based on my personal experience and expertise in martial arts, just as are yours when you express them. Our variations in training and ideas are what makes us all special. I would imagine anybody who thinks drills are essential has been doing drills for a long time, and that’s fine. I do not think they are essential, I do think that they have value and I do them because of that but I do not place the same level of importance with the same emphasis on them and that’s really my only point, just that the amount of attention drills get his more that I think is affective versus sparring. Really my other point is that even when somebody says drills are more important than I think They are, I could have that discussion although it better be a discussion about drills with resistance at a high rate of speed from the attacker in order to even be a conversation of effectiveness for combat, because the “average” (meaning most) schools do NOT drill like reality and create an environment that is conducive to a fighting environment.

That's an interesting perspective. It makes sense to me but it's still nice to know. I have never been in a real fight, and yeah yeah honestly it'd be cool to use my karate knowledge but I know that's just asking for trouble. And well beside the point. I have only ever done one full contact spar, in my Kyokushin dojo, during a belt test. The spar lasted 30 seconds. Me personally, I wasn't thinking about drills or even technique to be honest. The furthest thing from my mind. I see what you mean in that sense. I was having a really tough week, but I had persisted and I had survived. And somehow the stars collided and I was just in the awesome space of "I survived this week, I will survive this fight". I went into it with a totally clear head and conscious. I did very well, in fact I only later found out I had broken my opponent's rib. Wow. From that day on I understood what Funakoshi meant when he said "spirit before technique". To be honest I don't know enough about fighting or karate to opine on what would work for me in a fight and what wouldn't. All I know is the spirit of karate is helping me to advance and meet life's challenges, and as my example above proved to me, that same spirit does aid me in combat. Another example - yesterday I was in the supermarket and there was a real rough looking gypsy family in line behind me. A couple of big teenage guys among them, bigger than me. Now I have nothing against gypsies. But these particular ones did have a rough looking appearance, the kind of appearance that suggests they wouldn't think twice to rob or hurt you. They for whatever reason were kind of in my personal space, I didn't flinch, didn't show any fear, and calmly kept my hand on my wallet and money. The tranquility was real, and I owe it to my karate training. Now, where do drills play into this? Not totally sure. I like to think they help me train my body, teach me how to move my hips, shift my weight, deliver power. The kind of thing that when I have that "a-ha" moment becomes sort of subconscious. And secondly, of course, they help train my spirit. Wax on, wax off. Pretty much as I already said you have to look around and see what you see. Watch a fight or two on YouTube and watch the UFC and you will see that striking in the manner that we do in sparring ng is mostly what is out there. I practice self-defense techniques and drills so I’m not saying that I don’t practice them or find them useful but I am saying that most styles and schools place emphasis on them above sparring in a fighting stance and I just believe that is completely wrong, as a person who is been in fights and witnessed a lot of fights growing up in a rough area fights are always something that starts standing with striking almost always anyways, and in many cases it will end up in a wrestling match of some sort This would make your sparring and any groundwork a very effective method in the street, this is why in the UFC you see so many people work on striking and brown game. I’m not saying a person could not pull off some type of armlock or reversal or something but I am saying when somebody really knows what they’re doing you just don’t see that happen to them.

I spar same way, continuous sparring and treating it more like a fight because that is what he fight is going to be like, people swinging at you. We do not teach you that you must stand a certain way and bounce a certain way, everybody spiring stance and method of attack is their own. We encourage them to take whatever they like from the techniques and use them inspiring in a fairway do not injure somebody. One does not have to be in a fight to see that is what he fight looks like, in my opinion as I stated nothing will prepare you for a fight more than sparring in the correct manner. The chances that you are going to pull off a cross and uppercut to your opponents head is far higher than attempting to arm bar them or wrist lock them are you sure you.

And in 1993 I started in three martial arts... American Kickboxing, which prompted me to then take up taekwondo on opposite days, and when I got better my instructor offered Jeet Kune Do in which I did for about four years however I still practice it’s concept today. I would not say it better suits me I would say that because I started in it and simply had an open mind and care very little about staying pure to an art or earning rank I’d say my path has been very true to myself and I’m very happy with it. I took what I wanted and got rid of the rest with no issues. I teach a hybrid version of Tang Soo Do, and when I mean by hybrid is that the core and foundation or structure is Tang Soo Do, but the other things are my experiences different parts and techniques throughout my whole life. It feels like you are trying to push me towards what you think would better suit me but I am perfectly content in a traditional martial art and mixing in whatever I like. I am very open-minded as a person and it is only reflected by my choice of practice in the Arts.

I would dispute calling it boxing.. The arm techniques are boxing but not the stances. The label is a bit ubfortunate “Boxing up top”

Most KB nowadays is a hybrid variant of Muay Thai. It’s essentially been adapted in ways to accommodate MMA in the sense of stances, some hand positions and so on. American Kickboxing was guys that used Karate/Taekwondo kicks and essentially western boxing up top. In today’s KB fighters typically take a step to use lead roundhouse kicks or what is called a switch kick. Typically in older American Kickboxing because of their traditional martial arts background they did them just like Karate/TKD practicioners Do today, straight from the guard. Also today’s fighters stand (typically) much more square, American Kb guys because of their traditional art backgrounds stood much more sideways. This is obviously more similar to sparring in Arts like Karate for obvious reasons as they practiced these arts.

The first art I studied was American Kickboxing under a guy named Derrel Hollins in California. The first thing is that it’s actually Karate and similar Arts like TKD and so on, mixed with boxing. To this day it is the core of my personal style and the way I would fight, with this type of striking. This is probably why I place much more emphasis on sparring vs self defense drills for fighting. Just a few days ago I watched a fight with Superfoot Bill vs Ray Mcallem. These guys were so tough and again, this style of “fighting” is more appealing to me as I believe striking to be the most effective (aside from grappling) and weighing striking against wrist locks and so on.

I like that you said practice jumping over things. I have a child/pet gate for my daughter who is 19 months old. I jump over it often to stay on my toes lol! No question it helps me, so great advice.

Man a lot of great well thought out replies here. A quick point to Sensei as it sounds like he took offense in a way. I was saying what you are saying, that most “schools” I see spend too much time drilling and unrealistic drilling at that. You said “don’t like drilling quit karate” but sir I have never had as much drilling (thankfully) as some schools I see. I also agree it depends on the school and instructor. I do mostly a Korean version of Karate but it is common to see drills just as it is in other styles. Just not a fan. Alan Armstrong, I’m not sure what your saying exactly. I am not complaining about “my” training. I’m offering insight about what I see because o felt it would be a good topic. I consider myself very lucky to have a very mixed background in martial arts, and to have instructors who didn’t place such high emphasis on drills. Of course we drilled, BUT I’m not saying drills are bad, I’m saying too much is bad and that too many schools do too much without any real resistance or just to slow to give students anything to really develop. I have no need to seek anything as you have described. I prefer traditional Arts, because it’s not all about fighting, but for the portion that is, I’m not interested in doing slow, weak resistance drills over and over. Sparring is much more like a real fight. I say this as a person who grew up fighting as a youth. A fight feels like sparring more then any setting I have seen in martial arts. Thanks to everybody for offering great input. A plethora of knowledge is this forum. Take care.

I don’t hold the belief that all movements in forms are for fighting. It’s realism that most traditional Larate guys will think otherwise but I believe some movements are to help focus on breathing, some to focus on balance, some to look cool (as Noah said above). Some are for the skill and to show it, and of course many ARE for fighting. My instructor in 2013 gave a speech about the many benefits of forms (Kata) which had little to do with fighting. He mentioned the 90 year old man that had strong hips instead of needing one replaced. He spoke of him having balance and not needing a walker. You see he went on about how the portion of martial arts that is for fighting is such a small portion of ones life, especially considering a good martial artist won’t easily fight anyways. Sometimes I joke with my wife and call forms “old people Karate”. Actually I use forms to warm up before I train, as it’s an excepent pace to warm a student up, and help them relax and focus on breathing! To me, and I’d like to say that I do a good deal of slow techniques in forms, it’s what really makes the forms look beautiful. The slow parts really accent the fast parts. At any rate, I have never really thought so deeply about this topic, interesting topic jr137.

I am 40! I have a difficult time with high jump kicks, as they should be taught at first they jump kick can be done with a springing motion in most cases, barely leaving the ground. In the end though this is still a jump kick because what he finds a job is not a certain height or higher. Hey small job is still a job so many of my jump kicks are low to the ground . My vice if you wish to get higher or even if you don’t is just to focus on a slight elevation in these techniques because many of them are about footwork more than the jump itself.

I find that often many Karate styles and dojo’s Fall short in effectively teaching fighting. Too many tines I see students spend hours upon hours drilling self’s defense moves. I watch their opponent repeated and endlessly drive a slow moving punch forward, while the defender performs a set of techniques. It’s not a problem to start slow but what gets to me is even after years and black belt levels are earned, many practitioners who are defending against an attack me move very quickly, however the defender is never coming at a fast pace and is always very telegraphed to ensure a good outcome. This in particular is why I am not actually a fan of things like one step sparring and self-defense. I personally believe that the biggest form of self defense happens in free sparring, most often karate I see spiring used as a sport version or additive to what they do. For me and my experience sparring was treated more like a fight. In karate it is common to see everybody moving the same exact way as they are taught to stand, and move, and strike identically. Of course with this happening it does not bring about a real mess of a fight because every single street opponent will move differently. When I teach spiring everybody may use the techniques they learn from class on their own, and although they are taught way to stand in the end they are aspiring stance is their own in the ways they move specifically are their own. Inspiring having an opponents coming at you is much more like a fight and nothing will feel closer to a fight in this. No matter how many self-defense moves we do there always seems to be a lack of true 100% resistance and consistently telegraphed slower movements where as inspiring it may be controlled because we don’t want to harm our opponent but in fact we aim to achieve very fast effective techniques that land. I believe Karate’s weakness in many cases is the lack of treating sparring more like fighting, because as I stated, performing self-defense techniques with a partner is typically way to controlled. Tell me what you guys think, I always welcome your opinions.

To me I usually see the word system used when somebody blends different styles. As for concept, I have really never seen it used except for Jeet Kune Do, which by all means is a concept and not an actual art because in order for it to be a specific aren’t it would have to have some structure, Bruce intended for it to be malleable and fit each practitioner like a jacket. This was one of the very first Arts I delved into in 1993 and until this day I say I studied “Jeet Kune Do concepts” because it’s not a set group of techniques, it is simply the idea of intercepting your opponent with a strike. I actually was awarded a 2nd degree black belt recently in a “System” which is a blend of Arts, although it has a foundation in a particular style for structure. Typically a style is done more similar across the board and represents a more one dementional approach. This is not a bad thing, it is the difference between being well-rounded versus being a specialist. I went through this as a mechanic for 16 years. One of my mechanic mentors used to say it is best to be well-rounded and no lots of things, years later another mentor of mine suggested it was best to be a specialist and specialize in one area. Just as in martial arts I chose to practice many things, and the same as a mechanic. There were times I had to send things out to a specialist but over time I became very good at most things. I personally view the martial arts this way, but as to the original post I believe these three things are actually not just a label but I way of describing the difference.

Yes I guess you could demote based on inappropriate behavior. However the facts are the facts. If you have earned something you have it whether it's on paper or around your waste. You can not take away knowledge or the skill that has been attained so I see little effect in removing grade. If your going to go to that extent it would be better to just kick them out of class. On the opposite side, if you have not earned something it doesn't matter what is on paper or around your waste you are not that grade, period! You are nothing more than a paper tiger. And the difference between the military and the Dojo is one very important factor, you go home to your family at the end of class and never have to return if you do not wish to and nothing will happen to you. I get that because of some schools training methods you might liken it to the military but trust me it's nothing like it. I want to listen to a group of instructors insist that taking away the students rain is acceptable. I absolutely agree with what you said, you earned the rain because of the knowledge and somebody said you were competent to perform the curriculum, you can’t just take that away once they have achieved.

I agree but I don’t believe it’s only money making the standards go lower. Sometimes it’s the desire to succeed and the instructor feeling as though he needs to hand out rank in order to keep students happy/motivated. I have witnessed this with my own eyes. I have also seen a guy who was very friendly with the instructor, earn his 2nd dan in 1 year from his black belt, and better still a 3rd dan in another 1 year from his second. I’m not saying a guy can’t put in a great deal of hours and accelerate a bit faster, however the skill level/time put in/abilities didn’t add up to the rank given in my personal opinion. I once denounced any time in rank requirements, I have since changed my opinion because there will always be those that abuse it, weather if it’s for money or it’s friendship, or fear of students leaving. Time in rank (can’t believe I’m saying this) is a very good safty net to ensure at least some higher level of training takes place before Rank is handed down. In the UFAF one is required 3 years to earn a 1st dan, I think it’s fair. Some will say it should take 7 or even 10, but that’s your call to make on weather you respect that. At least there is a higher standard then a 3rd dan in 3 total years of training SMH!

I don’t feel deserving, I just try and at least contribute in these conversations with all of these knowledgeable folks. Thanks for the thumbs up guys I appreciate it a lot. Your all the members of the month, because you all keep it going.

Yes it definitely is awkward doing stances that small, I find there is some value in them though. Will you always have deep stances when attacked?

To the bold - Everyone has their way of teaching and learning. I personally teach the applications as they learn the Kata. To the underlined - This is exactly the point made above. Toudi's (Karate) Kata were influenced by Quan Fa and as such was taught pretty much the same way. The applications are what the Kata is created from and therefore is the way the art itself is transmitted and understood. Kata would be nothing more than a dance without an understanding of the applications. I'm not sure what applications you are being taught. In all my years I have never needed two years to understand or be able to apply the applications. Yes it is a life long study and you never stop training your art, which includes practicing the applications but to take two years before it becomes effective and can be used? There is a hard rule to Bunkai - it must be effective and be able to or have the potential to end the fight. If you are learning applications that not only take years to understand and are not effective even after you have learned them, it sounds like someone has made up your applications. For one they are not that complicated. The more complicated the less effective. The more moves the longer you need your opponent to sit still. Most postures (steps) within the Kata have one or more applications associated with them. The applications fall into percussive (striking) which also include an understanding of chibudi (vital, cavity and weak targets of the body), Muto (throws, grappling and take downs), and Tuidi (joint locks, chokes, submissions and dirty tactics). There are some Ne Waza (ground fighting techniques but this is more so to return to your feet than to stay and submit). The learning progression we use is the foundation applications (passed directly down from the founder), the basic or practical applications and then the student is allowed to experiment and discover other ways to apply the applications taught and to discover new meaning of the applications. They then prove them as effective by applying them to a resistive opponent to prove their effectiveness or ineffectiveness. Not all applications will fit a students needs. This is dictated by strength, speed, mechanics, etc. etc. Once you have learned the applications and understand how they are utilized and also have a deeper understanding of how they could be applied for other situations, the student literally has thousands of answers to pretty much every form of attack. Obviously this does not include ground fighting, or at least where we are concerned. This is exactly what I was saying above. My experience is that this actually makes better well rounded students. It forces them to start to analyze the uses and methods. Self discovery through critical thinking actually teaches more than an instructor handing them the information. This is often the case when students make the transition to teaching. By teaching others and having to answer questions a light goes off and what may not have been fully understood before is now blatantly obvious. I actually developed a deeper understanding the first year I taught than I had acquired as a student. It forces you to look at things from all sides and really think about the how, whats and whys. When a student starts to understand the methods and uses they then start to understand other meanings of the applications. About 50% of our practical (we call them basic) applications came from students. They are tested and proven as to their effectiveness before being taught or practiced. The other 50% comes out of actual use in conflict by it's instructors, their instructors or theirs and so on. If there is one application (most have many but for the sake of argument) and there 14 Kata (in our case) and there are lets say on average 40 steps (this is low), that is 560 applications. A pretty good amount. But they when you realize that applications can be used together you now double that. This is just the foundation applications. They you add the practical applications and then add the self discovered applications (that have been proven effective) a student has thousands to tens of thousands of techniques and applications to draw on. The average fighter has maybe 10 to 30. The original applications either created by the founder during combat or passed down by his teacher to him create the foundation and is the art itself. On the surface most Okinawan arts are similar. It's only after you delve deeper into the art's Kata and it's applications that you find it's uniqueness. Without the Kata and it's applications there is no art. I like the way you said the Kata was built from the application. Never thought about it this way, neat approach mentally! I do feel however that as for applications being learned, learning the application should be not too difficult and can be learned in weeks or perhaps a class. Learning to use it on an unwilling attacker is another story and that’s what I meant by taking years. 90% of the time people never complete pressure test their material. Against an unwilling partner is where the test lies and most students can’t be effective with anything less then years of training it. That’s my opinion from what I have seen in the few hundred students I have taught. More kids then adults but either way I feel it takes time.

I happen to think there needs to be a balance however, I feel that students should drill the form quite a bit before practicing applications. In Kung Fu, the form is much more important then any other style I have learned. It is literally the end all be all. That’s a different situation because it’s most of what is learned so learning applications should begin sooner in my humble opinion. I’m not a fan of advanced applications that require 2 years of drilling to get to a point where it’s useful, because in many cases it still won’t be useful against an unwilling attacker, I like striking applications for the most part. At any rate learning applications shouldn’t come right away unless it’s basic, because to me it is worthless until you really get the movement down anyway. Not just knowing the moves but being able to perform the mall with force. There has to be a balance though because I understand students need for knowledge to stay interested. Another important note is some instructors will encourage you to develop your own applications, my instructors have been this way. My instructors have always encouraged you finding your interpretation of the movements. Some instructors don’t go that route! Good luck in your training.

Good to see you buddy. I don’t know old WTF BUT the argument on my end is referring to the specific forms mentioned, Taeguek if I understood right! I have studied those, and WTF under black belt. No matter where it originated from it’s clearly bread into its own thing, and I can’t see any Shotokan. I have never practiced Shotokan exclusively however I do understand the history of Tang Soo ado and the undeniable connection of our forms to Shotokan. WTF TKD does not have those undeniable similarities, although as I said I lack the knowledge of the WTF’s specific history. Regardless, as you said it has clearly evolved differently.