Spartacus Maximus

In cases like that of the war veteran mentioned earlier, I would agree that the situation probably gave him few other recourse. He was old and he was outnumbered by younger perhaps stronger armed attackers. However, the fact that he was initially charged and taken before a magistrate proves the point that claiming self defense is very difficult to do. Courts can be costly and trials can have terrible consequences even if one wins. The general public perception of people who are trained to inflict pain such as active/ex soldiers, martial artists etc is always a disadvantage in court cases where such persons are involved. Escaping at the first opportunity is the best insurance because it clearly shows who is the defender if the parties end up in court. It also prevents the attack from escalating to a more serious conflict.

This thread seems interesting to keep. My goal for 2014 is the same one I have for the coming year and I have done it. So far I have been not caught a cold, a flu or any of the common viruses that aggravate people each year. Not even a runny nose! I think that is awesome because most people usually get one of those at least once a year. Now if I can keep that up for many more years it will be truly great. As far as training I'm hoping to improve the form and power in my basic techniques. Who else has goals for 2015?

Your friend is correct, I'm afraid. That is why doing anything except trying to escape is something that will land you in trouble. Even if the other person or persons involved are the aggressor, they can and will try to get you in trouble because bad guys are sore losers. If your actions obviously show to even a casual witness that you are trying to escape the altercation from the onset, you will be safe. Whatever the case, it is best not to stand around and wait to see if the authorities will take your side or if the attacker has mates that show up to give you a boot party. Later on you can explain with full confidence to the authorities that you were trying your damnedest to escape and the attacker got hurt in the process. You can also say that you left the scene because you feared further aggression. Both of these claims will sound reasonable and true IF and only IF you used just enough force to escape. Usually this means no more than two or three techniques such as blocking/countering, knocking down the assailant and running like the wind while he's still hurting.

Wow, 50 years old is not very old at all to "retire". Someone who is crippled by cumulative training injuries by that age certainly must have been doing something wrong. This is true today but it was also true a long, long time ago when medical care was not readily available and training was much harsher. Legendary Okinawan karateka of the past century all lived well into their 80's and some even older with few exceptions. Back then life expectancy was much lower than today and the fact that these men still had great skill well into their old age is a testimony to their level of mastery.Training is meant to increase physical fitness, not cripple and deteriorate health. Even if your instructor cannot perform the techniques the same way at 70 as he could do them before age-related differences started; he still knows how they should be done and the reasons why. That is where listening to instructions and applying become essential. Robotic imitation does not allow a student to internalize and truly own the techniques. Adapting the same techniques in a way that always fits oneself without compromising effectiveness and purpose takes a deep understanding of each step involved. If you are a 20 something 1st dan, you should not try to do your kata and techniques like your 60 something 8th dan instructor. Instead you should do them the way your instructor expects someone of your age and level.

I train in a place where physical violence between ordinary citizens is relatively rare and laws are very strict regarding self defense or defense of others. From reading about many scenarios it obvious that judging what is reasonable force in the heat of the instant is very difficult or nearly impossible to do through the rush of adrenalin and chaos of emotions. The simplest advice I ever heard was from my sensei, a karateka who has lived in some of the most violent places and times. Reasonable force is whatever allows you to ESCAPE from the altercation with as little injury to yourself as possible. If you stay or do anything more than that, someone somewhere in the aftermath will interpret that against your favour. This applies in double when the person defending has training and especially if the defender would be considered an expert. It may not always make perfect sense in all cases and even seem unfair, but that is the way the laws are applied in civilized nations. In more chaotic and harsh ones, a quick escape will prevent further violence. If knocking the breath out of your attacker creates the chance to escape, nothing else is needed. There is no need to inflict more serious injury or stand there waiting for his next move because it will be irrelevant if you are gone before he can catch his breath again. If you stay one second longer than necessary, any possible witness will see it as a fight. A fight is not self defense and fights are always punishable by law.The first thought in your head when attacked should not be how to "win". It should be what to do to escape. Run through, run over, run under but RUN. If there is no opening to run, create one and then RUN. It will be impossible to conclude anything except self defense if your attitude was defensive and if you ran after one or two quick strikes.

It seems like the discussion I started is taking a turn I did not expect. There are valid points here, but my aim was to point out the fact that learning by trying to copy your instructor has some limitations. Being out of shape and infirm is not the same as just being old. Regular training and practise will only slow down the effects of aging. Eventually, no matter how fit the instructor is, his techniques will naturally vary. The image of the old master with almost super-human skills is so ingrained in popular culture that students often try to emulate their older instructor without considering age. An instructor with decades of training will not do things exactly the same way at 45 and 70 years old, even if he is very fit. The older one gets the more important it is to make constant conscious efforts to maintain correct technique and minimize or adapt to the effects of aging. I'm not certain if I explained my point well enough. I hope some of the lifelong older martial artists know what I mean.

Observing and emulating the instructors techniques is one of the classical ways of learning karate. This works very well but students often forget that listening and applying the concepts that are explained. This is especially true if the instructor is past his prime. The instructor may be a phenomenally skilled expert, but students should realize that age forces him to do things a certain way. Slight variation in stances while executing a kata for example. Students don't often consider this and try to emulate exactly what they see because they are convinced the way the instructor does it is perfect. It is not stressed enough in most dojos that doing what the instructor says is sometimes more important than trying to do it exactly the way he does it. I have only heard this twice since I became involved in karate at age 10. Just recently, my instructor stressed that he has adapted his techniques and kata to fit his age and other physical attributes. His main point was that students should follow technical instructions and explanations more than trying to just copy the way he does. If a 20 year old student just apes his 70 year old instructor he would be doing old man karate. In other words that student would not be doing karate to his full potential. It is best to listen and try to apply what your instructor says. Once students acquire the correct way to execute a technique, they should aim to adapt it to their own physical traits. A great example of "Do what I say and not what I do". Too often student forget that a master or expert is not someone with perfect performance. An expert or master is one who has a level of understanding that allows him to adapt techniques to his own age and physical condition without compromising effectiveness.

The right way is the way that will work for the situation where you MUST do it that way or get injured, maimed or killed. That is the most simple answer but sometimes it is not that simple. The point is that as an instructor, it is not helpful to just answer a student with: Do it this way because this is how we do it in XYZ-style. This kind of answer might work for new students but sooner or later somebody will want to know more. Without understanding the function and purpose of the techniques, one is just performing meaningless gestures. It becomes form without substance.

Before asking the question that started this thread, it might be a good idea to give a definition of what is a beginner. Without first establishing what is considered a beginner, it is impossible to give a precise answer. Each martial artist who gives his opinion will answer the original question according to his definition of a beginner. Here is mine: a beginner is a person who is still in the process of learning how to execute the basic techniques, the first kata/forms and fundamental principles of the system such as generating power, etc. This stage is every level below Shodan. In my dojo it takes around 2 years of practise everyday. It takes up to 5 years if training only 2 times a week. At shodan a student is considered an initiate or advanced beginner. A Shodan is supposed to have a good understanding of all the basic techniques and must know basic applications of all the required kata. At this level a student should also be conditioned enough to do contact drills with some power. All the training onwards is focussed on skill refinement and increasing the level of technical precision, power generation and kata application.

It really is an unmistakable show of ignorance and narrow-mindedness for a karateka or any martial artist to make such a claim. With all the karate styles that exist and their off-shoots there are hundreds of kata and the variations of these easily double or triple that number. To conclude a kata does not exist or is not legitimate on the sole reason that one has never heard of it; or does not include it in their system is indeed very ignorant. Why, there are over a hundred kata with just the original Okinawan styles! Even Wikipedia has a list of nearly all the kata and it is quite long!

In the area I live and train my teacher is the only one of two, maybe three who teach traditional Okinawan karate. Other styles all as popular as ever and there are several high-profile commercial schools around us. Having experience in other systems is not as important in being confident in one's own skills and the system one teaches. Practising and teaching a single system that one wholeheartedly believes in should not be an obstacle to taking an interest in others. An instructor who is fully confident in his skills and teaching method will never be afraid or concerned if students take an interest in other systems.

Yes shouting at students or using abusive language is certainly not an effective way to teach anything. Sometimes students may need a hard lesson to understand the seriousness and the risks involved in what they are practising but shouting in their face or otherwise demeaning them will never get any good results. Challenging them to think for themselves about what they should be doing or how they can improve is always the best answer. Students need to be told more often when they do something well and exactly where they have improved. This is just as important as pointing out mistakes or necessary improvements. Maybe even more important.

Explaining the material is the most important part of a teacher's role. A mediocre teacher might just demonstrate and then state that technique A is done this way because it is effective. The demonstration may be the very essence of skill and this instructor may be right. On the other hand his explanation does not answer any question nor does it help understand the purpose and function. A good instructor will not only demonstrate but will also explain in a way suited to the level of his students understanding. His explanation will cover more than how a technique should be done. It will be on the function and the purpose as well as to why it should be done one way and not another. I would also like to add that an instructor may be an expert or technical master but it does not necessarily follow that this person also knows how to explain or teach what he does effectively. It is possible that the instructor lacks the teaching skills to do so. Not many instructors realize how the way they communicate the material impacts how well each student understands or accepts it. This is especially true for corrections and changes. Not all students will take the instructor's comments exactly the same way.

All of the training I referred to are those than can be taught almost without any actual techniques used. The youngest children I ever saw actually practising any kind of kumite were around 8 years old. They were visibly making progress but their training was limited to taking turns doing one technique and one counter. Contact was just a light touch like tag. Younger students between 5 and 7 did different drills using soft foam targets held by instructors or older students to help them learn their rang and reach. There were also many drills to train the skill of dodging, entering the opponent's space for a strike and covering up and blocking. All of these were done through a game or obstacle course type race where the children had to complete stations in limited time and against an opposing team. It looked like great fun and even the older children asked to do it. They would not take no for an answer so the instructor ended up doing the same drills for them every other kumite practise session.

If a school or instructor is so afraid of losing students and income that he discourages them from being interested or training in other martial arts, then he must not be very good at all. Even though this attitude is not exclusive to commercial schools, it seems to be prevalent in those circles. A martial artist will look at another system and see it for what it is: another system, maybe with interesting techniques. An instructor mostly concerned with turning a profit will see competition and maybe a threat to his business. This is quite unfortunate because when teaching martial arts becomes about making more money, it ceases to be about the quality of instruction or the sharing of any skills. An instructor who has no interest whatsoever in any system but his own is not a very good one indeed. A good school and instructor is one who is fully confident in the skills taught as well as the methods for teaching them to people. Such a school or instructor encourages students to take an interest in what else is out there in the vast universe of martial arts. I have met and trained under at least 5 instructors, three of them were masters at the highest level, one of whom is the head of a very old and traditional Okinawan school. Never ever have they told students to stay away from other styles or other martial arts. Quite the opposite in fact and each of these teachers was very well informed about martial arts in general. Enough to have a good discussion. Some of these had even trained in other arts themselves and gained a respectable level of skill. The only consensus in their opinion was that one should stick to a single system until the basics are well understood before attempting something else as beginners starting two or more systems simultaneously will get confused. They also told me that if a student was dedicated enough to do it, it was best to study systems that are different enough in focus as to not be possible to mix up when doing one or the other. Karate and judo or a kung fu style and kendo instead of two karate styles or judo and jujutsu. After all, if a student has the time and dedication and the resources to pursue multiple styles why not? I have nothing against it but I do get annoyed by dabblers. Those who drift from school to school never staying longer than a year or so before moving on to whatever the next passing interest might be.

A dojo training session should have just enough time to do the stretching and physical conditioning required to warm up and prevent injuries. Any additional workout is part of individual student's personal initiative. The bulk of the dojo training time ought to focus on correcting previously learned techniques, drills to reinforce these and introducing new material. Any other and additional practise is on each students initiative. That is why the best students, those who progress steadily and faster are the ones who practise on their own time in addition to training in the dojo. Those are invariably the ones who make a conscious effort to improve and usually end up staying. Just following along with everybody else and repeating the same things countless times without thinking like a zombie shuffling along the floor will not make one any better. Everything depends on a persons determination and will do do better than yesterday. The instructor can only counsel, correct and explain on how or what should be done according to a students strength and weaknesses. Effective dojo training focusses on teaching, correcting and fine tuning. Practise and repetition is homework and a good instructor can easily tell if his students have done homework.

Slow and steady, one step at a time is the best way to go. Just like learning to ride a two-wheeler bicycle. Many young children are still in the process of learning to control their balance and coordination. Teaching them the basics at this stage is the most productive. There should only be enough contact to get students over the fear of getting hit, such as light touch. Intensifying the contact can be done very easily and naturally as the students improve their skills and get a little older. Drills where each takes a turn dodging or defending works very well in my experience.

There are many reasons why an instructor or dojo might advise against training in another style at the same time. However, regardless of these reasons, no reputable school or instructor would impose any sort of penalty on their students for studying a different system on their own time. There is much to be learned by learning about and studying other systems. Again I would be curious as to what organization or school the OP got that rule from. I really wonder where the OP heard that non-participation thing. Sounds like something a competition or tournament would have rather than a specific school or association.

I am in agreement with Sensei8. That is the strangest rule I have heard of since I started martial arts. There is absolutely nothing that prevents a person from studying different systems and making some progress. Maybe some competitions have rules restricting judges and participants to one style, but I never heard of anyone lose a ranking as a consequence. It would probably help to find out where this supposed non-participate rule comes from. Without that anything is just speculation because no other information is available.

Fees are usually one of the first things a prospective student will want to know. There is so much variation in how this part is managed and a good school is usually able to provide basic information about payments. Advertising the pricing or not can be an advantage or a disadvantage. From a school/instructor point of view, using up add space for pricing details can leave out other aspects they may want to mention. Advertisement space can be costly and instructors want something simple and concise to attract people to their dojo. From a potential student point of view, if the main information is about fees it can distract from other information. The best advertisements I have seen only had enough information to satisfy initial inquiries about costs. Usually the cost of one month's worth of instructions.

The question I would ask would be HOW children should be introduced to kumite instead of asking if they should be. Certainly no instructor worthy of teaching would teach kumite to children with the same methods used with adolescents and adults. I have seen children learning kumite. It requires a completely different approach and the instructor must be familiar with the physical development stages(gross motor skills, balance, coordination of movements etc) of children in order to decide what aspects of kumite can be effectively taught. It is entirely possible to introduce and practise kumite skills safely. Things like: timing for offense/defense, effective range of techniques and many other useful things. Contact is possible but should be controlled and closely supervised. All of these are feasible to some degree with school aged children (5years+). Kumite for children under 10 should focus on preparing and the most basic notions with only very light controlled contact.

Japanese influence on Korean martial arts are more than obvious. Those who question it still often do it because of some political or cultural agenda. For centuries Korea, China and Japan have had cultural and commercial ties which brought many exchanges and parallel developments in many fields. The martial arts is just one of these. At the centre of the three was small but very prosperous island kingdom of Ryu kyu, present day Okinawa. Ryukyu was trading far and wide and sent its ships all over East and Southeast Asia. They may have even reached India. Exchanges with China brought Chinese martial arts and the Okinawan interpretation of these added to native techniques developed what became known as Karate. By the time karate was introduced to Japan, it had again been reinterpreted by the Japanese. This happened a few short years after Korea was annexed to Japan. Before the Japanese took over in the 1900's Korean culture and martial arts had certainly been heavily influenced by China, the superpower of the era, which had a very strong presence. It is best to understand as a cycle with influence moving from China to Korea and Okinawa and then from Okinawa to Japan and back to Korea again. Similarities in Korean, Japanese and Okinawan terminology are striking. Even more so if one is able to read the original writing. Chinese influence is also apparent in terminology but more obvious when comparing individual techniques.

Auto- grading is always a bad idea if the purpose of instruction is to teach any applicable skills. Students do not graduate from school just by going to class and sitting through their courses. They have to study to absorb the material and have to pass exams to determine how well they apply the notions taught. Martial arts should not be different and those who do not practise or only attend the minimum lessons should not ever expect to advance in skill or rank. Giving out ranks just for presence and participation renders them useless and affects everyone negatively. It just feeds the displaced and selfish sense of overblown entitlement that is so common in consumer mentalities. It is also a great insult to the determination of those who have spent years paying for their skills with pain, sweat, tears and blood. Taught the right way, martial arts is perhaps one of the best activities to teach the value of hard earned skills. Now that is a lesson for life. On the other hand the average person may not know or care that he has not gained an ounce of skill and still could not break himself free from a wet paper bag. Maybe some others are just happy breaking a sweat and flailing about without ever asking about what the moves mean. The still want that next pretty coloured belt and they will throw a fit if they are passed up on it. Usually a high number of belts and auto- grading is a clue that the pursuit and refinement of skill is not a priority. It is also a common strategy for increasing profit in schools aimed at children and youth including McDojos but not exclusively.

I am certain it is different from carpal tunnel syndrome because that has more to do with nerves and is much more painful than what I am getting. It happens most often when I try to relax my hands after having held them open as in a shuto or after keeping my fists closed tight when striking the makiwara or intense kata or drills. Sometimes my hands and fingers do not return to normal for several minutes and I feel soreness or numbness for hours later. I make it a point to exercise my hands and fingers in all the range of motion. It feels like every muscle in my hands squeeze and stay stuck that way. When it happens it is as if my hands are out if my control and unresponsive to my attempts at moving them to reclose or extend the fingers. I have had severe cramps in my thighs and calfs before but this is weird.

I feel very strongly about this issue and I agree with the moral and ethic principles according to which a martial arts teacher is responsible for passing on more than just martial techniques. Dealing with those who use what they are taught for unlawful purpose is part of those responsibilities. Some might consider this way of thinking old fashioned or foreign, but it is still possible to act on it. I may have particular thoughts about how one should teach martial arts, but I truly believe in the rule of law and it's enforment by the proper authorities. With this in mind I believe it is the responsibility of an instructor to confront any student who misuses or abuses what is taught. Anything and everything within the law to ensure the student changes or ceases the actions in question should be done. This includes warnings to authorities if applicable and letting peers know about the misuse and abuse. After all who wants the reputation of instructing thugs or frauds?