MatsuShinshii

I know some that practice JKD. I have never taken it so I can not speak directly to your question however it still exists through his students so I guess my uniformed answer would be yes. The reason I say this is because the context under which your question was asked, "since he's gone should the art be" is illogical to me. No art would exist if it just ceased to exist after it's founder died. We would all be learning that phony internet garbage that phony master perpetrate as effective and REAL just because they are alive. Oh I bet they would love that. Think of what they arts would be if this was a reality. Everyone would be doing a cartwheel kick because some no nothing fraud created a new art based on his own crazy idea's of what looks good must work mentality. No. JKD shouldn't be allowed to fade away. It is a legacy and even though I know pretty much nothing about it, the practitioners of the art obviously feel it's effective for it to be taught and for students to continue to return to class. I think Dan Inosanto (not sure of the spelling) would strongly disagree with this premise.

I have to disagree with this statement. Again I go back to the definition of "traditional. Toudi and Ti or Ti'gwa (the name of Karate before it was changed along with most of the original art by the Itosu and later the Japanese) IMHO would be considered traditional in the true sense of the word. Those founders and successors that refused to change their training practices or to join the Butokukai and continued to pass down the original COMBAT intent of the art would IMO be considered true traditional MA. I agree that wrestling pre-dates pretty much most martial arts but Ti or the original percussive art of Okinawa most certainly pre-dates western boxing. Sorry I'm a major history buff so I had to make this correction. I could not agree with you more on this. Most Americans haven't the foggiest clue. To go one step further most "Traditions" are not originally from the founders of the art but rather injected into the art by other cultures i.e. Japan and the western world. Again you are absolutely right. I go back to my previous statement concerning Itosu and Japan. The original art of Toudi (China Hand) and Ti'gwa (Original percussive art and Muay Boran) that was handed down to the next generation of students was for all intents and purposes changed in order to expand the art to school children. Itosu was the master mind behind re-inventing the art to suite this purpose. Obviously you can not pass on combat effective skills to children so they were disguised or removed. The art was further corrupted when Funakoshi brought it to Japan since the Japanese people despised everything Chinese and wanted it to fit into the sport or DO of other arts like Judo, Aikido and Kendo. In fact I'll make the following statement that will upset most that consider themselves traditional, "the vast majority of modern day (post Itosu/Japan) haven't the foggiest notion of what the original combat applications and techniques are". This one I have to correct you on. The repetition of applications and scenarios is to build muscle memory just like you do when you jab or right cross a million times. This is to develop an almost automatic response. No one, well let me take that back, I would never say that what is taught will happen in every fight. It's the direct opposite most times. People are unpredictable. However if someone throws a right cross and you have trained this counter a million times, the body takes over and it gives you an edge. However your statement about compliant opponents is sadly true in most cases. However I can not speak for them. For my experience in the arts, we do not rely on an instructor to tell us something works we have to find out for ourselves. This means putting it to the test. I will also say that we are not mind numb robots that do the same thing over and over. Each student must become a critical thinker and thus a critic of the applications in that it must be proven to work. Not all techniques work for all people. Also it is encouraged to experiment with the knowledge you have been taught and to apply what you have learned into finding new ways (your way and what works best for you) in terms of actual resistive training (combative/reality). Agreed. This is why you train in as many possible scenarios as you can. With the multitude of fighting arts and the differences between people there is not way you can prepare for every fight in terms of knowing what your opponent will try or do. The point is to train for as many as possible, build muscle memory, condition your body and the bodies weapons so that you are prepared to meet what ever is thrown at you. Can you or anyone here say that they have seen it all and are prepared for absolutely anything? If you can your a warrior God because I don't believe this is practical or even possible. Having said that I don't think this is the aim of any fighter. The aim is to train yourself and learn how to fight effectively so that you can face the unknown. Agreed. And again it's not just the specific applications that are drilled. When training in free form (resistive outside of the box attacks) you adapt just like MMA guys would. I get your point and would agree with a lot of what you say because I have taken other arts and have seen the brain numb robots methodically drilling on line the same thing over and over without ever testing it's validity against a non-compliant opponent. The new fad for Modern schools is what we call Bunkai. The problem is understanding that just because it's shown a certain way in the Kata does not mean that this is exactly the way it is done in real combat. Example; some instructors adhere to the movements and body positioning exactly ever time. If you step forward and punch at chest height that is the way it is taught. Problem... not everyone is the same height. Not every attack will be thrown with a particular leg leading. If students are not taught to be critical thinkers and they are not shown that not everything fits into a neat little package then they are doomed to failure. So I agree with your statement in some respects but I think you are tucking all "traditional" training into the same little neat box. Can't be done. I must of missed the post on eye gouges. Either way it comes down to training methodology again. You are putting every "traditional" art into a neat little box. There are those (not going to say more) that were rough in their earlier years and would put to practice what they learned to find out if things really work or not. So a broad statement that "you don't know because you haven't done" doesn't exactly fit all. However you are right in terms of techniques like eye gouges. No instructor would willfully allow their students to gouge out another students eyes. However there are other ways to train as you probably well know. I'm not taking about in the air against no resistance. 1. you can condition the weapon by use of Hojo Undo (makiwara, Jaribako to name a few). 2. you can practice with the use of a target on a rope or focus mitts to develop the timing. 3.you can target a specific small target on your opponents chest while in resistive training. You get my point. I don't know if this makes one more effective or not. However I will say that because these are within the curriculum that is practiced, they are a tool in the arsenal. Look I know there are a huge amount of ridiculous claims of "deadly techniques" out there and most of them are perpetrated by absolute frauds. However this does not negate the fact that there are techniques that are taught that are deadly IF you are able to use them against a resistive fighter. But just because an art teaches these does not mean one knows how to use them OR can actually use them effectively against a moving resisting target bent on tearing your face off. Like any other technique or application it must be practiced both in the learning stages and under duress in order to be able to use it effectively. But then again I think this rings true with just about any technique from a simple punch to a choke hold. Practice makes perfect. Look there is nothing mystical about traditional arts. If practiced as they were invented they are an effective combat method to protect yourself. And I don't think there should be this competition between MMA and any other art. They are both fighting methodologies. And both have advantages and disadvantages. No fighting method is perfect. If it were there would be no other form of fighting taught. Everyone gets beat sooner or later. I have nothing against MMA. In fact I would love to learn how to ground fight. It's my biggest weakness. And for me at my age, the last thing I would ever do is get into the ring with someone that would turn me into a human pretzel. However I think that most MMA guys sell old school arts short based on examples of modern day examples. I would point out that the arts (minus BJJ) in MMA are traditional arts. They have a place at the warriors table. But I would conceed that most including myself do not train for what most would call a work day everyday of the week and most do not get into a cage. However that does not detract the fact that someone that has dedicated their lives, or most of it, to learning a combative art is any less than any other practitioner. Training methods might differ, methods of attack and defense might differ, and the methodology might differ between arts but when all is said and done they are effective as they were invented based on what was learned on the field of battle during struggles for life. We all have strengths and weaknesses. If MMA has no weaknesses how is it that someone with relatively no training in any other art can dominate (albeit for a short time) and why is there not a specified grouping of arts that make up a super art that is undefeatable? It's simple because it comes down to the fighter themselves. Their mentality, natural abilities, knowledge, and their uniqueness. An art is only as good as the one utilizing it. So the argument over which art is the best is pointless to me. In the end it falls on the individual using the art(s) not the art(s) themselves. BJJ would not have been so successful if Royce lost. It's an unbelievably effective art that has changed the way fighter view the ground game. However if he was mediocre the UFC would have dwindled into oblivion and we wouldn't be able to have this lively discussion.

Solid Post. I'd have to agree with a lot of what you said. And I don't think the majority of us "traditionalist were selling MMA short by any means. For the sake of discussion differences were pointed out. Having said that I hate to agree with your premise concerning conditioning but in today's Dojo's contact for many is not an option. IMHO contact is the only way to train. Hit and be hit. That way you know what it feels like on both accords. Fear of the unknown cripples fighters when they actually get into a conflict and it's even worse if they have never been hit before and they get rocked for the first time. However it is next to impossible to convince Modern day schools that this is not only the way most of us trained but that it has major benefits. They fall back on the fact that most of the original guys bringing the arts back to the states were military and point out that this is the reason for the contact. Most say this has no place in the arts. I wonder if they rethink this position the first time they meet up with a hoodlum intent on pounding them? Either way I tend to agree with your statements.

White crane was developed by a female as well. I guess I don't know where this fits into the discussion of females fighting males in the UFC. Can you clarify?

Alan, I absolutely understand your argument but I have to differ with you on a few things. For one, although being slammed in a jail cell is a concern, it would be my last concern if attacked. My mindset, be it right or wrong to others, is to take the creep out anyway necessary so I can see my family. I get that it's a concern but again I go back to mentality. Fighting without fighting may work in theory but when faced with a guy intent on taking your life, all the small talk in the world won't change the outcome. It's better to be judged by 12 than to be cared by 6. So I would break the typical traditional Karateka mantra of love and peace and kumbaya singing around the camp fire but this goes back to the changing of the original intent of Toudi by the Japanese and latter by the western society. It was developed for war. Loose your weapon... use your hands and feet. It's meant as a means to protect your life. I can think of no better situation to use my training than if confronted with a person intent on doing me or my family harm. If I can talk my way out of it I'll know within seconds, if I can walk away I'll know within seconds, if the intention is there you only have two options IMHO, fight or flight. Personally getting a knife in the back or beer bottle smashed against the back of my head as I try to run away is not my idea of self protection. Maybe it's the Marine in me but I'm not turning away until the threat is nullified. If that lands my happy alive hiney in jail then so be it. Two - I don't know if I can agree with your comment concerning lethality. Again I was pointing out one scenario. I don't think I would go as far as saying that a trained Karateka is more lethal than a trained MMA guy on the streets. If the MMA guy has good stand up skills and is highly trained the outcome would be the same as a Karateka. The difference I was pointing out is the tendency to take things to the ground. On the streets this would more than not be a mistake. It's a difference in mentality and training not lethality. A common street thug with absolutely no training can knock out a trained fighter if the conditions are right and if he continues to bash the guys head into the curb I would call him lethal. I think the statement should be more on situational awareness and understanding the environment in which you are engaging in combat rather than lethality. I think it's up for discussion in either arena. There have been Karateka do very well in MMA and I think if confronted by a hoodlum an MMA fighter would be able to more than hold there own or better. Again I think it comes down to training practices, situational awareness and environment rather than lethality. An elderly man or lady with a broken hip in a wheel chair holding a guy with the intention of use it is lethal. That word is subjective based on circumstance.

I think you read me wrong. I have nothing whatsoever against MMA and I am not saying that it is not effective. I was merely pointing out a few differences in how we go about things and what our individual weaknesses are. I have no doubt that a elite trained fighter can more than handle themselves outside of the cage. However there is a different mindset on the streets. I merely pointed out that if a fighter that is prone to taking it to the ground did so on the streets it would be a lapse in judgement because it is the exception vs the rule that a guy would be alone. MMA trains to beat one and "old school" Toudi (Karate) trains to beat more than one. Before someone brings this up and skews my statement. No this does not mean that Karate guys can take on a multitude of opponents or that we are super bad "you know what". It was merely a mindset, prepared, awareness thing. I wrestled in high school and I also took Judo for years but as you are probably aware it is not the same as JJ or BJJ when it comes to ground fighting the intent is different. Learning to turn a hopeless situation into a submission is awesome to me personally. Growing up, my mind set was to stay on my feet which is were I live. Our techniques (Ne Waza) were meant to get out of the situation and get back to our feet. So to be on your back on the ground was and is the worse place for a guy like me. It's a huge weakness. You could not pay me to enter that cage unless you changed the rules excluding ground fighting. Maybe when I was younger and dumber I would have gladly entered the cage but I am older and much wiser and understand my weaknesses. No thanks. I am basically an hour away depending on traffic and where in Louisville he is. I know there are gyms in Cincinnati as well. My issue is time. I work a ton of hours during the week and then I have my art, family and of course sleep. Finding two hours of time a few times a week is difficult at best. Something would have to give. Louisville is just not in the cards at this time in my life.

There is a reason for age when it comes to instruction. Maturity is a huge factor, along with the knowledge that comes along with years of training. Knowledge is not just based on the memorization of techniques and application. It also the comprehensive understanding of how these techniques and applications are applied, when to apply and how to apply them. It is also understanding how to get the material you are teaching across to others in a way they can understand. My art holds no knowledge back from students as they learn but many arts hold back "deadly" techniques or even the actual meaning of the Kata. I know this to be true because I have studied other arts. So how then can an instructor of say 16 years old instruct when they have not been taught the deeper meaning of the art or it's true intent if you will? I agree that age doesn't have everything to do with being an instructor but I personally feel that it has everything to do with being a well rounded, I'd even go so far as to say good, instructor. Again my personal opinion but I'd rather learn from an instructor with 20 years + under his/her belt than a 19 year old that can perform all of the techniques with ease but has little understanding of why they are teaching them. Age equals years and it takes years to develop the knowledge and understanding of what the techniques and applications are and how, when and why they are used. That and youth equals utilization of strength and speed and basically ignoring proper technique. Things are forced and not necessarily correct. Over the years I have come to realize that I am better than I was as a youth. No I can't do the splits anymore, my strength has reduced along with my speed but I've come to realize that proper technique and true understanding of the applications makes me a better fighter and a far better teacher. My Shinshii while teaching was at the young age of 84 and was living proof that technique concurred youth, strength and speed. For me give me a crusty old Shinshii with the wisdom to understand the deeper meaning and proper technique over a young athletic one any day of the week.

It depends on which perspective you are looking at this from. We as "traditional" practitioners would not do well in a cage, without proper training, due to the rules and the fact that these guys are world class ground fighters and the vast majority of traditional striking arts has only a limited exposure to ground fighting and the intent is to be able to get back to our feet not stay on the ground. However an MMA fighter that would typically go to the ground would get destroyed on the streets as there is in most circumstances more than one opponent. It's two different worlds. There are rules for each and neither necessarily subscribes to the others rules of combat. I think I know what you are trying to say but I feel this is a huge mistake. Showing weakness when confronted by an unknown opponent is a bad idea even if it is to faint. It encourages an attack. Look, I know that most modern day Karate schools teach you to walk away and there is "no first strike", but... this doesn't work when your opponent is intent on doing you harm. I'll let the Modern Karate guys do the whole "no first strike" (Karate Ni Sente Nashi) stuff and I will strike first. Violence is a mind set and if you are not ready to attack with full on intent you will be destroyed in a street confrontation because as stated before there are most likely more than one attacker whether you see them or not. It's a pack mentality. Maybe this is the military in me but I'm not turning the cheek when my life is on the line. I will be the one to go home to my family. Depends on your definition of "traditional". McDojo's call there art traditional if it's more than 5 years old. Sport Karate is nothing more than acrobatics and dance as stated. As far as the elderly goes. There are few elderly in an old school dojo and most are highly graded and have practiced and taught for most of their lives. This is akin to asking if BJJ is for the elderly because you see Helio Gracie in the Dojo. I doubt anyone would say he's just an elderly man getting his exercise. In terms of modern Karate and McDojo's, this might be true. If you are talking about traditional as in old school, adhering to the founders teachings without the modern spin or Japanization then your statements could not be more false. Real traditional Karate is a combat effective fighting method that is based on combat tested applications derived by the founders themselves, their teachers of through externally introduced arts. The mantra is effective. If it doesn't work we don't practice it. High, flying, spinning, flipping kicks will not be seen in an old school Dojo. Blocks in the sense of the way they are practiced in modern Karate will not be seen in old school dojo. Strikes, kicks, weapon and body conditioning(hardening), body shifting, body mechanics in terms of power generation and speed, what some would call dirty fighting, submissions, locks, re-directions, throws, sweeps, takedowns, vital and cavity targeting, etc, etc, and yes a bit of Ne Waza will be seen in old school Dojo. Getting hit and hitting will also be seen in old school Dojo. point sparring or what I like to call patty cakes will not be seen. Unfortunately those that decided to meet the fast food generations expectations, those that turned their art into a sport, and those that do not deserve to pass on the art (frauds and McDojo owners, Belts for bucks) have destroyed the reputation and taken the attention away from REAL Karate (Toudi) and placed it on them, thus inspiring the comments you listed above. Again depends on your definition. Yes in terms of sport and McDojo's. Wouldn't you turn to a combate based art if you wanted to learn to defend yourself? I know if I was learning the weak techniques meant for sport and not having any understanding of the Kata past how many jumps and flips I can put into it to catch the judges attention I would run to the nearest MMA school. To be honest if I lived close enough I would be thrilled to learn how to become proficient in ground fighting. I'll be honest this is one weak spot in my art that leaves us vulnerable. So I don't even think it's an issue of better, it's more of an issue of something to complement our art. As far as stand up (striking) I'll stick with Toudi/Ti. Just my 2 cents on the subject.

First, there is no need to be nervous if you put the tournament in perspective for what it is, an opportunity to learn and improve. Too many worry about winning and loosing or looking good. How do you think elite athletes become elite? Do you think they never lost? No, they learned from their loses. Loosing is a part of the learning process. Each time you'll pick something up and then you store that in your memory banks. It's a chance to figure out where your strengths are and what your weaknesses are and then improve them. No one starts out being the best of the best. It's a journey and as long as you see it for what it is and learn from it you win. Trophies are nothing more than window dressing the real trophy is the knowledge you take away from the experience. Win or loose, it doesn't matter. Take something away from every Kumite session in class, every time you perform Kata and every time you compete and it will all work itself out. You will improve and the winning will come. There is nothing to fear if you put the experience into perspective. It's just a tournament nothing more. Win or loose, tomorrow still comes and it brings another opportunity to learn and improve. And as far as performing in front of people goes, you do this every time you go to class. It's really no different. Your there to perform just like you perform in front of the class. Ok, I got it. Think of the crowd in their underwear.

WOW!

Happy Birthday DWx!

I'm not sure it would work but then again I have never taught in terms of all students being able to perform techniques and applications to a specified level before moving on to the next. The reason I question it's feasibility is because we are now interjecting not only a students ability to learn mentally but also physically. No one student is the same in terms of physical ability. Strength, speed, mobility, dexterity, etc. etc. Not to mention each students learning capability in terms of memorization and complex thinking. I think this would reduce the interests of the more naturally capable students do to waiting on those less capable. I have always thought in terms of one on one basis or each student progresses at their own pace according to their abilities both mental and physical. This is why I don't understand set time limits on grade because not everyone learns at the same pace or is physically capable of the same pace. I think if you rush those that are not as capable it will discourage their interest or they just will not absorb the material as well and if you hold back those more capable they will get bored and ultimately find something else. And as Bushido_man96 stated, what would you do about those that join later than others? Start a separate calls? Hold back or go back to the beginning level of instruction until they progress to where everyone else was? In these terms no one would every progress beyond Hachikyu as students join at different intervals through out the year. It's giving me a migraine just thinking about the complexities of implementing this type of learning structure. I think in terms of the MA's you have an up hill battle because it's not forced, meaning that everyone must go to school. No one has to go to MA class. I would have to say it's an interesting theory but after thinking about it I would stick to allowing students to progress per their abilities.

Agreed, agreed, agreed! I am not saying that a female is not able to take down a male. But we are talking two different scenarios Sensei8. Your talking on the streets where there are no rules and the techniques that we teach can be employed to even the playing field or turn the tides to the females favor. Heck go back and read one of my other posts defending females against male. I can't remember the exact post but it was in terms of female vs male or small vs large or something along those lines. But that again was under a different context. We were not talking UFC. I am simply pointing out that in the terms of this post (UFC elite against elite) the male will come out on top every time because of the rules involved. We all know ways (or at least I assume we do) to take an aggressor out fast by means of submission, knockout, injury or even death. The difference is once you enter that cage you are stripped of the techniques that level the playing field of small taking on large and female taking on male. It's just fact. The male is genetically built over centuries to fight. It's in our genetic make up and a male of say 205 lbs is going to hit much much harder than a female of the same weight class. This actually skews the weight classes. I am taking into mind that both are equal in technical proficiency, skill, and knowledge. I watched a show years ago, I think it was fight science of something of those terms, anyway the were showing the power generation of a punch. The men punched two times harder (power) than the females and in some instances even harder. Its not an argument, it's centuries of genetics. Our bodies are built differently, it's science. Now having said that I agree with you 100% that a well trained female against a male, and allowing for all techniques, would more than have a chance against the male. Heck, take the number one equalizer weapon that any layman would teach a female, the groin kick. You can't do that in the UFC much less any other technique that we teach to equalize the fight. It's not an argument of whether females stack up in everyday life it's a question of rules in the UFC and what you can and can not do. If you take away our techniques larger or more powerful fighter will prevail. This is why the techniques were invented in the first place. Call it dirty fighting or what you will be this is the equalizer when a smaller man faces a large man or when a female faces a male. Obviously technique and intent will be the deciding factor unless there is a lucky shot but if you remove the equalizing techniques for the sake of sport and safety then size and power comes right back into play. It's just my personal opinion. Everyone is free to have there own. I am definitely not taking anything away from female fighters. Most could probably destroy me. God knows I do not train for 8 hours a day, have all of the science and multitude of trainers/ instructors to train me to be the best. I'd have to quite my job and find the fountain of youth to reduce about 30 years to even have a fighting chance in the cage against most of the fighters whether male or female. So I am not arguing the fact that women can stand toe to toe with men if trained. I am arguing that we are built differently and like it or not the male is genetically built for combative sports. In this case the elite male would over take the elite female on the same playing field and under the same rules (UFC). Call me a sexist or a bad instructor or whatever you will but I feel that these are the facts IMHO. Here is the latest fight science information.Punch like a girl ; has been known as a derogatory statement for a very long time; science proves otherwise as this video explains. For the statement highlighted in red https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8Qfhs_4z8c Ok, I have not seen this evidence presented before. In this case I would say my statements are dead wrong. Wow, that was impressive to say the least. Ok, I guess I have nothing left to add. Ignore my earlier posts. I guess I have to learn to like the taste of crow because I just ate some. Well supported argument Alan. I admit I was wrong in my assumption.

The funny thing is, the female posters in this thread (myself and Lupin1) are agreeing with you. The opposing views are being presented by two men. Make of that what you will... DWX, I appreciate you saying that. I feared this would be taken out of context. I take nothing away from women in terms of self defense or fighting capability. I was merely speaking within the context of this post (UFC elite vs elite).

Agreed, agreed, agreed! I am not saying that a female is not able to take down a male. But we are talking two different scenarios Sensei8. Your talking on the streets where there are no rules and the techniques that we teach can be employed to even the playing field or turn the tides to the females favor. Heck go back and read one of my other posts defending females against male. I can't remember the exact post but it was in terms of female vs male or small vs large or something along those lines. But that again was under a different context. We were not talking UFC. I am simply pointing out that in the terms of this post (UFC elite against elite) the male will come out on top every time because of the rules involved. We all know ways (or at least I assume we do) to take an aggressor out fast by means of submission, knockout, injury or even death. The difference is once you enter that cage you are stripped of the techniques that level the playing field of small taking on large and female taking on male. It's just fact. The male is genetically built over centuries to fight. It's in our genetic make up and a male of say 205 lbs is going to hit much much harder than a female of the same weight class. This actually skews the weight classes. I am taking into mind that both are equal in technical proficiency, skill, and knowledge. I watched a show years ago, I think it was fight science of something of those terms, anyway the were showing the power generation of a punch. The men punched two times harder (power) than the females and in some instances even harder. Its not an argument, it's centuries of genetics. Our bodies are built differently, it's science. Now having said that I agree with you 100% that a well trained female against a male, and allowing for all techniques, would more than have a chance against the male. Heck, take the number one equalizer weapon that any layman would teach a female, the groin kick. You can't do that in the UFC much less any other technique that we teach to equalize the fight. It's not an argument of whether females stack up in everyday life it's a question of rules in the UFC and what you can and can not do. If you take away our techniques larger or more powerful fighter will prevail. This is why the techniques were invented in the first place. Call it dirty fighting or what you will be this is the equalizer when a smaller man faces a large man or when a female faces a male. Obviously technique and intent will be the deciding factor unless there is a lucky shot but if you remove the equalizing techniques for the sake of sport and safety then size and power comes right back into play. It's just my personal opinion. Everyone is free to have there own. I am definitely not taking anything away from female fighters. Most could probably destroy me. God knows I do not train for 8 hours a day, have all of the science and multitude of trainers/ instructors to train me to be the best. I'd have to quite my job and find the fountain of youth to reduce about 30 years to even have a fighting chance in the cage against most of the fighters whether male or female. So I am not arguing the fact that women can stand toe to toe with men if trained. I am arguing that we are built differently and like it or not the male is genetically built for combative sports. In this case the elite male would over take the elite female on the same playing field and under the same rules (UFC). Call me a sexist or a bad instructor or whatever you will but I feel that these are the facts IMHO.

I would love to believe that resolve and determination is the ultimate leveller in any physical confrontation. I have two young daughters learning martial arts and a son who is small for his age and by all projections will be a smallish adult. They train in karate with a focus on self protection, not besting the opponent in a toe to toe fight. Fight to escape. Nothing is illegal in the right (unfortunate) circumstances. I teach my girls chokes and strangles from the guard for self preservation purposes. Eye gouges, small joint breaks etc are all allowed. It sounds corny but imo martial arts is about being the best version of ourselves we can be. The fight is with yourself. Someone with disabilities can gain a great deal from martial arts even if they're not a match, physically, for their peers. What other people are capable of doing isn't the yardstick by which I measure the value of ma. Kumite, even competitive, is a part of training. It isn't a fight, it's a test of yourself and an opportunity to expose your weaknesses. Mma is about being better than the other person. I like competitive ma but I do somewhat believe it to be a subversion of martial arts. It's about standing, ego and money. I don't see the dichotomy in telling my girls that, through training, they can help ensure their safety against anyone whilst still acknowledging that top flight male fighters are more capable than top flight female fighters. Physically males have a higher ceiling than women. We're conflating athletes at the peak of what our bodies are capable of with the average martial artist. We seem to be conflating mma with martial arts in general when they are very different. Could not agree more. In most instances the person with the most resolve (size of the fight in the dog) will prevail. I have experienced it and seen it. Size in many instances is trumped by shear will providing there is a basis of skill and technical proficiency. I have seen smaller female drop larger males. I've been thrown by a smaller female. So I'd be the last to say it's not possible. And Sensei8 is right we are teaching our students equally. However we are talking about elite fighters where both have the resolve and the skill and superior technique to match. IMHO the female looses 9 out of ten times. Again the reason why is genetics. Male have been in the fight game for a lot longer. Not to say that there are not women warriors in the worlds cultures but you can't argue with centuries of warfare where the male has been the warrior. It's not sexist it's just genetics passed down from generation to generation. The difference is rules. The UFC is set up to take the dirty, effective and dangerous techniques out of play that would level the playing field. This gives the advantage to the male. And don't forget that it was not that long ago when it was "unlady like" to participate in combative sports. It's never been unman like. So there is not gap in the mentality of men teaching their kids to fight and passing on those traits. I'm sorry if this offends our female members, truly it is not meant to do so, and I would be the first to say that a female student of the arts would be able to hold there own and would have ample chance against a male on the streets but I just can not give it to a female in the terms and guidelines suggested in this post concerning the UFC. Maybe a technical competition of grappling between the sexes but interject strikes and the game changes. Women striking women is one thing but a man in the highest levels striking a female fighter... Sorry but it's over.

Ok I watch a few. I still say more experienced woman and very inexperienced male. Obviously I did not sit and watch every one but in browsing through and skipping to the final result the men do not appear to be trying and in others they are just majorly out classed by technique. Technique will overcome brute force unless there is a lucky shot. Having said this all of the fights I watched, the men appear to be novice fighters at best. Again if we are speaking of equality and using these examples as an argument, they do an injustice. Again I am not saying a top of her game fighter couldn't best a male. But it would be through superior technique. I personally feel that if trained any one could beat any one if the conditions were right. However one must realize, and I'm sure this is going to come off as sexist but... a male of the same weight class is going to deliver more power in their strikes than a woman in the same weight class especially if they are both highly trained, but even if they are both novices. It's boils down to body mechanic's and the way we evolved. You might not like this but as a rule of thumb the male was the protector, the hunter and the warrior. This is something that is within the very DNA of the male gender and our bodies are better suited for it. Having said this I am not taking away from the fact that a female can be trained to a very high level or competency and skill and that said female couldn't best male fighters. I believe this in my heart and soul. The very essence of Karate is the fact that it evolved to give the smaller person a chance against a larger person and this has been proven to work time and time again in real life situations. However I do believe that putting a top ranked female against a top ranked male would be a calculated error. In this circumstance technique would be equal and it would come down to strength and power. In this case I'm afraid the female looses or as has already been said, gets destroyed.

Sorry I didn't read the small print.Just put 1on1 male vs female MMA; it looked good enough 99% Not really. If you put a purple/brown belt female up against a white belt male about her size, which means he didn't cut and she probably did, in an amateur setting with a school that is all about promoting female martial artists, you get a result like this. It may have even been a demo for the school with a pre-set outcome. Take the BEST 145lb female in the world right now. Inarguably that is Cyborg right now. Put her up against ANYONE on the UFC roster with a record at 145, she gets destroyed. Not beaten. Not "well it was a good fight". DESTROYED. Loses in the first round most likely. And if it is a ground and pound, the UFC would be out of business within the week from the fan blowback. Didn't see your post before I posted Tempest. Your pretty much spot on. I think their would be an out cry the first time a man destroyed a female fighter in the ring and depending on how badly she got hurt it might very well shut down the UFC. I agree with your assessment.

The kids fight I believe. The other three were less than impressive. Take the MMA fight. The guy had the opportunity to drop the hammer many times but barely hit her in the gut. The sumo guy wasn't giving it much effort in the least. I would never say that a woman couldn't best a man or that a smaller person couldn't destroy a larger one. Having said that these vids were a very pour example. The kids fight was pretty much spot on. Larger kid gets bested by better technique. That one I'll buy. I still do not think we will ever see a top ranked female and male fighter in the same weight class going at it. I don't think the crowd would watch a female getting knocked out. The natural tendency of men is to protect not harm women. I just can't see a sanctioned UFC fight on prime time coverage between a man and a women. And personally I don't think this is a needed spectacle for women to feel equality. They have captured the spot light. I personally think most of the female fights are ten times more exciting than the men's as 90% just go 100% out from the start to the finish making for a more exciting fight. However if a top ranked woman is willing to step in the ring with a top ranked man and both parties agree to it. More power to them. I just can't see it ever happening.

Do you have an age or maturity requirement? Are you ok with a student picking Nichogama, Yari, Nuntibo, Sai, Rochen or any other bladed weapon first before learning blunt weapons like Rokushaku or Tuifa? Beginner adults scare me with a weapon in their hand but kids with weapons scare me more. I have seen the "mistakes" and "accidents" caused by new students from fellow students being struck to a weapon flying across the floor to weapons stuck in ceilings and walls. I personally think that it is up to the instructors discretion when it comes to putting a weapon in a novices hands. I think that at minimum a student should at least get through the first 3 to four grades and demonstrate control without a weapon before being allowed to start training with one. Their maturity level should also be a concern to the instructor. Even a trained student with years of Buki (Kobudo) training can make a mistake and we all know accidents happen but as instructors I feel it a responsibility to make sure that the student is competent before allowing them to swing sticks next to each other much less bladed weapons.

Not telling me anything I haven't seen or heard before. It's the sad state of Modern Karate. Sport based over reality based.

As far as the CI taking over your class goes, that is his/her right to do so. You say you have been studying for four years, that is a blip in time for most instructors. In fact most do not start instructing for many years more. I think your missing the important context in this. You were asked to teach classes. You got that chance. I venture to say the CI never said it was indefinite so why worry about it? Move on and you'll get another chance. As far as the other instructor is concerned... there will always be someone that has an attitude. You are doing nothing more than feeding the fire by joining in on the antics. Train, learn and nothing else. If you joined the Dojo as a social networking project you joined for the wrong reasons. It's YOUR journey. Singular. No one can do it for you and no one can make stay or leave. The decision is in one persons hands and that one person is you. Stay, go, it matter little. You have to ask yourself if you enjoy what you are doing and if your doing it for the right reasons. Teaching takes humility and putting you ego away. It's about the students and not about you and this other instructor. Maybe the CI removed your classes because of the rift between you and this other instructor. After all you're teaching his students and they are there to learn and not get caught up between the drama. Lose the ego (your ego is the issue with your concern over what this instructor and the CI's wife is saying on social media) and do what you joined the Dojo for in the first place. To learn and improve yourself. You can't fill your cup with the art if your cup is filled with animosity and anger for this other instructor. You're not there for her so stop making it about her or... just quite. Simple.

Not to be corrective but that is not swordsmanship. That is meant to impress the crowd. I take nothing away from her performance. I'll even give her high kudo's for her athleticism but that is not the proper use of the sword. For one - if you watch closely at the angle of the blade in respect to the angle of the arms, they are not aligned. The sword would be striking at an angle and thus cut nothing. For two - she is using it as if it were a modern rendition of the use of nunchaku. This is "Xtreme" martial arts were they make kata specifically for the WOW factor. There is nothing about that performance that says she knows how to accurately use a sword or that she has learned real Kenjutsu or Iaido. And as Tempest said it's a blunt sword. And I'll agree that it is a dance because none of what she did came from an actual representation of battle tested applications when utilizing an actual Shinken. Flailing a sword shaped device while flipping and doing somersaults is very impressive but I will not call that swordsmanship because it's not. So yes she is too young to put a real Shinken in her hands especially doing what she is doing. So this just goes to show that those in power (Judges of Britains Got Talent) see but they are blind due to not knowing what they are looking at.On the other hand it is a talent show and what looks great to them, is all they care about, as long as it contains originality, novelty with a pinch of the WOW factor; authenticity and technicalities are not entertaining prerequisites for the masses, as the show isn't based on reality. I would agree with that assessment. It's a talent contest. Originality and Wow factor trumps everything else. And it should. Your trying to out do the next guy and it is not based on reality insomuch as it's based on what people want to see... Flashy, high flying and breathtaking wow factor. Do it and you win. It's the stage under which they compete. And you're right the judges see this and think, wow, I wouldn't want to mess with that little girl. But in reality the actions she is displaying (I will not call them techniques or applications) is exactly what they want to see but has no basis in reality when it comes to actual effective combat methodology. This is part and parcel what you find at 90% of modern tournaments these days. The Wow factor trumps the intent and actual reality based techniques. Don't get me wrong, I love watching these feats of athleticism. It's amazing and certainly takes years to learn. But the problem is the context in which people talk about it. When discussing something like this the comment always comes up that they are great examples of MA's, but it's not true MA. It's a staged performance with one goal in mind, to wow the judges and the audience. To say this has anything to do with real martial arts is ridiculous and false. It's a sport not an art of self defense. Nothing they do translates to the street. Whens the last time you say someone do a triple back flip and roll to a flying front kick to a multitude of high machine gun kicks on the streets? You haven't because it's for show not for actual combative situations. If you attempted this your ancestors would feel the beating you got. It's just for show kinda like Hollywood's version of war vs actual war. The two do not translate. You can't fire a shoulder fired rocket inside of a helicopter cockpit and live to talk about it. But in Hollywood Rambo walks away and so do all of the POW's in the back of the Helo. Not in real life. Flash sells which is why so many promote this. But make no mistake this is not MA.

I would assume there is a reason for his reaction. I would pull him outside of the Dojo and ask him why he feels this way. You could also ask the other Nidan why he would think this. I would also explain that you were attempting to help him out. Once he knows what your mindset is/was he may reconsider his actions. I would not however go to the CI over this. For one it doesn't seem like you have any of the actual facts, why he felt this way, what you did to cause him to pull you aside and speak with you. For two you will come off as a child complaining. As a Yudansha you are expected to handle things first hand and only when there is no other recourse should you approach the CI with this issue. Talk to the Sandan first. Based on your post it sounds like a misunderstanding. Talking it out will most likely solve the issue. Good luck.

Not to be corrective but that is not swordsmanship. That is meant to impress the crowd. I take nothing away from her performance. I'll even give her high kudo's for her athleticism but that is not the proper use of the sword. For one - if you watch closely at the angle of the blade in respect to the angle of the arms, they are not aligned. The sword would be striking at an angle and thus cut nothing. For two - she is using it as if it were a modern rendition of the use of nunchaku. This is "Xtreme" martial arts were they make kata specifically for the WOW factor. There is nothing about that performance that says she knows how to accurately use a sword or that she has learned real Kenjutsu or Iaido. And as Tempest said it's a blunt sword. And I'll agree that it is a dance because none of what she did came from an actual representation of battle tested applications when utilizing an actual Shinken. Flailing a sword shaped device while flipping and doing somersaults is very impressive but I will not call that swordsmanship because it's not. So yes she is too young to put a real Shinken in her hands especially doing what she is doing.