OneKickWonder

Just a thought. Why not add a weekly tai chi class into the mix. I did. It's helping me a lot. They do all the strength and flexibility stuff, but slowly enough to really focus on what every part of the body is doing, and also slowly enough to ease off if you find too much pressure going to one point. I've been practicing tang soo do for years, and other 'external' styles before that. Yet just a few weeks at tai chi has already made a measurable difference to my tang soo do work.

I see what you mean. I can kind of relate to some extent, in that I refuse to test until I'm confident I can blast through it. I never want to just score just enough to pass. That's no good to me. So I'll miss quite a few test opportunities by choice. Then some people, mostly the ones that I consider to be belt chasers, try to strike up conversations with me about grading. Conversely, those that really know me, never talk to me about grading, with the exception of comparing comical anecdotes about our past grading experiences. If you want to grade but can't, I would be tempted to break the golden rule, and ask the instructor what you need to do to persuade him to set up your test. If on the other hand you're really not bothered, I just wouldn't get drawn into other folks ideas of what's right for you.

If someone were to try to pressure me to test or compete, I'd ask them why it matters so much to them. Do they want the accolade of having the most black belts? Or do they want to boast about all the trophies in their club? It's your journey, not theirs. A good teacher will know that.

Thanks for the good tips so far. Singularity6, I like the idea of mixing it up a bit. Trouble with me is I tend to focus on one objective at a time. Sometimes that works out well for me, sometimes not so. I think you're right about mixing things up with the running objectives. With regards to swimming, I used to love swimming. In more recent times though I've grown bored of it. Well to be more accurate, I've grown bored of paying money to swim at a predefined time in a featureless rectangular pool. I'm lucky enough to live on the coast, so once the sea warms up a bit as we head into summer I might get myself out there a bit. Sensei8, you say I won't like your answer. I do. It's a good answer. I can easily mix up the kind of runs I do because I'm quite lucky where I live. We have plenty if completely flat routes, with different surface types, and within a few miles we've got lots of hills and countryside. I hear what you say about consulting the doctor first, but I don't think that's necessary in my case. That's just because not too long ago I had an 'exercise stress test' at the hospital. They wire you to an ECG, stick blood pressure and blood oxygen monitoring gear on and various other pieces, then make you go on a treadmill with steadily increasing intensity until you physically can do no more. The results were quite honestly astounding. I was told, and I quote, 'generally the only time we see higher scores in this test is when we're testing professional athletes or serving military'.

Hi all. I regularly receive compliments on my sparring skills. For an overweight middle aged ex smoker I move pretty well. For a short while. I burn out far too early. I've worked out this is partly psychological. I get so pumped up with adrenaline when a round begins that I think I'm not relaxing enough. I'm working on that. But the bigger issue is lack of cardio fitness especially when my legs are working hard. To fix that, I've added running to my training plan. Here's the thing. I've been a fool for a the last few years. I figured I regularly practice kicking. That's high energy leg work. Why should I bother with running? Well, I now realise it's all about which muscles are employed and how. In sparring it's not so much the kicking that burns me out, it's more the sharp manoeuvring I employ to maintain the positioning I want. In kick drill my legs are working at intervals. In sparring my legs are working non stop. So I've added running to my plan. And I'm shocked to find I'm terrible at it. I can run about 1.5km in one go then I'm burned out. And that's at a steady jog. About 10 minutes. This is where I'd love some tips and advice from the good folks here please. I track all my runs so I can measure progress. But I can't decide on the best plan. Should I focus on improving on distance first, or should I keep it short but work on speed? Or perhaps go for intervals, with a brisk jog for say 500 metres followed by walk 500 metres, the jog again and so on?

If you don't mind me asking, what is your current grade? And are you decided on continuing with shotokan or would you consider other options? Let's say as an example that you were say 2nd kyu in shotokan. Let's say you then joined the organisation that is am part of, which is not shotokan, but tang soo do. Remember this is a hypothetical example. As the styles have a lot in common, if you asked to be fast tracked, you may get an honorary promotion after a few weeks to say 5th kyu, then another one a few months later to 3rd, once you've had time to absorb any differences and demonstrate the ability in the new style. Speaking to friends over the years in other styles, it seems this kind of process is not unusual. It is important though that if another club just matches your grade without trialing you first, you should probably walk away. As any decent club would want to see that you are sufficiently skilled before promoting you.

That's why most of us pay someone who does know what they're doing to share that knowledge with us. It's just unfortunate that many prefer to withhold that knowledge, or disguise the fact that they know less than they'd like us to believe by being intentionally cryptic while pretending they're doing their students a favour by letting them work it out for themselves. I think this is an issue with traditional martial arts in this day and age. The old cryptic sage approach probably worked well 100 years ago, when a master had one or two students, and there were very few teachers around. Nowadays we have a wealth of information readily available from many sources covering many styles. The MMA guys have capitalised on this and done exceptionally well in many aspects of combat and fitness and such. Armies the world over capitalise on it and train their soldiers in a very short time to be effective at real aspects of combat and restraint and crowd control etc. The more orthodox traditionalists still hang on to the cryptic old sage approach and it's great (I subscribe to it myself to some extent). That's great for spiritual development but for anyone wanting to learn the fighting arts it's a very outdated approach.

I think this might be a clue as to one of the reasons why people are starting to question the relevance of traditional martial arts in general. There are of course many useful self defence tricks and principles in traditional arts. But it takes years to learn them to a sufficient standard for them to become really useful. This is in my opinion a fault with the culture of how they are taught rather than the style itself. Especially in the west where we seem to favour quantity over quality. When you can book onto a course for security guards where you'll learn physical intervention techniques within a few hours, it does beg the question why would we spend 5 years or so learning the same thing. Of course traditional martial art has lots of other things to offer beyond self defence, and in my opinion, and obviously the opinions of others, that makes it worthwhile. But for someone who just wants to learn to handle themselves in a scrape, I suspect a lengthy and formal martial arts path may not be very appealing.

Does he have useful self defence skills, remembering that self defence and martial art are two very different things? Can your friend, for example, teach situational awareness beyond knowing where your consenting sparring partner is? Can help teach how to look for clues as to what is unfolding, like is the guy across the street just a random passerby or is he friends with the guy right in front of you? Where can you run to, where or how might you get help, can you avoid the confrontation before it even begins, if a verbal encounter happens, how might you de-escalate it? What should your body language be? It certainly shouldn't be a fighting stance but nor should it be a weak and fearful posture. If it does turn physical can you immobilise and escape? What does the law say on appropriate use of force? I'm not saying this is true of your instructor because I don't know anything about him or her, but I know you can be a very senior and capable martial artist and have practically no self defence skill whatsoever. So the question really is, is your teacher qualified to teach it? If yes, then I'd suggest there'll be a lot of demand.

I know Kigong is the Korean and possibly the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese qigong. I know that both are fundamentally exercises that aim to develop good coordination of breath with movement. But are they literally the same thing conceptually, or are there subtle or even significant differences between the two?

While it's true that they were only applied to karate when karate came to the mainland, both jutsu and do predate Funakoshi's life. Either way, I'm not sure I see why this matters to my case, I only argue that conceptually the terms are worth thinking about in comparison to "martial art," which I will explain, is a newer term still, at least in how we use it today. Skeptics welcome. I'll elaborate. Funakoshi never wrote the words "martial art" in his book because he never wrote a book in English. I assume you are reading the Kodansha English translation of Karate-do Kyohan (though correct me if I'm wrong). Let's see if I can find the date of the English translation in the front cover. Ah! "1973" Yep, it was right in the middle of the rapid rise in popularity of the term "martial art." So why did the translator write "martial art" if Funakoshi never wrote "martial art" ? Well, it is hard to directly translate many abstract concepts between English and Japanese due to the extreme differences in language nuances between these highly distant language families. Translators often make the necessary decision to favor more commonly-used terms over more literal translations. Translations, just like original texts therefore vary with the times. This is how we end up with what we have here: a 1070's English translation of a 1930's original text book. This is nothing new. Take, for instance, Beowulf: banhus (lit. bone house) -> "body" -but I digress- The problem with assuming direct translation of the term "martial art" to how it was originally written by, say Gichin Funakoshi, is that off the top of my head I can think of at least three terms that get commonly translated as "martial art" when converted from Japanese to English (and yes, he was writing in Japanese for a Japanese audience when he composed that book, so it's a fair assumption). I'll list them here, though this is not an extensive list: 1. budo, 2. kobudo, 3. kakutogi (I'd write them in Japanese so you could see kanji, but board rules, I'm not allowed) Do these things mean the same thing? Absolutely not, but they all get called "martial art" in English for lack of a better familiar option. My whole reason for bringing this up is not to start some sort of one-ups-man-ship with "what term is older" so much as to point out some ways in which our thinking can be changed without us even knowing it. The words we use are powerful, and thinking in depth about them is important, but it's also important to remember where these terms come from, and where they don't come from, before burning them as holy incense for too long. By the way, if you'd ever like to look up frequency of published term use over time, google has a free tool for that, at least since 1800: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=martial+art&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cmartial%20art%3B%2Cc0 ***edit*** Fyi, I just looked up the Japanese version of Karatedo kyohan as well, using my university library server, and Funakoshi discusses all three of these concepts I mentioned at different times in his book (budo, kakutogi, and kobudo). Very good points well made. Thanks.

I agree most wholeheartedly with Brian!! Now, there's the dictionary definition, then there's the MAist definition; oftentimes, they're both worlds apart!! Yes, I agree with that. I'm not a fan of the dictionary definition of what a Martial Art is. It obviously wasn't written by a Martial Artist.Agreed. Let us also not forget that the term "martial art" is a relatively modern and entirely western term, having been used by English speakers mostly after 1961 to describe the "exotic" and increasingly popular eastern fighting arts that already had more accurate unifying descriptors that make reference to ultimate point of training them (do, jutsu, etc.). In effect, 'martial art' is only used as a unified term for all fighting styles right now because it has social inertia. What gets called a marital art in English therefore isn't inherently meaningful because this is an after-the-fact descriptor of a culturally diverse and differt-goal set of fighting practices. To the OP: There is karatedo, there is karatejutsu. Learn the difference, and it will lead you to the answers I think you are seeking. Hmm. The skeptic in me can't help but remember that the term karate do was coined by Gichin Funakoshi. Karate jutsu came later and was created by those that wanted to strip away what was seen by some as superfluous philosophy to focus exclusively on the violence aspect. That same skeptic in me can't help but wonder how the term martial art could be an entirely western term that appeared in the 1960s, when it appears in the first chapter of a book written in the 1930s by a Japanese man of okinawan descent, again, none less than Gichin Funakoshi. References: Kara-te-do kyohan by Gichin Funakoshi. It is of course possible that the book is not really by Gichin Funakoshi, so I will of course consider points of views that conflict with it. But wouldn't that be a massive fraud if someone had gone to such lengths as to impersonate him, even to the extent of including a preface claiming to be written by his son, and copies of letters of correspondence claiming to be referencing Funakoshi's drive to bring karate to the masses.

Very true. I guess the point I was attempting to make is that sadly, too many 'self defence' instructors focus on the point at which it is almost too late. Ie, the physical violence stage. A person that is going to start a physical confrontation knows in advance, even if only a moment in advance, that they are starting a fight. Basically they know they are attacking before the intended victim knows they need to defend themselves. The self defence teacher that follows the standard formula, if they do that you do this, is overlooking many things. Two important things he is overlooking are 1. If the attacker does that, you will panic. Unless you have trained a lot, you will be unlikely to do the technique you've trained. And 2, the attacker isn't going to grab you then wait, or throw a straight punch from 2 miles away then wait. It will be pure chaotic violence. Your response will be pure primal instinct. If by chance the attack by chance puts you in a position that is familiar from training, for example if you find yourself in a position you've trained many times, then you're training might kick in. But perhaps the biggest issue is that the terms 'martial art' and 'self defence' are too often used interchangeably. They are very different things. A real self defence teacher will cover situation awareness, posturing to be ready but passive, body language and verbal skills to diffuse and de-escalate, and finally physical defence with a view to facilitating escape. Very different to 'martial arts'.

The difficulty with the question is that it kind of assumes two things. 1. That the student initially has no self defence skill at all. And 2. That the training given will arrive some point enable the student to defend themselves effectively in any situation they might reasonably expect to find themselves in. On point 1, this is flawed because we have built in, inherent self defence skills. Those being the instinct to run, hide, lash out like a crazed wild animal, as appropriate. Those are just animal responses that we're born with. Life experiences will modify those inherent abilities over time. On point 2, any teacher that promises effective self defence ability is a lying marketing person rather than a real self defense teacher. Can anyone 5 ft girl effectively defend herself against a gang of much larger and stronger armed thugs with a history of violence? No. Therefore there can be no guarantee of self defence ability. What we really should be aiming for, is to improve our ability within realistic boundaries. Fortunately, for most, the necessity to actually resort to combat is rare. For most, martial arts or self defence is for fun or fitness or interest rather than a necessity. So we should really train for our goals without expectation of guarantees. Specifically on self defence though, the main skill is to avoid violent encounters in the first place. If you have to use physical force, you're already right up to the point of failure in self defence terms. Escaping from grabs, disarming someone then breaking their limbs, throwing them to the floor, the need to do any of this means you failed miserably to avoid the fight, and therefore have performed very poorly in terms of self defence.

Lots of techniques would, I expect, work well against an opponent who doesn't know what's coming. But what if you do recognise a technique early enough to react to it? Is it OK to be able to neutralise a technique easily because you recognise it early? Or does that highlight a weakness in the technique or its application? To give a specific examples. Let's say a block turns into an armlock and then a takedown. The block, armlock, takedown is by no means slow. But recognising it's going on, and bit of well trained jiggling renders the armlock ineffective enabling you to escape easily. Does that mean the armlock was rubbish, or is it testament to ones training that you recognised it early enough to stop the lock being established?

Ours is white. At black belt you get a black trim on your white jacket, but the bulk of the suit is white. White represents the emptiness that we will fill with knowledge. No matter what grade you achieve, there is still more to learn, therefore white still applies. Interestingly in our system, being Korean and therfore slightly different culture, we have no tenth Dan rank for the same reason. A tenth Dan is considered to have achieved total mastery. As there is always room for improvement, there can never be total mastery, and therefore no tenth Dan.

I've come to realise in the last maybe a year or so that strength training is at least as important as, and a precursor to, flexibility. I think in traditional styles, there is a tendency to overlook strength training somewhat. I have a theory as to why that might be. Prior to the last couple or so decades, pretty much all forms of employment were hard physical work. So to develop the fighters muscles, you're already building on a solid foundation. That being the case, holding stances for 30 seconds or more at a time combined with kick drill and forms would be plenty to ensure all the strength was there. My theory continues that strong muscles are less likely to tear without warning during fairly normal activities. Therefore strong muscles have the potential to be more flexible. That at least is my theory. I can't back it up with hard facts at this stage. But following on with that, we often look back on our youth through rose tinted glasses. Often as youths we were leaner and most importantly perhaps, more active, and therefore strong. I don't believe we grow old until the very end. I believe we simply grow more damaged and less active. The less active muscles have poorer blood circulation, and therefore take longer to develop. They've also had more time to sustain injuries and so will contain more scar tissue. But I don't believe that age per se is an issue. I think the challenges we face as we get older are not so much about, how do we train at our age. But more about, how do we start to reverse some of the damage we've done through neglect and bad practices. Again, that's just my theory. But taking that theory, I've made some significant changes to my personal approach to training. I'm focusing more on gently developing strength, more on being generally active. A lot less on pushing to the limit. I've even taken the stance that I'm never going to 'train' but instead will 'do', but only while it's fun. It's early days yet, but so far seems to be paying dividends.

Stupid question... how old is he? How old are you? I agree with most of what you’re saying. But as we get old, it seems like we get exponentially less flexible. Or at least I do. He is late 20s. I'm early 40s. But I don't believe age is as big an influence as many people believe. I've recently added tai chi to my repertoire. Most of the folks there are retired. They're also more flexible and agile than many martial artists I know.

The average civilian won't be wearing body armour or a duty belt. But if caught up in a violent encounter in the street or in a bar, they are unlikely to be dressed in their pyjamas and fully warmed up and stretched either. As martial artists, typically were in our pyjamas and bare feet. We'll loosen off and stretch and ease into training. Then with our warmed up muscles and joints, in our nice loose fitting purpose made pyjamas, on a perfectly flat and level surface, in the presence of like minded people, we'll do some awesome moves and convince ourselves we have great combat skills. This is why, although I'm not for a second suggesting that stretching is pointless. Gentle stretching is always good. The urge to gently stretch is natural. Even animals do it. More intense stretches are good if the goal is to be good at gymnastics or displays. Probably also the sport aspect of martial arts. But what I was really thinking about when I started this thread was the genuine everyday self defense readiness. My own experience is that after a session of hard training with stretching to the max, I will actually feel less combat ready the next day, due to aches and pains, than if I'd skipped training. To that end, I've changed my focus in recent months. Instead of stretching hard, I barely bother. I probably look quite lazy in class during the stretching part, and most of my kicks have come down a bit except when I specifically want them high. What I'm finding is that since putting less effort into stretching, my natural flexibility seems to be increasing faster than ever before, and I remain more flexible even when not warmed up. I asked one of my ex military buddies what his thoughts are on stretching. He said simply, it's pointless. He said practice doing what you want to improve, and if that requires more flexibility, it will just come.

In tang soo do we have il soo sik, or one step sparring which sounds like the same think. A predefined attack cones in, we give it a predefined response. That could be a punch to the face being countered with a trap and takedown type response, or it could be an escape and counter from various restraints, or defense and disarm from knife attacks ( the knife being made of rubber to save on paperwork). Would that be what the karate guys call tegumi?

To the underlined. So you're saying that no technique/application works all the time on any attacker? Yes. Every time? Against any opponent? If that's the case, then all martial arts would be pointless except for one very simple one with just a handful of techniques. I'd pay good money to be trained such techniques.

What? Does that ever happen? I've never heard of or witnessed a beginner being expected to spar before they're ready. Never. That's not to say it doesn't happen. I've never known it or heard of it. Is that something that happens in the US? Quite apart from it being morally wrong to ask a new starter to spare before they're ready, it would also be dangerous not just for the new starter, but for the other students. What if the new kid is both completely mental and extremely tough? Are there really instructors out there that would take that risk before getting to know and trust the new starter? Then there's the civil liability. The new person is effectively a guest. Are are there any insurance companies out there that are happy to cover clubs that throw visitors to the wolves? Unfortunately it still happens, but hopefully very, very rarely. That was the norm when my former and current teacher started. It wasn’t the norm, it it was still around when I first started in ‘94. I sparred my first night. Both of them shake their heads and say “yeah, we don’t do that anymore.” Too many hard lessons learned. It’s an extreme example, and highly unlikely the OP will be subjected to it. In fact, I really hesitated to mention it at all. My main point was to watch and see what’s going on before jumping in. What if he works out with them, then realizes they’re a bare knuckle/full contact school? Even if he’s not allowed to spar that night or until he’s genuinely ready, what if he wants no part of that type of sparring? He’s spent the night working out in a dojo he’ll never join. What if he starts working out with them, then they break out into a chi ball no-touch knockout session? There’s an hour of his life he’ll never get back. Another extreme example. My main realistic point is watch what’s going on before you get on the floor. Haha, I am pretty much up for most things, bare knuckle would not bother me at all, a chi ball no knockout session might be a huge turn off though! xD It's described as "Shotokai" which i think is the same as shotokan? I am going Friday and i wondered whether or not i should research about the art some more first? the only experience i have of karate is seeing lyot machida and wonderboy in the ufc also a lot of videos posted to social media platforms the reason i chose karate is because it looks like an awesome style, i'd say possibly the best defensively and in terms of counter attacking, I hope i'd never have to use it and i doubt i ever will but yeah those are my reasons. Obviously it's up to you to decide whether or not to research the art first. But beware. YouTube and the Internet are full of material geared towards people's own agenda. A few years ago, there was a particular style of full contact karate that was all the rage. YouTube was full of videos showing practicioners defeating every other style. Then more recently we've seen lots of videos showing white belts of that style being knacked. Best way to research it is to do it for a while, then if you're still interested, by some books written by key figures from its lineage.

It seems to me there are 3 main reasons why aikido gets a lot of unfair flak. 1. The observer compares it to combat sport. Aikido is no good in a situation where 2 people face each other, knowing they will begin fighting when signalled to do so. But Aikido is absolutely not for that. Aikido and combat sport skills are for two very different purposes. 2. The observer doesn't understand what they are seeing. When an attacker takes a dive as soon as the defender starts their technique, all eyes are on the defender. Few realise that very much part of the display is the attacker's ability to feel a technique going on, before it reaches the point where it is effective, and roll or fall out of it and still be immediately able to resume the attack. 3. It's not a complete combat system. The observer often thinks an Aikido practitioner will only do Aikido. They fail to realise that in a pickle, the aikidoka will do Aikido plus whatever else he or she has, whether that's trained in like another martial art style, or inherent, like the instinctive knowledge to kick and punch. So Aikido is a supplementary skill rather than a be all and end all. But the so is any other style.

What? Does that ever happen? I've never heard of or witnessed a beginner being expected to spar before they're ready. Never. That's not to say it doesn't happen. I've never known it or heard of it. Is that something that happens in the US? Quite apart from it being morally wrong to ask a new starter to spare before they're ready, it would also be dangerous not just for the new starter, but for the other students. What if the new kid is both completely mental and extremely tough? Are there really instructors out there that would take that risk before getting to know and trust the new starter? Then there's the civil liability. The new person is effectively a guest. Are are there any insurance companies out there that are happy to cover clubs that throw visitors to the wolves?

Thanks. But this just supports what we're always told. It doesn't explain why my ex military friends can be so tough without stretching routinely, if it is so necessary. I suspect most of these ex military folks won't be delivering round kicks to the jaw, nor would they need to. Chances are, their strikes are all very basic, but fast and efficient. A good chunk of their combat training probably involves a few relatively easy-to-execute-but-effective locks and throws. From my understanding, most "basic training" programs are 6 months long. Take these techniques, and train intensely (nearly daily) for 6 months... yeah, you'd be pretty good, too. Certain stretches are absolutely necessary for me to be able to participate in my classes. If I don't keep my hip flexors warm and stretched (but not over-stretched) on my right hip, it gets strained pretty easily when I throw round kicks (especially jumping round kicks.) Self-defense isn't my primary focus in martial arts (even though that's one of our school's primary focus.) I am doing it because it's a lot more fun than going to a gym and running on a treadmill/lifting weights, and I enjoy the challenge of learning new things/pushing my limits. My flexibility has definitely improved. But, can I do the splits? Nope... If I did the splits, I'd probably stay in that position indefinitely. ...and, I don't think I'd ever be able to do a full split, and that's okay. Excellent post. I suspect you're right. It is food for thought though. Like, if military personnel keep it simple but extremely effective, should we adopt their training model? Could we? I'm not old but I'm not a youngster anymore either. I don't know if my body could handle military style training now. Then there's the bigger issue. As martial artists, we're not just training to be fighters are we? I'm not. But stretching, and I should clarify by that I mean stretching for high kicks, not moderate stretching for general activities, is a fairly high risk process in terms of minor injury risk, and the reward, the ability to kick high, brings it's own risks. Gichin Funakoshi wrote that kicking should be a last resort, and most of the kicks he describes are no higher than groin height. And although he stresses multiple times the importance of exercise, even describing some exercises, he doesn't seem to write of stretches in his book karate do kyohan. I must admit, I will continue to stretch multiple times per day as I have been for as long as I can remember. I'm not trying to discourage stretching in any way. I just think sometimes it's useful to question our deep seated views and habits. Like the old saying goes, insanity is repeating the same action and expecting different results. I'm that same way, while its OK and even essential to repeatedly practice things we want to become good at, we should also sometimes ask ourselves if what we are doing is the best way to help us achieve our goals.