Sens55

I have to assume that if someone is stupid enough to push me, they mean harm. I don't get into anyone's face, if an argument was brewing I'd vacate before it erupted. However, if someone pushed me unprovoked, it's on. There has been a lot of talk and I've seen a lot written about applying just enough force to neutralize the threat. Well, I don't know what that level is and I don't care. I could let up easy, give him a breather and he can pull a boot knife or a gun. Why wouldn't he? He was crazy enough to start it in the first place, who knows how far he'll go. So I'd take whatever target he gave me and drop him. I wouldn't attempt to kill him, unless of course he was attempting deadly force, but I would keep on him until he's unconscious, screaming uncle or I have a clean escape path. As Icetuete pointed out, better his doctor's bills than mine. Just hire a better lawyer and you'll win. After all, whatever he might say you can always countersue claiming "mental duress". "Your Honor, being forced to snap his arm like a twig was traumatizing. I have nightmares about it. I can't sleep. I need a $250,000 and I'm sure I'll be fine." Seriously though. I have to be alive for him to sue me. And being sued is preferable to being dead.

Man, you said it. Anyone who watches a Hollywood movie where the hero shoots a .45 with one hand at a moving target 100 yds away and hits it and believes that's real has never tried to hit a moving target. While in the Army I put thousands upon thousands of rounds downrange, and as a civilian I put at least a few hundred a month and I know I would still have trouble past 50 feet in shadows and a moving target. Now, if that assailant would stand still like the silhouette targets at the range.... Actually I do miss pop up targets. Nothing like that around here (that I know of). And to the previous post by someone about most altercations happening in public events and guns not being there....my advice is don't make that assumption in Oklahoma. They have relatively loose concealed carry laws and I know guys that pack going to church. And these aren't thugs or gang members. They're bankers, lawyers and business owners. Just thought you ought to know. In some places the wild west still lives.

I think you can teach yourself. Heck, the best MA training I ever had was having two older brothers. The time between coming home from school and my mom getting home 2 or 3 hours later was nothing but one long class in survival! I still have scars...literally! However, I think a good school speeds up the learning curve. Learning on your own might teach you some things, but you might develop bad habits and not know it. Also, while in the end it's all about effectiveness, proper training should give you more options to use in different situations. And, you should have the test tube of trying your newly learned skills on different opponents to see which work with different body styles and which don't. Of course, there are tons of people who spend tons of money and years of training in a dojo/dojang but aren't very good fighters. That isn't their focus. I can think of half a dozen in my school alone that have beautiful form, but little killer instinct. To them classes are just a form of gymnastics. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just to point out that even though they've been training beside me for a few years, they don't focus on the "fighting" as much.

I'm like Kamidake. I'm a little older and I work in a "professional" environment (and MAN is that a misnomer). Most of the people I work with are more of the golf crowd with the accompanying 19th hole. Mowing the lawn and going to their kids soccer matches is about is active as they get. They've become spectators in the lives of their kids. That being said, they think I'm a little nuts to be rolling around on sweatty mats with kids half my age. I prefer to play WITH my kids, not watching them. My son LOVES it. My daughter's still young, but she loves it when I help teach the kids class. But my coworkers frequently make references to the Jim Carey skit on In Living Color or the Blackbelt Adam scene on The Man Show. However, I notice they only do it from WAY outside my reach. In truth, though, I think they really respect it. The constantly ask me questions and want me to show them some technique. I got tired of showing them so I started using a lot of joint manipulation techniques....they didn't like that and the requests have slowed. But when they found out that my American Ju Jitsu school actually participates in MMA matches, they offered to pony up and buy 100 tickets if I'd get in the ring. I thought that was a warm show of cameraderie. Only later did I find out they wanted to be there to watch me get my a** kicked! Gotta love friends. I NEVER tell people I just met that I study MA. It nevers seems to come up. You know..."Well, we just refied the house and got 5 1/2....my stock portfolio is climbing, should I pull my bonds and ride it?...I've got a Tee Time at Iron Horse for the reps from the Avalanche account, and by the way, I'm studying three different MA at the same time!" Somehow doesn't seem to fit.

Pretty much. There were three instructors that came together. They all had a Kenpo background, but two had a TJJ background (I don't know which style) and another did kickboxing and wrestled in college. They kind of blended them, and of course they couldn't ignore what the Gracies were doing. Some classes are all groundwork, others look like a kickboxing or a boxing match. They use a lot of boxing conditioning (medicine balls, speed bags, jump rope) and such. It's kind of fun. A lot of the guys do NHB matches regionally. That's not my bag (way too old, and I don't want to get any uglier than I already am) but it's something to watch. The "competitors" have some pretty brutal workouts. It's also very laid back in that you work at your own pace, so to speak. If you need a break, you take a break. If you want to roll for an hour and have a partner, you rolll for an hour. Or you can just work on technique. There are belts, but nobody wears them. We workout in shorts and T shirts. I'm not saying it's better than BJJ, TJJ or anything else, it's just different (and yet remarkably similar). My point being, there are lots of styles and blanket statements about BJJ or TJJ being better might be misaligned. Styles, schools and individuals all differ and it's really about what you want for your time and money. If you think that MMA/NHB is the measure of success, then go to a school/style that focuses on that. If you want to study a more traditional style, or more stand up work, then maybe BJJ isn't for you. Some styles are right but the schools wrong. One of the reasons I left the BJJ school (besides it being further) was that it was full of 20-somethings that wanted to be the next Royce Gracie and had way too much testosterone to burn. They were all itching to prove their manhood and they liked me as a target (I'm 6' 300 lbs). I didn't like by the Stretch Armstrong toy for kids half my age. And I have nothing to prove. I'm not entering into any competitions and I'm not going to bars to get into fights (hell, never seem to make it to the bars much at all anymore). And as far as self-defense, I know a fair amount and my shotguns and pistols know the rest. I just wanted to workout with my son who lives with my ex to learn something that might help him if he's in a fight. I thought the AJJ taught a more complete form. He can box/kickbox someone if they jack with them, and if he ends up on the ground, he can guillotine them or joint lock them into stopping. So when any of you say that this style is better, my question would be "for whom?" If the answer is you, then you're correct, but understand that it may not be the answer for the other person that has different goals.

Bustr, I'd be careful about some things you're saying. I'm not a member of that organization you're discussing, but if I were I'd certainly want to know what you had seen with your own eyes, not heard....can you say "slander"? I'm not saying you're wrong, because I don't know. But I'd have to believe that if someone was using switches on kids, even in Texas (sorry, I grew up in Lake Charles, some things die hard) someone would be in jail. Also, KarateMom, karate/TKD birthday parties are actually relatively common. Again, this is usually more common in schools that have dedicated kid's classes. Ours does a few for times when the dojang isn't being used (Saturday afternoons & such). They're kind of fun for a kid that is just learning to invite some school friends and show off a little. Plus, for the school, they might get another student or two. And Bustr, that doesn't mean a school can't be serious. The kids classes are for the kids and the adult classes are for the adults. The goals are different. The focus for most kids is to learn discipline and focus. Not necessarily negative discipline, but rather the kind that comes from paying attention, following direction and working on their technique to get better at it. I've seen a lot of shy, scared kids gain a lot of confidence in themselves by working on these classes and advancing a little. No one mistakes what their learning as the equivalent of what the adults learn. But they do learn goal setting and other important lessons while being physically active, which is much better than going home, eating cheetos and playing Playstation2 for hours on end. And some of them become serious and stick with it for a lifetime. It's no different than other sports. No one mistakes a pee wee football game for the NFL. And Karatemom, again, I believe you should make sure your son is getting the positives of what he can learn. The discipline doesn't have to be harsh to be effective. And regardless of age, technique needs to be demonstrated OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER. I still get minor corrections on simple techniques from time to time. It's not that my technique is bad, it is that it isn't perfect. And that pursuit for perfection is what drives people to study the art for a lifetime. If it was something you could study for one year, get it and never have to do more, no one would stick around.

The story I have read, and there are a lot of websites and organizations claiming this heritage, is that Tang Soo Do and Moo Duk Kwan were both started by Hwang Kee and predate the name "Tae Kwan Do". He originally created Moo Duk Kwan from his experiences in Manchuria and reading Japanese (or Okinawan) MA texts he found in a library while working in the railways. However, he continued to evolve the art (or some claim reached back to older parts of the art) and later changed the name to Tang Soo Do. And even later to Tang Soo Do Soo Bahk Do. Some, however, did not change into TSD and stayed with MDK, and others were labeled Tang Soo Do Moo Duk Kwan and some just TSD, others TSD Soo Bahk Do. Confused? Yeah, me too. Anyway, all of the above started out very similar in their techniques and philosophies. Again, it was an evolution, not an absolute birth. Most are "traditional" in their philosophy, and while related to Tae Kwon Do, it is not the same, especially when compared to what TKD is evolved into as far as the sport aspects of all the kicking. Anyway, when the creators of TKD became involved with making a national art they wanted to eliminate as many foreign references as possible. TSD was apparently too Chinese, and they chose instead to adopt the name TKD, but attempted to fold all of the various schools into one happy family. Most in Korea had no choice, they either adopted TKD and its tenets or they wouldn't be able to teach. Many outside of Korea however chose to ignore the changes and continue to teach their form of MA. I think this is why we now have a lot of disagreements, even on this board, about the sport TKD and the "traditional" TKD. Most of what is traditional has a lot more balance in hand techniques with foot techniques and tend to be more "martial" in their art. Most of these probably have a closer lineage to one of the older forms of TKD before they were grouped together (Moo Duk Kwan, Tang Soo Do, Chun Do Kwan and others - sorry if I missed any) if they don't outright say that they are that art. Such is Tang Soo Do. Of course, as someone pointed out, due to the splintering of TSD, there are many different schools in many different areas that are calling themselves TSD that are very different from another school calling itself TSD. And, of course, its close cousin, MDK, isn't too far off either. All of that being said, I think you'd find most TSD schools tend to be more traditional in the focus, although many also do tournaments. Most that I have talked with get a little upset if you call their art TKD and insist it is not TKD but TSD. Hope that helps. http://www.kcmartialarts.com/historyoftkd.htm http://www.hwangkarate.com/history.htm http://www.geocities.com/karate_institute/mooduk_sms.html http://www.soobahkdo.be/history_sbd.html http://www.angelfire.com/nc3/tangsoodo/tangsoodohistory.htm And I also read a series of "Belt Books" from the MDK TSD.

Our instructor (Moo Duk Kwan) likes to point out that many of the techniques are actually Okinawan and Chinese in origin but that with the advent of the TKD the "Reformists" (his words, not mine) wanted to attempt to eliminate such references, much of it do to apparent long-standing prejudices (especially towards the Japanese). They never truly succeeded and many books reference this lineage, but many attempt to make it appear the TKD is a truly "Korean" MA. He feels a lot of this was as much for their national psyche and esteem as anything. Again, I'm not he's 100% accurate, but I can see elements of truth in it. He points out that many of the old MDK forms made by Hwang Kee are actually VERY simliar to some Karate forms (the Haeons I believe) and that many of the elbow strikes, inside kicks and hand techniques (which we do teach) are very similar to some Kung Fu techniques.

Yep. That's what I meant.

If you think you can, try it. Taking it up another notch may be good for both of you. Of course, if you let fly with one, be prepared to receive a few (or maybe more than a few). If you can take 'em, then you're prepared to give them. However, after taking a few, you might realize how far you still have to go. I know I wish I could generate the equivalent power of my instructor with the same efficiency, I'd be devestating. Maybe someday....

If the instructor only showed a young child once, and not again, failed him on a pretest and won't instruct more and expects you to show up (and I assume pay extra) for a belt test, I'd go elsewhere. The focus should be on learning, not acquiring a belt. And, with that teaching style, learning may be difficult. It takes thousands of correct repetitions to get even the basic movements down. Once for a child is not even close to enough. I also have kids in MA. In fact that's why I got back into it, so we could all do something as a family. You obviously sound like you're a very caring and involved mother. And that's GREAT. But don't fret this too much. Just make sure that your school is the right school for you and your son. And, as far as asking for advice, be careful. Everyone here is very helpful and no one would steer you wrong. But, at the end of the day, the only one that will be grading your son is your instructor. There are many subtle differences in a lot of basic techniques between styles (and even schools of the same style). That's why it's important to get your instructor to either teach you exactly how they want it or point you to reference materials they want you to use, and stick to them for technical advice in relation to belt testing.

I can occasionally best my instructor. That, by no means, means I am anywhere close to his level of expertise or that my knowledge exceeds his. Far from it. However, I'm 6' 300 lbs, very strong and relatively quick. My instructor is 10 years older than I, 3 inches shorter and 125 pounds lighter. He punches and kicks WAY harder than I do. However, part of our art involves throws and submission holds. And if I can catch him, I have a chance to use my weight and strength advantage to get him down. It's also worth noting that some techniques don't work on everyone, and it sometimes takes "real-time" training for that to become evident. He's put me in holds that would work on most people, but I'm able to muscle my way out of them. The difference is, he's a better martial artist, because I can only beat him in one way. He beats me in dozens. But he's not afraid to try a technique on me to see how it works, and it sometimes doesn't, to his (temporary) demise. I'm just stronger. And, to be honest, me winning is the exception, not the rule. But I only wanted to point out that beating your instructor shouldn't be the "end all", or in my opinion, a goal of your training.

Well, I think it's gets a bad reputation because there are a lot schools out there that are interested only in your money. Show up, buy the school dobuk, pay your fees and every 3 months you get a belt. This, by no means represents the best of TKD, but there are enough of them (in my area I can think of at least 3 other school chains with many actual dojangs) that do this that it may be the image that those outside TKD see. And, in my opinion, there are more of these types of schools than good schools (but the same could be said for other arts as well). But, there are more TKD schools in most regions, so the image may be tainted by stereo-typing all TKD in the same boat with the money mills. On top of that, the sport sparring frequently instills habits in its practicioners that would probably get them hurt in a real fight. They are much more focused on delivering a fast, point-scoring kick to the Hoguk than using an actual debilitating blow. I've sparred with people that deliver punch to my chest but leave their chin wide open for a counter that would lay them out for a week if I would have been able to drill them with more than a friendly jab. In fact, about 2 months ago I had a guy at work challenge me to spar....at work! I thought we was joking. We work at a professional office in a Fortune 500 company. But, he found out I studied from a coworker and said that he was a brown belt and had won a bunch of tournaments. I said that was cool and he could come by my dojang anytime for a workout. He started bouncing and said, "Naw, we can do it here" and let fly with an outside-inside crescent kick in the vicinity of my head. He missed by about a foot and a half and said "See, I gotcha'." Needless to say I was a little PO'd and I said this wasn't the place, and besides, I'd hardly say he "got me" since it wasn't even close enough to make me flinch. He responded with the exact same kick, but closer. I ducked and moved to his side and found his arm in a bad position, so I slipped him into an arm bar with a wrist lock and forced him to the ground and simulated a kick to his throat. His eyes were HUGE. He couldn't speak and stammered off a reply saying something like "That's not TKD, that's wrestling!" I agreed but pointed out he was the one on his back and that I didn't want to do this anyway. Later he apologized and explained that at his school that don't actually make "contact", but simulated contact, and that coming within an inch of the opponent scored a "point" and a kick to the head was a KO. I said that at our school we actually make contact, and that in general a crescent kick to my head (I'm 6' 300 lbs, he's 5' 10" maybe 150) would only upset me, and get him killed on the street. Now, he made a fool of himself in front of about 20 coworkers by bragging about his TKD prowess. I doubt any in the room walked away thinking it was effective. Even though what I learn is also TKD, they surely missed the subtlety of major philosophical differences in our respective TKD schools. Instead they remember that he studied TKD and never touched anyone. It was actually a sad scenario, and, if I had to do it over, I would have tried harder to get away. At the time I felt cornered by the circumstances, but in retrospect there was more I could have done to avoid it. But no one got hurt, he sits right next to me now and everything's cool.

There are other styles of Ju Jitsu besides BJJ. I went to a few months of training in BJJ but found a school closer that has "American Ju Jitsu". The ground stuff is basically the same but it also has elements of american boxing and kickboxing in it. Heck the first time I went I thought it was a boxing gym because that was the focus of that class. It's not as high profile as BJJ (in fact it's pretty small), but it's design was to make it more complete.

Anything that works. I can lie about it how good it looked later! Like that used to say in baseball...thei all line drives in the box score. Seriously, I think any move that works looks great. Much better than the other way around.

TJS, Good point on the guillotine. That's always a good option. You were more succint, but said the same thing as far as using his momentum to wind up on top.

Ours teaches Moo Duk Kwan, which predates TKD and Hapkido as such. However, it has both inherent in the system. During the "standardization" of TKD a lot of what is now Hapkido was stripped from it only to become a stand alone art later. So, some places have them seperately and some combined. Ours is combined.

I would say it would depend on the exact situation. As the others have mentioned, sprawling is good, but only if you were facing an opponent, saw it coming and anticipated the move. You indicated that your reasoning in asking was that it was a common street fight scenario. So it's worth pointing out that under such circumstances you may not have seen it coming. If you did not, but are quick, you might try a sacrifice roll. Since he's basically tackled you, you roll onto your back but try to capture and arm or elbow while positioning your feet inside of his legs. Using his momentum your roll onto your back and try to either kick him off or roll through onto his back, possibly captured a joint lock or controlling position. Again, it'll depend on what he gives you.

I know it's an old thread, but I say "both". Each has situations that they are more suited to than the other. One of the first self-defense lessons taught is how to be aware of your surroundings and to not look like a victim. By the same token, displaying a gun can, in the right context, make would-be wrongdoers think twice about their intentions. State laws vary concerning carrying, displaying and concealing a weapon so don't get yourself in trouble. However, my job requires me to travel all over my city, sometimes in areas that aren't the best. I ALWAYS have a pistol tucked away. I am absolutely certain that this saved me from harm. I was in a part of town where there were locals with a lot of time on their hand during the middle of the day. They decided they wanted to investigate me at a stoplight. The were basically circling my car, peeking inside at me and my car as well as checking out who might be looking. I slid my pistol out of its hiding place and placed it in a location where it was VERY easy for the closest visitor to see while I made eye contact with him. I did my best to make it clear that I meant business if he did. Upon seeing the gun he shouted something to the others and they walked on. Now, it's worth noting that in different settings it wouldn't have concerned me as much. I'm 6' almost 300' lbs. I'm not in the best shape of my life, but still in good enough shape to take care of myself. I've studied MA off an on most of my life and spent over 15 years in the Army in units where Combatives were taught regularly. I only say this to point out that I, generally speaking, do not look like, and am not, an easy target. However, sitting in my car at a stoplight, there wasn't much I could've done if they'd have tried to carjack me. One guy was standing in front of me, another in the back, so I couldn't move without hitting someone (which was an option). But to the 4 or 5 of them I alone was not a deterrent, however my Beretta was. One last thing. If someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night, regardless of my MA skills (or lack there of), the intruder will be greeted with the business end of my Remington 12 guage. Period.

I liked Shogun's story. The reasoning is also in line with what we learn. For soft tissue, go hard. For hard spots, go soft. If they attack in a line, go in a circle. If they come in a circle, go in a line.

Pick the one that you feel most comfortable with. I believe the style and kwan are worth considering. But, to me, when it comes down to it, I want to know that the instructor is willing and able to help me reach my goals in MA. You're going to spending a LOT of time and money with your instructor if you stick with it. For that investment you need to make sure the instructor not only knows what he's teaching, but knows how to teach it to you. Teaching style can be as important (if not more important) than the MA style. And teaching styles vary. I've had instructors that were knowledgeable in their style, but unbearable in their delivery. Watch a few classes first. Come in unannounced about half way through class. This will give you a general idea on how he interacts with his students. If you still can’t make up your mind, then stop thinking and follow your instincts. They’re usually smarter (for me anyway). Good luck and welcome.

I've been in fights, and not usually by choice. The only way you can get me to fight now is if you were seriously threatening my family, myself or some defenseless person. At some point you realize that, in a real fight the chances are that someone going to the hospital, jail or both. I don't relish either option.

In Moo Duk Kwan I love the blending of the various arts. They are unabashed when they point out the derivation of a Chinese Kung Fu technique or the assimilation of an Okinawan form. It's kind of a smorgasbord of older asian martial arts.

My take is that while all martial arts are supposedly "martial" some are more direct than others. Some have many other elements thrown in, while some are strictly "combat" oriented. Some can have sport, spiritual or some other focus as well. Also, many of the arts have the lethality of their techniques "hidden", only to be unlocked after many years of study. As an example, Tai Chi is ostensibly a martial art. However, it would take years (maybe decades) to learn the art to a point of being efficient in defense if attacked. However, when I was in the Army, we were taught certain forms of hand-to-hand training. We didn't have the luxory of years of training to become proficient. We had a few weeks of intensive training followed by semi-regular intensive training during my career. We were not training to become "experts", we were learning a handful of very fundamental, direct and lethal techniques that we could use without hesitation, since hesitation is the kiss of death. That is not to say that those that focus solely on "combat" are "better". They just get to that point quicker. However, many of the other arts, once they get there may actually provide the artist with more answers to any given situation, thereby increasing chances of success. Of course, not everyone (including many instructors) are interested in the self-defense aspect. Again, with profienciency what they teach may be "crossed over", but it takes longer to do that.

Thanks guys. That's what I thought. I don't place a lot of stock in a certificate, belt or anything else. I trust my instructor and what he is teaching and plan on sticking around. I have never cared one iota for the politics of it all, and as such I am ignorant of that aspect. I just wanted to make sure that my ignorance didn't have unknown surprises down the road. I would still stay with my Master, but if there were issues, I'd be prepared. Thanks again for the input. I truly love this board.