Sauzin

Even the UFC and Pride have rules. See some of the previous statements regarding rules and real street fighting. You know in a way I understand people who idolize televised submission and brawling competitions as the real thing and believe that the best fighters automatically choose to join this competition. Really it's as simple as the best that you guys have seen is what you idolize. And I'll give you the same suggestion I give to everyone who says what you are saying. Save up a couple of grand and go visit Okinawa for a week or two. Go into a couple of dojo's and ask some questions, pay for a few classes, and heck if you really want to find out, ask a few "what if's". You'll learn more in that week or two then you will with 10 years of mixed martial arts training and it will severely reset your standard for what the "best fighters in the world" might be. I have never heard anyone who has visited Okinawa and seen what they are doing there make any claim resembling what you are saying. And I've known many, since I lived there for 7 years. There is a reason for this.

A lot of it has to do with the Japanese influence. From what I was told they approached it from a very scientific standpoint. The deeper the stance the more rooted it is and the more force it can take. Put this with the Japanese tendency to be very hard, clean, simplistic, and snappy and the deeper stances simply fit. Then came the idea that these stances were more for training then anything else and you can see where the divergence in practice and practicality may have occurred. Now don't get me wrong, I find deep stances extremely practical in the right circumstances. But deep stances in almost every move in every kata? No that's not how it was originally done and that's not how most Okinawan arts do it today (just ask some of the guys here who practice Shorin-ryu, the style Shotokan evolved from).

Traditionally full contact means full gear. That includes gloves, chest, leg, and groin protectors along with full head gear that looks a lot like kendo armor. But when we say "full contact" we mean full contact. The only control is that you can't kick to the knee. Everything else is game. That includes full power punches, elbows, kicks, knees, grabing, throws, takedowns, locks, punching on the ground, the works. Still not the same as a real fight, but you'll learn how to give and take a hit.

Well I'm sure there's more to all of this then you are bringing up here. It's a tough decision either way you go. Personally I would put politics aside and do what was right for my art. The best ways to respect your original teacher are to hone your skill, pay tribute to him for what you already know, and never speak ill of him. Beyond this you have to do what is right for your own art. If he respects you he will understand this. In the end respect shouldn't be about making other people happy and it should not be mistaken for politics or popularity. Respect should be earned by tirelessly pursuing the art, helping others do the same, and remaining humble to those who would help you. If this is what you are doing then go to whatever school will help you grow the most. That is my suggestion.

For about 7 years now I haven't been paying anything. My instructor made it very clear that he wanted students not customers. I had given him several gifts but never any money. Recently however he has run into some bad financial luck, so the other students and I have been gathering donations. They average between $40 and $60 dollars per month for what we offer to him as gas money. We owe him a lot more however, and I doubt any of us will ever feel that we can pay or are paying enough. The instructor I had before that I paid by doing dojo artwork, t-shirts, symbols, and insignias. I didn’t really have any money at the time and I was extremely lucky to have met him and to benefit from such an arrangement that was clearly in my favor (I’m not that good of an artist). The two classes per week that I co-teach we don't ask any money for. I don't think that would be right considering what was given to me and while I can’t see the future I find it unlikely that I will ever charge unless I end up renting an area in which case we would all likely split the costs. Right now our garage is free.

its true. Um...where? In what state/city and under what code or provision? Certainly not in PA. Here's a link to an article that specifically mentions that state: http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=460 Here's a link to another thread: http://www.karateforums.com/archive/o_t/t_18070/do_black_belts_have_to_register_themselves_as_weapons.html So I believe the answer to that myth is no.

I actually know a thing or two about stage hypnotism and from what I observed in the no-touch demo's there was one aspect missing. An inductor. In stage hypnosis there are two types of inductors. Focus inductors that allow a person to focus on an object, sound, or visual stimuli and be talked into a hypnotic state and sudden inductors that startle a person who then quickly falls into a hypnotic state. You see this also when charismatic showman preachers call on the word of God. There was nothing like this with the no touch KO’s I saw. The subject just stood there and looked around. No noise, no fast hand movement, nothing that would indicate an induction. I'm not saying that it still isn't possible that some of the same principles are at work. I'm just saying that it doesn't seem to precisely follow established hypnotic theory.

Yes I've seen it. No the guy wasn't palming a taser. He (Jack Hogan) was half way across a rather large room from the subject when he did it. He offered 3 separate demo's. He was rather nonchalant about it. He had the guy stand about 8 yards away from him. He stood there with his hands out and about 15 seconds later the subject dropped. He didn't say a word and the subject was local and was not touring with him. One of the 3 times it didn't seem to work. After at least 30 seconds the subject didn't even look dazed. However two of the guys who were standing behind the subject for the purpose of catching him started to bob and weave and a 3rd guy slightly to their left dropped like a sack of potatoes. Coincidently the guy who dropped that time is known for being rather easy to KO and was one of the seminar's local organizers. So is this proof of projected chi or it’s effectiveness on the street? By no stretch of the imagination. My observations were that there was more at work then just a guy staring down another guy with the inferred subconscious suggestion that it should cause the one guy to pass out. But that was my observation that day yours might have been different. As for being bold, would his teacher be a con artist if he believes in what he is doing? Doesn't being a con artist infer that someone is employing a purposeful means of deception? How do any of us know his teacher's intention or what he believes? Isn't it rather bold to assume it is malicious? I think it is very possible that someone completely believe that their no touch knock outs are a legit defense and can be taught. One scenario mentioned at the seminar I attended was if you were in a store during a robbery and wished to subdue a subject as he robbed a counter without having to directly assault them. Or in a similar hostage scenario. I don't think anyone can say for sure that it wouldn't work. Even if it is psychological. If his teacher sees it work for him in class why shouldn’t he show it as a legit technique? How many teachers try every technique they know on the street before they teach it? Do any of us really have proof of everything we use? The answer is no, but we think we have sound theory. I’m not going to criticize another person’s theory just because it differs from my own and I’m certainly not going to call them a conartist.

In regards to who, I wish I knew more then to say that both George Dilman and Jack Hogen have done a lot of research and had a lot of success. Again this isn't entirely scientific and likely has a lot to do with psychological aspects of suggestion. I may be criticized but I don't believe that is all there is to it though. Go to https://www.dillman.com or https://www.jackhogankarate.com or do a couple of google searches on the guys and do some of your own research. Beware that I don't give Dilman any further recommendation then to say that he has done research. Whether that research has a lick of truth to it should be your own judgment.

I wouldn't go so far as to call your sensei a con artist. No-touch knock outs do exist. How much is psychological and how much is something else is likely never to be proven, but it does exist.

Nerves do more then just transmit pain. As a result pressure points offer more then just pain compliance. However, different drugs do affect nerve reactions differently depending on the drug. This is something you have to take into account.

In a lot of ways it sure does. Sometimes it will change certain aspects of the application causing you to use slightly different principles to get a similar effect. Other times it will offer new possibilities but may move from the ones originally intended. You see once someone has done kata for 30 or 40 years they start to understand these various aspects. And sometimes minor things change based off of the preferences of these masters. After you go through 2 or 3 generations of masters sometimes styles begin to evolve differently. The important thing is that the people who make these minor changes to the kata know everything there is to know about what they are changing. The real tragedy is when someone who doesn't understand what they are doing decides to change it. Then things get messed up for them and the people they teach. People who understand kata know how to spot this kind of degradation and it really is a tragedy when this gets propagated and taught as the real thing. This commonly happens in Mcdojo's and with "masters" who claim to have 4 or 5 different black belts in different styles but never really stuck around long enough to learn even one correctly. The truth is that no two people do a kata exactly the same. That is why it is so important to learn kata well before you teach. That way you know how it is supposed to be and can keep the kata as close to the original as possible until you truly understand it.

Training to strike first means nothing if you don't train how to strike properly. Most point sparring I've seen does no face contact and light body contact. The most common mistake you see in point sparring is the tendency for people to slap or flail. Now good judging can counteract some of this, but it shows that point sparring trains to touch first not to strike first. There are many drills that you can use to train reaction time. But the exchange of non forceful and often mistargeted strikes and blocks has no correlation to the street except for maybe gaining a familiarity with timing and opposition. But everything from distancing to proper structure and power are missing.

Understanding pressure point theory is all well and great if you have the art to use it. I'm just suggesting that people don't put the cart before the horse.

Great question! Let me offer a couple of reasons. First of all in a lot of bunkai everything does have to be just so. If you changed all the movments or made them sloppy then you'd loose the bunkai that relied on these precisions. Best to keep the presision and figure out the bunkai latter. Second reason is that kata teaches movement not specific applications. A lot of times you will have a precise movement that doesn't perfectly fit one application or the other. But if you change it so that it does perfectly fit the one application then you loose the similarity that makes the other application work. This is what I call middle ground. These are techniques that with a little modification in one way or another can be about 100 different things. But if they took the precise form of just one of those applications you'd likely loose most of the other 99. What you have to understand is that kata trains the body to perform movements that depending on what the opponent is doing and where he is, will have a wide array of different applications. To work against such a large array of situations, certain things have to be certain ways. Otherwise they will only work in very specific situations. That's not what you want when you get in a fight. Lastly a lot of the details make a big difference in how well things work. While what stance you are in or the angle might change with the bunkai, the timing, grounding, and structure will remain the same. The devil is in the details. As you learn more you will learn what details to modify to adapt to situations. Keep the kata pure 'till you get there.

There are some aspects of sparring that are applicable on the street. But you will be creamed by someone who has even a little real fighting background if sparring is all you do. Here are some examples that help illustrate the differences: Sparring: Guy hits the ground and reff call's hut and the guys square back up and continue to fight Street: Guy hits the ground and someone gets mounted and usually the bigger guy start's pummeling the smaller guy. Sparring: Guy throws a punch and the other guy blocks and throws a punch back. Street: Guy throws a punch and the other guy doesn't seem to care. He simply throws the other guy against a wall and knees him in the stomach and continues by smashing his face into a table. Sparring: One guy who is tired of getting hit grabs the other guy and the ref breaks them apart and they square back up. Street: One guy who is tired grabs the other guy and they both hit the ground, the guy who is tired falls onto a curb and cracks his skull as the other guy falls on him. The conscious guy gets back up, kicks the dazed guy about 10 times and leaves. Sparring: Two people face each other and a ref yells hogime and they start fighting. Street: One guy gets belligerent and gets in the face of another guy. The belligerent guys slightly drunk friend sees there's about to be some action and wants in. He grabs the guy his friend is assaulting. As the guy who gets grabbed turns to face his new assaulter he gets punched in the back of the head by the original assaulter. He stumbles, falls against the side of the bar, hears someone yell "call the cops" as he realizes his ribs are being broken by repetitive undercuts to the gut. Pinned against the bar he struggles to get free but can't summon the strength because he has no breath. Eventually someone breaks it up and the cops take statements. I hope this illustrates why sparring doesn't teach most everything you need on the street.

A lot of the criticism given to Dillman is really his own making. His no touch stuff is definitely a little hooky. There is definitely an element of belief. In one demonstration given by Jack Hogan, everyone began to fell that was behind the target. The target was unaffected. Coincidentally the target didn't believe in the effectiveness of it and the guys behind him belonged to affiliated schools. Don't get me wrong, I believe in energy work. And "I've heard" of cases where people who didn't believe in it passed out very quickly from a no touch. But I think belief affects one's resistance to it to some degree and as a result it will likely fail most placebo studies. Dillman has done many things to bring scientific study to pressure points. He has also done a lot to raise awareness of them in other martial artists, when it was monetarily beneficial. But he’s a showman, and in a lot of ways he's gone overboard. He’s guilty of deemphasizing the importance of technique in kata, instead focusing on a very narrow (and nearly nonexistent in some arts) portion of martial arts surrounding targeting. The guy has virtually no quality control in his organization and he's greedy. A lot of his claims to legitimacy are patently false. Specifically his styles name as he has no legit ties to Okinawan Kenpo. This isn't just stuff I've heard its stuff I've witnessed happen. You might even ask Jack Hogan about some of it as I've heard him and Dilman recently had a falling out due to some of the above reasons.

I have to dissagree with CQC here, at least as there is a large difference in the arts I have seen and practiced. In most Okinawan styles it goes something like this. White belt - You walk in the dojo and you get this belt. It means you are there assuming you know nothing about what is being taught and are completely open to instruction and learning how to learn. Technically all color belts are a white belt and represent these same aspects. Yellow belt - You've managed to take your first steps toward being a student. Green belt - You are well on your way to being a student and have at this point learned to keep up with the class well enough not to need special tutelage to do so. You are helping other white belts with their first steps. Brown & Purple belts - You are training for your black belt. You are nearing the final steps of learning how to be a student. You make a great uke, and are given this honor often. Things are starting to make sense on their own, without having to have it explained though you are still open to instruction. You are beginning to realize just how little you know. You are a leader among the other white belts. Shodan (Beginning Black Belt) - At this point you are officially a student of your art though you have just begun. Traditionally the testing for this belt is the hardest test because it is designed to leave you with an accurate impression of just how little you know. Gaining this knowledge is the beginning of really moving forward. Application is often the focus of this rank. Nidan (2nd Black Belt) - At this point you are an intermediate student. You have begun to flesh out your art and work on the areas you learned you didn't know when you made shodan. And there's a lot of them. Theory is often the focus of this rank. Sandan (3rd Black Belt) - At this point you are an advanced student. At this point you should begin to feel that the art you practice is more your own. The shoe should fit at this point and it should begin to evolve to who you are. Learning how to teach is often the focus of this rank. And sandans often teach under the more laxed tutelage of a qualified instructor. YonDan - Godan (4th-5th Black Belt) - At this point you are a teacher. You find ways to contribute to your school and art overall. You continue to learn by teaching, protecting, propagating, and developing your arts legacy RokuDan and beyond - These ranks are given to karate-ka that have devoted their lives and provided significant contributions to their respective arts. Often seen as more political then skill related, these ranks denote status, contributions, hierarchy, and sometimes a longstanding proficiency in rear end kissing . Redbelts are not worn by color belts in most Okinawan arts. In Okinawan arts, redbelts are worn by 9th -10th degree blackbelts and are reserved for grand masters of a given art. Rumor has it that the red belt began to show up in korean color belt systems as a insult to the old Japanese masters. The major difference here is Okinawan arts see obtaining a black belt as a beginning not an end. There are a lot of people out there who drop out upon reaching Shodan thinking they've been given the full course when in fact this is when it starts in Okinawan arts. This may be something that has evolved differently in other arts and may be an area of confusion for some.

Ahhh, exact same style. You see that makes a difference. Yes that would be a slight jab to your old sensei, but no where near as big a jab as you are making by going to the other school in the first place. I would put politics aside and accept what they were willing to offer. Over time you will gain their trust and earn their respect and they may evaluate your rank differently at that time. They may not, but what does it really matter? You're still learning what you need to learn.

No, pressure points are not a newer thing. They've been used in Chinese medicine for thousands of years. Different karate styles approach the idea of pressure points differently. Some styles don't focus or recognize them at all, instead believing that if you perform the technique correctly they will naturally strike the appropriate targets and activate the appropriate points. Other styles only teach pressure points at more advanced levels because it is necessary to be proficient at the techniques you would use to activate them before learning the theory. Theory isn't any good unless you are proficient at it's application. Knowing targets does you no good if you don't know how to strike properly.

More of a sport art really, but were a real blade used it could be very effective. I would say if TKD or Judo can be called martial arts then so could fencing.

^ that is what I disagree with. Just standing in a horse stance as someone goes to take you down is a poor take down defense. However dropping into a horse stance adjusted slightly to the side and at an angle while circling under a shooters arm to an armbar position to flip him over or while taking his head or while striking an opportune target (spine, opponent’s leg, etc) or while grabbing his belt, or while getting behind one of his legs are all examples of good take down defenses. The horse stance, in the correct position and used at the right time, buys you the time and stability you need counter in many positions. Of course other deep stances work as well, depending on what you are doing, what he is doing, and what angles they are being done at. They all have limitations. Sparring has limitations offered by rules and your opponent. That's why it is so important to change the rules every once in a while and spar different people. Even still you work with limitations. Even the slightest rule in sparring changes the field severely. Just having a person in front of you can limit the depth and vision one can gain into different applications of a technique because you have a tendency to think in specifics. Fighting can be any situation and it is impossible anticipate and train for all of them in sparring and paired training drills. That's the problem with doing just drills. People who do this get very myopic. Punch, grab, move, throw, punch, grab, move, throw. In kata you perform movements that can have many meanings. The punch might be the throw and the grab might be the strike, and the move might get you off line. It depends on where the opponent is and what he is doing. Kata trains movement, this leaves the application as broad as possible so that it works one way or another. Drills don't do this. Not by themselves anyway. I agree that drills and sparring are important to help understand kata. But kata is still what teaches the subject matter it's just a question of how you use it to teach. Break it down, repetitively practice, visualize different scenarios, work different paces, apply it against different situations, whichever. It's still all about the kata in karate.

I'm of the same mind as Gunyo Kogusoku. It is largely a waste of time to work without an instructor. Particularly with sword work. If you have a combination of really good source material and a lot of patience you might learn a few things about other weapons, depending... Please don't take this wrong, but I have yet to see a weapon kata that really looked in depth and legit from American Kenpo. I don't know what lineage you guys have for your weapons but what I have seen looked rather recently made up. Having a background like this might make it actually harder to interpret kobudo kata from other resources on your own. Your best bet might be to correspond with a weapons instructor on material that both of you can look at. Sending tapes back and forth with lots of e-mails and long phone conversations might be your best bet. These day's online video conferencing might offer another good option. Also in regards to the length of kata with weapons. In kobudo the kata are very similar to the length of non-weapon karate kata. 2-3 minutes is the average done at a steady pace. You can image since kobudo (the primary origin for sai's, nunchaku, bo, etc) evolved along with karate on Okinawa they both have very similar lengths along with other shared characteristics such as certain stances and timing. They have many unique aspects as well however, this is really where the value is. I truly respect your desire to learn a non-sport weapon system. There are many arts that focus on the actual practical use of the weapon that have a huge history of effectiveness and art. Many of the old masters prized weapon work greatly, and they had their reasons. I wish you luck and if there is any assistance I can provide with any kobudo weaponry please let me know. Respectfully, -Paul Holsinger

Amen. I can't say I understand where the disagreement is. Yes, you need to be able to move from any stance. But there are moments in a fight when you don't want your stance to move (such as when you are throwing an opponent over it) or you want to be able to control your own movement. Being able to assume a good stance quickly lets you control when what moves. Of course you wouldn’t want to just sit in a horse stance as an opponent moved into a position of control. The idea is you move into your horse stance assuming a position of adequate control. This way you get to decide who goes where and you move from your stance when and how you want to. This is what a horse stance is for. Providing adequate support while getting into a position of control. I would compare this to a well structured punch. The arm must be aligned, shoulder and elbow down and wrist straight. This way it doesn’t bounce back or crumble when it meets with reciprocal force. For a moment you don’t want it to move a certain direction and you need the stability. This doesn’t mean that it’s static or that you can’t move your arm to the next position. In fact you practice all kinds of transitions from a jab or punch, but still you need to be able to assume the correct position at a moments notice or you will not have the desired effect. A stance is the same way. Still I don’t know if I would call a punch transitional just because you can move from it. I didn't mean to infer that boxers just stand put and punch each other. They move a lot, but karate and boxing have different goals. As westerners many of us have a tendency to think of karate in boxing terms. Cover, parry, punch, dodge, jab, etc... I think this is a huge and very common mistake to limit one's view of karate and kata to these things. Drills and sparring are very important. But they teach only specific techniques and specific applications. Which is great if the specific scenario or attack that you practice occurs. Kata teaches a much broader system of defense. It is kind of ironic in my opinion that some people view kata as only good as a solitary practice. In my mind describing it this way neglects the inherent value of the movements and how they are taught using kata. It also neglects the process of practicing and interpreting bunkai as you learn more about each aspect of your kata. Really at face value this description seems to be very misleading. But in the end you are right. The practice of kata is solitary in its very nature, but so is a fight. In any struggle, it's you that either does or does not do what needs to be done. Kata and fighting are the same. Your fight is the only one that needs be won.

Or you could find a good instructor. You know just a thought. Seriously though, most weapon instructors I've met love analyzing other people's kata's. If you have some old kata's that are a bit rusty and would like some help brushing them up then run them by an instructor. If you can't remember a move and he doesn't know, chances are he either knows someone who does or has a video or book he might lend you himself. If the kata are in really that bad of shape though, and you can't go back and re learn them from an actual person, then it is probably best that you learn some new kata from someone else. You'll get more that way.