White Warlock

Aye, i agree that it would be helpful to know what he did, or at least have it described to us. It may be that he simply was so much more skilled than you that he had 'room to play.'

g-force maybe?

A Northern Shaolin style. It's white dragon fist. Hmm... actually that one is mostly a southern style, with a strong northern kenpo influence, and an even stronger Japanese/Okinawan martial arts influence. I had to do a little research, but it was an interesting read. A hybrid system that was developed by grandmaster Daniel Pai, in Hawaii, who was an extraordinary practitioner in his own right. Seems his system also influenced the development of kajukenbo. /tangent off

Indeed, i have read nothing in regards to that either. Would like to know where you heard that as well.

hehe thanks, and i noticed you had a similar aversion to the 'best of all the rest' perception.

I'm not even remotely close to a traditional martial artist. As noted by Ben (thank you Ben), there are 'plenty' of rules, many of which disqualify a lot of the 'highly technical' and/or more 'down & dirty' systems that are actually very effective, including, but not limited to styles utilizing "everything-as-a-weapon" (as beautifully demonstrated by Jackie Chan and Ong Bak). The assumption that the latest UFCs impresses upon the viewers, is that 'ground & pound' is the most effective means to win a confrontation, and this is simply not true. When all these restrictions are in place, there simply leaves 'ground & pound' as more effective for these types of rules. Which moves to my next point... In the older UFCs, we were able to watch many a fight last a very long time on the ground, or even a long time standing up. In the Severn vs Gracie fight, it took 45 minutes before Gracie could apply a triangle choke. The UFC fight extended beyond the Pay-Per-View allotted time, and i recall quite clearly how the channel simply 'cutoff' in the middle of the fight. The cable companies were immediately bombarded by a mass of angry viewers, and the 'end part' of the fight, the finale, was put back on in about 20 or 30 minutes. I'm sure this, and many other issues, is what caused the 'interruption of fights' rules to be put into effect, but it is a direct disruption of how some persons fight... and thus changes the dynamics of the fight game in a UFC. It is also the #1 reason that the Gracies discontinued participating in the UFCs. Recall the Gracie/Shamrock fight, where Royce ended up with a shiner because the referee broke up his ground-working a multitude of times, forcing him to stand up and try 'once again' to bring Shamrock to the ground so he could eventually work in a lock or a choke. Given time uninterrupted on the ground, Shamrock would have lost. But, because of these interruptions for the sake of 'entertainment,' it ended a tie, with Shamrock celebrating (celebrating a tie?!?), and Royce walking off angry, his shiner prominently displayed. There are a lot of things that go out a window in a real fight, and i don't deny that practitioners who never step out of the test tube of their dojang are going to be in a world of hurt when it comes to a 'serious' real life confrontation. However, most confrontations are not 'serious' to a practiced practitioner. There are plenty of techniques from other systems being applied in these competitions. It would be grossly unfair to give credit to these three systems alone. Oh, and i haven't noticed a technique i didn't recognize yet. (ego, hehe) Apologies, but i'm in total disagreement. Not on what you state, but on what actually occurs. First, TMA is a sort of 'odd' classification that is generally delegated to those schools practicing a system without actually applying said system in MMA-type competitions. MMA stands for mixed martial arts, but it does not mean 'mishmash' of the arts into a single person. There are plenty of competitors that are single-system practitioners (including, but not limited to, the Gracies). It is a misnomer to state that MMA stands for eclectic practitioner that enters no-holds-type competitions. Also, it is incorrect to state that MMA competitors are implementing the ‘best parts’ of different styles. In most cases, it is merely the techniques that fall within the 'rules' of the competition and that they don't have to spend too much time learning. Seriously consider that many of the MMA competitors are very young and have had only a few years of actual training. They focus on fighting with the tools that are applicable for that particular type of competition, and thus limit themselves to a select few actions that won't break the rules, or skirt the edges of those rules. We return to the debate about traditional. Most of the so-called traditional styles are actually 'younger' than the styles you presented above. I believe the differentiation you need to make is not traditional MA vs. mixed MA, but full-contact vs. otherwise (all the ones you mentioned above are full-contact). The difference with full-contact vs. otherwise, is that there are body dynamics that cannot be readily learned merely by practicing the techniques and actions. Resistance and change must be experienced in order for these dynamics to be understood at a muscle memory level. The systems you presented give that opportunity, and thus the practitioner becomes better conditioned to deal with a real altercation. And there it is... conditioning. It has to do with conditioning. How you practice is a major factor in how effective you will be. edit: fixed a stupid quote bbcode, thrice. bah!

I like the look of the opel gt, but they are horrible cars. I can't stand the price of really nice cars nowadays. For that money you could save the lives of thousands of starving and medically indigent people.

It's going to be really difficult to put a hole in someone's cheek with a fish hook...I've been fish hooked...I think the simple counter is to bite down. I personally didn't find it that painful, even though the guy had it ripping at my cheek, but maybe there is some kind of technique that it can be done with that makes it hurt more. if you don't put your fingers between their teeth, they're not going to be able to bite them off. I have lost a lot of interest in UFC. They've added plenty of silly rules to ensure there is 'more action,' but this detracts from being able to watch martial artists in action... and instead focuses on brutes in action. The first 10 or so were good, since then it's lost a lot of what i consider 'martial-art related' study material.

You haven't displayed an awareness as to 'why' he is doing this and, as you indicated, you have no training. You will 'not' learn how to fight or defend yourself with a few comments off the internet. Learning how to fight, how to defend yourself, will take years and you have a problem 'right now.' Knowing 'why' someone assaults you is a thing that martial arts training will eventually provide, as well as help you 'avoid' confrontations in the future. I agree with "Martial Artist" that you should invest in some martial arts instruction. The payoff is immediate (health and positivity) and future (confidence and security). "Martial Artist" has provided the best advice under the circumstances. Seek 'professional' assistance through the law, because that's what it is there for. He is committing a felony, even if he doesn't think he is. The laws were devised to protect people who are being victimized and he is likely taking advantage of your ignorance on this issue. All the comments "Martial Artist" presented are valid and should be followed. Let this guy learn that you're not ignorant of your rights.

My opinions only, mind you. The full-extension presented in wc is not to be considered 'standard practice' and not all wc styles encourage this during training. It is a means to develop your ability to recognize the depth you can present when striking from centerline, but the benefits of such are lost when performing side-based strikes. Also, you'll note that when you strike from centerline, using the standard wc strike, your elbow is facing down, which by the way it is used, is better defended than if you were to apply the same from a side-based strike, wherein the elbow is outside of the center and facing out, fully exposed to exploit. There's more, of course, but those are the more obvious points. On another note, Shaolin is a generic term really. When you are talking Shaolin, what system are you referring to?

I was called "Monkey" when i was young, because i could climb anything very fast and used to swing and jump from pole to pole or branch to branch like a spider monkey. Even made a school record in climbing at 4th and then 5th grade. That nick lasted a long time, following me to high school. Had a few nicks for competitions back in the 80's... "Bear" and "Taz." Both were put there by the sponsoring schools, to bolster my look. I thought they were stupid (the nicks, not the schools). Neither was altogether applicable, although Taz was closer than Bear... at least to the way i fought then. I was nicked "Guru" by a programmer during my first few years in modem bulletin board discussion groups (the forerunners to internet forums), because of my uberlong philosophical debates and "Tibetan mountaintop sage words" (his words, not mine. ). When internet forums became popular, i found too many persons with that same nick, so i opted to adopt the one i have now, since it was my most popular modem BBS-birthed RPG character and pretty uncommon.

Sort of like French women?

Kung Fu Hustle is a parody. I don't know anything about Shaolin Soccer, but it sounds like a parody as well.

all better now.

First, i didn't say there was no value. It gives a taste of many different systems, but doesn't provide sufficient, or indepth, training in any particular system, unless a practitioner in that school studied a particular system extensively 'outside' of that school and then offers to the students within that particular school. My feelings are that a multitude of systems, without depth or understanding... is for a resume'. Second, i believe you are making an erroneous associative judgement on the school based on 'one' person you know who displays 'more' information on these issues than you do. Just as well, someone could say 'eclectics' are knowledgeable about the arts merely by posing me as an example... but that would be mostly incorrect (besides the fact i'm not all that knowledgeable... only talk about what i know, or present info after doing research). Most of the eclectics i've met were mostly ignorant of anything but the basics of many systems, and horribly confused about ma lineage or history. The "pick what works, toss out the rest," mentality of many eclectics (which also happens to be Bruce Lee's JKD philosophy), cause them to grab the 'obviously' effective, whilst not obtaining knowledge or training in the inobviously effective. As well, just because something doesn't work for someone within a short period of time, is no reason to 'toss it out.' Many of the best concepts in the arts requires long-term dedication in order to grasp, and then later master. I believe this is the same mistake presented at the shaolin-do schools. What i'm getting at is, just because your instructor has knowledge, or at least more knowledge than you, does not indicate that the systems he studied, or the schools he studied at, or the instructors he studied under, are all that great. An individual is just that, and while they can attempt to represent a style, they ultimately only represent themselves while demonstrating a style. And my closing point is a reiteration. I do not care for either of these schools of study, oom yung doe and shaolin do (and for that matter, shou shu) because of the dishonesty presented by the founders. It's about peace of mind, spirit, and body... not building a resume'. "It's just that, to me, i want truth. Sincerity is a big issue with me, as i may have mentioned here before. I don't like to study any system, or under any teacher, that is not sincere... honest. Falsity is something that can eat at the soul, create or encourage an imbalance." I thank you for the info about your instructor's kuntao background. It puts my mind at ease. I had recently been hearing of shaolin-do practitioners claiming to be kuntao practitioners, due to shaolin-do's alleged origins (Indonesia/China). However, the two are very different, and have non-coinciding histories.

Thanks for the compliment sdargie. I was trying to think of a wise counter-response, but could only think of all the great posts i've read on this community and thus felt humbled by the knowledge i've gained here, as well as the encouragement i've received to continue my studies... despite the countless injuries.

Okay, your avatar is starting to freak me out. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v283/White_Warlock/icon_eek.gif

hehe, hiya newbie. edit: dang, u modified your answer.

My only problem was getting my right foot to make a pretty circle from the onset. Instead, all i could manage was this ragged clockwise hexagon. The #6 thing didn't have any effect. Still a ragged clockwise hexagon.

*clap* *clap* And welcome.

*burp*

All good points and good cameras. Based on your input, ShotokanKid, i was going to recommend the same one gheinisch recommended and use the extra cash to purchase a photo printer, or instead invest a little more into the camera and aim for a Canon Powershot A610 (5.0 megapixels). The others noted are, as well, great cameras. Notice how everyone recommended the old masters (Minolta, Canon, Nikon)?

Yes. Walked in one time, sat down, watched, got up, shook the instructor's hand, called him David, patted him on the back, we went out for a drink (him a beer, me a soda), we talked about the good ol' times in high school, and then he went home to his kids, and i went to the airport. Seriously though, that's the extent of my direct exposure. I didn't point out all the advantages, I noted only the disadvantages. Regardless, while it may develop the ability to strike while in close quarters, or in grappling range, that was not my point. I must state that i am basing my thoughts on the 20 or so videos i've seen of modern-day kyokushin competitions, which i admit is merely a sampling. But, what i noticed was that 'all' of them fought while being closely pressed against each other, yet performed no grappling actions. I think this is significant, because grappling actions do change the dynamics of a conflict, the dynamics of that particular range... and thus while this type of competition may develop the ability to perform effective strikes at such a range, i did not see any demonstration of such strikes being performed while grappling actions hindered their mobility, or balance. I.e., each opponent was pretty much allowed to do what they wished, in the standard, "you punch, i punch, you punch, my turn" format that is so typical of many sparring-type competitions. As to the k-1 comments, i agree that in those types of competitions, they have done well (as have the muay thai competitors)... but i also know they have not fared well in competitions that allow significant grappling (ufc, pride, etc). Okay, my last tangent on this thread.

Well, to be fair, not all medical studies are the same, nor are all martial arts the same. As well, even when a person studies medicine, more often than not they do specialize. I agree that it is not the best analogy, for the simple matter that the patient with a problem is not equal to the assailant with a problem. While a patient may have a particular issue that can only be managed by a specialist, the assailant has a particular issue that can be managed by most any competent ma practitioner. See, even if we generalize this point... it comes up blunt. (having fun with my metaphors) In truth, i'm not quite sure what argument you are attempting to present here danieldc, so i don't know whether to agree or disagree.

Nowadays, no less than 3 megapixels is acceptable, 5 megapixels is quality, and higher than that... oooooo. SLR is far better, in my opinion. All the best brand names for standard optical cameras are also the best brand names for digital nowadays. When these camera giants made the transition, they did it with style. Canon, Minolta, and the others that i can't remember right now. The questions that need to be answered are: 1. what you intend to do with it? 2. how much you intend on spending? 3. is photo more important, or video? 4. do you even want video? 5. do you have any experience with photography? 6. any experience with digital photography? 7. any experience with photoshop or similar?