White Warlock

If they wish to lie to themselves in order to sell a product, that's their loss. Don't take it personally that others are willing to present themselves in false fashion. They deny themselves growth by doing so.

Humble Novice, i would say... umm... no. Not unless the practitioner was really really good AND the opponent was not.

Be aware that in many areas, kicking with a shoe on is considered assault with a deadly weapon. Steel toed boots especially fall into this category. Also kicking someone while they are on the ground can be presented in court as 'excessive force.'

My intro - http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=153108

hmm... well, i used to park outside in negative, nasty degree weather, with only a shirt and pants on, and focus on being at peace. I wouldn't shake or shiver, or get goose bumps due to the cold or wind. Unfortunately, i did get pnuemonia a few times and this taught me a more important lesson. That your body's functions have a purpose, and if you attempt to control them, rather than accept them, you endanger your health.

Hehe, kinda hard question. Most of my fanciest stuff was grappling related. I suppose one of my fancier ones was open hand slapping of their face (shock), and leaving my hand there (blind and control) just long enough for me to manuever myself to end up halfway behind them, taking my opposite arm over their shoulder, across their neck and under their opposite arm, then using my momentum to throw them against some of those cheap cafeteria-type furnishings, then charging up as he's attempting to get up, and parking my knee in his groin, as a warning for it to end. The action described above was from san soo. Grappling related ones, were me gaining control of a person's ankles and standing up with both of them stuck in my underarm, ridge of my forearm digging into their achille's heels if they resisted, and kicking them in the tailbone if they tried to rise up. This was done until others could come to secure him (mental hospital work... assailant was a sane, but violent patient). Another one would be a guy swinging around a belt, keeping everyone at bay. On the apex of his swing, i charged in to his side and swung behind him, using his own body as a pivot point, and locking both his arms out, which allowed the rest of the persons to charge in and take him down (again, mental hospital work). I don't know dude... this is an odd question. I think part of the reason i think it is odd, is because everyone has a different perception of what is fancy. I mean, my personal take on fancy... is that it doesn't work. So i'm having to stretch my perceptions for these discussions, and include things that 'look neat,' as opposed to just fancy.

But that is not humility. That's common sense. In this day and age, with powerful concealed weapons and a high degree of enforcement on violent crimes, it's simply not smart to smack someone, start a fight, or even overdefend yourself.

Assuming punching is the totality of boxing is where you're getting into trouble with these notions Hudson.

Hehe, i'm with Shane on this one.

Hi Ryan, I checked out your forums and a few things caught my attention. First off, the default text is way too small, but that's a minor issue. What concerned me more was your presentation of articles from various news organizations and your posing of pics from other sites. I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but unless you have received specific permissions, doing so essentially constitutes as copyright infringement. Good luck in your endeavors.

I have heard, repeatedly, that the majority of these so-called Shaolin monks running around right now are actually wushu practitioners that decided to band up, park in an abandoned temple, and call themselves Shaolin, noting the 'profitability' of such a venture. I have seen nothing to contradict this.

It is also important to realize that karate is not the only martial art being studied out there. Humility, for example, is not ingrained in boxers, wrestlers, or some other sport-inclined martial arts. I know i've mentioned many of my personal experiences here on these boards. I've enjoyed sharing them, not as a means to buff my validity, or brag about my skills, but as a means to give example to various discussions brought forth. I mean, we can speculate, and then we can examine actual instances. I think sharing of experiences is a productive action, in that we can all learn from each other, but i do agree that some have posted here as a means to brag... or to insinuate their being tough. Always a tad disconcerting, but in these actions as well, there is an opportunity to learn. For if we feel such is wrong, or improper, then we can reaffirm that our training is working well to become a mindset. I.e., everything that everyone does... is a means to learn. It is not necessary to be dismayed, or even disgusted, when in the examination you come through with a grain of knowledge.

Hmm...

Hmm... Best Quote/Line Sig of the Year or... Shortest Temper Quickest Wit Longest Tale Sharpest Tongue

just grab a sturdy pen and keep it in your pocket. The kubotan is a gimmick.

Well, that wasn't cool. Anyway, it's not merely about whether someone has an opinion or not, it's also what they've been conditioned to believe, through media and otherwise. Verbally arguing with them, and posing physical injury as a means to teach them that there's more to the martial arts than violence... kinda overshadows your argument, doesn't it? To most people, the martial arts are a 'cute classic' of a pastime. Something that you could practice for 30 years, and still get shot in the head. I don't argue something like that, because they're right. At least, if you put it in that context. In the 'civilized' world, violence is a cruel and unforgiving momentary interruption to their daily lives. Witnessed on television, or occurring to 'someone else.' Those who don't prepare for the possibility, and then become victims of it, oftentimes do not gain an opportunity to reevaluate their perspective on it all. But, throwing fear on the table is a poor salesman's tactic. I prefer to toss out chivalry as a motivator. Well, with all this stated, i'm actually just a tad bit confused as to what your cousin's stance is, and what yours is. It seems you are saying he thinks it is all about fighting... while you are saying it is useful. But, for what? Opening bottles? Picking up chicks? Fighting?

That's pretty much the same as he described, with the same counters and potential dangers indicated by me and others. good luck with that one, Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

Was never in this situation at a tournament. However, while i'm willing to workout with a woman, i am not willing to harm one. And as i am not willing to compromise my values for my martial art studies, i will nonetheless compromise them for my survival or security. So yes, it's about social norms. Values ingrained through childhood, by both parents and society as a whole. Not everyone has these values. Most that don't, also think beating their wives is a viable means to disciplining them. The stigma goes the other way.

Agreed. It is a technique that 'can' be applied with a reasonable chance of success, in a grappling-only scenario, but not if strikes are allowed. Also, there are plenty of counters to this, including a full pivot during takedown, which leaves the defender sitting on the attacker, with the option of dropping into an overhead triangle choke. Other easy counters include bending your knee and putting your weight forward, which could either be a painful smack for the person thinking of putting his head there, or it could simply be an immovable object. Or another would be turning and dipping, while simultaneously placing your arm wrapped below and over the other attacker's arm, with the other arm ensuring the hand holding the heel remains as is. The attacker's push ends up being your means to flip him on his back, with your knee landing somewhere on his chest or face... or pretty much anywhere you want it to be. Everything works, and everything can be countered. Just matters who you apply it to (i.e, their skill level, etc), with what degree of skill you apply it with, whether there was any setup involved, the speed at which the actions are committed, and what rules, if any, exist.

Sometime back in 1992ish, i was studying aijukikan (danzan-ryu jujutsu) at a local college club. A very buff weightlifter/bodybuilder came in one night. He was a nice guy and joined in on the various stuff with as much courtesy as any other new student. But, along the middle of the sessions, he queried me and a few others, asking the old challenge question of, "how could this stuff possibly work against someone like me?" I went on to discuss how muscle and mass are not, in and of itself, sufficient to counter skill/technique. And even though he showed himself to be physically quick, if he applied himself to attack me, with all his speed, power, and size... without skill, his physical advantages would be used to his disadvantage. As you can imagine, a demonstration or two was needed. Happy to oblige, i started out simple, and asked him what he considered to be the two most advantageous holds he can place on me. He opted for the bear hug and the head lock as the two (typical choices for the unskilled). I asked him to perform both on me, and to do so with full strength and resistance (i.e., resistance to anything i might try). In both cases, he ended up on the ground. In both cases, i showed him how i could have left him on the ground gasping for breath, by having my weight fall on his chest/solar plexus, rather than buffering it for him (I wasn't there to humiliate him or hurt him, and he appreciated that). Without skill, he wasn't able to fully implement his mass and power to ensure his holds were sufficient, nor was he able to realize that the holds he had opted to apply... were not that good. His next discussions were on the avenue of attacks (strikes, etc). I stated that if he could make physical contact, it could very well hurt most practitioners of this style. But, the hard part was to make contact. I also told him that other styles provided significant amounts of training in redirecting and reducing the impact of a strike, by ensuring it doesn't succeed in striking along the centerline (i.e., energy of strike being pivoted out). Again, he wanted a demonstration and again, i happily obliged. At first i stuck with the system we were studying, and demonstrated how his strikes didn't hit me, and how i would both move him and me so that i would be facing part of his back, and he would have to turn about in order to continue his attack... which was sufficient for me to tap him a few times to illustrate strikes i could have committed. Without skill to backup his mass and power, he easily overcommited with his strikes and placed himself slightly off-balance at every turn. More than enough for me to exploit. I then stepped away from the system studied, and directed him to strike me in the chest and face. In both cases, i pivoted with his strike and he stood there somewhat surprised that his full-on strikes had no discernable impact (in truth, it friggin' hurt... but because i pivoted, it was not even remotely close to what it could have been... had i just stood there). Because he did not receive training in 'chasing' the centerline, or in penetrating without overcommiting, his strikes were a combination of point impact and a push. Easily exploitable and at every hit, with my pivoting, he fell off balance. We closed our little side demo with him trying to tackle me, of which i responded with a sprawl, swinging around and behind him then putting him in a chokehold. I told him that my response was from wrestling (sprawl) and judo (chokehold). I also told him that many other systems would encourage simply clocking him as he tried to enter in such a fashion. Because of his lack of training, his tackle was his entire attack, was fully telegraphed, and was top-heavy in implementation. His upper body mass became his Achille's heel. Anyway, what was the topic on again?

Pfft

Toe-may-toe, Toe-mah-toe

while the issue of 'creating' a new kata may have deserved a little ragging, the question itself, about asking for a translation of a word, didn't. Also, this thread went on a tangent, focusing on the 'age' of the poster and their 'rank,' both noted on the sig. I like most everyone in this community, but sometimes the gang mentality slips in...

And i don't blame you. If it makes you feel any better, i wrote legal declarations (sometimes in excess of 30 pages long per) for 4 years, in assist to civil and family law attorneys for their clients, witnesses and character references. Every case was a win, and there were plenty. *knock on wood* *further inflates ego* My study in criminal law is not nearly as hands-on. But, i can definitely tell you that much of this has to do with the jury, and juries vary substantially. If we were to go on averages, most jurors have no background in the martial arts, and thus would not comprehend 'control' as something related to grappling, over striking. One just 'seems' more violent than the other, and impressions are heavy in a court of law. A good attorney can ride impressions far further than they can ride facts, and the impression of someone striking is that of an aggressor, while that of a grappler is that of someone trying to subdue without injuring their attacker. A good attorney can argue that a grappler attempted to subdue the attacker (aggressor), but the attacker struggled too much and an accident ensued. It is far more difficult for an attorney to present a case whereby the striker attempted to subdue the attacker, but the attacker wouldn't fall down... so the striker had to hit harder and an accident ensued.

I don't demand respect. I'll just take it if given. Anyway, i agree that there are many who don't present humility. It's pretty annoying. Hell, i'm pretty annoying, because i act like i'm not humble, just to play the role that i've seen so very often posed by punks and dweebs, and all those inbetween who attempt to cover up their insecurities with audacity and pomposity. I suppose this is something to consider. It may be that there are simply more practitioners today entering into competitions when they're not 'ready' to do so. I have noted that many schools are eager to fill up their windows with trophies, and thus rush their students to learn what 'works' in a competition, but won't work worth * in the streets. The new trend, perhaps?