White Warlock

I'll have to agree with feels here. Seems he has full control of you as it is. In fact, you completely ignored all of my initial post, which means you are being blind to the issues in this case, and being pulled around by this guy who wants to fight you. I would say you already lost. All that's needed now are the bruises to prove it.

Agreed on all points presented. Also, what's to say they're going to believe you? I've heard plenty of 'non-belts' saying stuff like that, as a means to intimidate. Titles mean nothing, words count, actions count. Communicate to end a confrontation, or just get busy.

Brazil itself is not synonymous with latin. It is merely a region. It is the people that define whether something is of Latin, African, Saxon, or Basque origins. Those who practiced Capoeira, who devised it, were of African descent. They were displaced Africans, enslaved by the Spaniards and Portugues that migrated to the Americas. Capoeira was a martial art system, hidden within a series of dances, in the hopes that one day the African slaves would be able to find the opportunity to free themselves forcefully from enslavement... and return to their own lands.

So, shogeri, what's the weather like over there?

lol Mental. The military posture puts an inordinate amount of pressure on your mid back area, it 'forces' the spine to be straight, which is not its normal state (spines are 'naturally' curved). Such actions may look good, but they pose undue strain on various muscles in the back, chest, neck, abdomen, and buttocks region. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v283/White_Warlock/posture.jpg

Agreed Rick, unfortunately... i have bills to pay. When the bills become larger than the cost of having a good time teaching, guess what gets kicked to the side? Right, my students. Woot! lol

Does that translate to, "hi, i'm going to sit on you" ?

hmm, i'm wondering if you saw my post.

My high school / college wrestling / judo coach was a whopping 5' tall. Repeatedly he would tie up his 'champion' students, with one hand dangling in the air half the time, like he was riding bronco. All weight classes, didn't matter to him. Skill is a major factor that simply cannot be arbitrarily dismissed based on a person's size. Just thought i would toss that out to further tangentialize these discussions.

Hmm, let me see if i can find a few: Boxing - i was going against a guy with a significantly longer reach. He would repeatedly jab me and i had little defense against it. I kept thinking i was out of his range, since he was out of mine, but always came the jab that reminded me i was not. It was still the first round, and i noticed his jab retreat carried with it a body retreat, so the next time he took in a jab, i stuck my face to it... literally, and followed his fist back to his body. I then proceeded to pummel him repeatedly with uppercuts and hooks, all the while keeping his arms all tied up so he couldn't counter (ye' ol wing chun tricks). I guess the domination was obvious, as the bout was halted, end of story. Wrestling - i had watched this competitor wrestle before, and he was always linear in his attacks, and almost always going for a single-leg. It was my turn to go against him, so i baited him with one of my legs being thrust forward... as if i didn't know what i was doing. He, of course, went for it, and as soon as he did, i redirected my weight to that leg, pivoted to his side and knocked him over for a quick pin. All rather quick and far too easy.

I think cultural aspects are cute, but unrelated to the study of the arts themselves. If the arts are mired in philosophical/religious connotations, it is something to examine... but in all things, if it doesn't jive with your philosophies/beliefs, then you need to take from the system only that which is the 'art' itself. We live in a different culture, and it is 'our' culture that we base our existence and understandings on. Although it may be 'fun' to learn fortune cookie culture, you are not actually obtaining insight into yourself. Instead you are merely obtaining 'more' confusion, because the obtainment of information is piecemeal and thus incomplete. And although it is very important to consider other perceptions, other cultures, it should be done with legitimate intent from a formal anthropological standpoint, and not merely to 'spice up' your training or to make you look more legitimate.

Hmm, well they both taste like chicken.

On the other hand, your examples present defense being associated with speed, and offense being associated with strength. These are not appropriate examples, for both are a factor in offense and defense. Also, being able to resist a hit is more along the lines of 'skills' and conditioning, not physical power.

If you were hoping for a short survey, with no input, it's likely this isn't going to be all that beneficial a survey for you. Fairfax' points are valid, in that neither speed nor strength are valid ends. Speed is measured by the distance you travel given a finite timeline, but developing acceleration is actually a more apt goal. If you are able to accelerate through all your techniques, despite the resistances presented by your adversary, then you will clearly present more capability of utilizing your mass to a greater extent than say someone who does not work on developing their ability to accelerate through their techniques. Strength is far more subjective, and one must consider so many 'set' values, as well as some variables, in order to present an examination of strength being a determinate in a confrontation. Mass, center of balance, weight distribution, muscular power in the legs or arms or torso, the degree of dependence on strength to effect a technique (many techniques require very little strength, if done properly, and thus if strength is utilized it is due to a technique being done improperly... which could cause the person performing said technique, via the use of strength, to be exploited), your opposition's physical dimensions, etc. As a whole, strength is more an abstract than an applicable value. At least in comparison to acceleration. It is the system itself, and the techniques applied therein, that determine whether one or the other is more effective in presenting the benefits of said system. Personally, i would say... given a choice between the two, i would choose acceleration over strength. The problem here is, strength also effects acceleration, while acceleration 'and' strength effect presentation of power. Granted, mass is more a factor than strength, but it can be argued that mass in motion is essentially a presentation of strength. For to move mass in the first place requires strength, and to accelerate, requires plenty of strength... sufficient to move a large mass at an increasing rate of speed.

Because although it has been argued repeatedly that MMA rules no longer really favor strikers or grapplers, it definitely disfavors 'real-aspect' combatants. The rules exist that prevent people from fighting as they would in a street scene, when their lives are on the line. The ultimate goal of the martial arts is to ensure you survive a confrontation, not win in a competition, therefore the goal of a competition that is geared towards finding the 'best of the best' should stay focused on the ultimate goal of the martial arts, not the ultimate goal of 'sport competition.'

A few of the things to consider, when posed against multiple opponents: Your primary goal should be to protect loved ones, Your second goal should be to escape, Your third goal should be to deescalate, Your fourth goal should be to take out the more aggressive, Your fifth goal should be to intimidate the remaining aggressors.In this, obtaining a weapon is always something to consider but it should not be an objective, merely an opportunity. The one more likely to attack should be your prime target. As far as choosing opponents, it should be somewhere along this order: 1. The most aggressive person, or the person more likely to attack first, 2. The person preventing you from escaping (either because he is blocking your escape route, or because he is the faster runner), 3. The person most capable of causing injury to you.Presented in this are some recommendations: Be the aggressor. Do not wait until you are attacked before going into action. Do not pose your back to a wall, it removes half your options for escape. Although it provides protection from someone attacking your back, if you had time to do this, then you had time to attack. Do not place yourself between assailants. Interpose your targeted assailant between you and the remaining assailants, either by placing yourself on the 'outside' and away from the other assailants while attacking your immediate target, or by 'moving' your immediate target and posing him/her as an obstacle. It is not sufficient to merely take out your immediate target. You must also ensure that the immediate target is presented as an 'example' of your ferocity. The first few targets should receive ample 'audible' and 'visible' injury. Stay mobile. Do not become a fixed entity. As in any confrontation, do not turn your back to your assailants. Do not go to the ground. If you find yourself on the ground, make it a priority to get back on your feet and out of the grasp of anyone that 'is' on the ground. Grapple only when absolutely necessary to eliminate an assailant or utilize them as an obstacle for the other assailants. Spend a fraction of a moment to survey your battlefield. Examine your options and plan your route of escape/conflict. Use your environment to help you defeat your assailants. Cause your assailants to trip on objects and to be bottlenecked through an opening or doorway. But, be very much aware that any foriegn objects can be utilized by them as weapons, so try to steer them from such. If the conflict is in a secluded place, work diligently to try and present the conflict in a public arena. Get it out in the open. After the first or second aggressor is taken out, use a strong, firm voice to command the conflict to cease. This is most effective if it is noticed that the remaining assailants are presenting doubt or hesitation. Whatever you do, do not 'egg' anyone on. Do not insist upon another person attacking you. This does NOT work to deescalate a confrontation. It merely poses you as a challenge in a 'game.' Call for help if help is anywhere within visible or audible range. Do so by yelling, "FIRE!" and not by yelling, "HELP!" Unfortunately, people are more inclined to act in their own defense than they are to act on your defense, so FIRE is a better trigger to their own adrenal surges. The goal here is merely to switch spectators into 'fight/flight' mode... and then hope for the best.Again, these are only a 'few' things to consider and one should not limit their choice of actions based merely on this list. In every encounter, one must rely on their instincts and common sense, for every instance of violence is different. The odds are stacked against you, and in no way are the above recommends going to prevent you from injury. The best they can do is offer you insight into your options and increase the possibility you will come out of such a confrontation... alive. Thanks for reading

I'm not a chi/qi advocate, but there's plenty more associated to it than merely physics. There is also visualization, mental determination, and a few other things that fall outside the realm of physics and inside the realm of psychology, biology, and pattern baldness.

finger breaking against grapplers is very effective, and rather easy to do.

That's odd, pretty much everyone calls me, "hey you" or they call me collect.

I just want to iterate that Mikkyo are 'not' ninpo, nor are they exclusive to ninjutsu. In fact, very few so-called ninjutsu instructors even know a fraction of kuji-in, let alone kuji-kiri. It's part of the false mystique surrounding ninjutsu, played out by pretenders to the point it has become synonymous with ninjas (which, btw, were a theatre creation, and otherwise did not actually exist in its present renditions). If you wish to study these things, at least know the truth... they are esoteric Buddhists studies, primarily from the Tendai and Shingon sects. They are referred to in Mikkyo traditions. In order to learn these, you should learn them from a 'legitimate' Buddhist priest (of the Shingon or Tendai sects), not from some guy claiming to be a ninja. An additional note: Morihei Ueshiba, the founder of aikido and a devout apprentice of Buddhism, practiced these beliefs... and we all know he was no ninja.

correct

Biting is a really bad idea. It is probably one of the easiest ways to contract some rather horrible diseases.

Bruce Lee would not participate in the UFC... because he is dead. Let him rest in peace.

Well, obviously your first mistake was letting people know you study anything at all. Your second mistake was bragging (as noted by reading your previous posts in this forum), Your third mistake was to accept the challenge. From thereon, you're right... you got yourself into a bit that it looks like you're going to have to bite down on. A few things: Is this ufc-style fight a legitimate event, or something in his backyard? If it is the latter, you should decline and state you thought it was an organized event, not some joke backyard scene. Another thought is... do you know where he studied and is he still studying there? If so, i recommend going to the class and 'practicing' with him. If not, i recommend going to the class and practicing ... period. Understanding what it is your opponent may present to you gives you more than you presently have to work with (i'm making assumptions right now, because as y2sub indicated... we know nothing about your body type or background in the arts). It could also 'deflate' the scene, since you've opted to 'join' him in his studies, rather than remain an adversary. Seriously, if you're intimidated by this challenge, then you need to do some cross-referencing, and get into the arts behind the man (or boy) you fear. Elsewise, take this event as an opportunity to obtain a degree of humility.

My first thought was that it seems everyone else wants you to fight, yet you don't. Does the other person want to fight? If neither of you two do, then get together, shake hands and stop putting on a show for the spectators that are egging you two on. If you two become close friends, you will have effectively disarmed the antagonists. From what you presented, i would say 'they' are the real opponents, not the football guy. Anyway, low kicks will work, but you need to make them strong, quick and snappy. they need to get the job done, which is to attack the knee, the shin, the thigh, the balls. If you don't have ground skills, and he does, then obviously you have a problem there. It sounds as if you also aren't as good as he close-in, so distance fighting is all you have. May i recommend you expand your knowledge at a later time. As to whether an attack works or not, i'm sure it does... he's just not going to let you know it. That's part and parcel to boxing strategy. Anyway, you seem to be aiming for general body shots, rather than prime targets like floating ribs, kidney shots, solar plexus (if he's fat, strike downward, not up), underarm, back of hand, center of forearm, lower-center of thigh, top of foot, behind the ear, temple shot, bridge of nose, just under the nose (aimed upwards), side of neck, throat, etc. I suggest you reexamine your targets, as well as the degree of force you're using. This isn't point contact, nor is it a casual sparring match. Your goal 'is' to hurt him. Not just a little, but a lot, so go back to basics and generate that force, that power in your strikes. Put your body behind it, don't just throw your arms out like sockbags. If necessary, visualize him as that wall in your bedroom. You know, the one with the poster covering the hole? Be aware, your goal here isn't to kill the guy, and i gather it's not to permanently disable him. However, what is his goal? You need to set the level of severity of your actions based on whether this is a friendly duel, or one in which you will be repeatedly stomped if you were to hit the ground.