White Warlock

Always had an interest in shuai chiao

It can also run down your leg, when put to the test. Bruce's analogies were cute, fine and dandy, but i've never really been keen with them. We aren't water, despite assertions arguing otherwise. Although we may be able to 'mentally' approach things as if we were water, our bodies are solid-based. We're more like a carton of milk if stiff, and a bag of ice cubes if flexible. See how cute analogies are?

Since we're only talking 'physical' characteristics... Speed was my bag when i was younger, but as i've grown older, i've become a bit more well-rounded. Well, except for flexibility. More flexible than most, but a far cry from being able to take my toe to scratch the middle of my back.

I think it's important we emphasize this part. Many people have injured their knees by attempting to practice the horse stance incorrectly.

kids benefit from these things called 'short-term goals,' but i feel it is counterproductive to have such things being applied to adults. If there was a universal change in the way things are handled, whereby kids can traverse from white to black and when they obtain adulthood they hangup their colors and simply practice, i would be amenable to that. Of course, we all know that's not going to happen. On a side, i understand the Kudokan does not allow anyone under 16 to obtain a black belt in judo.

Wing chun wasn't his art, it was merely his foundation. He studied wing chun for about 5 years. His art is jun fan do. He developed a philosophy of fighting called jeet kune do. All three were stages in his evolution. All three he eventually left (closing his schools, etc) and he ended up last with "way, no way" or "style, without style." His closing of his schools was an effort to emphasize that a 'preset style' was not a viable foundation for understanding. Okay, that's enough...

My point exactly Jade.

Hey all, You all know me (or most of you do) from this forum. I've been haunting another of Patrick's forums and if any of you are interested in photoshop, either as an amateur or a professional, i would like to see some of your faces over in that other forum. I'm reasonably accomplished with photoshop, so i can and will share my secrets. I am also interested in picking up some tricks along the way, so by all means share. All skill levels, all ages, all interests... http://www.photoshopforums.com You can also find it listed in a drop-down menu on the top-right corner of this forum (where it says, "Network Websites"). See you there, WW

Hmm, i'm wondering if this discussion has been converted into a testorone contest.

Sometimes the case, but you commit the falacy of exclusion here- there are many more types of fights than brawling for your life. And, even in a brawl, it is possible to create an opening or take advantage of one that occurs. Yeppers. Street fights are not sparring events, but they also aren't aliens. You've practiced to deal with many of the things that may fly your way. Also, my personal experiences have shown me that time seems to slow down and speed up at just the right moments. Much of this is mindset, but with the proper mindset, you can do a helluva lot, so don't discount setting up your opponent or using combinations. I'll have to agree with Delta1 on this. Penetration is actually a combination of all three, so you're right SevenStar, it shouldn't be placed solely under accuracy.

I would like to understand the definition of 'sissy.' It seems to me that anyone who puts their mind to learning the martial arts, and learning how to defend themselves, will obtain a degree of change in the way they handle and approach things, even if the change isn't going to be overnight. There are people who have no interest in violence, or in learning how to deal with violence, but these people wouldn't study the martial arts. Are pacifists your definition of sissies?

Just noticed my mock-thesis closed the gap with A-S-P. Interesting how that works, eh? Umm, rule number one in a bar fight is, there are no rules. From my experience, size is not the determining factor. But, what do i know, right?

thanks. Maybe it's a perception thing, but i include angle of trajectory and penetration as part of accuracy. Angle of trajectory takes into account a target's movement and body curves. Penetration is pretty much that whole 3" deep thing. Essentially, you don't aim to strike the surface, you aim to strike 3" in (actually, i aim to strike deeper than that, depending on where the organs are). When it comes to accuracy, i'm considering the targets within, not the targets without. Any thoughts on this differing perception?

pfft... made a joke, but i didn't laugh... so off it goes and in it's place, this incoherent rambling.

The Gracies came out with a series of videos. Worth purchasing and studying. Give you insight into things the instructor hasn't yet subjected you to.

I agree the use of, "this is a fact" stands as a kludge in his arguments, but i believe he may have done this merely to not have to go into detailing what those differences are. I think most, if not all, of us can agree that fear significantly and negatively impacts such things as self-confidence and security. I think we can all agree that fears generally surround those things we do not know, but which nonetheless pose a threat. I.e., fear of the unknown. Unlike tennis, badminton, baseball or ballet, the study of martial arts directly confronts these unknown threats. The study on how to deal with fundamental threats to one's livelihood, which tennis, badminton, baseball and ballet simply do not address, can give you a better degree of self confidence. Also, in studying the martial arts, you slowly obtain a higher understanding of why people become hostile, commit to violence, or react in ways that would otherwise seem irrational. The more indepth you get into the martial arts, the better an understanding you obtain in these areas. This, in and of itself, can boost self-confidence. But combined with knowing 'how' to react... that's a big boost. Knowing yourself is fine. Knowing your enemy, great... but together, a gem.

Hehe, i should have taken into account you were working with English as a second language. My bad. I do know how things don't quite come out clear, or even courteous, when i try and speak a language other than my primary. Actually, my explanation was too complicated. Should have corrected my explanation as soon as i found myself tossing in the "disclaimer" of my explanation being too complicated. Not sure if it would been made more clear but, ah well. In truth, it's something that can easily be converted to muscle memory, so you wouldn't even need to think about it.

hehe

Hmm... assuming technique isn't in this mix, i would say accuracy is #1 for striking, speed is #1 for takedowns and power is #1 for groundwork. Oh, you asked for a why... pfft. In striking, you are 'usually' not in contact with the opponent until you impact. Because there are far more places on the body that a strike would have little effect, and even some places where you could easily injure your fist or wrist if you strike there, accuracy becomes more important than either power or speed. No matter how hard, or how fast, you hit a rock, it's still a rock. Best be accurate enough not to hit that stupid rock in the first place. In takedowns, speed takes front and center. Speed is essential to get in and apply a takedown before your opponent can prevent you from doing so. Because you already have contact with your opponent when 'finishing' a takedown, and because you are attempting to obtain and control a 'general' target, accuracy isn't nearly as critical. Power is a close second, because in order to complete a technique, you often have to apply power to 'force' it to work. However, having to apply power often has to do with the fact the opponent has had the opportunity to perform a counter, or at least some form of resistance. This means... you simply weren't fast enough. In groundwork, power is critical. Don't confuse power with strength. Power is a combination of strength, leverage, and effective application of body mass. When you realize this, it becomes pretty obvious why power takes the lead on the ground. Speed is a close second, because if you are able to perform a technique quickly, you'll more likely be able to catch your opponent off guard, but because groundwork requires a significant degree of physical contact... the effect of speed as an advantage is significantly reduced. I.e., despite having speed, you are still far more predictable, because there is simply more signals to be received. Every friggin' muscle in your body, when in full-physical contact, is muscle-memory readable by your opponent, which gives your opposition a significant defensive advantage, if you were to rely on speed alone. As far as accuracy, the fudge-factor with groundwork is huge, so it really doesn't matter all that much how accurate you are... just as long as you get the general areas you are attempting to manipulate or control. And there's my thesis.

Hooboy, just reread my post. Must remind myself not to post when i'm dead tired.

Smokey, You are giving credit to things that have nothing to do with chi, but with self-confidence in opposition to lack of confidence. I.e., if i look at you with self-confidence and you hold significantly less confidence in yourself than i, you will feel intimidated and will likely be unable to look into my eyes for more than a few seconds. Also, as mentioned before, it has to do with hardness... of the willingness to commit to violence, regardless of the consequences. Essentially, we're talking about intimidation, which is a 'psychological' effect. Chi has nothing to do with that. The longstanding problem with chi, hara, and all these other 'foreign' words used as symbols of ideas, is that they've become mystified over the ages, even moreso when carried over to the Western world, without said ideas being 'directly' translated. Cutting to the chase, mysticism be damned. Scientific studies have been made on a variety of issues and it has been determined that the vast majority of 'magical/mystical' things presented over the centuries, have been parlour tricks. Walking over hot coals was shown to be a mere buildup of ash, which acted as insulators. Sleeping on a bed of nails was a simple issue of pounds per square inch, etc etc. Of those things that have shown promise, extensive scientific studies have been, and continue to be made on them. Such is how we learned to harness electricity, which was first noted with our conduction (static electricity, aka: friction induced electrical shock). Returning to psychological effects, such as intimidation and feinting, our body is a complicated machine and therefore sensitive. It can be easily influenced by internal stimuli and by external stimuli. With some good 'head games,' one person can influence another to perform actions, either by intimidation, persuasion, coercion, temptation, hypnosis, and/or deceipt. There is very little 'magical or mystical' about all of that, even if it may 'look' as such.

Able to provide better quality training. More individualized. I have a tendency to explain things 'while' i'm teaching, so it doesn't matter the size or longevity of the class. Absolutely not. If i don't personally like them, i don't subject myself to them. If they are disruptive, i dismiss them. If i feel they're going to use this knowledge for ill intent, i boot their * out the friggin' door and cash the check they gave me, before it bounces.

I think i'll look into this Propel drink thing...

Ah... okay. I'll agree with that. In fact, thinking about Kirves' post and his contention that learning to combat in the opposite stance can provide new perspectives, i think he would agree with it too. Of course, i'm not him, so...

With that clarified, i agree.