spinninggumby

Well technically you can throw a kick 'using your whole body' and still keep a fairly upright torso. Using your whole body and throwing your whole body into the kick (or at least the hips and waist, since that is where the originating power comes from in an effective kicking technique) doesn't require that you lean far back. Usually you should always rely on that torque or quick snappy circular or forward thrusting force of the hips (if not your whole body esp. emphasizing loose shoulders that also twist easily) in a kick for sufficient power. Kicks that are naturally centrifugal/circular in nature such as the hook kick or turning kick obviously need loose twisting hips (side kick also) but even the front kicks involve a slight or partial pivoting of the supporting foot in order for the hips to open up. The leg for the most part only provides as a channel for the power to be released. Once again, only a TKD perspective. _________________ "Being able to move in and out of styles, movements, and rhythms with ease is the highest skill." - Donnie Yen "If you have to resort to violence, you've already lost" - Rising Sun "The finest steel emerges from the hottest furnace" - a smart guy [ This Message was edited by: spinninggumby on 2002-03-06 03:00 ]

If they keep the same rules about scoring as they do before (break up once a single point is scored), I don't see how a punch is more brutal than a kick to the head. A kick hurts way more. All elite TKD tournament practitioners should be able to throw kicks to the head at the speed equal to a fairly quick jab or hook to the face, but naturally with the leg as a weapon it will be more powerful. Punching will only add to the strategy. It has always been a hard habit for me to break to cease using the hand strikes to the head as part of a sparring session, and it can be frustrating. On the other end, you could say that the uniqueness and athletic aspect of TKD is high and fast kicking so in order to distinguish it from other sports (and other martial arts) they have only allowed you to kick to the head and/or encouraged high kicks for more points. After all, TKD tournament sparring is NOT real fighting, so from that point of view I don't see any immediate harm in restricting face punches. It is a sport, a game derived from martial techniques and strategies. TKD sport chooses to focus on kicking and reward those with accurate kicking. From that perspective, I don't see a problem.

Yeah, it has always kind of confused me why certain schools or certain masters and/or instructors decide not to teach a certain technique or movement even though it is clearly a part of the style (even more so if it is a traditional school). A lot of sport-oriented schools have obviously thrown out a lot of techniques which they deem 'unnecessary' or 'impractical' or obsolete but for a traditional school this puzzles me.

The hand may be quicker than the eye, but it is what you see with your eyes that gets your hands going. Errr, don't look too much into that :angel:

Hey I love ballet! Don't get me wrong. There is an excellent ballet school down the street from me and they always supply the brownies at all our tournaments Disclaimer: Just in case any ballet enthusiasts suddenly realize a sudden urge and desire to rip out my innards, just remember, I KNOW WHERE YOU POST! Plus, ballet rocks. AAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!! :angel:

Usually IMHO you should try to lean back as little as possible and try to keep your torso as straight as you can with your hands guarded. Leaning back compromises your balance and power and leaves you vulnerable. When you lean back it also takes longer to recover from a kick so it is harder to immediately throw more techniques or commit to further actions. Also, leaning back is usually done in order to make up for lack of flexibility. If higher kicks is what you want, leaning back may just be a way of cheating yourself. You should just do more dynamic stretching so that you will not need to lean to achieve greater height. Obviously there is no way you can do many high kicks without leaning your torso back somewhat, but for the most part I wouldn't say beyond 45 degrees. On a side note, the side kick might be a different story since it is virtually impossible to throw a super high side kick (close to vertical or vertical) without leaning your torso back significantly (over 45 degrees). This is more of a modern TKD perspective so many other people may disagree with this.

It's only a problem if someone feels or is ignorant enough to think that doing or focusing on high kicks alone is an excellent and practical all-around way to learn how to fight(i.e. neglecting more practical maneuvers). Otherwise it is an excellent supplement to one's training in order to boost strength, flexibility, confidence, etc. IMHO. Btw I don't feel that high kicks are 'fancy'. All they take is flexibility and not any or much more practice than low kicks as long as you have the range of motion in your joints and muscles that have the necessary elasticity (and perhaps a few changes or alterations in body mechanics but nothing drastic). And according to Tom Kurz of Stretching Scientifically, flexibility, if trained correctly and wisely, is one of the easiest and quickest assets to develop in one's athletic or physical training. Nevertheless, point well taken, AO, I would expect nothing less from a hard-core traditionalist who does not believe in flowery tactics :smile:

Well a while back when I was just starting kung fu, my teacher had me sign a contract or statement before enrolling, saying that I would respect the art and never misuse it. I don't know just how legally valid this contract would be, but just my input there

IMHO, despite the fact that MOST techniques have the capability or potential to be effective in combat, you cannot deny the fact that there are some which are definitely less practical. For example, which would you prefer, spending 10 years to develop a proficient flying spinning pinky-poke, or spending about a week developing a devastating straight blast fist to the temple or strike to the neck. If combat and self-defense is your priority, I highly recommend the latter. The art of pinky fighting, you could say, is not totally useless for combat. I mean, after 30 years of intense training you could immobilize any attacker right? But take an intensive 4 week special forces training class and you will find that you can achieve self-defense proficiency in much much much less time, obviously. Self-defense and combat are personally not my priority, but I do feel that if in fact techniques that are excellent for combat is what you are looking for, there are many arts that you should shun for good reason. Not because no one could ever become good at them. But perhaps b/c the techniques require too much effort/time to learn, and the ideologies/theories/tenets are not so easily grasped. Why do you think there are so many testimonials of how effective Muay Thai is on the street? I strongly believe that it is b/c it is simple and easy to grasp for the vast majority of the public. The training, although intensive and physically strenuous, is straightforward. However, that is not to say that there could not be a Wing Chun or Taekwondo practitioner who could surpass an elite Muay Thai practitioner in self defense. The simple fact is that the practitioners of other arts may have to invest more time. Is it wrong to choose Muay Thai simply b/c it is more simple and takes less time to get to a proficient level? Not realllly. In fact obviously you are one who is familiar with special forces units. Simple is better. No one wants to spend forty years learning, refining and sharpening a devastating technique that will work eventually, but only after you have watched your grandchildren give birth and you are laying your dentures out to dry. ESPECIALLY if your main focus is self-defense and not spiritual growth. Spending 40 years in toil towards a cause such as this just might build character. However, after you achieve that character, you will die the next day b/c u will be like 105 years old, but anyways let's move on As for myself, what I choose to train towards has nothing to do with how hard or difficult the practice will be, but whether not the result is worth my time, sweat, blood, and constant questioning of my intentions. One thing I would like to emphasize is how I disagree with how people tend to think that practical=hard training and impractical=wussy training. Try practicing a wushu butterfly twist into lotus kick into splits. That is some hard sh*t. But very impractical. Training to develop this is harder and more sweat-inducing than any type of training you will undergo in order to develop the most practical of kicks (or at least one of them), the sharp and painful kick to the groin. It's all about the result for me. If the result appeals to me, I will go for it no matter what the cost. I have no intention of spending 2 hours a day trembling with frustration in a horse stance just so I can, um, show others that I can squat for such a long time. Ok i am exaggerating, but I'm just saying that hard training is not a problem, as long as I want what it will give me. _________________ "Being able to move in and out of styles, movements, and rhythms with ease is the highest skill." - Donnie Yen "If you have to resort to violence, you've already lost" - Rising Sun "The finest steel emerges from the hottest furnace" - a smart guy [ This Message was edited by: spinninggumby on 2002-03-04 23:27 ] [ This Message was edited by: spinninggumby on 2002-03-04 23:28 ]

Moi???

Regarding my first question, I was referring to the Sabaki method/style founded by Kancho Joko Ninomiya. I think he wrote a book on this.

Interesting thing about karate training. I was reading Gichin Funakoshi's master text KARATE-DO KYOHAN and found some of his insight on training very peculiar. According to his text, extensive karate practice/training lasting beyond 2 hours at a time is often a byproduct or result of youthful vigor and headstrong enthusiasm and is not necessarily a good thing(even if the attitude is positive). If I remember correctly, he also says that exhaustive or extensive practice should be avoided or approached with caution. In fact, he further goes on to say that practicing kata or techniques for 15 minute intervals a few times a day is quite sufficient. Many of us here on this forum would probably be quick to question this advice and doubt the effectiveness or benefits provided my such a meager training schedule. I am sure that many of us also will ignore this and continue our half-day long workout sessions. However, this is Funakoshi we are talking about, not some McDojo running karate shirt-wearing poser. Just goes to show that either 1) the masters are not always right or 2) the masters are right but often times their true advice and perspective on things go unnoticed due to everyone being caught up in their worship of him/her. In order for exact quotes, the specific words in the text can be specified if needed.

Hentai means 'pervert' in Japanese. So basically any Anime that would appeal to perverts? Pretty simple No further discussion needed haha.

Welll this is kind of a universal topic I think. I feel that for effective self-defense or sparring, first you are taught how to defend when the opponent throws a kick or punch or rushes at you, etc. You practice drills which involve blocking or dodging and then counterattacking. After a while, when you get more experienced or comfortable, many of my instructors have always told me that if you are faster (both in body and mind) than your rival, you should attack first once you see an opening. Actually I prefer the word 'intercept'. This means that he/she is coming in and ready to commit a life-threatening act (i.e. attack) and you strike before they have the chance to even throw the maneuver. It's kind of a fine line though b/c it takes lots of practice before you are able to train your body to stray away from impulsive foolish attacking and calculated intercepting strikes. Also, if you get sued, your case for self-defense might be a little clouded too

My knowledge of Japanese/Okinawan martial arts is fairly limited. Can someone either tell me (or refer me to a reputable source) the significance of the following karate-related topics? 1) Sabaki method (circular?) 2) Main or general differences between Okinawan karate and Japanese karate 3) Mas Oyama 4) Gichin Funakoshi As for Funakoshi and Oyama, I am simply interested in what set them apart from the other karate masters of their era (or of any era for that matter). Thanx a bunch!! :grin:

There are many people out there who can throw out head-high kicks with ease at blinding speed, precision, and accuracy. However, in a self-defense situation with your life on the line, the simple fact is that your basic low kicks to the groin and strikes to the eyes, kneecaps, other vital organs etc. will be that much faster and more practical. Why take a risk (even the slightest risk) when your chances could be greater using techniques that require less effort or energy, and your life is in danger? No matter what, a quick strike with the fist to the bridge of one's nose will always have more practical potential than a high kick to the head, regardless of how good you are. On the other side of things, a deadly kick to the head can result in serious injury/bleeding (external or internal), brain damage, or death. Why would you want to deal with that kind of liability? Yes you can plead your case as self-defense but in this day and age things are never that clear cut.

That's a very good point. Turn your head and the body should follow. One of those things that works well for some reason LOL When spinning, if your head doesn't turn then everything is slowed down and hampered. And like Ram Calgary said your eyes should always face the target as soon as possible. Obviously where your eyes go, your head will go too (hopefully! :lol: ).

Joecooke007: Yea Moo is pretty funny. She's also a gojo-ryu person so mabey you guys can dog kung fu together LOLLOLLOL.........punks :kaioken: [ This Message was edited by: spinninggumby on 2002-03-03 21:49 ]

I personally do not think that one should focus on training for one-hit-one-kill b/c there is just no way that it can be foolproof IMHO. Just what happens if your one strike or shot is a little bit off center, or your attacker moves at the last moment, or if a whole band of thugs attack you at once? While you are landing your single killer hit on one guy, the others will pummel you. Maybe this is where conflict awareness (including being able to predict attacks or sense escalating tension) and reacting accordingly to stimuli comes in. Although I could quite be misinformed, a lot of karate advocates hard force-on-force blocking that probably would not go over too well if you were 125-130 lbs (like me) against a 250 pound thug who wanted to rip out my vocal cords. That is why it is so important to move around your opponent to a more advantageous position, either that or strike before he/she has a chance to strike. And when you have 10 people who are interested in killing you, the last thing you want is hard, stationary blocks and movements that involve pitting your force against anothers and have to worry about the ones who will jump your a$$ while you are counterattacking. I have been taught to try to take out the nearest or perhaps weakest attacker and then use him/her as a shield if the assailants become too overwhelming, and to keep moving if possible. I have considered the possibility that many traditional masters may have preferred stationary and solid stances as opposed to moving around in a fight. Once again, this might be okay (maybe) if you are fighting one other person in a ring fight. However obviously this is different when nineteen of his other friends come along and declare it national WWF Appreciation Week, it won't really matter how stable your stance is or if you have iron arms to block samurai blades.

KEIBLER. That's all I have to say. That's all I need to say. The rest sucks

Just remember to keep an open mind and push yourself for self-improvement, and you will reap many many benefits. WTF will suit you just fine, just remember that the measurement of your potential lies much more within you rather than within your teacher, your school, or even your particular style. :smile:

It has simply been my personal experience that it does little in terms of progress to train intensely in one form for over one hour at a time, or to train over 3-4 hours overall (including stretching, warmups, weight-training, drills, forms, any physical workout and/or martial arts) even at varying speeds or intensities. Sure I guess I could train for 8 hours a day, spend 3 hours reaching my physical 'peak' and then the last 5 training my 'mind' with a worn out body, but I guess that just doesn't sit well with me. I would much rather spend those 5 hours doing something else I enjoy like either play the piano or eat ice cream. Like I've said, martial arts isn't my whole life. Maybe it's yours. If that is the case then I understand why someone would do this. The idea is to challenge and push your body and mind enough so that it goes just past its limits a bit each time so that eventually you will have built your tolerance and skill up to a higher set point. And of course the intent is to keep raising it since it is a never-ending journey. However, raising and surpassing your limit does not necessarily mean surpassing your previous amount of training time or going until you feel like dying, hence the cheesy term 'quality over quantity'. Contrary to what some people may think, it is not always (in fact it is often not good) beneficial to 'train until failure'. Bruce Lee believed in this and he even went to the extremes to say that a workout was useless unless you put your whole heart into it and exhausted yourself. Not entirely true IMHO He was a great, competent, and skilled man of his time, with an amount of drive, charisma, and committment that would be admired by anyone of any generation or any era. However, the accuracy and practicality of his training theories were still based upon when he was alive (i.e. 40 years ago or so?) and had nothing to do with the impressiveness and high quality of his spirit. Another 40 years from now we will find that we were totally wrong about a training theory which everyone today finds acceptable, helpful, or accurate. Such is the case of that damn modern science

Keeping an open mind is not just vital for martial arts, it is vital in every single part of your life. Those who do not adapt and are not able or willing to mold to new surfaces when needed often experience great hardship, frustration, sadness, all that negative crap LOL.

What matters most is the quality of the instructor. Actually, it's funny that you mention it because I always feel that the more run-down a school, the less chance it is of being a commercialized McDojo type place. A lot of the best boxers trained underground in dim lighting, punching and blasting away at a worn-out heavy bag. These are not high-tech facilities we are talking about here LOL. Then again, that doesn't mean that you should go around looking for schools that would make the middle ages seem sanitary. There is something to be said for a clean looking training area and a professional staff. Just two ways to look at the situation. Once again, the instructor is who you should focus on. Try to make an intelligent decision based upon his/her credibility as a teacher. Would you enjoy learning from this person, does he/she seem like a guy/gal who could or would really motivate you, do they seem down-to-earth or seem to have a way with identifying with beginners or other students/learners, do they seem like they are serious practitioners and refiners of their craft, and also, of course, whether or not their craft best suits your primary purposes for taking a martial art. :smile:

Ask Leigh or Tom :smile: