Ottman

The most difficult part is being able to actually complete the spin, whether you're kicking or not. Try just the spinning and landing part without kicking until you get it down. Then worry about adding the kick. Also, a few more tips: Remember to delay going airborne until the first 180 is complete. Do not try to jump high, instead try to clear as much distance as possible while in the air (just like trying to dunk a basketball, you don't try to jump up to the hoop, you try to soar towards the hoop. Same concept here.)

This is a good tactic for teaching beginners, but I would be wary of creating a bad habit with a pre-pivot. If they continue to pre-pivot and it turns into a habit, this is a major telegraph. Instead of pre-pivots, I have my students chamber for the kick, first without pivoting the grounded foot, and then with a pivot, so that they can feel the difference in their hips. Then I have them just practice the chamber (the proper chamber with the pivot) without kicking, so they can get used to pivoting and picking their leg up in one motion. I do the same for side kick, and I have them practce the same at home, telling them to do 5 chambers only before practicing full kicks. After a week or two of this, most students develop pretty darn good kicking mechanics (or at least a good understanding of what needs to happen to throw a proper kick, even if the physical execution needs some more practice to get down, which is understandable.)

I've never trained with a 35 degree off center target particularly, but good snap and or following through the target will get you some pretty formidable power if you practice enough. Of course if you're sparring someone skilled, there is rarely a target directly in front of you for long enough to hit it, so it's good to be able to hit targets in a wide variety of positions.

Yeah this happens to me sometimes too. Easier said than done I guess.

Not just women, everyone who participates in high intensity exercise should do them. Specifically medium weight, high repetition, low impact (i.e. execute each rep slowly, maximizing the amount of time the muscle is engaged) workouts, with lots of stretching mixed in. This will not only strengthen the muscles supporting the joint, but will also increase the maximum extension and elasticity of the tendons, making them less susceptible to injury from rapid motion, and especially from rapid direction change.

no problem, I hope it serves you and your students well, and thanks for all the praise.

I went with the never strike first philosophy, as I believe that you can avoid violent situations altogether if you try hard enough. I think that not fighting is actually a lot harder than fighting, as it has taken me many years of training to tame the feral beast within that just wants to lash out at even the mere hint of physical threat. Sure striking first is the most effective way to deal with a physical threat (or a percieved physical threat), but in this case, I believe the philosophy should be to stay away from violent situations, or try to diffuse them before they start. Of course, if someone is approaching you in a menacing way, I wouldn't consider it a 'first strike' if you whacked them if they didn't stop their advance before getting into your range, but I guess their advance would be considered the assaulting movement in that case.

Yeah, I find myself giving this advice quite often. In my experience (and I used to do this too, in fact I probably still do from time to time) students can get so focused on the end all result of a technique, that sometimes it seems that they forget they even have other parts of their body, which have to move in certain ways to allow the technique to be executed. I find that simply saying something like: "what's your grounded foot doing?" breaks that tunnel vision on what their kicking foot is doing, and all of a sudden they have a realization that they must kick with their whole body and not just one leg. It's worked out really well in my teaching. When I first started teaching, I used to try to get students to look at my technique and emulate it. I quickly found that this isn't very effective. Now I really break the technique down, and when I see a student get ultra focused on one part of a technique, I'll try to shift that focus to an area they haven't been paying much attention to, and again, the results from this strategy have been great.

That sounds exactly like my TKD classes, to the T, but with not as much self-defense, and more one-steps. My TKD classes are similar as well, especially when it comes to being very picky with proper technique. The difference is that we focus on only one or two aspects of our training in each class (be it forms, basics, sparring, kicking, self defense, etc.) The schedule rotates so that each class will work on a different aspect every week. I think it's just the way the scheduling goes. We sign our students up to come on the same day(s) every week so each week we can give our full attention to whatever is scheduled. I've heard a lot about how TSD is more traditional and TKD is just for sports, etc. but I've competed and trained with TSD guys, and I can't find much of a difference at all. It seems to follow the same logic as any other MA: different instructor = different teaching style.

One thing I see with a lot of my students is improper position of the grounded foot. Specifically, they aren't rotating the foot that stays on the ground 180 degrees so that it is pointing directly away from the target. This usually means that they aren't rotating the hip enough, but in any case, I'll give you the same advice I give them: Worry more about the position the rest of your body is in, and less about what your kicking foot and leg are doing. If the remainder of the body isn't positioned correctly, the motion and position of the kicking leg probably isn't correct either.

I can understand your point from a logical position, but I have to disagree. The protectors impede my mobility, my kicking speed and height, and subsequently, my power. I literally can't hit as hard or as fast when I'm wearing the pads, so it doesn't help my technique at all. It stops me from training the same way I'd fight out on the street, so instead it's just frusterating, and in my opinion, it's holding me back from really going to town. It isn't like wearing a weight vest or ankle weights that can actually make me stronger. When I train with ankle weights, I still use the same extension and form in my kicks, so when I take them off my kicks are faster and stronger. With the pads on, I have to change the way I kick in order to move 'around' the pads and it isn't like they're providing any significant resistance training for me, so when I take them off, I revert to the proper technique, but since I couldn't use that proper technique while sparring, I haven't really improved much.

I've been sparring with no pads at all lately, and I have to say that despite all the bruises, I like it so much more than wearing pads. I put the pads on and it feels like I'm wearing a straight jacket. I end up getting hit more often because of the restricted movement I have to deal with. Sparring with no pads is like escaping from prison. It feels so much more free.

Same thing here. Any kick above chest height is very difficult while I've got the chest protector on. If I want to go for the head, I'll have to lean back a bit so my hips can clear the bottom of it. It's horrible. Feels like I'm telegraphing everything.

I hate my chest protector. It's huge, it has hip pads!! They hang off the bottom of the chest gear near the hips protecting . . . well I'm not even sure what they're protecting. I didn't realize they made better cut versions until recently, so I think I'm getting a child's sized one; more like a band of padding around my solar plexus. That's all I really need.

Absolutely. It also makes it hard to teach practical self defense technique. You always have to be making disclaimers like: "I know this works in sparring, but out on the street, I'd actually do. . ."

Sure this is a problem, but unfortunately, in order for instructors to continue to instruct in today's world, they have to make money, and this usually comes in the form of taking on more students. We can't expect ever student to be as committed, hard working, or interested in martial arts training as the next. I think that the instructor's job is to create an atmosphere of discipline in their school, and those who really want such discipline will excel in class. Other students who might not try as hard, or have the ability or motivation to do as well, still gain from martial arts training. Although they may not make it to black belt, or may not be national champion competitors, I can't remember any instructor ever guarunteeing that this type of thing will happen. All an instructor can do is provide guidance for their students' to become the best people they can be both inside and outisde the school. Whether this comes in the form of being an excellent martial artist from an athletic standpoint, or just a more mentally disciplined person, with more self confidence and self control than before makes no difference. You'd think that these two things go hand in hand, but this isn't always the case, and perhaps the student's goal isn't to do the most crisp forms, highest kicks, or win all of his/her sparring matches. Maybe they just want a fun activity to get some exercise and improve their overall wellness, and therefore, their advancement up the ranks should have little to do with how technically perfect their technique is, and more about their progression as a person. Perfection is for competition, not grading. I'm not saying that students shouldn't work hard and try their best, but when it comes to kids just screwing around: in my experience, they will eventually become more disciplined, or quit. When and if they do become more disciplined, they will be able to advance to higher ranks, and into the adult classes based on this new attitude, and their progression further into discipline. It may not have to be dependent on their physical and technical ability, but rather their overall progression in attitude and behavior. At any age, your own physical conditioning is up to you, not your instructor. If you can do all of your forms correctly, but maybe not with the same fluidity, power, grace, etc. as someone of comperable rank, should you be penalized for your lack of physical ability, even though you have worked hard and shown improvement? I don't think so, nor do I think that black belts should go only to those that have the highest kicks, best power, and most technical ability. Even though a student may not perform up to the standards of an instructor that has been training for years and years, many students who start MA training didn't have the confidence to even try some of the things they become able to do even after a few months of MA training, and this is what should be considered more heavily than actual physical ability. Again, those who excel in improving themselves can become great martial artists just like those with natural physical ability and total committment to technical and athletic training, but great martial artists aren't too concerned with rank, either their's or the ranks' of others. They are more concerned with attitude and self confidenc. Any good MA school should be a family of people supporting and helping one another to improve regardless of rank, age, sex, race, physical ability, time available to commit to training, etc. We all progress at different speeds and to different levels, but belt ranks should reflect the student's individual progression, not relative to the abilities, or progression of anyone else. Sorry to be so long winded, but I've heard this problem come up in many posts, and I feel that a lot of people are just comparing themselves to whoever is standing next to them, and not focusing on actually improving to the best of their ability. If you get jealous because there is a student who has been promoted and you think you're better than him, or should be a higher rank than him, or just that he didn't deserve the promotion, then you aren't focusing on the right things. Focus on yourself and let your instructor worry about the other students. If you are an instructor, and are disappointed in your students' performance, first evaluate how much that student has progressed. If he hasn't shown improvement from his last test, then don't let him test until he does, if he has shown improvement and hard work, but maybe doesn't do as well as other students for whatever reason, you shouldn't penalize him by holding him back from testing, but just do what you do with your other students: teach him to the best of your ability, and the rest is up to him, but I wouldn't hold a student to standards that are clearly beyond their means.

Officially my school is WTF, but we don't advertise that. We do both continuous point and olympic sparring, and we even have some hapkido incorporated into our classes. We also teach a few ITF forms as well. The emphasis is definitely NOT in sport sparring, and from what I've heard, this is the emphasis at most WTF schools.

Bushidoman is exactly right. Olympic style tournaments do not allow hand strikes to the head at all, and while you can score with a punch to the body, it is exceptionally hard to convince a majority of the judges that you have struck your opponent with the shocking force required to score a point. Blocking is frowned upon in olympic sparring. It is taught that you should avoid contact and counter instead. Within the rules of olympic sparring, there isn't much of a reason to keep your hands up. Hands down gives you better balance and power on your kicks, and having just competed in the USSSA nationals, I kept my hands up for my entire match, and was still defeated by my opponents superior kicking speed. I had some good shots, and some good body punches, but none of them scored. Head kicks also score two points as opposed to just one for body kicks and punches, so the best strategy is to work the high kicks. Not my prefered set of sparring rules, but I don't make them, so I can only accept them.

The Olympic style I know is continuous, but I think the point fighting is a stop point. Have to check though, I'll ask my instructor tonight. Thanks!

Are they doing continuous point or stop point in the aau these days?

I definitely see your point sycron. In my previous post I said that belts were more for instructor's organization than for students, but after my instructor recieved a number of complaints about it taking too long to get through the middle belts (green and blue in my school) she added a bunch more belts because some students (who were otherwise good martial artists) were getting frustrated and quitting. Sounds crazy, but when a dojang is also someone's livlyhood, it really becomes the students who set most of the policies. No students = no income, so you have to adjust to what the students want as unfortunate as that may sound to those who are serious about martial arts for the training rather than the belts. When I went through the colored belts there were 11 belt ranks before Bodan and we tested every 4 to six months or so. Now there are 20 ranks before bodan and we test every 8 weeks. This gives the students the feeling of progressing and keeps them motivated and coming back to train. I was a blue belt for instance for almost an entire year, and although I had no intentions of ever quitting, it did get a little frustrating to me (especially because I was only fourteen at the time.) It is obviously much easier to stay focused on a goal that only takes 8 weeks to complete rather than half a year to a year, so our retention rate of students has skyrocketed, even though we still teach the same cirriculum. Strangley enough, the extra belts fit perfectly into our organizational structure for teaching, so it made not only the students more motivated, but the instructors more organized.

My TKD school calls the kids program 'Kickin' Kids', so you understand that we are a Martial Arts school. Even though TKD is the art we teach, we also have BJJ classes, and we used to have Aikido, and we also incorporate Hapkido into our self defense program. For 3rd degree Black Belt testing in TKD, we're required to learn some martial art outside of TKD, be it a weapon or a different style, and present what we've learned to the school at our test. All of this encouragement in cross training prompted my master to change the name of the school from 'TKD Academy' to 'Martial Arts Academy'. Why don't all of the schools that you see with 'Karate' signs, just change it to 'Martial Arts'? Who knows? But I think that if you're a beginner and don't have the vast knowledge of martial arts and their histories as the members of this forum have, does it matter? The students are trying to find an activity to better themselves, and the schools are providing one, so as long as the instruction is of good quality what's the problem? As most of us here have come to realize through our martial arts experience, we all end up with our own individual style in the end anyway.

Ditto on trusting your instructor. Especially because the belt ranks are more for the instructor's organizational aid than than as a measure of the student's skill as compared to other schools and styles. As ps1 mentioned: "the belts are meaningless", which I almost totally agree with. Again, you shouldn't look at your belt in context of the belt systems of other schools or styles. Since instructors have multiple (usually many) students, the belt ranks help them to more easily determine what the student has been taught, and what he has become proficient in so less time is wasted during class trying to figure what needs to be taught to which student. Each instructor has their own system for teaching, and for what should be learned at each rank, so natuarally you can't say that a yellow belt from one school is the same as a yellow belt from every other school. My school not only employs belts, but also tags to go on the belt to better help us determine how far that student has progressed at each belt rank, and what they have left to learn for their next test. This way, every instructor at the school knows what each student is working on just by looking at their belt. Sure the students get pride and motivation from acheiving ranks, but this is not the main point of the belt system. Again it is more primarily used as an organizational tool for instructors.

Yeah I've heard that about Seagal as well. Not to be an apologist, but after being such a revered 'round eye' in Japan, and then becoming an international movie superstar, I guess I can understand him becoming arrogant and stuck up, while at the same time I don't condone such behavior regardless of who you are. It's just unfortunate. When Seagal writes and produces his own movies, (like he did with above the law, and into the sun, and a few others) they're usually really good. I wonder what movies he's written that haven't gotten made (if any) because of his attitude? And concerning Van Damme, I'll give you the original Universal Soldier movie. That one was good, but I attribute it to Dolph Lundgren. That guy is gold in everything. Did you ever see the original 'Punisher' movie he made? Much better than the junk they made recently with Travolta.

I think we're starting to get into what it really takes to be a black belt in the last couple pages of this thread. IMHO, you can take things like age, amount of training (whether it is a lot or a little), athletic ability, etc. and throw them out the window. As long as you know the basics, which from a technical standpoint, don't have to take very long to learn, it's then all about maturity and attitude. You can be the most skilled and most athletic person, with years and years of training under your belt (whichever belt that may be), but still not have the attitude and spirit it takes to be a black belt. Conversely, there are many people who have this attitude and spirit regardless of whether they even train in MA or not. These types of people need only take the time to learn the basic physical skills of the art, and they are ready for a BB. This could potentially take weeks if you are a fast learner, and already have a good athletic base, with lots of body intelligence. So why are we so concerned with time here? Time is man made, and it shouldn't concern us in the least when determining who is a good MAist and who isn't.