ps1

In a life and death situation, violence of action is what will save you. The lethality of my techniques would not cross my mind. I would simply take actions necessary to defend myself. When the threat is neutralized, I would stop. I'll point out that this is a very different scenario than the "drunk guy at a frat party" that alot of people deal with. Certainly it's a potentially dangerous situation, but I would be much more careful how I handle a situation like this. I wouldn't be gouging eyes or crushing throats. I would choke him to sleep though:) As I've said before though, if it becomes a situation where more than one person is coming at me, all bets are off. It's difficult enough to defend against two people (and a bit of luck helps) let alone trying to be nice while doing it.

Opposite shoulder! No wonder I was always falling over! Yup, that'll do it! Good luck.

I'm currently working on a couple of things. No specific techniques, more like refining of certain elements of techniques I already know. 1. Escaping side control more quickly 2. Taking the back more smoothly 3. Submission finishing (I get to alot of a submission positions, but have trouble finishing sometimes) Those are the three I'm concentrating on right now.

I just checked my book and it agrees with you. Thanks for your tips Anytime! Good luck and keep training hard. You'll get it down in no time.

Welcome to the forums! Good to have ya!

Thanks. I do what I can.

I have studied kenjutsu (not kendo!). It was part of a sogo bujitsu program I was sent to. However, we did not study ninjitsu.

Clearly, if we are trained well, our reaction time is going to be pretty good. Still, however, reaction is never faster than action. I am a huge proponent of the pre-emptive strike. Perhaps it's the military in me, maybe I'm just more violent than some, I don't know. Here's what we are taught about the reaction loop(it can actually go much deeper and is explained well in the book Leadership and Training for the Fight by MSG Paul R. Howe USA Retired). To react to any scenario you must do 4 things: 1. Observe the initial action 2. Orient yourself to the situation 3. Decide on your course of action 4. Act This is infinitely more slow than any initial action. Period. If you are in a situation you deem as threatening, attack. That attack can be verbal or physical, whichever you deem appropriate. Let's say you're in a dark parking lot and you notice someone approaching you. You can't tell who it is. There's nothing wrong with firmly telling them to stop where they are, before they're close enough to touch you. If their intentions are sincere, they'll probably communicate this in some way. If they are not, this will become clear quickly as well. If they keep moving toward you, consider it a threat and tell them you will attack. Don't wait for them to get to you. (This is all assuming you could not get away for some reason.) That's a pre-emptive strike, it's a mental/verbal strike, but it's going to let a would be attacker know you are not a push-over. Many will displace the crime and move on to someone easier. How about another scenario. You're already, for some reason, engaged in a scuffle with a person. You notice a person (assume it's not a friend of yours and not an authority figure) coming toward your position rather quickly. What do you do? This is a tough one! If I know I'm alone, I take the guy out. Otherwise, maybe I see if a friend holds him back. I will assume he's coming to the aid of the guy I'm already fighting with. This is easily defendable in court as a 2 on 1 situation can be considered lethal force. Others may not make that decision. Maybe the guy was going to break it up, I'm not going to wait until I'm in a hospital bed to find out what he was doing. MSG Howe actually applies Boyd's Theory to military and police tactical combat situations as a continuous loop that occurs in combat. I'm applying it to one moment in time, but both applications are correct. This reactionary loop is actually called "Boyd's Theory." I'll make this last point that, imo, because of how I understand the reaction loop and apply it. I haven't been caught in any of those types of scenarios above. I avoid the "danger zones" and have managed to avoid that conflict. But, I have not doubt about my actions should the situation arise. I keep a layered offense and train it every day.

If it's something you feel compelled to do (learn another art) I feel the instructors should be well informed of your decision. However, permission is not necessary. It should be more of an open discussion about your development as a martial artist. If your current instructor can't handle the fact that someone might know something he/she does not, they may not be a good instructor anyway. I think, in America anyway, many instructors just expect you to eventually learn other things from other people. However, the open discussion allow for you both to set some basic ground rules of what's expected. For example: "When your at my dojo, I expect you to practice your roundhouse this way, not they way they teach you over there." or "Please do not promote the other school in this school, Don't show grappling techniques in my karate school" ect... The ground rules will help keep everything on an even keel and ensure no feelings are hurt or toes get stepped on.

Menjo, No offense taken. You're clearly more well read on the subject. I got my information about the Samurai blades breaking on the leather armor from a history channel special on the subject. It would not be the first time one of their documentaries was flawed. They specifically spoke of two instances that the Mongols attempted an invasion. In the second, the storm (which you mentioned) decimated their fleet and they were forced back. In the first, the Samauri barely won, but victory is victory none the less. The video is entitled Warrior Tradition and is "AAE-40260" if you would like to check it out:) Thanks for the corrections. For the record though, I didn't assert that the mongolians used a sword as a primary mode of combat during the invasions. I really didn't write anything about them or their tactics, other than the Samauri swords were breaking on the armor. Which would apparently be incorrect. Thanks again for the correction on the subject.

Happy belated birthday!!! It's also my mother-in-law's birthday. She's a wee bit older than six though:)

Great post. Thanks for the insight.

If it's being done correctly, the momentum of the opponent should carry you over. You can also come out to side control on this technique. In general, it's difficult to pull off because most people are going to back off when they feel you pushing them up. Which takes us to the next area. PS Practice back rolls without a person in order to get better. There really isn't any more to it than putting your head to one side and rolling over the opposite shoulder. If your feet are already in the hips, the back sweep isn't a good option. You should transition to a hook sweep or sickle sweep. The back sweep should be done with your thighs (hamstrings) on the hips or quads of the opponent. As the opponent falls back, make sure to reach and grab their lapel (arm or neck if no gi) so their momentum helps pull you to mount. As long as you remain hip to hip, they cant lock their legs around you. That's not a good way for them to defend anyway (you can turn and kneebar). good hook sweep video I would also point out that a great combo as you try to slip in the hook is to reach the hooking leg up for the triangle, as the opponent makes posture to defend you can usually get the hook very easily. I couldn't find any video of the sickle sweep. It's described well in the book Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu: Theory and Technique by Royler and Renzo Gracie. It's a very basic book and I highly suggest it to any BJJ student. It also has the double ankle (back) sweep, and front sweep.

In this case, I will have to vote for the knight. Reason being the katana was not perfected until after the Mongol invasions. In fact, the Mongol invasions were one of the reasons they switched to the curved blade. The blades they utilized prior were more straight and broke on the armor of the Mongols during the first invasion (the second invasion didn't really get that far). I think this sword would break against a broad sword. Now if we move it forward a hundred years, after the katana was perfected. I think we would have a better fight. Maybe I'm biased, I probably am, but I give this fight to the samauri. The sword was far better and I think the samauri pulls out the win. All other things are going to be relatively equal. They were both professional warriors. They devoted their lives to the art of ending the life of the enemy. They were both deeply spiritual in their own ways. They were both prepared to die and totally unafraid of it. Overall education would have been similar. In fact, I have changed my mind. The fight ends very quickly. Both make their attack, they both counter and both suffer life ending wounds. I think they slay each other virtually simultaneously.

We were always taught that there are 3 purposes for kiai. 1. Startle the opponent. 2. Add some power to the strike. 3. Control your breathing. As far as startling the opponent, I liken this to drawing attention to the situation at hand. It's kind of like yelling "fire." Get the attention of everyone around you. A would be attacker would rather move on to an easier target. This is called crime displacement. Muscles work more efficently when you're breathing out. That means you can move faster, thus adding more power to the strike. Remember when you were a kid and fell out of a tree? I do. I also remember the feeling that I may never be able to breathe again when it happened. The kiai allows you to control the amount of air that leaves your lungs when you get hit. This allows you to keep fighting even after being hit hard. That's what we always learned anyway.

Ok. Thanks for the info.

Very informative. Thanks!

It takes time to get the stuff down well. Ju jitsu is very technical, hence the complicated feel. However, once you create the proper habits, by training consistently, it begins to feel much more natural. Good luck with the training.

Is there any soreness to go along with the tightness? Also, did the tightness seem to start around the same time as the work on the deck?

Bushido, It was my understanding that the long sword was more of a perry and thrust type of sword. That is, it wasn't great at slicing, rather thrusts were the attack of choice. Since you seem to have a firm grasp on the subject, is that a valid statement?

I'm working on getting the compression software. I didn't think about splitting it up! I'll get it.

According to the Random House Japanese-English/ English-Japanese Dictionary the word Shuto translates to "capital city." I looked up "knife" which is kogatana, and "sword" is Ken or katana. One of my instructors, who lived and trained as a deshi with the Yagu Ryu for several years, told me that much of the terminology used in our training is old and out of use with the general population. For example, most dojo still count "ichi, ni, san, shi." However, because "shi" also means "death," yon is used. As in "yondan" or fourth level.

Oh ok. I see what you mean.

Happy Mom's day!!

Those are very interesting to watch. They are extremely different than what I'm used to. Most of our "set" kumite techniques are only one, two, or three steps long. Very cool.