MASIsshinryu

I always keep my trusty white belt in the same bag as the black one. I think of it as a reminder of how it was to be a beginning student and what it has taken to get where I am. I also wear it if I work out at another dojo (like when I travel) , regardless of style or affiliation. I don't even ask about wearing another belt, I just throw on the white and get into line with them. Interesting what you see, hear and experience doing this. Yes, I do talk with the sensei beforehand.

It really varies from Sensei to Sensei. In some dojo the step from Kyu to Dan is marked by a significant increase in the complexity of the test, in others it is simply the addition of a few pieces of new required techniques and concepts. Your Sensei is the best source of information, or others who have made the Kyu to Dan transition under the same instructor. In one dojo I attended, this step was marked by almost doubling the time the test took, and the addition of extensive fighting endurance aspects which were not present in those forms in any lower rank tests. Good luck!

We practice those as well, usually in conjunction with having attacked to disable the opponent's knees/legs, and specifically with the intent to strike the spine, base of the neck, shoulder or (if you have collapsed the legs and unbalanced them backwards) the face, throat or (on rare occasions) solar plexus. My apologies, I interpreted your comment as meaning that you did not believe that strikers use any significant amout of elbows at all.

Free-standing: I ended up making a wooden frame, like a 2" tall square around the base with two "arms" extended behind the bag, which braces it against the side wall of my garage. That and a foam-type "welcome mat" under it seem to allow it a normal rocking motion, but not to get away from me. It does fall over fairly often, but the base stays in the right area... If given my preference, I would get the hanging MA type, but I need something that can be moved out of the way frequently and quickly.

In both cases, the bite was used as the arm came across the front of the intended victim. In both cases, flesh was torn (in one case away) by the bites. In one of the two, the attacker did attemt to persist at first, but ceased when the victim drove her keys into the open wound, and began to peel back the open wound. Stating that elbows are "NOT a strikers weapon" suggest that you have not spent time in a good striking program. We have elbow strikes in almost EVERY kata in Isshinryu (just one example style), when bunkai is examined properly, and have spent a good deal of time working them in the dojo. Obviously, placing such rules is essential for the safety of the competitors, and they limit pretty much any effective style of fighting, in some way. I enjoy watching UFC-type events for the pure sport of it, and take it for simply for that.

The original rules were: No eye gouging, no biting and no fish-hooking the mouth. I can understand these from fighter safety (and sanitary) reasons, however even these simple rules made the UFC already separated from realistic street fighting. I know of a couple of people who have broken attempts on the street to choke them by shifting position and "taking a bite out of crime." Currently, the UFC has posted on the web the following set of "fouls:" 1) Butting with the head. 2) Eye gouging of any kind. 3) Biting. 4) Hair pulling. 5) Fish hooking. 6) Groin attacks of any kind. 7) Putting a finger into any orifice or into any cut or laceration on an opponent. 8 ) Small joint manipulation. 9) Striking to the spine or the back of the head. 10) Striking downward using the point of the elbow. 11) Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea. 12) Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh. 13) Grabbing the clavicle. 14) Kicking the head of a grounded opponent. 15) Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent. 16) Stomping a grounded opponent. 17) Kicking to the kidney with the heel. 18 ) Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck. 19) Throwing an opponent out of the ring or fenced area. 20) Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent. 21) Spitting at an opponent. 22) Engaging in an unsportsmanlike conduct that causes an injury to an opponent. 23) Holding the ropes or the fence. 24) Using abusive language in the ring or fenced area. 25) Attacking an opponent on or during the break. 26) Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee. 27) Attacking an opponent after the bell has sounded the end of the period of unarmed combat. 28 ) Flagrantly disregarding the instructions of the referee. 29) Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury. 30) Interference by the corner. 31) Throwing in the towel during competition. Although the more technical fouls obviously have a place in competition, there are quite a few that clearly are designed to impede certain styles of fighting from being effective.

My stance on this is the same as free sparring. If used only as a tool, then it is acceptable. If it becomes a goal, then it is not. Exactly. My first instructor was very into tournaments. At the second one I went to, also the last one I went to, I observed one of the Black Belts performing a series of kicking techniques which I thought left him very vulnerable. When I asked him later why he felt comfortable doing this, his response was "because he (the opponent) is not permitted to sweep my base leg, or kick to the groin." Clearly, he had based his strategic doctrine on the rules of (tournament) engagement.

Also, forget what the movies show you... Multiple opponents will almost never politely wait in line to move against you; they will come at you at one time (with variations based on their individual level of aggression and reflexes). Some suggest, if you feel the level of the threat justifies this, disabling the first oppenent in a fairly brutal manner, in an effort to give the remaining aggressors something to think about. Try to avoid taking significant amounts of extra time, as your time allows for the all-important movement that gives you some degree of control over the conflict. Disclaimer: This is not the best consideration from a liability point of view, but if you feel your life depends on it, you might take it into consideration.

My practice, as well. Unless well practiced at it, looking at the extremes (Head or Feet) will severely limit your ability to pick up movement indicators at the other end of the extreme. Now, take into account two other factors: 1) You will do, under stress, what you have done with repetition in training; and, 2) When you are facing a serious threat, your adrenaline will impact various parts of your body in certain ways. One of those is the often rapid loss of peripheral vision, the so called "Tunnel Vision" problem. If you are used to looking at the face/feet, then find yourself trying to defend yourself on the street, you will continue to look in those same areas, even though your body will not be able to see the same peripheral field that it is able to in training. Unfocus your gaze on the itten, and most movement precursors should be detectable within a narrow field of peripheral vision.

I really don't care much about the people who buy them knowing they don't mean anything. I think it casts a poor light on the Martial Arts, in general, but you will find such things in every line of human endeavor. The reason I cannot stand these offers is because they will convince some unsuspecting people that they have learned enough to defend themselves ("Wow! I earned my Black Belt!"), when they have actually probably not gained any appreciable level of skill at all. They are taking money from the ignorant, and possibly endangering their victim by filling their heads with false confidence. I feel most sorry for that gentleman/lady who ends up bleeding out in the street, because they felt they knew enough to fight off a knife-wielding dirtbag.

Yes. It probably always will happen, too. The part of humanity that does not actually study a martial art (the majority) often have no interest in learning about them, either. Most will be content to believe it is all about what is shown in the movies.

Mirrors, like all external opinions, can be skewed. Don't believe it.

Training is, to me, the imparting of knowledge and skills through direct instruction. Practice is the performance of a given skill to hone it, and drive it into motor memory. So... to me the pursuit of Karate involves both.

Another thing to remember is that many Street Fighters, although not trained in the sense we are used to, have often had some repetitious practice. If they have ever been incarcerated, they have probably at least had the chance to learn some "tricks" from fellow inmates. Correctional personnel often find inmates teaching each other tactics for fighting, resisting attempts to handcuff them, or other skill useful in "their line of work." Some of the people you might encounter have had other lives, before ending up where they currently are in life. That could have included any number of skill sets. These are not usually as much of an issue with the younger offenders on the streets, but never rule out previous training as a possibility.

How do your students react to the discovery of movement limitations, traction issues and similar changes in the performance of them?