ThorLoser

While it is a distinct possibility that an individual may learn more techniques or become more confident in another system, it should be pointed out that Cho-Dan level in Tae Kwon Do does not in any way infer that a person can defend themselves in every situation. What it represents is that they have achieved a specific level of competence in performing approximately 75% to 85% of the basic blocks, kicks, punches and self defense techniques in the system, as well as having demonstrated adherance to the tenets of TKD. In TKD, the fun doesn't really start until after your 1st degree Black Belt. If a 1st degree Black Belt can defend themselves in all situations, why would there be need for higher levels? After achieving Cho-Dan rank is when the individual begins learning more complex basic maneuvers, some advance maneuvers and how to apply those techniques in a wider variety of actual real life circumstances. Some systems and schools of course have different standards for ranking, but Lauri S. is discussing promotion in TKD and not promotion in one of those systems. The reason for training in martial arts is to increase an individuals retinue of techniques, familiarity with combat situations and experiences in order to increase their probability of survival beyond what their probability of survival was previous to engaging in the training process. The purpose of ranking is to honor and identify the individual for reaching a specific competency level in a set of skills. It is undeniable that even in the 'perfect' system, when two practitioners of that system spar one another, someone will lose. Losing is obviously not the goal of training, so can it fairly be said that the loser needs a new system? I doubt this. It is inevitable that when entering into combat, there will be a loser. I know of no system which grants it's students a certificate of guarantee that they will prevail in all encounters; I know only of systems that certify that an individual can accurately reproduce the techniques taught by that system. It appears that you are confident in your system and your ability to achieve the outcome of victory if confronted with many possible confrontations, I applaud your ferocious spirit, fierce determination and the obvious will to dominate those who would do harm to you. You have ego and a fighting spirit which will serve you well, this is the heart of a warrior. Lauri S., on the other hand, is not completely confident in her ability to effectively use her techniques to achieve the outcome of victory in all instances, I applaud her grasp of the futile nature of combat, humility and realization that any conflict could be her last. She will face every encounter with the knowledge that she is fighting for her very life, this is true courage. Both of these attitudes are prevalent in martial arts. What must be accepted is that individuals engage in combat while systems, styles, schools and attitudes do not. Niether her humility not your fierce aspect are enough to ensure victory in combat, but harnessed properly, they can each lend strength to both of your techniques, thereby increasing both of your chances for survival and thereby fulfilling the purpose of training in the first place.

I had a very similar feeling that almost ended my martial arts career about a quarter of a century ago (yeah, I feel old ). The major difference is that I had my doubts after achieving my black belt, not before. As I stood there having my first picture taken after wrapping it around my waist, I felt empty and uncertain rather than feeling that I had achieved anything. I was the same person before the test and ceremony as I was afterwards. I didn't feel worthy of the honor I had always bestowed on others who had achieved such a rank. Who was I anyway? Some pretender parading around in a belt that I wasn't sure I was worthy of. I looked into the eyes of the children in the class and felt like an imposter and a disgrace to the art. I felt that I should have had the courage and character to refuse the promotion and end the charade, but my ego was too strong and my will was too weak. My internal conflict brough tears to my eyes. For months afterwards I struggled with my demons, should I quit in shame or continue to feed my ego? Years later, while I was being awarded with a world championship in Germany, I had an uncanny flashback. This time though, I realized I had conquered my greatest foe. Had I let my fears of inadequacy defeat me, I would have lived the rest of my life with the firm belief that I was a failure and a fraud. The very fact that you question your own abilities displays humility and the knowledge that someone loses in every conflict. You have accepted that you may very well be defeated. Without ever witnessing your technique, I can safely say that in your mind you are already worthy of Cho Dan. I feel comfortable in making the claiming that every Black Belt would be proud to count you among our numbers. All that's left to do now is to go take the test so you can display the rank you already appear to be worthy of.

In some traditions, systems and schools, the open hand wrapping the closed fist represents the sword and the fist, in others it represents a restrained fist and it can represent harmony with the universe (among others). That you have indicated that only the instructor uses this particular hand movement leads me to believe he may be saying "pleased to teach you" and that your bow implies "pleased to learn from you". In my experience, instructors are generally happy to tell you why they bow as they do (as it can become a very personal thing after decades of doing it).

Battlefields throughoughout history are littered with the bodies of those who did not, in practice, effectively defend themselves. In these battles, even the victorious side inevitably suffers losses. For what purpose did the fallen engage in combat? Herein lies the true goal of the martial aspects of the martial arts. They are designed to 'increase' an individuals chances of effective self defense, however, no system can 'guarantee' it. If two practitioners of a system that 'did' guaranteed success in combat sparred against each other, one individual would be victorious and one wouldn't. This does not render the study of a system an excercise in futility. Similarly, it does not render the system impractical, what it does is demonstrate the reason for the prevalence of attempting to instill humility in the practitioners of most systems. One would be well served to practice and execute every technique with the knowledge and expectation that every maneuver you execute may be your last, not that it may be your opponents last. This will lend your techniques a fierce aspect born out of your inherant understanding that while combat itself may be futile, life is not, and therefore you will struggle to maintain yours with every fiber of your being. When a practitioner achieves this state, and even if he fails to effectively defend himself, it shouldn't be required to ask him why he defended himself, he should be honored for displaying courage at having acted to preserve his life while at the same time accepting that his life was lost.

This is a three part question. 1) Does the book accurately convey the subtelties of attending personal instruction? 2) Can the reader of the book accurately interpret the subtleties provided in the book? 3) When comparing the proper techniques of one individual who trained from books to another individual who trained from personal instruction, which individual most accurately depicts the techniques? The answer is that it depends entirely upon how effectively the information is conveyed, how effectively it was interpreted by the individual and finally how accurately the individual can then depict those techniques. it is possible to compare one individuals techniques to another individuals techniques and have the superior depiction of those techniques be performed by the individual who read the book. However, I posit that anyone who could learn effectively from books would learn even more effectively through personal instruction. Any study at all is superior to no study; a good student will learn from anything, a poor student will learn from nothing.

A great deal of emphasis is often given to the techniques present in the system rather than to the techniques that can effectively be employed by one individual when confronted with another individual. Styles can't compete with one another, but practitioners can (and do). Someone may learn to employ effective techniques to attack and defend against techniques that are employed and used by individuals in their own school and system rather early in the course of their martial arts career when compared to using effective techniques against untrained individuals or compared to well trained individuals from completely foriegn systems with completely foriegn techniques. When faced with an opponent who can employ effective techniques from a wide variety of systems, it becomes increasingly difficult to effectively employ techniques against that individual especially if they are also trained to use the same system and style of techniques you have been taught to use. Your opponent can now trick you into seeing flaws in his attack or defense which are not really there. If you take the bait, you may very well be walking into a technique designed specifically to defeat those who have a more limited retinue of effective techniques. For an individual to use a technique effectively in the widest set of possible scenarios, that technique should be practiced when faced with a wide variety of scenarios so that the practitioner can gain insight as to when, where and against whom a given technique should or shouldn't be employed. Add to the practical application of these techniques the elements of situation, awareness, ability to improvise, environment and luck then it can rarely be truthfully stated that one practitioner is superior to another in every situation, much less that one system is. The prevailing individual is generally the one who can maximize his strengths and options while minimizing the strengths and options of his opponent. For this reason, knowing your opponent is of very great importance. Similarly, ensuring that your opponent knows little about you is also very valuable. In short, it's not your 'art' that is effective or not, it is 'your' art that is effective or not.