JusticeZero

By that definition, it is less than clear that we use the hips at all, at least for attacking. That seems to speak to me of the act of lifting the leg either forward to the side, whereas we try to swing the leg like a flail or nunchaku. Moving needs the legs to be moved, but so does walking, so i'm not sure that a special meaning can be derived there. Beyond "to avoid being bedridden"at least.

Core is closest to fundamental principles, bread and butter is a staple, but may not be the most theoretically central technique. For instance, if you emphasize a slip and sweep in your forms and try to build your tactics toward slipping and using it to lead into a sweep, then that is core. If in practice you throw a lot of jabs while you are trying to get an opportunity to use one of your slips and sweeps, then the jab is "bread and butter", but might not be "core". What sort've techniques are you encountering disagreement on? Do people argue about basic punches and kicks, or is it, as I have seen so far, mostly limited to "finishing" takedowns and manipulations?

I cant really put it better than Wastelander just did. The hips do not generate movement, they are something which is moved. They are a central point around which things which move are arranged, and which is acted upon by the rest of the body. To just say "Move the hips" still leaves unanswered how to structure and what dynamics are to be used to generate the movement. Beyond a certain point the results are simply lacking.

I don't think i've had to deal with that. I think part of this is because I already disclaimer all of the things I demonstrate; after all, I can't actually ensure that they "will" work in practice, only that they are valid techniques that work as advertised given the inputs that we have as part of the exercise. I show them "This is how we WANT it to work and what we are doing to their balance and ability to move; this is how it will still be fairly useful if not everything goes according to plan, here's how if you just whiffed through the movement and missed completely, you're still in an advantageous position and here are a few nasty things you can do from there.." All my students know, either through practice or watching me do some impromptu improvisational tweaks in the middle of a drill when the attack wasn't quite as expected or because I tell them now and then, that there is no surefire 100% technique. We show techniques that can work pretty well and that leave you able to react when things get changed up on you. Could you give an example of what you do (or do not) mean by referring to these "universal techniques"? Do you mean "core", "bread and butter", "always works" or what? (All three of those have different meanings.)

I don't believe there is a specific list of deadly weapons. The court and jury has to make a judgement call on it.

Okay, well, it comes from the realization that we really aren't "using the hips". We're doing things that sink, or we're aligning the pelvis to adjust the structure of the legs and spine, or we're using the spine and wringing to sling the legs, but we aren't doing anything that is distinctly "using the hips" - because the hips are not a thing that can be used in isolation. As such, the only thing I could find was "you're not going to be able to keep your legs attached to your torso".

Good luck! Practice the hammer strike in super-slomo on a target, focusing on the body mechanics. Every time, 'see' the board where the target is, and keep moving through it. Practice that until the body dynamics are second nature. Focus on the parts where you sink or fall or move your spine, since those tend to be the important bits.

Well, yes. My concern here is just that "From the hips" is not a "moon" statement but rather a "finger" riddle. It needs to be examined and solved, not merely parroted.

This response is so late as to be meaningless, but. under such circumstance, it might be best to approach the instructor and say: "I thought I was on track for that rank, but I must have missed something; what do I need to work on to be ready for the next rank that I didn't have last time?" The statement to be made is: I accept your judgement in this matter. There is a goal, a rank, that I am working on which demonstrates that I have achieved the goals you are guiding me toward. I believed that I was prepared for this next rank to the best of my ability. Clearly, I was mistaken. However, I do not know what it is that I did not know. I want to improve. You also want me to improve. if I know what you want, I can better achieve the goal you have set for me. Please help me to know what it is that I did not demonstrate when I was tested.

I do not mean to say that the statement that the power is in the hips lacks meaning. The statement that "internal martial artists get power from their tendons, not their muscles" has meaning, too. What I am saying is that the statement, itself, needs to be unpacked much more than I commonly see. It needs to be deconstructed and picked apart to find the meaning in it. tendons do not move. if someone thinks that they are learning to move by flexing their tendons, they are wrong - but they were not told that they were MOVING with the tendons, strictly speaking; they learned that their POWER was in the tendons. There is meaning - but it is not the obvious and visible answer. The HIPS, do not move. They cannot move. The hips are one big assemblage of fused bones and joints.If the hips are "driving", then something outside of the hips are doing the driving. The statement then is a shorthand for a more complex and fundamental idea, or several such ideas. At a certain point - the level at which we find it important to communicate these concepts, for instance, which many of us are at - we need to advance our understanding of what is happening beyond merely saying "Move with the hips. *nodsnods*".

yes, I have two students right now. One has no background in martial arts, save for a tiny amount of ballet as a child; the other has a substantial amount of experience in gongfu. (I am not teaching a chinese art.) They both practice at home, and reportedly a relatively similar amount. The one with no martial arts background has progressed leaps and bounds past the gongfu stylist, with whom I am still continually trying to make quite basic form corrections. I can still work with some of the habits from the gongfu, even if they are incorrect form in many ways. If the form was simply incorrect from top to bottom, we would be even slower on this process.

If you change the traditions to make them local, you will sever the connection to the past of the art. This isn't actually important as far as your material is concerned, but it does disrupt your ability to deal with the teachers from the source region. Language differences have been mentioned, for one, and the foreign teachers are no longer being granted the appeasement/status of having the art retained in a familiar form in the host country. Furthermore, in the current, American-derived cultural norms held by most English-speaking students, there exists a sense of traditionalist xenophilia as a marker of high cultural status; sacrificing the foreign-ness of the art as a package may lessen the status of the art and make it less appealing to students.

He might be able to if "beat" includes "Gorilla leaves, having realized that this is stupid, that beating up a small hairless primate won't grant him any status with the ladies, and he has fruit waiting for him that won't eat itself". Which would prove the superior intelligence of the gorilla.

My techniques have Portuguese names; I use the portuguese names because I want students to do Mea Lua de Frente (lit. "half moon (crescent) in front") because it is not the same kick as the "front crescent" the TKD school teaches.

And unfortunately if you ever STOP competing, all that competition-born reputation will tend to evaporate quickly.

Does their "lifestyle" change their danger profile and expose them to more violence or different violence? For instance, if an instructor were an outed homosexual or muslim in an intolerant community, they likely have to worry about security and violence being directed at them much more often than most - and that might be a good reason to listen to them when it comes to learning about how to protect oneself against random violence.

Then what are you doing by "snapping and driving"? Hips are an immobile framework. If the hips are to do anything, it is because they are being acted on by the legs or torso. It's a bit like saying "The thing that makes this car move is the frame," and then nodding knowingly as if this were obvious and self-explanatory. The frame is immobile. It is the engine, drivetrain, and wheels that make it move! Blindly stating the importance of the hips as self-explanatory is a bit like the Chinese martial artists who blindly accept that they are learning how to move their arms around by flexing their tendons, which are immobile connective pieces. It is either sufficiently profound as to require more explanation of what, exactly, is being pointed out in such a generally absurd statement, or it is wrong because the statement is, strictly speaking, absurd.

Well i'm not sure. Because in a sense, we're not "using the hips". The hips are a solid framework that other things are attached to. It can't really do anything by itself. Indeed, when working on kicks, I am not focusing on getting my students to use their hips; I have much more need to teach them how to use their spine and abdomen.

Right! I don't actually care if the board is *broken* as long as it is laying down on the floor out of the way.

Yeah, you're going to get asked why..Should we also be worried about something possibly wrong, or are you just doing something normal but stressful?

Six. No Belt: Just started. Still learning the basic fundamentals. If you ask them to do (insert basic bread and butter technique here) , say reverse punch or front kick, expect to be looked at in confusion. Green Belt: Knows the basics. Typical student. Yellow Belt: Advanced student. Can be thrown around the room forcefully or have other intense things demoed on them and will deal with it gracefully. Blue belt: Instructor. Qualified to teach. White belt: Instructor.. of the class you are in. only one of these in a room at once. Brown belt: Visitor. Green or higher, but in a different style. Expect them to move wierd.

Honestly, a few years ago you were probably the same way. O:-) People arent born thinking like adults. If you use the analogy of the brain being like a computer, for kids, they just order the bare minimum and start it up, then have to wait for other parts to "arrive" with age. As the new pieces come on line, it is hard to imagine what it is like not to have them; behavior that was once completely reasonable is suddenly "What the... what are you DOING?!?" At this point it is probably time to move up to the new class.

Capoeira is one style; this is most frustrating to see in students of the art. It also isnt completely false at the upper levels since the art has an open source aspect to it. But from a teacher you will be learning a very specific structure and strategic layout. Your teacher by and large will look like their teacher and so on. You cant fight with that.. we were banned because we were a bunch of thugs, and Bimba re-popularized us in part by kicking the snot out of people in the NHB matches of the day.

Hip movement must be seen differently by different arts to some extent. When I see many Asian arts move, I also see them as being very stiff, immobile, and "dead" in the hips. The CG. is moving but the pelvis and spine are not being used to their potential. I can only presume that there are notes of movement we lack that I simply am not seeing.

1: No, I cannot get any, because I wear a 12EEEEEE shoe, and I still stretch the width out on my shoes. If I could, I might wear them and try training to see how well they work. But they don't really work well for the kicks we do on the whole; those are more based on the sturdiness of the sole if anything.