Hansen

I have two family members, actually in-laws, that are ex-military. One is a Captain and the other is a Lieutenant. Both have stated that empty hand fighting was never emphasized much at all for the general soldier. But those who wished to learn such skills could do so of their own volition, and their were programs available to those who wanted to pursue it. The stance of the military was and still is (to their knowledge) that if a fight moves to an actual, empty hand H2H situation then something (many things) went wrong. There should still be some weapon the soldier has access to draw upon to end or aid in a confrontation and it should never (ideally) become an unarmed grappling match. As it was told to me, the reality is that such scenarios are just unlikely to arise in real battle so the military never required its soldiers to participate in such programs, except on perhaps a very small or limited scale. Definitely not to the extent of being a full blown hardcore martial arts course requiring years and years of training as Karate25 seems to be implying. Perhaps a few days, a week course or a set of courses (spanning a couple weeks at a time), but covering many areas of combat, not just grappling or boxing. McBeth - I'll check on Karate25's reference as well. Sounds crazy to me as well, but who knows... maybe we're wrong and military is no longer practicing for military situations. After all, they already have the best technology for handling most military scenarios. Perhaps BJJ is what they've gravitated to as their last challenge.

Subgrappler - I don't think McBeth was saying that dirty tactics were necessarily superior to kickboxing and submission skills. At least that's not how I read his post. (McBeth - Jump in any time and defend your position). I think he was just stating that dirty tactics are not overestimated tactics. They work and are excellent tools in one's arsenal, especially since they require little training to implement. In fact, the H2H program in the military (in every country that has such a program) emphasizes and encourages dirty tactics, especially if soldiers need to be trained for H2H immediately. They don't spend time teaching complicated kicks or bob and weaving manuevers or submissions, at least not in the early stages. Those require more time to learn and execute successfully on a consistent basis. Also, you seem to be unfairly comparing professional fighters, who are trained for a particular environment and know what they are getting into prior to stepping into the ring, with average people on the street who may find themselves in a physical confrontation at a bar or party or other "social" gathering place. Merely because a professional fighter can use his high level of skills to defeat another fighter (who relies on dirty tactics and is not as good a fighter) doesn't mean that those dirty tactics are without merit or over-valued. After all, Gordeau's opponents were skilled professional fighters who knew prior to entering the ring what could potentially happen, especially after he'd tried such tactics before. But from my experience, most people don't expect to get eye gouged in a fight or know how to handle themselves when bitten, especially in the neck. Just like most people don't expect a person to pull out a knife or a gun or run them over with a car during a heated argument. And like McBeth I've used such tactics quite successfully. It's come in handy more times than my boxing. (But I do admit, I would not rely solely on such tactics). In addition, you've listed a handful of such attempted dirty tactics in professional tournaments. While it is valuable information to take note of, a handful of attempts (2 of which were by the same fighter) would hardly constitute one reaching the conclusion that such tactics were overvalued in usefulness. If I had based all my conclusions on fighting from the early UFCs I would've studied nothing but BJJ and never bothered much with striking. BJJ dominated the early UFCs and has proven itself useful, but with time and with a greater number of fights, it has been shown that BJJ tactics are not the only way a fight can be ended nor is it necessarily the most efficient way to win a tournament. Dirty tactics are just tools. But they are useful tools to have in one's arsenal. It may not always be sufficient to end a fight, but when combined with other fighting skills it can make a fighter much more formidable. Imagine Royce, Couture, or Liddell incorporating such tactics into their repertoire. It'll make them that much more scary to contend with.

Battousai16 - Very interesting post. Never heard of Bob Dougan or the lawsuit that you mentioned. But I am curious enough to browse into this matter. However, I can't think of what Bob (if that's his name) could've really sued Joo Bang Lee over. A person can't patent or copywrite a martial technique. So based on the info you provided, the only thing I can think of him suing over is false advertising. Moreover, if this Bob only aided in the development of a handful of techniques, then I would hardly say that he was pivotal in the development or creation of Hwa Rang Do. Perhaps he influenced certain techniques but that's about it. Of course, I am basing all of this on what you've told me thus far. But I hope to do a little probing on my own out of curiousity. In addition, I don't know if the lawsuit had much effect (assuming Bob won the suit). There are still many websites by Hwa Rang Do practitioners that seem to promote Hwa Rang Do as the ancient art of the Silla, and Lee's book is still titled, The Ancient Martial Art of Hwa Rang Do and the content is quite clearly promotes modern Hwa Rang Do as the same art as that of the Hwa Rang warriors. There's no mistake about that. I was not aware that Hwa Rang Do (or any martial art) required that its students come in with a prior martial background. If what you say is true, then Hwa Rang Do is quite unique. Do you know why it would have such a pre-requisite? And do you know if any prior martial background qualifies or if only the Korean arts are considered adequate? I think you missed my point here. It isn't that Hwa Rang Do can't have two different expressions of a roundhouse kick. Rather, my point was that during the 1960s, 70s, and 80s Hwa Rang Do never expressed its roundhouse kick like a muay Thai round kick. The body mechanics were different. That's why I suspect your school has merely incorporated modern NHB influences into its Hwa Rang Do. Also, I never stated there was anything wrong with it. As a matter a fact, I stated that it was great. But my point was, your description of the roundhouse kick is not Hwa Rang Do, as founded by Joo Bang Lee. And personally, I get irked when schools promote their academy as being Wing Chun or Boxing, or whatever and then include tons of other styles into the art without giving credit. They try to promote it as if their art always had such techniques in their system. Again, they only get away with it because you cannot patent or copywrite a martial technique. However, I feel that failure to give credit is like plagarizing another art. Give credit where credit is due. (It is more of a complaint toward the instructors who plagarize, and not directed at you personally). You are correct about that. We did not see small joint manipulations in the very early UFCs. But I think the reason was because such techniques were frowned upon, though they were not considered "illegal" at that time. You can read about this in some of the books out there on the history of MMA. There were certain unwritten "rules" that the fighters were requested to adhere to, despite the promotion of the tournament as the Ultimate Fighting Championships. But today, such techniques are illegal and grounds for penalty or disqualification. Besides small joint manipulations, there was no formal rule against eye gouging in the very early UFCs either. Rorion Gracie even stated such during an interview in the late 1990s. But it was understood that such tactics were frowned upon. To my recollection, there has been only 1 person (Tank Abbott, I think) that has even made an attempt at an eye gouge. But that was very early on. You won't see such tactics any longer (except from Mike Tyson, if he enters the UFC) Please continue to provide us with info from past articles on Hwa Rang Do. I look forward to future posts from you. That is true. Not everyone wishes or cares about being a great fighter. However, even if a practitioner doesn't care about learning a street effective system, I think the martial arts themselves must still be about fighting. Otherwise, it is no longer a martial art. All of the other reasons why people take up martial arts (e.g. discipline, conditioning, etc) can be developed by other means, including other sports. But fighting is what makes the martial art... martial. I do agree that Hwa Rang Do is a more complete system than any of the arts that I listed, but I still think even an amateur (or pro) boxer will be a superior fighter over an amateur (or pro) Hwa Rang Do practitioner. The primary reason is the boxer trains against a live, resisting opponent on a routine basis. He subjects himself the possibility of a knockout or broken rib each time. I don't think most (if any) Hwa Rang Do schools do such a thing. And to me, that is more important than the specific art one trains in. It must mimic realistic conditions as closely as possible, and boxing does so much more than Hwa Rang Do (though boxing itself is not complete). As for grappling, I think a good grappler will be able to neutralize the strikes of a Hwa Rang Do practitioner and submit him pretty easily. And I just don't think Hwa Rang Do's grappling is anywhere near as sophisticated as BJJ, judo, or even wrestling. And so far, I have never seen a Hwa Rang Do practitioner make a name for himself in a NHB tournament, though I'm sure there are some tough Hwa Rang Do guys out there. As for your other statements, whatever your learning at your school if it works for you, then great. I encourage you to continue. I want to make it clear that I have nothing against Hwa Rang Do or its practitioners. In fact, there are a few things that I learned from Joo Bang Lee's book. But I do think there are better arts out there (my opinion). And I do have some doubts about the authenticity of Hwa Rang Do and its association with the arts of the ancient Hwa Rang. From my own research, the association seems very loose, at best.

Was that Sami Berik? In either case, it would explain why the clip looks nothing like traditiona Wing Chun.

LOL!

Cool video. Very entertaining. However, I don't think most of the techniques the guy shows is Wing Chun. There are no ground grappling techniques in traditional Wing Chun (i.e. Yip Man/ Wong Shun Leung style). No notable joint manipulating moves, very few kicks, and no elbow or knee techniques. Most of the schools that claim to teach Wing Chun in the States have been influenced greatly by Bruce Lee, who had already begun incorporating other styles outside of Wing Chun into the art back in the late 50s/ early 60s. For a good look at traditional Wing Chun, James Lee's book is good and so are William Chung's stuff. But even their stuff has evolved from Yip Man's original teachings, and James Lee was one of Bruce's students (though he tried to keep his book as close to traditional Wing Chun as possible). Nonetheless, you can check out their books here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0897500377/qid=1123274471/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-3493194-9120005?v=glance&s=books http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0897501187/qid=1123274498/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/002-3493194-9120005?v=glance&s=books In the video clip, the Wing Chun elements are limited to the traps and some of the entries. There are a couple kicks the guy does that seem Wing Chun based and he does execute a short jik chung chuie, but most of the other stuff looks more Jun Fan/JKD or muay Thai influenced as opposed to strict, traditional Wing Chun. In fact, there is one sequence of successive knee strikes that is shown that comes from a classic muay Thai drill. And I have never seen that particular kneeing sequence outside of muay Thai (or a muay Thai influenced system such as Jun Fan kickboxing or Shooto). He also finishes his opponent in one clip using a boxing hook. And many of the elbow strikes are definitively muay Thai in expression. I don't know who the person is in the video. It's hard to tell due to poor resolution. But if anyone has any idea who he is, I might be able to reveal more based on the guy's martial background. I chose Krav Maga, only because I felt Wing Chun was incomplete and Kali is primarily a weapons based system. So I didn't feel it was fair to include Kali into the mix. But it is still a great art.

Don't know what you are exactly stating here. Are you implying that modern Hwa Rang Do is not the same as what the ancient Hwa Rang warriors practiced (Um Yang Kwan, as you mention)? If so, then I would agree; however, that is not what Hwa Rang Do practitioners claim. According to practitioners of Hwa Rang Do, Joo Bang Lee learned his art from a Buddhist monk who is able to trace his marital heritage directly to the teachings of the ancient Hwa Rang warriors. In fact, in Lee’s book, The Ancient Martial Art of Hwa Rang Do: Volume 1, he even says that the art of Hwa Rang Do went into seclusion during the Yi Dynasty (1392 – 1910) and has been preserved in the Buddhist temples of Korea until the art re-emerged again during the 1940s. It was at this time that Lee began his training in the art at the Yang Mi Ahm temple. This info is all in Lee’s book. You can reference the section entitled, “Hwa Rang Do O Kae,” in the introduction for more details. In any case, if you read his book, it’s quite clear that Lee is promoting his Hwa Rang Do as being the same art practiced by the ancient warriors of Silla. He never states or implies that what he is teaching is merely “based off” of what these ancient warriors did, although it is logical to presume that an art’s expression will evolve over time. In addition, in all my readings on Korean history, including from Korean history textbooks, I’ve never heard of Um Yang Kwan being a martial art or style. However, I have encountered such a term in reference to techniques (i.e. Um and Yang techniques or skills), and it’s never been used exclusively to reference Hwa Rang Do techniques. Um and Yang are the Korean equivalent of the Chinese terms, Yin and Yang. In fact, Um and Yang are embodied as the red and blue circular symbol seen on the South Korean flag. And Um Yang Kwan is roughly translated as Soft and Hard Skills, a rather generic expression. It’s also interesting to note that Joo Bang Lee does not use the term Um Yang Kwan in his book (at least not in volume 1 where he covers the history of Hwa Rang Do) when discussing the art of the Hwa Rang warriors. However, he does use the expression, “The traditional martial arts of Hwa Rang Do” and does make reference to Um and Yang frequently in the beginning sections. From this, I would venture to guess that the exclusivity of Um Yang Kwan is a 20th century invention. That is, the ancient Hwa Rang warriors did not call what they practiced or trained in, Um Yang Kwan. It is a modern term that perhaps has become associated with Hwa Rang Do. I do realize that many Hwa Rang Do practitioners state that their art is based on the principles of the Um and Yang. But then again, so are many gung fu styles, jujitsu styles, and even the Jun Fan Martial Arts. My main point here is that the founder of Hwa Rang Do claims his art is ancient Hwa Rang Do. He even titled his book, The Ancient Martial Art of Hwa Rang Do, not The Modern Art of Hwa Rang Do Based Off of an Ancient Martial Art. So in the eyes of Joo Bang Lee, his art is more than just “based off” of the ancient Hwa Rang warriors. To him, it is in fact the same as what they practiced and trained in. So Um Yang Kwan (as you call it) is the same as modern Hwa Rang Do, according to Lee. I’ve never heard about a “white dude” being involved in the development or creation of Hwa Rang Do. Are you sure he wasn’t just Lee’s P.R. man or helped with marketing? According to all the major websites on Hwa Rang Do and Joo Bang Lee’s own book, the art was passed down directly from the Buddhist monk, Suahm Dosa, to Joo Bang Lee and his brother (who was not a white dude, by the way). But if a white dude was involved in the creation of the art, as you state, then it would seem to me that the whole art is a fraud. After all, it is promoted as "The Ancient art of Hwa Rang Do". And I am not aware of any "white dudes" in ancient Silla or even knowing about Hwa Rang Do until well after Lee made the art public. If you are serious about a “white dude” being involved in the creation of the art, then please provide us all with the name of the individual and the source where you are getting your information. I’m sure many of us on this forum would be interested in learning more about this. I don’t think I stated that kicks were a major focus of the art. I merely stated that among its striking techniques kicks played a large role, many of which are high kicks. And it was the latter aspect that I had some misgivings about. For example, in Volume 1 of Lee’s book, when he actually gets down to teaching his striking techniques (which begins in Chapter 4), he demonstrates 26 hand techniques (not including the variations) versus 22 kicking techniques. In other words, nearly 50% of the striking techniques shown in his book are kicks. And two of the hand strikes I would consider pretty lousy, such as the Three Stooges finger poke to the eye on page 89. I was surprised to not see the Three Stooges counter to the attack – the vertical placement of the hand against the bridge of the nose. But more importantly, of the 22 kicking techniques that he presents, 14 are demonstrated as high kicks and 4 are (literally) jumping kicks. That means 18 out of 22 or 82% of the kicks he shows are high kicks of some sort. As for the 4000 techniques in Hwa Rang Do, I have no comment. I am not a practitioner of Hwa Rang Do. But from my experience, when someone says there are X number of techniques in an art, they are often counting every variation of a single concept as a distinct technique. For example, a roundhouse kick to the head, ribs, or thigh are presented as three separate techniques. To me, that’s all one technique because it’s the same concept expressed against three different targets. Or a hand strike using the outer edge of the hand is one technique and a hand strike using the inner edge is a separate technique. Then add all the targets you can attack using those strikes and suddenly you have hundreds of techniques. But to me, that’s still all one technique because it is based off of one concept – edge striking. But if Hwa Rang Do truly has 4000 distinct empty hand techniques and all of them are useful for modern day combat, that’s great! More power to you! But it seems quite difficult and time consuming to become proficient in an art with 4000 truly distinct techniques that its practitioner is supposed to master. While I also agree that Lee probably displays the jumping kick (on the cover of Volume 2) merely for promotion of his book, he does seem to view jumping kicks as worthwhile techniques to learn for modern day combat. As stated above, he includes 4 jumping kicks in volume 1 of his book as viable modern day techniques of combat, and that makes me feel a bit suspect of the usefulness of the art compared to other fighting systems. It isn’t that it can never ever work, but such techniques have a low percentage success rate, so in my opinion, it is best not to include them (except arguably at the black belt level). But that’s just my opinion. Our conversation has pivoted on the striking techniques, and Lee has a book devoted to the joint manipulations, so I have nothing further to say at this point in time regarding joint locks. However, if Volume 1 is only a beginner’s book (i.e. without any advanced techniques presented) then I find it odd to include very flashy, high kicks. Most novices in the art aren’t even flexible enough to pull off many of the kicks in volume 1 (82% of which are high kicks of some sort). But I guess back then, you needed those flashy kicks to sell a martial arts book. As for the TKD style kicks only being taught that way at the white and yellow belt level, that makes no sense. Why would someone do such a thing? It only delays the development of proper body mechanics and may ingrain bad habits into its practitioners. If what you are saying is true, then I definitely would not recommend taking Hwa Rang Do. It’s a waste of time and there’s no point in teaching someone to kick one way and then stating later that was only how beginners are taught to kick; now here’s the real way. That’s a ridiculous way to teach an art, especially if you’re looking for something functional right away. I can teach someone how to execute a proper muay Thai round kick in one lesson, and it’s much more powerful. Why wait until the advanced levels? Don’t know anything about Silver Bullets, but I did browse through volume 3 years ago. But overall, from what I’ve seen of the system during my research in the 80s, I think the grappling oriented arts like BJJ, Judo, and even wrestling are more functional and far more sophisticated for handling a modern day encounter. It doesn’t mean that Hwa Rang Do has nothing to offer, so don’t misinterpret me. But other arts have the same grappling techniques that Hwa Rang Do has, and in Judo or BJJ, at the end of each class the students get to actually practice the techniques and see for themselves what does and does not work. As far as I know, Hwa Rang Do schools don’t do much of that, and I think that’s perhaps the most important aspect of training regardless of the martial art. But still, the ancient warriors would’ve trained almost exclusively in weaponry, at least if they expected to live. Certainly, small joint manipulations would’ve been rather low on the list. And I doubt a single Hwa Rang warrior was required to practice or learn all 108 weapons. For sake of developing experts on the battlefield, most military tend to force groups of men to master specific weapons, and perhaps learn a back up weapon as well. Spending time on too many skills or tasks merely divides one’s attention and focus and is less conducive to the development of a functional, strong military. Again, if what you are stating is true, then I think this is the result of greater knowledge and evolution resulting from the NHB style tournaments. The art, as founded by Joo Bang Lee, had no muay Thai expressed kicks in it as you suggested in an earlier post. And besides, why would a properly executed Hwa Rang Do roundhouse kick be expressed like a TKD style kick only in the blue book (volume 1) but resemble a muay Thai kick in later books? There’s no logic to your argument. Either the mechanics of the kicks shown in volume 1 are correct in that style or they are not. Let me clarify. What I was stating was that merely because you see an emphasis on joint manipulations in your school, does not mean that the original art was primarily a joint manipulation art form or even heavily emphasized such techniques. Merely because you see a roundhouse kick being delivered like a muay Thai round kick, doesn’t mean that was how the original art taught its students how a properly executed Hwa Rang Do roundhouse kick is delivered. Many schools nowadays have incorporated other styles and techniques into their curriculum but fail to give credit to where they are acquiring this information and knowledge from. And based on your statements, that is what I suspect is going on at your school. As for why none of the NHB fights have ended in small joint manipulations, small joint manipulations are illegal. They’re not spectator friendly techniques, and many small joint manipulations would be difficult to catch on camera. You’d more likely see the after effects. But the primary reason why such techniques are illegal is simply because they can shorten a fighter’s career. Despite the “brutality” of MMA, the promoters still have a desire to preserve the fighters sufficiently so they can fight again and again. Again, I never stated that Hwa Rang Do or TKD were useless arts. All I stated was that, in my opinion, there are better arts to learn for modern day encounters. I am merely stating my opinion. And I don't know what Lee's travel agenda or the fact that his school is in the U.S. (if indeed it is) has to do with Hwa Rang Do or our discussion. But when you get a chance to unpack all your stuff, I'd be interested in some references to the Hwa Rang Do roundhouse kick being the same as a muay Thai round kick from some old magazine articles from the 70s or early 80s. I have quite a few articles on Hwa Rang Do from back then and the demonstrators are showing TKD-style kicks and very little of the joint manipulations. Though they do show some, depending on the article. True. But my statement was that there were arts that could teach a person to FIGHT more quickly. If it is not teaching one to fight, then it is not an effective art. So my point was not the speed at which someone could to learn an art or style, but the fact that there are arts out there can and will teach a person to fight but do so in a much quicker time frame than Hwa Rang Do. Personally, I think most people can become competent fighters after only a year of boxing, BJJ, or muay Thai. If you add small joint manipulations, it will only make such a fighter that much more nasty to contend with. But the traditional arts usually take much longer for someone to become good at or become functional fighters, from what I’ve seen.

I don't know what Joe Lewis' time in Vietnam or bodybuilding background has to do with him as a street fighter. It does reveal a bit of his personality, athleticism, and fighting spirit. But I have friends who've wrestled in college, been in at least one Gulf War, and would kick my butt in a power lifting session, but I wouldn't consider them skilled street fighters, though they are tough guys. In fact, I've had two of them taken out by a guy who only weighs 160bs and stands a little over 5'6" - both were taken out quite easily with a rear naked choke. Also, many modern pro-bodybuilders have commented on how awesome Bruce's physique was for his size, and how it even inspired them to strive for more in their own sport. This includes guys like Lee Haney, Dorian Yates, Shawn Ray, and Flex Wheeler. Haney and Yates were both multiple winners of the Mr. Olympia title. But I've never once heard mention of Joe Lewis. Most don't even know who Lewis is. I'll admit that Lewis was in shape, but I'd hardly call it a Mr. America physique. Check it out yourself: Here's Joe Lewis: http://www.completemartialarts.com/whoswho/halloffame/images/joelewis2.gif Here's former Mr. America 1965, Dave Draper: http://ontargetpublications.com/Dave%20Draper%20Mr%20America%201965%20Brooklyn%20Academy%20of%20Music.jpg I heard about his pro-wrestling ambitions. But I also heard he wasn't good enough to make it big as a pro, so he "chose" karate. Don't know if it's true, but that's what some people are saying. As for his Mexcian knife encounter, I don't know anything about it. Maybe it's true, maybe it's made up. I don't know. Are there any living witnesses to the event? All I know is that Bruce's encounters are documented and as stated before, many first hand witnesses to these incidents are still alive, including Hollywood notables. I am not stating anything that cannot be verified by you or any one else on this forum. I do not know what you mean when you state that the Bruce Lee legends don't make sense. You'll need to elaborate on what you find "lacking in sense". Again, nothing I've posted is without your ability to verify, if you are willing to probe. It is no secret that Bruce Lee's art was geared toward street fighting, and modern vale tudo is as close as we can legally get to actual street fighting in the States. So I don't know what you find so unbelievable. Also, it is common knowledge that Lee trained with Gene LeBell, a very well known grappler. And Inosanto himself has admitted that Bruce had a Silat instructor whom he kept in touch with over the years. As for BJJ, I never stated that he knew BJJ specifically. But the submissions in BJJ are nothing new. If you know the history of BJJ, you'll know that it's actually pre World War II Kodokan judo. And similar submissions are found in catch wrestling, Japanese jujitsu, and other arts which Bruce would've had full access to learning (or learning about) during his lifetime. Bruce even takes out Samo Hung in the opening scene of Enter the Dragon with a submission. Don't know who Howard Williams is. But maybe he could've beaten Bruce, maybe he would've gotten his butt kicked. Bruce is dead, we'll never know. But win or lose, it doesn't mean Bruce couldn't fight or wasn't a fighter. As far as I know Bruce didn't deliberately train to be a teacher. And some have stated that he was actually not a great teacher because he was very authoritarian in his approach. But they admit that he was able to convey information rather well and had innovative ways of getting his students to learn the material. As for his acting ability, he may have trained to be an actor but I think he was a mediocre actor at best. There was definitely much room for improvement. (But still better than Keanu Reeves) As for Bruce only being a movie martial artist, I've already discussed this on prior posts. The people who say that he was "just an actor" never had the guts to say that to his face while he was alive. And the one person who made such a comment (i.e. Chuck Norris) while he was alive, was challenged openly to a fight and the guy backed down. I'll give you that. Norris was the acknowledged champion at striking air. And you're probably right. Norris could care less about all our little discussions on this forum. And he probably is a millionaire. But I would hardly call him a fighter. He was a non-contact tournament practitioner. Concluding Remarks: You seem intent on attacking Bruce. I don't know why, considering your own hero, Joe Lewis, thinks highly enough of Bruce to have studied under him and to teach his art today. In fact, this art from a mere actor was so good that it was better than anything Lewis, a so called "great fighter", could've come up with himself. That alone should give you reason to pause. I never heard of Bruce or Inosanto teaching the Joe Lewis method. Even Ted Wong, whom you say took privates under Lewis, teaches Jun Fan/JKD. Anyway, it's been an interesting discussion, but I think it's time to let this one rest.

Kajukenbopr - What do you mean by "incomplete"? If you mean that the founder (Bruce Lee) did not finish or finalize his art form, then you are correct. But that was also how he intended it. In Lee's mind, martial arts should be ever evolving. If it is static it can never adapt to new situations. The problem with traditional martial arts was the fact that they were "complete", and stopped developing to meet new circumstances as they arose. And many of the practitioners of these traditional arts came to view their system as a complete martial art and therefore did not bother seeking knowledge in other styles.

I did not mean to suggest that a broken hand was a guaranteed result of a fist fight. I figured everyone on this board is intelligent enough to know that was not what I was stating or implying. But I can understand why some individuals may have gotten that impression from my prior post. So I will clarify. All I meant was that the more closed fist punches you throw during the course of a fist fight, the greater the potential for a hand injury. And I am talking from my own experience as well. But a hand injury doesn't have to be serious to alter the course of a fight. That is, it doesn't have to result in broken bones. Wrenched fingers, injured wrists and such are all forms of hand injuries sufficient enough at times to alter the course of a fight. And I do realize that some times adrenaline can kick in and a person may not know that his hand is even injured or broken until after the fight is over and his opponent is a bloody mess on the ground. But my reply was in response to a poster that seemed to suggest that NHB was the be all and end all of street fighting and that palm strikes were useless techniques. This is simply not true. I would also like to state that I liked Elbows and Knees post about striking with hard weapons against soft targets and soft against hard targets. It's a simple and logical principle. However, during a rapid exchange of blows, it does not seem easy to switch from open to closed handed strikes (and back to open hand) in response to specific targets that present themselves in "milliseconds". I won't say that it cannot be done or done well. Like anything I'm sure you have to practice, but to me, it seems much easier to stick with one and blast the opponent. Just my opinion.

You are incorrect. The first Hwa Rang Do school started in Seoul, Korea. And there are still recognized instructors of this art form in Korea. Here is a link to some Hwa Rang Do academies throughout the world, including Korea: http://www.hwarangdo.com/Academy.htm That's funny. So I shouldn't take the words of the very people and culture from which Hwa Rang Do came from (including ranked members in the art) as meaning much? Then who's word should I take? Should I take the authorities to be a bunch of white dudes who wear pjs a few times per week, and were born into a completely different culture, to mean more? I think it's reasonable to assume that the Koreans would know more about their own history, culture, and art, especially if they are practitioners. I do not recall mentioning jumping kicks specifically, but I did reference high kicks. But since you mentioned jumping kicks, here is a link with a picture of your founder performing a jumping kick on the cover of volume 2: The Ancient Martial Art of Hwarang Do. You can check it out here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1884577016/qid=1122876624/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-3493194-9120005?v=glance&s=books Also, I never stated or meant to imply that Hwa Rang Do only consisted of kicks. But kicking (and high kicking) is a big part of its striking techniques. If you disagree with me, then you may wish to browse through volume 1 of Joo Bang Lee's book. Much of that volume is devoted to kicking and they look very much like TKD style kicks. I think the reason your school emphasizes grappling so much and downplays the kicks now is because of the popularity of MMA, which has shown that strikers have been neglecting an important range of combat in their training. A lot of traditional striking schools have begun doing the same. But from what I saw of the art during the 80s, while Hwa Rang Do did teach grappling, it was far from being a grappling style and no where near as sophisticated as today's grappling systems. Even modern TKD teaches grappling but I wouldn't call it a grappling oriented system. Besides, the ancient Hwa Rang warriors were soldiers. They supposedly used this stuff on the battlefield. So like any battlefield art the emphasis would've been on weapons (and rightfully so), not empty hands or grappling. The Romans also knew how to strike and grapple (think about the gladiators) but their military emphasized the gladius and the scutum because that was what was going to save them in battle, not punching, kicking, a double leg takedown, or an ankle lock. I think you're confusing modern Hwa Rang Do, as it has been reconstructed by Joo Bang Lee and subsequent instructors, to what the ancient Hwa Rang warriors used during the reign of Silla. Even ancient jujitsu is not the same as modern jujitsu or its sport counterpart, judo. Heck, judo has even changed dramatically since post WWII. It's a completely different art. If you want to know what pre-WWII judo was like, take Brazilian jiujitsu. That's about as close as you'll get nowadays. As for the expression of the roundhouse kick, I think a quick thumb through Joo Bang Lee's books will end this discussion. It is definitely a TKD-style kick and looks nothing like a properly executed muay Thai round kick. If your school teaches muay Thai kicks, that's great. But it's not the Hwa Rang Do that Joo Bang Lee promoted during the 80s. While I cannot say what it is you are learning at your specific school, I can tell you that since the birth of the UFC and Pride tournaments, many schools have integrated various styles into their curriculum without changing the name of the system. For example, I've gone into karate schools where a punching bag is hanging, the stylists train with focus gloves, and use Thai pads to practice their kicks. These are western boxing and muay Thai equipment. I've also entered wing chun academies in my area where they teach ground grappling. But the school still maintains the name, Wing Chun, and the instructor there states that original wing chun had ground elements to their game. But interestingly, none of the powerhouse instructors would've agreed to that statement, including Wong Shun Leung, Bruce Lee, or William Cheung. And the ground grappling looks strangely familiar to BJJ. Go figure. All I can say is that whatever you're learning, as long as it's effective, then great. But you shouldn't mistake the art, its history, or its culture for ancient Hwa Rang Do. Glean through some old martial arts books, magazines, and videos from back in the 60s, 70s, and 80s and compare them to the way the arts are presented today. You may find that many things have changed, and that a large percentage of schools in the States do not adhere to the original founders' of their systems teachings, though they may claim to do so. I'm not saying its wrong, I'm just stating its different from how the original founders expressed the techniques or taught their curriculums. Finally, I did not state that Hwa Rang Do or TKD lacked any combat effective elements. A good practitioner with some real combat experience could be quite effective in a fight. I just feel there are better arts to learn and better arts that can teach a person to fight much more quickly.

Daedalus, I'm not trying to offend you, though it is apparent that I did with my prior post. From your response I get the impression that your entire view of what works in a fight is based on NHB tournaments. Unfortunately, while the techniques in those bouts are worth examining, you still have to remember that you are watching a sporting event. I've broken my hand twice in real encounters and have also had a few individuals injure their hands on my skull. Once an entire weapon is put out of commission it changes the course of a fight real quick. As a result I strike primarily with open hands now. Just think about why properly wrapping and gloving up are important in boxing, muay Thai, and NHB bouts. If you honestly want to know the answer and understand its implications to real combat, then you'll have your answer. But if you want to insist that closed fist punching is the best strike to deliver in a fight in all situations, then be my guest. It's your fist, not mine. But the guys on this post with actual fighting experience know what I say is true.

I disagree. Even though a closed fist strike is powerful, if you don't finish your opponent with that single shot, with every punch you throw you increasingly jeopardize your own hand. If you are using NHB tournaments as a gauge of what works in a real fight you are forgetting that all sporting events require the use of wrist wraps and/or gloves. Wrapping and gloving protect the striker from injuring his own hands. During the early UFCs and the old bare knuckle boxing matches of the 19th century, broken hands and wrists were very common when closed fist strikes were thrown. If this happens out on the street, you're screwed. You won't be able to punch, palm strike, or grab someone with any power or strength. You've basically lost an entire weapon. As just one recent example, look what happened to Keith Hackney in an early UFC. Sure, he won but only because the sumo wrestler he was up against was more clueless about fighting than he was. And he was forced to bow out of the rest of the tournament. On the other hand, an experienced brawler like Tank Abbott walked in with fingered gloves from day one. He knew better. While I think closed fist strikes are excellent tools in one's arsenal, it is just that - a tool. A palm strike is the same, but it does have the advantage of decreasing the risk of injury to one's own hand and can be delivered to all the same targets as the fist.

There are two different posts here that I will address, since they are in response to one of my prior posts. First, I do not disagree that there are some women who are knowledgeable about fighting and are quite skilled. Erin Toughill is one example. And there are others, but they are exceptions. The reality is, the overwhelming majority are not as knowledgeable or have the level of actual empty hand combat experience that men do. Most could not tell you the difference between TKD and JKD and consider a "black belt" in Tae Bo as meaningful as a King of the Cage title. How many women even know what King of the Cage is (unless a boyfriend is into it)? To illustrate my point further, when was the last time you saw a woman with cauliflower ears? Or with a permanently disfigured nose from fighting? How many fights have you witnessed even on a school playground involving girls, compared to the number of fights you've seen between boys? While there may be women who are as knowledgeable about fighting or more so than men, they are the exception and a very rare breed. To Anbu Alex, your sensei is correct that there are different outlets in terms of marital art. Sport and budo (or combat) are merely two examples of such outlets. But if the TKD techniques (not strategies) used for combat do not differ much from the TKD techniques applied in sport competition then there are obvious limitations with the art. For combat is not the same as sport fighting. Example, high kicks are great in sport TKD, but on the street its usefulness is more limited. I agree that sport fighting is still useful for training in actual fighting, but only as long as the practitioners are training against a live, resisting opponent who are attacking and defending in the manner they would during an actual encounter. Most traditional martial art schools do not practice in this way or only do so in a limited manner. Example, two sport TKD fighters will spar by exchanging (high) kicks, but I've rarely seen even an attempted high kick in a real encounter. In contrast, I have seen sport BJJ practitioners beat an opponent on the streets with a shoulder lock and another by a choke. I've also seen a Judo practitioner execute a hip toss and severely injure his opponent once the guy landed on the asphalt. But I wouldn't generalize by stating that all sport fighting arts automatically translate into a useful combative art. I've also known TKD practitioners win street fights, but I only know of one person who actually used a TKD technique to beat his adversary. It was a Korean dude who delivered a classic roundhouse kick to his opponent's temple while he was still mouthing off at him. The guy dropped instantly and the fight was over. But this guy was very very flexible, could use his feet as fast and nimbly as we use our hands. He was an exception by far, and I wouldn't say that most TKD practitioners would've been able to pull that off. I know I couldn't.

MuayThaiBoxer - Bruce did spar with Norris. Norris also conveniently leaves that out. When Bruce and Norris first met in person they had a few short sparring sessions and Bruce beat the crap out of him. It was only afterwards that it turned into a student-teacher relationship. But I should also state here that during a talk show interview in Hong Kong, when Bob Wall and Norris (after the release of Way of the Dragon) stated that they were students of Bruce, Bruce jumped in and stated (in Chinese) that these men were only actors. They were not his students. He was quite emphatic about that. But I don't know the reason why he stated such a thing since I do know that both have trained with Bruce on different occasions. But perhaps it was because Bruce knew that people were already trying to use his name to promote themselves. That's what I speculate anyway. I have been trying to secure that actual interview footage for quite some time and have had no luck thus far.