omnifinite

A bit of a stretch I think.

Here's one element of kata that I think on its own makes it worthwhile. A person really dedicated to kata will spend hours on a single movement. They'll pay attention to what their body is doing as they go through the movement very very slowly. Is there any antagonistic muscle tension? There's one minor adjustment. Is everything properly aligned? Does anything feel like it's binding slightly? There's another adjustment. Is any part of the body working against the technique in any subtle way? Another adjustment. It sounds obsessive... but when people's lives were on the line they had to be obsessive. Do that for a couple years (not just going through the motions but really doing it), and eventually the perfect lightning-fast technique will come without thought when you need it most. You don't have time to think about all those little factors in combat... you probably won't think much about all those little factors when sparring... and to really give each of those things your full attention I think you have to do things slowly, sometimes mind-numbingly. And if you want to get really obsessive about it switch to Tai Chi . That's part of why it can be so powerful.

I know someone who sparred a good Shotokan person once. He simply couldn't block the guy's punches. They were too powerful... they'd go right through his defense (and probably would have broken a rib or two if it were more than just sparring). His best option was to get out of the way of the strikes if he could. That sounds like a formidable approach to combat to me.

Hmm. I don't know why this thread was unlocked again, but most of what was said recently has been deleted, when there are plenty of off-topic (and much more inflammatory) posts that came before mine. Hopefully those posts still would have been deleted if they'd all been in support of Christianity... you never know. But what I did say in one of the posts was that the burden of proof is on the person making the claims about the seemingly unprovable, not the other way around. A hypothetical example. I propose that the universe was created by gnomes (yes, a purposefully silly example for the sake of contrast), and day to day they run everything that goes on everywhere and will be for eternity. These elves are massless, invisible, and completely undetectable in every other possible way. You either have faith that they exist or you don't, and often they make things happen in the world that are seemingly contradictory to their existence just to test your faith in them. They are everywhere, watching everyone all the time. Nothing could exist without them. Prove me wrong. You can't and you don't have to... that's my job. It's my claim. Either I can undeniably back it up or I can't (and no matter what I say someone will feel they have reason to deny it because they're going on a different set of assumptions about what can rightfully be considered knowledge and what can't). A flood probably did happen 4,000 years ago. Legends tend to be fueled by actual events. But according to my assumption-set, the existence of a flood only proves the existence of a flood, not divine influence. The whole earth's orbit thing sounds like pseudo-science to me, probably gathered from a book or website that had an agenda. If you seek to prove that God exists, you'll succeed. If you seek to prove that God doesn't exist, you'll succeed. Only objective science that asks questions and lets the conclusions come naturally really gets anywhere. Incidentally, the dark side of Mercury is one of the coldest places in the solar system. Global warming has more to do with atmosphere than proximity to the sun. Look to Venus for what happens when global warming goes horribly wrong. And then compare the temperature of Venus to the temperature of the hot side of Mercury for that matter. I'm not exactly an atheist... if I were forced to pick a label (which won't be accurate since my beliefs don't fit some encyclopedia definition) I'd go with pantheist. So I'm not against super-natural beliefs, but (real) science has never contradicted what I believe either. Guess I can say goodbye to this post. Maybe I should tie it into martial arts somehow . Ok... art vs. art... style vs. style... I don't believe any of these arguments have answers that aren't circumstantial and subjective. No one fights in a vacuum. We simply have to make a personal choice as to who we listen to. In every art, there are people who give ego-based rhetoric-laden reasons for why their art is best. And in every art, there are people who give extensively-researched objective reasons for why their art is best. You just have to decide which approach you find more valid. I find it an easy choice. (edit: On second glance, the locked thread is still intact and this is a duplicate thread. Hmm. I don't get it.)

It seems when two people have a different set of unquestionable assumptions from the beginning there's really nothing they can say to each other. They may as well be speaking different languages. "God says..." "But I don't believe in God..." "But God says..." "But I don't believe in God..." can go on forever. I'm completely comfortable with the way I feel about the usual Christian claims, but as long as we have different assumption-sets my conclusions won't mean anything to anyone else. And I think if we want to call ourselves rational intelligent creatures we're obligated to pick up a book or two and earn those assumptions ourselves instead of just having them handed to us . Trying to plop them into someone else's head is just an exercise in futility anyway. Out of all the Christians I've talked to at length with about this sort of thing, I've only talked to one who really truly knew why they believed what they believed and could back up everything with research. They had a solid background in history and philosophy and were probably on their way to being involved with the Vatican in some capacity. This is the sort of person I'd much rather talk to. In fact they tend to be just as disgusted with the sheep out there trumpeting the unexamined word of God at the top of their lungs as we non-Christians are. Too bad epistemology wasn't part of the high school curriculum. Drawing valid conclusions from the day to day information put before us seems like such an easy thing, but I guess it's something a person really has to learn. It's an indispensable skill. I'm still working on it. "I respect your viewpoint but it's wrong and you're going to suffer for eternity for it," is the kind of comment that makes people mad . It hasn't been said yet, but we're getting close. Throw the R-word around like that and it really doesn't mean anything. Not to me anyway. Bah, ranting, time for bed now.

I kinda like the stuff.

Never met 'em.

Only one I know of is Trident Martial Arts Academy in Woodbridge.

By putting himself that close to you he's literally handing you half the targets on his body. Assuming I had any real knowledge of pressure points I'd start putting them to use .

I think I'll regret getting involved... but... If there were a "God" that made itself a "son" that was all light and compassion and love, he wouldn't care in the slightest if someone somewhere didn't revere him. Perfect beings aren't needy and insecure. And if he wasn't divine, well, he's been dead for two millennia... he has other problems. I think Jesus could have been any number of things... a Boddhisatva, a person with with ideas a few centuries ahead of his time who was in the right place at the right time, a myth... who knows. I bet we'll never make our way through 2000 years of personal and political agendas to find the facts. But when someone elevates a person to "Son of God" status, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim, not the other way around. (and I have no idea how this thread has so far survived the almighty lock )

Do it really, really, really slow.

I'll bite, who?

If you could pull it off in the summer you'd have applause from me .

Elbow in the crotch. It's right there .

This whole thing is interesting to me, and I've been contemplating it too. But like everyone is saying, I'd rather not be pandered to like a tourist either. Though even if it isn't in the actual temple, when being taught by a monk's disciple in close to the same ways they were taught, knowledge-wise would it really be a rip off? Does it really matter if it's the actual temple or not? I'm looking for more people who have hands-on experience with it.

If you'd like to receive this letter yourself request it at henrysouth@hotmail.com Newsletter #2 -- 2/12/2003 Dear readers, ive been getting loads of responses and replys to my news letter and i welcome all the new commers to the forum. anyway my training is going well, and getting easier to keep up with. in fact i swear i can feel myself getting fitter. im using the gym a lot more than i was. but the big news is that ive been hired as security staff (a bouncer) in pubs and clubs in Berkshire. ive heard a lot of horror stories about being on the door, but im quietly confident. and i need a lot more money before i can get all that i need for the trip. £7000 to be exact. but dont worrie im not going to switch on u and start asking for money. my kicking speed is up to 2.5kicks per sec. give or take a couple of microseconds. my punches are up to. (will give u the results of the punching times in my next letter) there should be another letter from me in about a week with some funny pics of me being beaten by my sifu and the before and after henry security makeover party but apart from that ive been training my wrists and fingers... ok its not that kind of training. basicly getting a jar and fill it with water and sand and hold it in an "eagle claw" (picture of eagle claw fist in attachment)sounds easy enough but trust me after 6mins of that ur wondering why u do it. and that is exactly what im wondering now. but i do it for the love of the art form, the poetry in motion that ur body can achive with practice. i think thats why most of us do it. that or to beat up the school bully karate kid style. regards henry p.s. any questions regarding the newsletter or martial arts can be sent to me at this address.

Hmm... maybe I'm using something different. I've never noticed ours moving at the seams, catching my feet, or squeaking.

In grappling the difference between a technique working and not working can be a couple inches. A video might not tell you that kind of thing.

I'm not really into him. He's great and all, but when I see his movies usually he uses these moves that are completely unnecessary. Doing all sorts of fancy things to do something that would have obviously (to semi-trained eyes) worked better if done more directly. I know the general public eats that stuff up, but I usually appreciate moves that still look impressive when they don't require 10 extra steps or wires to accomplish.

All roads lead to the UFC, remember?

We have puzzle mats I believe (the interlocking squares that are about 2'x2'?), but not Century brand. They aren't slick, I doubt you do anything more than press to fit them together, and I don't know if they slide, because we have about 30 of them, so it may be too massive to do much sliding by then. I haven't tried smaller areas, but it sounds like he's going to be going bigger than that.

My last girlfriend hated violence. But since she left me for a swordsman I doubt martial arts had anything to do with it.

How are "traditional" and "McDojo" synonymous? If a McDojo doesn't know why it does the techniques it does and hasn't held on to any of what made the art powerful when it was originally used, it is being supremely UNtraditional. Traditionalists are just as upset with those schools as you are.

I'd get my butt kicked if I just had a yellow belt in any style.

I prefer to let things be what they are. If my desk is often used it's only natural to look often used .