bushido_man96

That sounds about right.

10/11/2017 TKD Class: 6:00 - 7:00 pm. Basics, assisted with forms, one-steps (white and green), and then combinations.

Wishing you a speedy, and full, recovery, Danielle. Can't imagine what that's like, but hopefully you'll be stronger in the end.

I think that's a good point, Alan. But, I also think that its a phase that many MAists go through, somewhat wishing for an opportunity to prove to themselves that their skills will work when called upon. Its something instructors need to continually address throughout the course of training their students to try to quell that desire.

These "handling skills" should be honed in partner practice, with one-steps and sparring. One-steps can be tricky, though, as they should be used as a basic learning tool, but should be modified in my opinion as time goes on should become more of an engaging exercise between the two practitioners. Not quite sparring, but not as one-sided as one- or three-steps.

Moderation when it comes to exercise and training has more to do with what your body is capable of. My daughter is preparing to run a marathon, so running a 5K would be considered pretty moderate for her. For me, a 5K would probably put me in a wheel chair. Brisk walking for 20 minutes would be more moderate for me, at least in the cardiovascular realm. When it comes to more intense exercise, like Martial Arts or weight training, its going to depend on what makes you really tired, and what makes you break a sweat and just feel kind of warmed up. My guess is that if you get to that warmed up feeling and maintain some time there, then you'd be looking at some moderation. That's the best I think I can put it, so I hope that helps, Bob.

If I'm walking into a formal, traditional MA school, I probably would. When I go to DT training, I do not, because its not the norm there.

Welcome to KF!

Congrats, Luther!

I think the older WTF forms, the Pal Gwe forms, were much closer to the Shotokan origin, but as time went on, the WTF made a very visible effort to differentiate what they did from Shotokan, and so the newer forms were designed and they moved forward from there, and also focused on the differences in sparring.

To the bold, I hear you, and I agree. I don't wish for the opportunity to have to actually use one of these defenses, nor do I ever want my fellow officers to be in that position. You are right about the petty crimes, and yes, it is usually better to just hand over the wallet (I rarely carry cash as it is, so its just my cards). But, I'm of the opinion that if you don't want to turn it over, and you make that decision to use your skills, then fine by me. I won't judge it. The consequences, however, might be severe. I guess what I'm saying is that regardless of how I would handle it, I'm ambivalent to how another might do it. Agreed, 100%. Again, agreed. In the long run, its the best bet, I think. I agree that there are these guys out there, and they can be dangerous to others.

You are right on the money. I'm kind of lucky in that I met my wife at my TKD class, so she pretty much gets it. But, I've got two young boys at home that play sports and have school activities, so I get caught up doing those things a lot. Right now, I get one class in per week. I spend other nights watching my oldest son at football practice, and after that, wrestling season will start up, and I watch both boys at that. Add that into a rotating work schedule with different days off every few months, it gets hard to stay consistent. My weight training has gone out the window for now. Hopefully in a few months, I can get back to it. So, it can be difficult, finding that balance.

I think there has to be a balance in training. If you go full power with sparring partners all the time, you'll quickly run out of sparring partners. To minimize this, its important to also do focus mitt work, bag work, and things like that.

Not doing a good job here, so I'm going to change that. 9/27/2017 TKD Class: 6:00 - 7:00 pm. Basics, stretched out, forms (Yoo Sin), one-steps, sparring. After class, we reviewed our first two three-step sparring sets, and me and one of the youthful and enthusiastic 2nd dans talked and worked some sparring concepts. We also had a visitor pop in for class tonight. It was a gentleman who was a black belt at the academy when I joined up many years ago. He had moved to one of the Dakotas for work in 2002. He stated he should be popping in now and then, which would be really cool. It was nice to see him, and he stated he had started up Shotokan a little while ago, which is cool. I figured he had been doing something, because he slipped and answered with Osu a couple of times. He also let a few hand techniques to the head slip in sparring, which was fun. At any rate, it was good to see an old, familiar face pop back into class.

I agree with Bob. I think things have gotten so far afield that unification is just a pipe dream that gets talked about now and then with no real plans at doing anything. It would involve too much compromise on one side or the other, and I don't think either side would give that much.

I can help with this a bit. A high percentage of gun fights (or violence involving a firearm) in the civilian population happen within 3 to 5 feet from the assailant. I'm sorry, I don't have a number for you, but I think its upward of 80%. Maybe Alex has some better stats. In the Police Krav Maga program I've been through, I've trained both long gun retention and disarms and pistol retention and disarms. They tell us up front in regards to gun disarms that these disarms pertain to the type of attack in which the armed individual is using the gun to intimidate, threaten, or take something from you or take you somewhere against your will. So, its the situation in which a suspect puts a gun in your face and begins talking and threatening you for whatever reason. They have other options for those in which a person draws or presents a gun and just pulls the trigger. With all that said, I would say that situations dealt with in the civilian population would be different than those dealt with in the military, especially during active duty. Good to know both. The problem I see with concealed carry, and I tell this to everyone who is even thinking about thinking about carrying concealed, they have to make sure to they know how they are going to carry it, where at on their person, and they have to train on how to draw and get to threat ready position from where they plan to carry it. Its so much more than just learning how to shoot the gun. It maybe where I live but I've never even entertained carrying a gun except during hunting season and that is just to deal with Coyotes during bow season. That and I don't purposely travel back alleys or go to the local drug hang outs. I don't put myself in sketchy situations. I guess I think of this as common sense that going into a bad neighborhood or walking down dark alleys is probably something that you should avoid. I have never found myself in a situation like this so I have never felt the need to carry a gun or to teach gun disarms. Don't get me wrong, back in the 80's and 90's my association was on the so called self defense kick and they taught disarms. After seeing it from the real side of gun use I have never understood why you would even attempt to disarm someone with a gun. For one the chances of being shot are high because you are essentially taught to trap the hand with the gun but in real life the opponent doesn't hold still to apply your ultra cool technique and it is a fraction of a second and your shot. The other thing I don't understand about disarms is the fact that you are in effect trying to not only get the gun but hold the assailant. Why? If your going to commit to engage, you shouldn't be doing so with locks or stripping the gun, you should be taking them out (I mean dead). Neutralize the threat all together. I'm sure if practiced you could have a margin of success against a percentage of attackers. In my mind this equals shot the other percentage. Unless your life is at risk why would you increase your odds. As soon as you go for the gun you commit that person into defending themselves which mean using it. Maybe I'm wrong but if an idiot actually gets up in my face with a gun, thats to intimidate you to get something, typically your cash. In knowing this I can only think of a few reasons you would engage them rather than letting them have what they want and allowing them to run away. 1. if their demeanor changes - they get upset or become angry. Your life is at risk. 2. if you just want to show off your new disarming skills and be on TV. Hero complex. 3. you have a death wish or like to gamble with your life and those around you. suicidal or thrill seeker. To me there is only one reason to engage someone carrying a gun. My life is in jeopardy. In which case i'm not going to disarm the creep and detain him for police. I'm going to use deadly force and neutralize them. If not I'm going to just allow him to take my wallet and then I'll call my bank to cancel my cards, call the police and make a report and go home to my family, which at the end of the day is all most of us want to do. I also get what you are saying, however if I ever find myself in this type of situation, I think I would just give them the cash. The thing that most MAist's do not consider in this scenario is the fact that rounds (bullets) travel beyond the confrontation area and even if you are successful in disarming the perp someone else may not be so lucky if a round gets squeezed off. That and 95% of the time if I'm out in area's that something like this would occur (Parking lots, sports outings, etc.) it is a high likely hood that my wife or family members would be with me. I don't think it's worth the risk to disarm someone that is desperate enough to rob someone at gun point with the sole goal of taking their cash and running away. I can make more cash but you can't make another family member. And I appreciate the stats and don't doubt them. I guess we have a bunch of stupid criminals in the world. If I were bent on taking someones life I wouldn't walk up on them to within arms reach to shoot them so this scenario never even crossed my mind. I wouldn't think anyone would be this stupid. I realize that I answered your question, but maybe not completely. First off, I'd clarify that the disarms I teach are not what you would call fancy. They involve the principles of redirecting, control, attack, and takeway. We do a lot of striking in our gun disarms. The main thing is to stick to the principles. Also, keep in mind that I'm speaking in the realm of police defensive tactics, not the citizen who is being robbed at gunpoint. You also mentioned some comments about "hero complex" or "thrill seeker." I don't necessarily see it that way. I do think it is important to evaluate every situation you are in before taking any action, but I also think that if someone wants to stand up to someone trying to take their things, then that is up to them. I would not put them at fault for the actions of another who attacked them. That aside, I don't necessarily disagree with the points you have made. A gun defense can be risky, but so can a knife defense, or any open-hand defense against an unarmed attacker. The goal is to educate oneself, train smart, and be smart when it comes time.

Cause and effect is very important in training. I think in many forms applications, this can be seen. One technique leads to another based on how the body will react when struck by technique A, leading to technique B attacking such and such an area. We can use this in sparring all the time. If I throw a lot of round kicks to the body, the opponent will tend to keep the guard lower to defend those kicks. When I finally go high, I might have a better chance of landing a successful hit, because I've caused the opponent to react in such a way. When it comes down to why someone ended up having to actually defend oneself, it can probably be summed up in a cause-and-effect scenario. Where are you, and when are you there, and what led to the incident?

In the TKD that I have done, by not allowing hand strikes to the head, we avoid the match becoming a boxing match. While kicks can be much stronger, it takes considerably more skill to get good at scoring with head kicks, and they won't usually come in with the frequency that hand techniques to the head would.

I tend to think of a keyboard warrior as someone who tends to talk a lot about either opinions or about themselves in various online formats, and does so in a way that they would usually say things to or about people in such a way that they wouldn't do to them personally. Many can avoid having necessarily good points for their arguments. They tend to be just loud about it, and don't worry about or feel concerned with any repercussion about what they might say or claim.

Congrats!

Well, double jointed doesn't actually exist- its just a term for people who are flexible. Anyways... So heres my two cents on it. Athleticism hinders technical progress rather than helps it. For good reason too. Any reliance on strength, speed, agility, or endurance is reliance on athleticism and less technicality. Many professionals aren't necessarily good in a technical manner but they're moreso merely good at optimizing their athletic prowess. These are usually the guys who wear out after they hit their early 30's. I was one of those guys that was "double jointed" and it wasn't until I got my black belt and reinvented my game that I realized just how much bending in half hindered my progress. The same is true for a guy that's strong. I'll just throw this out there- I recently saw a video of a "guy" explaining how to do a hip escape. Not for nothing, the guy IS very capable and very talented but his technical knowledge of the hip escape wasn't very impressive. In short, he does it like everyone else- hes just such an athlete (and top player) that hes never had to pay the price for NOT having size and strength and being on bottom.... and hes arguably one of the best there is in the game at the moment. I know that "double jointed" doesn't exist, that's why I used the quotes...But, I agree with what you say. The problem with top level athletes is that athletic ability can mask what they lack in technique pretty well. I'd add that speed is another attribute that can have the same effects.

I have the same issue, as I've gotten older, its harder to do jump kicks. My knees hurt too much. What I do is that I just don't jump as high as I used to. With some kicks, like the jumping front snap kick, this is ok, but with others, like the flying side kick in Choong Moo hyung, it suffers a lot. If it were me, I'd do squats with weights twice a week, and maybe a box jumping workout once a week. Make sure to give your body time to recover, as jumping workouts are very taxing on the neuromuscular system.

I can help with this a bit. A high percentage of gun fights (or violence involving a firearm) in the civilian population happen within 3 to 5 feet from the assailant. I'm sorry, I don't have a number for you, but I think its upward of 80%. Maybe Alex has some better stats. In the Police Krav Maga program I've been through, I've trained both long gun retention and disarms and pistol retention and disarms. They tell us up front in regards to gun disarms that these disarms pertain to the type of attack in which the armed individual is using the gun to intimidate, threaten, or take something from you or take you somewhere against your will. So, its the situation in which a suspect puts a gun in your face and begins talking and threatening you for whatever reason. They have other options for those in which a person draws or presents a gun and just pulls the trigger. With all that said, I would say that situations dealt with in the civilian population would be different than those dealt with in the military, especially during active duty. Good to know both. The problem I see with concealed carry, and I tell this to everyone who is even thinking about thinking about carrying concealed, they have to make sure to they know how they are going to carry it, where at on their person, and they have to train on how to draw and get to threat ready position from where they plan to carry it. Its so much more than just learning how to shoot the gun.

Experience is important for an instructor. However, it doesn't have to be fight experience. As long as an instructor can vet what they are passing along, then teach it with confidence. This is the path I take. I've not been in a ton of fights, but I feel that I can teach someone to defend themselves if need be, because of the concepts, strategies, tactics I teach with are sound and proven. This is how I approach DT training classes. I trust the people who put it together, and I trust my ability to pass it along.

Great points, Bob. I think you hit the nail on the head; trying to change all of a sudden is doomed for failure, as we are creatures of habit.