bushido_man96

Is this not just as disrespectful to Martial Arts not of the eastern traditions? I feel it is' date=' and it sells short the legitimacy of these styles trained in a sporting and competition venue. [/quote'] You're being too sensitive bushido_man It's not my intension to disrespect martial arts NOT of eastern origin - or those born out of the sporting arena - far from it! My point was simply that the origins of martial traditions of yesteryear (and as a result their descendants today) were, more often than not, fuelled by religious or imperial belief! Whether you were a sengoku period samurai or a medieval knight on a crusade - your belief in your god(s) / faith (and thus your divine right to win) was all powerful. K. I'm not being too sensitive. I'm just pointing out in regards to Bob's opening post that traditional stylists aren't the only stylists that get disrespected by other stylists. I do think your point about faith in fighting styles is a valid one.

I don't stretch nearly enough, nor do I train nearly enough right now. I try to stretch some evenings while at home, and stretch every time I train.

Congrats!

12/31/2013 Worked on Wrestling drills with my son. 2:30 pm - 3:30 pm. Worked on stance work, take downs, reversals, standups, and sprawling.

Well said!!! I agree. There is no quick fix. My concern is this: what good is the "reward" of these gun disarms I can finally realize 10 years of training from now if a gun is drawn on me tomorrow? Why can't we learn the gun defense, and practice it, without the form? The point is, we can. I need to teach weapon retention to my fellow officers, and I need to be able to do it in a way that is easy to understand, and allows my fellow officers to be able to utilize the techniques at a highly successful rate early on. Is this bad? No, its a good thing, even for traditional stylists. I'm also not really sure of the belief that "society wants everything handed to them." I've always been around people with strong work ethics that emphasize that hard work pays off. I don't think a lot of people view MMA as the "quick fix." It takes a lot of hard work to get into a position where one can compete. This isn't just in traditional styles. I see this in Wrestling already, and I've just started scratching the surface of working with my boys on it. To assume that this kind of understanding is only achieved in the "traditional" arts is a disservice to all styles.

So we have these sentiments in regards to how others feel they don’t respect “traditional” arts, And then we see these sentiments: Is this not just as disrespectful to Martial Arts not of the eastern traditions? I feel it is, and it sells short the legitimacy of these styles trained in a sporting and competition venue. We basically have people setting on two sides of the fence, pointing at each other instead of talking to each other. It didn't take long in this thread to "blame MMA" for how "traditional" arts are now viewed. In my opinion, it isn't the fault of MMA. Like tallgeese pointed out, there are those out there who have evaluated what they spent a lot of years doing, and then changed things to help achieve their needs. It does speak to how one side can help the other side, and vise versa.

My sensei said something very poignant on this matter to me once years ago. If you look at a bunch of competitors, at least in my organization (JKA), you'll see that the people winning the championships both in kumite and especially kata are seldom below their thirties or late 20's at the very lowest (many are even in their 40s). Anyone over the age of 18 is allowed to participate, everyone is obviously considered on an individual basis in a competition, but still you see this trend. My sensei argued that this is because when looking at a karate-ka's performance over time, there are two important curves to consider: the physical peak, and the mental peak. Given a full life of training most people are at their physically strongest somewhere from 17 to 24 or so (thus most Olympians being so very young). However, with age one's experience level and mental incorporation of this experience into their karate can continue to increase. Where a karate-ka is most technically proficient and actually physically able to use techniques effectively is a combination of both of these two functions. Around 35 or so a person is still fairly strong, but what's more so, in the 10-15 years of training since their physical peak, they have learned so much through experience, even just on the level of how bodies move, that this increase offsets their decrease in physical stamina and strength. After 45-50 or so, the body decreases a bit more rapidly, but if the mind continues to improve enough, one's karate can accommodate. People who have done this in my opinion are the ones that have cracked the code. They are the ones I would like to train under. Most young masters will simply not have had to deal with the experience of a declining body yet, and may or may not rely too heavily on their heightened physical state to achieve good results. So it's not that their not good, just not experienced. I think that in a system where rank reflects technical ability in the art fairly well, rank will then naturally follow this trend where most high-level promotions (whatever they may be for your organization) happen from 30 up, depending on a person's special case of course. Sometimes people think too much about strength and misunderstand that this trend of 35-45 peak is artificial, but really, there are just other factors to consider, even just on a performance level alone. This is not even mentioning contribution to the art or responsibilities to students or research or whatever else have you. I can't argue that experience comes with time. That's generally the way that works. But, everyone's experiences are different. There are lots of Martial Artists out there with 40 years of experience and no fights to their name. And that's ok. Then there are those with 40 years of experience, and 10 of them as a bouncer, or LEO, or something like that. There will be a difference in experiences. Then, we can look at someone who is 45 years old, who has 30 years of experience in the Martial Arts, but many would probably view them differently than a 70 year old Martial Artist with 30 years of Martial Arts experience. I just think that it goes deeper in figuring out someone's level and ability than how old they are, how many years in, and if they do well in tournaments or not.

Well, I'm not Japanese. So you'd be right. With that said, I think you've missed the point I was trying to make. My point was that not everything that is the end all, be all of Martial Arts has to be done the way it is done or was done in the Far East. There are other Martial Arts styles and cultures out there, from all over the world, both old and new, with something to offer. I don't think there is any one format that must be followed in order for something to be considered a Martial Art.

I just placed an order for a new TKD book by Stuart Anslow, on the histories behind the names of the TKD ITF forms: http://www.amazon.com/From-Creation-Unification-Complete-Histories/dp/1906628556/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1388439479&sr=8-1&keywords=Stuart+Anslow I think it will be a fun read. I've read is other books on Hae Sul, and each pattern chapter is kicked off with a brief history on the historical figures or actions behind the name of each form. This book seeks to elaborate further on each. Those brief sections are always fun to read, so I'm excited to read a bit more about each one. My favorite one was on Choong Moo.

That's too bad. Its really too bad they didn't keep those records.

The only Tang Soo Do book I have is called Authentic Tang Soo Do, by Chun Sik Kim and Joe Goss. Its a bit pricy, but a nice book.

Hands down my favorite quote from the whole video. It really says it all for me.What Mr. LeBell speaks about is solid, however, not all MAists are willing to not criticize, for whatever the reason(s). Sad, but true. As a teacher I had likes to say "They're still on the journey to be a Martial Artist, just like you and me. We're just a little further down the road."I like that.

Still, it's better to lose your wallet and phone than your life. No reputable instructor recommends going up against a gun or knife unless you suspect they're not satisfied with your belongings. of course, good on him, good that it worked out, but in general? You're right. If this was a hypothetical situation I would urge my students to comply with the robber. An iPod (at least the ones that I have seen) are not worth your life. I agree and disagree. Personally, I think its great he took the fight to this guy. Its a choice he had to make for himself, and he did what he felt was right. I agree that most times, its best to give up your stuff. But, I also think this guy did the right thing. He decided not to be a victim. Good for him. As for how the control went, evaluating the situation from a technique and execution standpoint...that's how these things go. Technique doesn't end up perfect, and when you get into it with someone who resists, it changes the whole dynamic of the situation. Also, the tight quarters caused issues, as well, and if the bus was moving, then that's a whole other factor to consider. The only thing you can count on in combat is chaos. And its tough to plan for.

Not necessarily. I think the idea of chivalric types of codes are largely based on the beliefs of people that pass the styles down, and not on the style itself. So in the end, its more a part of the person that perpetuated the system, rather than the system itself. The system ends up becoming the vehicle for trasmitting a person's beliefs. Get enough people to follow along, and then it seems to become more of a part of the style. Then, when people have some differences, the splits happen. I think this is another of the biases that Eastern style practitioners tend to pull out of their experience and then require to be applied to any style that considers themselves a Martial Art, or else deem it "not so." All styles have a history. Its impossible not to. Time implies history. How old, or how new, is just a factor of when on the timeline it happens. Nor do I believe that because a style may be a sport style, like Boxing is today, or Wrestling, or MMA, that it isn't a Martial Art. They still are. They just have a different focus.

One of those "a-ha" moments preceded by an "ouch!"

Ah, the joys of scheduling! Sounds like it was an interesting session for both sides!

I agree. It just isn't for everyone. And I think there is something we need to clear up a bit when we use the word "traditional." For the most part, we are using "traditional" to describe styles with roots in the Far East, many of which have some sort of philosophical or spiritual base along with them. But not all styles orginate from there. Boxing has a rather rich history, from the Hellenic style of Boxing from the ancient Olympiads, along with Wrestling and Pankration. Western Swordsmanship has just as rich and deep a history as that of the Samurai from Japan. Fencing has a nice history as well, and the list goes on. Not every system uses a training method like that of these "traditional" Far Eastern arts that many of us have been exposed to, and have a bias towards. Its kind of like the thread Alex put up a time back, speaking about different ways of learning. Not everyone will pick things up the same way, and different approaches work better for different people. For example, some people see the idea of practicing a jab on a heavy bag, focus mitts, or with a sparring partner as more productive than walking up and down a floor in front stances doing a lunge punch, focusing on stance transition and pulling the other hand back to the hip or ribs. Not that either is right or wrong; they are just different. Then we end up with discussions by traditionalists saying a Boxer's technique isn't very good, because of their method, and a Boxer saying a "traditionalists" punch isn't practical, because they walk and punch the air all the time. This banter just proves how much one doesn't realize about the other. So in the end, its probably ignorance on each side that plays the major role in disagreements on subjects like this one.

I've got lots of my certificates and credentials in clear plastic sleeves in a notebook at home. I do have several of my black belt certificates and instructor certificates in frames that were hanging in my parent's house. I have that at home with me, now, and when we get some walls up in the basement, I'll have a place to hang them. For the most part, they are in some pretty standard wooden frames from Wal-Mart. My 4th dan certificate is kind of bigger, so we are going to try to figure something out with that.

Well of course I would hope the 8 year old could prove himself both in knowledge and in skillset irrespective of his age. Otherwise he shouldn't really have the belt should he? I'm of the opinion anyone, regardless of age, should be awarded a rank if they check all the boxes and meet all criteria. Out of interest, at what dan rank do you say someone becomes a master? In my style it's at 7th dan however in some styles a master title is given at 4th dan. Our's is at 5th dan. I'm not crazy about it, but it is what it is.

This is one of those arguments that proves that "the belt doesn't matter," until it does matter. But perhaps we aren't discussing belts, but ranks, which could be different. I'll play a little devil's advocate here. Why does one have to be past their physical prime in order to be considered a master? And why not wait to hold judgement on someone or show them respect until after spending some time speaking and training with them? Each should be considered on a case-by-case basis, certainly, but to make a judgement call without any other information is a pretty quick jump to a conclusion.

12/17/2013 Did 55 minutes of basics, using almost all of the floor at our gym. Then, had a good stretch. I'm sore today, but yesterday, I felt loose and pretty good. I will do some more of this, looking into the Encyclopedia for more "fundamental exercises" to do up and down the floor to change things up a bit.

Oh cool! I missed that episode. I'll have to see if I can Netflix it or something.

I think the main reason is because what was originally Kalaripayattu is not the same as what it is today. I think that what it was is probably gone, and there is an attempt to resurrect it because of the stigma of being "the oldest style," which I doubt is the case, unless he was the first man of the first civilization to do any fighting, which would be really hard to trace. I'm not trying to put the style down. That's not my point. But I don't think there is a hard and fast way to trace back what the practitioners of today are doing to what it was orginally.

That sounds like a great experience! Keep up the hard work!

KC pulled out a win against division rival Oakland, but it didn't end as pretty as it started. I was a bit nervous that KC allowed Oakland to really get back into that game in the 3rd quarter. But, they really turned it back on, and defense came up with some key turnovers, although they gave up a lot of yards, which is a concern. Overall, though, KC clinched a playoff spot, and things can still swing in their favor for the division, if they just take care of business. Patrick, I saw the Phins took care of NE, which puts more of a damper on NE's playoff pursuit of the #1 seed. Bob, the Cowboys won, beating the Packers. Are they still hunting for a playoff spot?