bushido_man96

Yes, I agree, and it can be good training to get the muscles to recognize that position and make it easier to get back into when needed. But, the author also kind of pointed this type of training out as the being the reason that many perceive the stances as launching pads more than landing gear. This kind of training is often accompanied by throwing techniques from these held stances, and when doing so, instructors will teach the "loading" of the hip and blasting of the technique. I know I've taught this way as an instructor. But it also tends to instill that idea of launching pad over landing gear.

Its a good idea, Dobbersky. Do it.I used to do it a while, while back, when I was still competing. Its good to see your own performances like that, because when you do it, and glance around at stances, arm positions, etc, there is only so much of yourself that you can see. Watching yourself on video, you can look and say, "oh, wow, I didn't realize I did it like that," or whatever. Once, back at my ATA school in my hometown, I did this with the class. I videoed each one doing their form, then did a video review with each one. I'd point out this or that to them and say, "here is what I am saying when you need to do" whatever it was, with stance, or kick or punch. They see it and the light bulb kind of pops on at times. Then, you can have them do the technique or stance and make the correction right then and there. Then you can even re-video and show them the difference. Its really good stuff, and now with the ability of most smart phones, you can video more readily, review it on the spot, then make corrections and do it again, and delete or keep what you want. The quality might not be as up to snuff as some nice video recording equipment can do, but its still feasible and pretty reliable.

10/24/2012 Dreadmill...I mean, treadmill: jog/walk for just over 20 min, 1.4 miles. Bike: 1 mile cool down, 4:51 min. Stretch Forms Do San x5 Songham 4 x5 Do San is the 4th form in our TTA curriculum. It moves in about the same I pattern as Bo Chuung and Dan Gun, with a steps out to the 45 degrees on the top part of the I, before coming back into line and and going back to the bottom of the I. I like this form, because it has some tight movements and turns, and I get a lot of power into it. Songham 4 is the dreaded camo belt for of the ATA, the 4th colored belt form. Its pattern is of a rectangle laying long ways, starting in the middle of the top part, going to the left, then back to the bottom, along the back line, up to the top line, then back to the middle and starting position. This form adds the "sparring stance," along with the reverse side kick, done in combination with a back leg round kick.

There was a duty knife course put on by our law enforcement training center this month, but due to my injury, I wasn't able to go. I wanted to so bad. Like, so bad... Maybe next time.

Basically, yes. He sees stances "as a result of motion." He also addresses the heel up vs heel down argument, but that would be for another thread, I think.

So I think we're clear that the main drawback on running a school is on age to open a business, and the other drawback is insurance/liability. And these are both important considerations, too. But, what's wrong with a 10 year old earning a black belt, then perhaps grading to 2nd dan in 2 and half years (time requirement in my style), being a 2nd dan by lets say close to 13 years old, then 3.5 years down the road, at close to 16, being close to eligible to 3rd dan. So, by the time you've got a student getting of age to open a school at age 18, they've got a bit more rank, more experience, and have matured more, and you'll have a very competent 2nd or 3rd dan ready to teach, and likely be able to promote their own students through to 1st dan. This isn't the perfect scenario, and it isn't the only scenario, and as I mentioned earlier, this scenario won't apply to every student, as every student is promoted on a case by case basis. I just don't see why one has to get old before ever becoming a master.

Wow, that was something else. The Sheriff's office I look for has a High-Tech crime unit, and they do some pretty cool stuff, most of which I can't begin to understand. A department with capabilities like that could come in handy.

The pace of the fight might not be the same as a men's fight, but as far as skill level goes, it should be up there. I'm sure White will do what it takes to quickly cultivate a group of competitive female fighters to make the exciting and fill the seats. Santos and another gal used to fight quite a bit, but I'm not sure if they still fight or not. Was it Corano, or something like that? They were both pretty fun to watch, and if they still fight, that would help White, too. All in all, I think this is good for the Martial Arts in general. Kathy Long revolutionized women's Kickboxing years ago. Who knows?...maybe they'll get her and Cynthia Rothrock to commentate?

Yes totally agree. Although kata training is good for a variety of reasons, this is one of the limitations if the gap isn't successfully bridged between it and a more free model of sparring. Seconded. Making that transition to sparring and self-defense is important to cover. I've been guilty of referring to stances as "techniques all their own" in forms, because its the first thing that becomes lazy and forgotten in forms. Students are more worried about the punching, blocking, and kicking, and the stances become lost in the muddle. Also, in regards to forms training and stances, we train that we want to see those stances, so when the student lands in the stance after a technique, we want to see that stance, and make sure it is "right and good." This naturally causes a bit of a pause, hindering the idea of landing and transitioning just a little bit.

My TKD uniform is white. I was in another school for a while that wore white tops and black bottoms. My Combat Hapkido uniform is black. My suggestion is to worry less about color, and more about training.

When Bob and I had the chance to train together, we worked on some blitzing defense together. I've never really been blitzed like that before, so it was a new experience for me. The main thing was getting off the line. The tough part, as opposed to getting off the line at a 45 degree angle, is getting over the aggressiveness of the blitz itself. It can be quite an imposing sight with a big barreling at you that fast. Another option is to jam the blitz. Its less artful, and may require in a bit more of a physical sacrifice, but if you rush in, close the distance with them, and end up hip to hip or chest to chest, it shuts down the blitz.

I do believe what you are saying is felt strongly about kata in Goju. However, kata training wasn't always that way, and I don't think there are some kata that counter others. I think if you dig enough, you can probably find something to that effect, but I don't really think some where developed for that purpose. There are lots of speculation as to what the katas were originally meant to be for when looking into applications, but I think it can be a stretch as to say what it originally did.

More that I never considered it that way. We can do the same things as other people for a long time, but when we hear things put in a different perspective, a light bulb can come on. I've never sparred in anything other than a "sparring stance," with feet around shoulder width apart, body slightly bladed, slight knee bend, and hands up. Not a "stance" per se in many styles, but the ATA did adapt a "sparring" stance into their curriculum that you could say lives somewhere between a back stance and a high middle stance. I've thought for a while as stances being transitional, moving between techniques or even for leveraging a sweep. I learned to throw techniques from a stance early on, and still teach that way early on. Its just that the "landing gear" terminology Redmond used to describe the stances makes my mind look at them differently now than I did.

So it sounds to me that you are saying every kata is as important as every other kata, but at certain times only certain kata are taught, and not everyone taught the same kata equally. Am I understanding you correctly?

Yet another topic idea retrieved from Redmond's book, Kata, The Folk Dances of Shotokan. On pp 107-108, he is discussing one of his principles of excellent kata, and is elaborating on strong, flexible stances. In this section, he refers to how stances tend to be viewed as the platform, or launching pad, from which we deliver techniques. The example he uses is the reverse punch in the front stance, driving off the rear leg, turning the body and engaging the hips to fire the fist. This idea makes sense to me; how many of us as instructors set students up in a stance, and then proceed to teach techniques from the stance, fist on hip, use the hip, fire the technique out. Punches in front stances, often time knife hand strikes or middle blocks in back stances, etc. In forms, every technique has a stance. But, Redmond likes to refer to the stances as a landing gear as opposed to a launching pad. He said he takes his view from watching two Karate experts spar one another. He said "the very best Shotokan sparring champions of old" didn't assume rooted positions, but rather put their weight on the balls of their feet, and moved swiftly into stance after stance, like landing gear. He goes on to explain how the body moves forward and backward or sideways, and the feet have to move to catch us in this new position. It makes sense to me; after all, walking is nothing more than controlled forward falling. So, Redmond sees the stances as the result of motion, as opposed to a posture from which to launch a technique. I think he has some good thoughts on this, and it makes sense to me explained this way. Other thoughts on the matter?

Perhaps getting a bit off topic but a lot of people seem to forget that Gen. Choi's TKD was originally for the military and I think it'd be a good explanation for why the training (and the use of standardized forms) is the way it is. You learn the forms in a set order and set way and also don't really find a parallel to the idea of bunkai in the training because it was about training up a platoon as efficiently as possible ready for combat. I agree. Very good points.

The BJJ blue belt deal came to my mind, as well. I knew it was ok for non-black belt BJJers to open a school, but didn't know how many BJJ schools were in the UK.

Thats a point that Redmond has made in his book, and I know in the Encyclopedia that Choi referred to he forms as "platoon training." Standardizing made it easier to teach in the relatively new idea of these larger class sizes, where there was only one way, everyone (supposedly) knew the same way to teach it, and therefore, groups could come together en masse and train together, providing training consistency.

10/23/2012 Treadmill: 20 min walk/jog, covering 1.3 miles. Bike: 1 mile cool down, 5:09. Stretch Bag Work on BOB: 3 rounds, 1:30 and 1:30 rest between, kicking only. When I got tired and felt I couldn't do more, I just kept burying body round kicks into BOB. Stretch Forms Bo Chuung x5 Songham 3 x5 Bo Chuung is unique to the TTA, and I've been told it literally means "extra form." It follows basically the same I line of Dan Gun, and has the 3/4 turns in it as well. The strikes are to the mid section, and this is the first form in the TTA curriculum that has kicks; 2 front snap kicks. The back leg front snap kicks are each followed by a punch, from the same arm as the leg that kicks. Many of the forms later on contain double punches after a kick, and the first punch is usually with the same leg side, and this helps to ingrain that idea, as it can be a bit awkward. This form also is used to teach students to get their hips into techniques by "twisting" the hips for each strike. Songham 3 is the 3rd ATA form, and follows the opposite rectangle of Songham 2, starting in the middle of the right long side, moving up to the top, turning and going right along the short top side, then back down, over, and back up to the beginning. This form starts with a strike as opposed to a block, showing that at times, the best defense can be a good offense, and a preemptive strike can be necessary in self-defense. This form also adds jump kicks; jumping front kicks, #3 jumping front kicks in the ATA vernacular.

But, did you still have certain kata you only learned at certain ranks, or where they introduced on a per-student basis?

But a 20 year old brown belt could open a school, because he is old enough to open a business of his own. But could this brown belt grade his own students? So now we aren't even talking about the belt, just age. Aside from that, I know some styles don't grant instructor status until 2nd or 3rd dan are reached. My style doesn't grant instructor status until 3rd dan, at age 18. And as sensei8 and others have said, not all black belts can teach. Not too sure if its accepted where you're from but in the UK, Black belt or equivalent is the minimum grade you can open a Dojo. I've known many 1st, 2nd ad 3rd Dans who's teachin skills surpass those of higher grades, I knew a guy who'd remained 1st Dan for 17 years before grading for 2nd. so its also about time in grade too Is that requirement set forth by the UK government for MA business requirements, or is it in regards to the NGBs of the MAs there. Is it universal? Does GKR have instructors at level below black belt? I'm not citing them as the model to follow, but just trying to establish where the rule comes from you stated. As mentioned before, the case for promoting any student, regardless of the age in question, to black belt should be done on a student by student, case by case basis. Not all students are alike, and not all will advance at the same rate. But just because one 10 year old doesn't demonstrate the maturity of knowledge to advance to black belt rank doesn't mean all 10 year olds should be held to the same standard. As far as kids, like a 10 year old, teaching adults, isn't something I have advocated here. Our society, any society, just won't tolerate kids being in charge of the adults in any situation. So, I would avoid putting black belt kids in charge of any section of an adult class. But, that doesn't change how I feel about ranking a kid of that age in regards to their knowledge of the curriculum and grasp of the style. Now, I would feel comfortable putting a black belt kid in a cooperative teaching situation with other kids. Allowing the child black belt to assist in class drills, be an example for others to follow along, etc, are all good things to help bring a new black belt along in the teaching process. I would feel it would be my job to lead the class, as responsibility to my school and students, but would absolutely allow assistance from 10 year old black belt in a kids class. As far as having control of a class goes, that's hard for any new teacher in any new capacity. We are all aware of the substitute teacher syndrome, I think. When I first started teaching, all my buddies still wanted to be buddies, and pal around during teaching time. Its a hump everyone has to get over, not just kids. But, kids can be more prone to peer pressure, and it can be tougher for them, in any capacity. So, its important as the head instructor for me to help foster that transition, for any new black belt helping to teach. Neither does earning a black belt automatically make one a teacher of Martial Arts. Like anything, its a skill to be practiced, learned, and honed. That's what makes us awesome!

Or, as mentioned earlier, how do we know the whole thing isn't a hoax? We really don't.

I think the problem has arisen in the standardization of katas for rank purposes in various styles. When we talk about the classical use of kata, it isn't the same as it is today. Now the kata are as they are, and they do not change, because that would be a blasphemy. But kata used to be learned and adapted as the practitioner saw fit for them. There was a lot more exploration and tailoring of kata for the individual's training. The problem is now that things have been done this way for so long that either everyone doing it now thinks it has always been done that way, or to change is blasphemous as I mentioned, or the blind loyalty to whomever told them to do what they are doing and not question it has led them not to wonder what else went on. I'm pretty sure that the status quo won't change now, and standardized kata are here to stay. This has its advantages and disadvantages.

Learning how to control what people know about you on the internet is a good way to start. Turning off the GPS on your phone, avoiding "checking in" when you go to places on Facebook or whatnot can help. I think there are some companies out there that can help you limit your internet presence, as well. If you start to get the inkling that someone is stalking you, start documenting it. Dates, times, and activities, however miniscule they may seem. Then take the documentation to the court house, and apply for a protection order against the person. They will review the events you have documented, and decide accordingly. They may think you don't have enough to consider stalking at that time, but just keep documenting things. Also, make a report to law enforcement if you think something funny is going on. They should document the incident, and if they do, and several incidents get documented by them, then those can help in getting the order through, as well. The order is the first step. The next step is acting on the order once its through. The order is just a piece of paper; it won't physically stop any other action from taking place. But, once the order is in place, report any thing you think is a violation of that order to law enforcement, and then they can take action on the violation. Unfortunately, one of the main ways to combat these pencil pushers is through pencil pushing of your own.

Most likely not, unless he can some how articulate that he thought the guy was a threat to someone else. In this case, I'm not sure he could do that. Sure, the tweets could be used against him. At this point, though, have there been any charges filed? I would also like to point out that I did not site any facts to state they were muggers. In the reading, they were referred to as muggers, so that's where I get my labels for the thread. As far as I'm concerned, there aren't any discernible facts in the article, nor can we really infer any.