bushido_man96

I did Taekwondo for a while, and you're right, it gets that sort of rap, really viewed as ineffective fighting - the trick is to do it right; I wasn't, so I wasn't really kicking hard, just fast, my kicks were basically slaps but then I started Muay Thai and Capoeira and my kicks are now insanely strong - easily my strongest suit in sparring. But my Taekwondo training really helped me build my kick foundation. I'm not sure why I typed all this - I guess I'm missing Taekwondo a little bit. One day I'll go back and get my black belt. Don't fret it man; thanks for sharing your thoughts here. As a TKD guy, I've always appreciated Capeoira, and would love to give it a go sometime.

That also helps to explain why none of the masters that went on to found TKD and other Korean kwans didn't do any bunkai for their Shotokan forms, or their future forms.

I think the emphasis on the 3 K's really started being a mantra when Funakoshi was implementing Karate into schools. Those 3 K's created an easy to follow class training protocol that really got things going for the style. I can't confirm this, and if anyone else has any other solid information on it, please chime in with it. This is just an estimated guess on my part. @Drew. Good post, with some very good points. I agree with your thoughts on character development.

I agree with pitbull. Getting proficient in a smaller move set is the way to go, and then to work the scenarios over and over again.

He doesn't make me look bad. I've never met the guy, so I don't worry about what he does. The muggers were the thugs here; not the victim. I'm not saying what he did is something I would have done myself, but since he had the skill and ability to tweet a beating, then kudos to him. To me, it demonstrates the level of control he was able to exude over an opponent. I'd also like to point out that many of the Gracies probably don't adhere to the kind of spiritual and philosophical aspects of Eastern Martial Arts practitioners would. They come from a completely different society, and they embrace that. I think that's to be applauded, as well.

But what do you consider a "good, solid base?" Also, where the stand-up skills might go in favor of the KarateKa, they will likely be more equal in the ground game, which is where the "advantage" of the KarateKa could be nullified to an extent.

I'm kind of confused by this. I don't think Karate's techniques has any inability to counter these other styles. I don't think it has to do with that. I think it has more to do with the training methodologies.

Those were some very nasty knockouts.

Unfortunately, that's all I've seen as well. I'd love to do some friendly sparring against a Capoeira stylist to see the real combat style of it. Gee, Taekwondo tends to get that rap, too....

Welcome to KF. I can't offer any info on the school you attend, but if it seems like you're getting quality instruction, and you enjoy it there, then go with it for a while!

Martial Arts is Martial Arts; driving a car is driving a car. Not the same thing, and trying to compare them doesn't really do either justice. Just because it seems unsafe to teach a younger child how to do a neck crank, doesn't discount the fact that the child could attain black belt level in a style. When I teach adults, I make sure they understand to use their judgement, and avoid situations in which they would fight if at all possible. I tell kids the same kinds of things; don't use your MA on the playground, and avoid fighting at all costs. Do I teach kids to punch to the throat? No. But does that mean they couldn't learn how to do that later if need be, as an adult? No. So to me, it sounds like this: "You're a kid, and so your punch to the body, knife hand strike to the body, or to the head." "Ok, so now your 16. Let me show you the secrets of how to kill with Karate. Instead of punching the body or the head, punch to the throat. Aim your knife hand strike to neck. Now, you are ready to be a full dan grade." Perhaps I am over simplifying things, but this is how I read the reasons others give in holding back junior grades.

10/15/2012 AM session at the clinic, 45 minutes. Also had a follow up appt with the doctor today, and got a lovely cortizone shot in the biceps tendon. Hopefully, that speeds recovery up a bit.

So, would you say his Karate has no "soul?" Also, I'm curious if this instructor gets cut some slack because he teaches a knockdown style, and not a point style. If a point stylist did this, would he be viewed the same way?

The difference, though, is how you learn the techniques. A Judo shodan may know a good amount of ne waza techniques, but I doubt he would be able to apply the as well as a purple or brown belt in BJJ.And yes, BJJ grew out of Judo, but the focus it took on the ne waza techniques has made BJJ the special style it is today.

Very good points as well, Justice. Also, the nice thing about the isosceles stance is that it translates nicely to rifle and shotgun; three weapons, same stance for all three. Since I've never hunted before, I didn't have to try to break the habit of shooting from Weaver.

But that is not a problem with the JBB rank as such, that is a problem with the school for not building in a maturity requirement into the rank or at least taking how the person acts into account. Being a BB is about skill but also you are acting as an ambassador for your school and style. Few people will look at colour belts but will definitely notice how the blackbelts act and how they conduct themselves. Doesn't matter what the age is when getting the rank because people develop maturity at different rates, I've known 12 year olds who have acted more mature that 16 or even 17 year olds. Heck even some adults are very immature. If the 9 year old acted like that he shouldn't have been granted rank in the first place or if he developed this once in rank, the school should have done something about it. If he didn't have the speed or power appropriate to the rank he shouldn't have been graded to that rank either. It sounds like the JBB has reduced requirements so why not hold him at 1st kyu instead of making him pay for another grading? (McDojo???) With regards to your final paragraph, that's great and I think that's how it should be. But I wouldn't say that a child wouldn't be able to do it. Not every child will but you will get some who can. Especially those who have effectively lived in the dojo from a young age. And if a child can't, you could argue that neither can some smaller women. All very good points, DWx. The point in bold is especially one to consider. I agree with DWx that this is a fault of the instructor, and not to be the sole determining factor for all children in regards to black belt ranks. That is another issue when it comes to passing anyone for any grading at any age; each should be reviewed on an individual basis, and not as an entire group. If I saw a black belt of any age acting that way, I would pull them aside and discuss etiquette and common sense with them.

I remember when I started doing some of this in classes. What an eye opener it was. And such a great experience.

All good points, Justice. Thanks for your thoughts here. I'm not trying to point to the validity of lack thereof of MMA in comparison to other styles. Nor am I saying I think having a cage fight as a requirement is good, bad, or indifferent. What prompted the thought of this thread was the idea I've heard in past discussions about how "black belts used to be tougher," guys like Wallace, Lewis, and Norris. There usually wasn't a question of whether they could fight or not. And that nowadays, black belts are "given away" and don't mean what they used to. My thought process is along the lines of thinking that if the option to do a fight in the ring are present, would be a prudent course of action for a black belt candidate to endeavor? One thing is for sure; it would be a learning experience.

Don't worry about what others think, especially when it comes to something you want to do for yourself. Just get yourself started, and let things take over from there. If you are truly worried what others think of you, then you are not letting yourself do it for yourself; your doing it for others. Here's another way to look at it; I've been doing the MAs for 16 some years now, and I am a bit overweight. That doesn't stop me from getting out on the floor and showing the others in class what a short, chubby guy can do.

Very good point to consider here. I hadn't thought about that one initially, and its a very important one, for sure.

This is another note of contention for me, and I want to address it here, since you brought it up, Dobbersky. On a side note, I'm going to swap my stance and defend forms training in a thread where I have been discussing the idea of training without forms....oh, well, that's why we like it here so much, right?! Just because a style doesn't teach forms applications like Karate kata bunkai, doesn't mean the forms are "only for grading." I'll fall back here on my experience in that ATA, for two reasons: 1. Because I have enough experience with the ATA forms, and the thought processes behind the creation and reasons for the ATA forms. 2. Because whenever the idea of "forms are just a belt curriculum," the ATA tends to pop to the minds of many. The ATA forms seem to some to be just a series of moves, put together just because HU Lee thought his style should have forms, since other TKD styles did, too, but that he wanted his forms "to be cooler." The ATA actually used Gen. Chois forms in its early days, but Lee actually learned the 16 forms taught him rather quickly, and wanted to create forms that presented more of a challenge, and also had a more focal point on kicking, which is what TKD became known for after its branch from Shotokan. My dad also remembers learning the Pal Gwe set of forms in his early ATA days. So, with these goals in mind, and as Lee established how and what he would teach as the curriculum for each rank in the ATA, he established his forms system as such. Lee established, for example, the white belt curriculum, with the focus on the reverse and lunge punch, knife hand strike high block, middle block, and low block, and the front kick and side kick, and the stances of focus were front and middle stances. So, with this in mind, he designed the white belt form to focus on these techniques, done on both sides of the body, with the form having equal movement in both directions. So, the applications of the techniques in the form are in the skill development of the techniques for that rank. White belt, very basic. Orange belt then, added the round kick, along with double forearm "guarding" blocks, and backfist strikes. It also added the back stance. The idea behind the ATA forms is to introduce new movement concepts and more advanced techniques as the student goes up in rank. So, you get a progression in the difficulty level of the forms as one gets higher in rank. Which is what one would expect to see as a student rises in ranks. The one-steps also reflect this as the ranks go up. One could also say the "applications" of the movements in the forms can be seen in the combinations of the moves done in the forms. In the ATA, its more face value and less digging and interpretation than in most Karate styles. As for the ITF forms, there is the school of thought out there that the applications of the forms were not taught to the Koreans who would go on to become masters and propagate TKD, so they didn't see any reason to adhere to the forms as-is, and made some modifications. So that's my take on that front. I appreciate he discussion so far from all fronts!

The differences there are solely rested on the shoulders of the instructors at hand. Those instructors also did something I wasn't really describing, basically making a "Kickboxing Karate" option as a class. What I am talking about is using and training the applications of Karate kata bunkai, and training those things without the kata. Because after all, most of us agree that the katas are the repository for these applications. The idea most hold to on the creation of kata was that they were created to "store" this information; whether for secrecy or some other reason is still up open to debate. So, what I'm saying is, we have the kata recorded; there really isn't any danger in today's world of this treasure of the MA past being lost. Why can't a Karateka train the applications of the katas without learning the katas? It can be done, because styles like Aikido and Hapkido successfully train self-defense applications minus kata. What I am not espousing is taking Karate and making it into random shadowboxing.

See, this is why I prefer the Jutsu. While the martial art is a huge part of my spiritual life, that is up to me to find that personal meaning. I think all of the long term guys from our family would feel this way, too, despite having very different religious views. Agreed. I don't think its part of my job as an MA instructor to attempt to instill my viewpoints, ethics, and philosophy on life in the others I come into contact with. If someone wants to know my point of view on such things, I'll gladly tell them, and if they want my opinions on their own, I'll gladly fill in those blanks, as well.

And this is what we see the most when it comes to training the two different styles, the give and take of contact levels vs target selection.

The points I list in bold give rise to some points for me. Situational awareness is something I believe that is a bit easier to train when not actively, physically training. Just taking the time while standing around to study where you are at, and come up with some scenarios in your mind of how to react to various stimuli. I'm not trying to over-simplify this concept, but I think its one that can be more easily intertwined amongst the two styles. As far as scenario training goes, I agree and disagree. No, the fight training is not likely covering weapons scenarios or impromptu muggings. But, they do plug contact levels into the scenario more often than not, and end up training under a more intense level than some RBSD scenarios. But, this is dependent on the trainers, as well. Thank you for contributing your own such experiences to the discussion. I think these experiences really lend to the discussion.