bushido_man96

I think any technique offered up should be able to pass a "bull" test. However, not every student should challenge every technique at any given time. I think its important as an instructor to take into consideration when the argument is made, and by whom. If its a newer student that perhaps hasn't been able to get it down yet, then it may take more time to convince them to see it, because they may not be doing quite right yet. If its someone with experience, and does not like or trust the technique, then that opens up opportunity for discussion and application.

10/3/2012 AM session at clinic for 45 minutes.

Thanks for posting this link.In my opinion, the appeal of the head kick in the first round shouldn't have scored. It was a mere touch on the head, and not really a good head kick. More like a point sparring tag, from my view. The Italian appears to land some pretty good body round kicks. A lot of stalling by both, though. The reviews really slow things down. Nice axe kick by the Italian in the 3rd round. Not a bad match, but too much looking at each other, and not enough fighting.

Ali was a good Boxer, but man he was mouthy. I'm not sure what was so much different between his antics and the antics that people dislike so much about current MMA fighters.

In my mind, DWx, everything you said ITF does, WTF style needs to make it fun to watch again. Maybe rework the rules system, and set up a system that scores more advanced kicking techniques higher if they hit, but still allows hand strikes to score and be worked into the strategies is what they need.

That is a frickin' awesome shirt! It would be so cool to get one of those.

That very well could be. Maybe some old-time Boxing stuff would resurface.

I agree. The "take out the leader" idea is a good one, but it shouldn't be carried out unless its feasible at the time. If you are that outnumbered, and have to do some fighting, then you just have to start neutralizing threats. Find a stick or something, fast, and use it much.

I don't think Cassius Clay had experience in African Martial Arts. As far as his Boxing skills went, he used great footwork, and the ability to bob and weave to evade strikes, reducing the number of direct powerful hits he took considerably.

I think power come from the muscles, more or less. The spine is basically a support structure, but the muscles are what allow for power production. The musculoskeletal system is what allows the body to move and work in a powerful and efficient manner.

I agree with tallgeese here. I know there are a lot of people out there, many that might be referred to as "traditionalists," that are vehemently opposed to the idea that MMA is its own style or art. Every style had to evolve in some way to become what it is; be it Karate, TKD (which came from Karate), or MMA (which can be compared to TKD in how it came from an already established style, and added some different influences). To me, the cool thing about MMA is that our generation got to see it be born and evolve into what it has become.

I think its kind of tough to say what the deciding factors are that make the distinction between MMA and a "this with a bit of that thrown in" type of place. I think what you have to do is look at the credentials of the person running the place and/or teaching. By and large, the place will train for competition; I'm sure there are some that aren't soley dedicated to comp training, but that's where they will make their money for the most part. That said, there could be one guy running the show, with experience in stand-up and ground fighting, or one guy who has brought together several coaches to teach each facet of the fight game. Either way would mark the place a "legit" MMA school in my opinion. Now, if I had my own school right now, I would be doing what I can to teach a combination of TKD and Combat Hapkido. Would that make me an MMA school? No, I don't believe so, and I wouldn't tout it as such, either. I'm still up in the air as to whether I would make the two styles requirements for everyone in the school, or whether I would allow advancement in one over the other. I haven't dinked around with the curriculum enough yet to decide, but my goal would be for each student to attain black belt rank in both styles upon completion of black belt testing.....anyway, back to the topic at hand. I think the other distinguishing factor to refer to a school as an MMA school is how the stand-up and ground factors are incorporated. If you are learning to transition from one to the other, and not just being taught stand-up on Mondays and grappling on Thursdays, and never bringing the two together until you have a fight. That, in my mind, is the kicker; am I learning it all more or less together, as equal parts of the same kind of fight, or am I being given the doses separately, to figure out to bring them together myself. My 2 cents.

Welcome to KF, Jon!

10/2/2012 AM session at clinic, 45 minutes. PM session, 25 minutes at home.

Hey, looks good. I'll be checking into this. Thanks!

Yes, crazy, indeed. Quite a different cultural outlook.

Nice find! Thanks for posting it, DWx.

I'm not sure why it would be too brutal. Boxing seems to do just fine. They already allow knockouts, so I'm not sure what the difference would be in changing things to an ITF aspect. I think it has more to do with politics than much anything else.

I'm glad I could be of a little assistance. Thanks for sharing you video with us.

Careful about getting the one good arm too much bigger than the other, it might give people the wrong idea. Get it? Yes, my jokes are lame. Hehe, I gotcha. I'm not lifting weight with my one good arm yet, so no worries there.

It sounds like it you've got some of the good training, then. I know when I was in the ATA they had started up their Protech systems, and were starting to do more weapons stuff, making some requirements at black belt levels. The nunchaku stuff they did was mostly the twirling, and we never struck any target with it. In my mind, that's just not good weapons work.

He makes a good point in the first video about how someone learns something, and then everyone forgets why it was taught that way, and then never changes it because "that's the way we've always done it." Thanks for sharing them. I've subscribed. I know when we train at the range, and the way we learned at the academy, is we did tactical reloads with the shotgun with the gun pointed downrange. How do you do it at your agency, tallgeese?

Thanks for sharing this. Very informative. It appears more like basics to me than kata, but very similar none the less. I love the applications as well. This video also shows how "controlled" this style of swordsmanship is, and what it realistically entails, and not what is often assumed as banging and clanging swords together. I hope that with the continuation of studies such as this, that we will eventually see some better representations in movies and the like, and I would also like to see some Japanese sword styles training with WMA to see how things link up against each other. Watching this video, I also recognize some of the terminology from the books I've read, which really helps the visualization. Thanks again for sharing this.

If you are just learning, and are "twirling," then start with the foam. The back of your head and your groin will thank you for it. Then, as you increase in skill and confidence, move to the wooden. If you are not just twirling them, then jumping right to the wooden ones might be ok.

I agree and disagree with tallgeese here. I agree with him that if you are looking for something practical, then knife, gun, and club are the way to go. You can carry a folding knife in your pocket, you can acquire a conceal/carry license in most places, and you can keep a stick or small bat in your car without drawing undo attention to yourself. I find little league style wooden bats quite handy. So, you have three legal weapons on or near hand at a lot of times. When it comes to the nunchaku, especially the practicality thereof, I think its important to find the right instructor. I think what many Martial Artists do with the nunchaku is pick them up and twirl them around and try to look cool. This is not the practical use of the weapon. Find someone that knows the combat applications of the weapon in order to train in it practically. To get an idea of what all that twirling does, hit a heavy bag with the 'chucks a few times, and see what happens. It will be eye-opening, for sure. But I think many instructors just teach the twirl factor of the nunchaku, so be aware when being taught.