bushido_man96

tallgeese: I didn't learn much about koga the other day. What I did see is the DT guys there kind of get sqeemish about touching someone up that much without having them in cuffs to begin with. I'll have to see if they show up again, and do some observing. 12/15/2010 TKD class: 6:00 - 7:00. Basics and one-steps night. We had some extra time, so we got to do some bag work at the end of class, too. We did some work on the spin back kick for sparring. 12/16/2010 Weights: Push day: Military press: 95x10, 105x8, 115x6 Iso shoulder press: 45x10, 55x8, 60x6 Dumbell shoulder press/rotate: 35x10, 40x10, 45x8 Rear deltoid fly: 120x5, 90x10, 105x7 Deltoid machine: 115x10, 130x8, 145x6 12/28/2010 Weights: Push day: Bench press: 155x10, 175x10, 185x6 Thera crunch: 25x12, 12, 12 Incline bench: 135x10, 155x5, 165x3 Smith crunch: 20x15, 15, 15 Decline bench: 160x10, 170x8, 180x6 Ab coaster: 20x10x3 Triceps push down: 110x10, 120x8, 130x6 Overhead triceps ext: 90x10, 100x8, 110x6 Cross body dumbell press: 20x10, 25x8, 30x6 Squats: 135x10, 155x8, 175x8

Or without a good partner. I'd say if you have time to watch and learn from a DVD, then why not an hour for a class setting?

Learning TKD will likely help you learn most of what techniques are done in Shotokan. Learning the applications of Shotokan, however, will likely only take place in Shotokan.

My dad actually learned the Pal Gwe's back when he started TKD when I was very little. Its funny how some end up learning them in other places, but in Korea, they don't as much. I haven't seen a Pal Gwe form in a while, but I bought a book a few years back by Sang H. Kim, in which he and another master have both the Tae Gueks and the Pal Gwes recorded.

Yeah, that's pretty much the case. You can even see it in the similarities in the techniques. The big difference you find is in the sine wave movement of the ITF styles, but all in all, the techniques aren't much different.

In my TKD experiences, I've never worn the V-neck dobok, but have always worn a "gi" that was called a dobok. The school may not be a great one, either. See how the forms classes go, and let us know how the week trial ends up.

Our department spends no time on Defensive Tactics as far as going hands on is concerned. My DT training partner, who recently earned a certification as a Defensive Tactics instructor through our state training center, has convinced the police department to hold mandatory quarterly DT trainin sessions for all officers. I think that is a great deal, and I hope to try to wriggle my way into some of those training sessions.

Even his experiences have come under question. There was a video of an excursion to a BJJ school where his stuff wasn't working.

I would say that you can find good teachers in all kinds of places, and that although public recognition can go a long way in establishing some credibility, its also important to see what the "little guy" has to offer, and the mode it is offered in. I've only ever done Martial Arts in pretty small rural areas, but have been blessed with having some pretty good instructors.

My goal is to make my form, Yoo Sin hyung, look better, and work my way up physically so that I begin to feel ready to test for my 4th dan. I want to feel like a 4th dan, though, so I plan to increase my abilities as best I can.

I'd go back to your instructor, and ask him again. Make sure to clarify what you are asking, so you can be sure he understands your question. We won't be able to tell you here what he is thinking there.

I voted for both. Perhaps that is the easy way out, but I think it is true, both the effectiveness of the system and the ability of the instructor are what will produce the best results for the students. I do agree with Master Pain about the ability for styles to adapt and change somewhat as things change, like training methods, etc. In this case, its important for the instructor to recognize what is needed and is beneficial, and what may be just a fad, and not worth the time to invest in.

I'm not big on training to music. If its playing, then fine, but I'm not one of those people who has to have something plugged into my ears when I go training.

I don't think it has anything to do with this being the "world of instant gratification." It has more to do with the differences in cultures, and how different cultures learn to do things. Learning how to fight and defend oneself truly doesn't take very long. What takes time is building up experience and ability through training. I have never met anyone who took one seminar or 6 months of self-defense training and then decided they had learned enough. I have never seen or heard this, and I don't think it is as prevalent as traditional MAists around the world might think. I think this thought process comes more from those who less and less worry about achieving high master ranks over decades of sticking with a style and search more and more for effective means of achieving their training goals.

I never have in self-defense, just because I haven't had it happen that much. As far as just losing my temper and letting my actions get out of hand, oh yeah, that's happened before. Afterwards, I take the time to analyze what I did, and if I care or not that I may have broken or destroyed something, and what to do about it. Now, here is where I'm sure my outlook will most likely differ from other Martial Artists' outlooks, but I don't mind losing my temper. I don't mind getting that hot feeling all over, and then becoming singularly focused on one thing, and dealing with it. I know I've got mad in classes before, and lost my temper, and I didn't feel bad about it. But, I didn't take anything to excess, either. The other side of this is that I don't chalk up my actions to "losing my temper." I'm still responsible for my actions, and accept that. When I lose my temper, I know what I am doing, and I own my actions. Others claim it wasn't their fault because they lost their temper and control, but I do not think that is the case. Its just a convenient excuse for them to use. Resposibility doesn't go away.

I don't agree with this entirely. I do see what angle you are coming from, and in order to truly learn a technique, you have to give it a chance, first. But, I think questioning is very healthy. Being questioned by a student helps make the instructor think, and see things in a way he may not have previously.

To me, effective means it works in an active situation when you need it. I think what goes hand in hand with effectiveness is also efficiency. I've seen some powerful kickers that can make a jumping 540 degree spin side kick effective. But, its hardly an efficient means of accomplishing a similar goal that a front kick can.

Nice article, Joe. I feel inclined to answer the questions, and seeing Master Pain did so, I quickly scrolled down and did not read his answers, so I don't have any influences on my own. I will be providing answers soon, hopefully!

I've also heard others tout the use of slow kicking to improve. In a series of books I've been reading by Shawn Kovacich, he recommended the same things. In my old TKD school, we used to do what we called "concentration side kicks" a lot. What we would do, is all grab a spot on the wall, and at the instructors count, we would chamber, then execute in a slow motion, hold, and rechamber the kick, doing many reps before finally setting it down. Its a good exercise, and builds those hip flexor and outside adductor or abductor muscles up.

Thanks for the compliments, guys. I really enjoyed delving into it and writing the article. It made me really think, too. Yes, sojobo, I do see the parallels there.

With the gun out, making space would have been better than closing. Once he made contact, bolstering might have helped him get the guy into an armbar. But like tallgeese mentions, once the adrenaline dumps, its not easy to get things to go like you would think they should. If he wouldn't get down during verbal commands, and he felt he could go to hands on, then holster and go. If weapons are still a concern, keep the space, give commands, and wait for backup.

I'm not sure it would make the fights any better if they did come back. Nor do I think the majority of the fighters out there now would agree to bring them back.

I don't think hand retraction is necessary to get hip into a move. I like to punch from more of a Boxing stance, but still involve my hips. I also feel that the lunge punch is a difficult technique to apply in a useful manner, aa it telegraphs big time, and takes considerable time and space to use.

This post was originally published as an article in a dedicated KarateForums.com Articles section, which is no longer online. After the section was closed, this article was most to the most appropriate forum in our community. The thought process of this article sprang from reading Teri Tom's "Jeet Kune Do Source" column in the May, 2009 issue of Black Belt Magazine, titled "The Stage of Art." Whereas Tom's article focuses on one of the Three Stages of Cultivation that are listed in Bruce Lee's "The Tao of Gung Fu," I am attempting to expand my understanding of all three stages, along with a few of Bruce Lee's quotes that seem to fit in with these stages. Bruce Lee discusses the Three Stages of Cultivation in "The Tao of Gung Fu" on page 25. Prior to this, on page 22, he discusses the Three Stages of Development in the art of Gung Fu, which seems to echo the Three Stages of Cultivation. The discussion of these stages of cultivation leads to Lee's summation of this developmental process with this quote: The Three Stages of Cultivation Lee mentions are: 1. The Primitive Stage 2. The Stage of Art 3. The Stage of Artlessness 1. The Primitive Stage Teri Tom states that in the first stage, one knows nothing of a particular art (for the sake of this article, the art of combat). One will attack and defend instinctively. To me, this melds with the first part of Lee's quote: "Before I studied the art, a punch to me was just like a punch, a kick just like a kick." It appears to be just kicking and punching, in a sense. Perhaps I am oversimplifying a bit, but if you have ever seen an untrained victim defend themselves, or seen an injury report of such incidents, it clarifies things a bit. One doesn't know enough of how to put things together to make them work coherently and efficiently. One will just react in an instinctive manner. This corresponds to what Lee refers to as the first of the Three Stages of Development of Gung Fu. He describes it as a natural, primitive, no-holds-barred type of fighting (pg. 22). It was not scientific, he claims, but natural and free, without inhibition. "Primitive," perhaps? 2. The Stage of Art In the second stage, The Stage of Art, one is learning all the system has to offer. The techniques are new, Tom explains, and in this phase one does not yet have the mastery of them to allow for the true flow and expression. Lee points out that although a scientific knowledge is gained, the original "self" and sense of freedom are lost. Here, it appears that "After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick no longer a kick." Perhaps at this stage, we are so caught up in learning and working with the techniques, that they seem to become more to us than they are. We may tend to over-think things when using our techniques, which Lee wrote causes our minds to "stop at various movements for intellectual analysis and calculations," (pp. 25). Teri Tom calls this a dangerous stage in which "the proverbial brain fart can cost you valuable time in a real fight," (pp. 34). Referring back to Lee's Three Stages of Development of Gung Fu, he describes its second stage as "finite and not as free and natural," (pp. 22). The primitive techniques were "intellectually" improved upon, but in becoming too scientific and philosophical, Lee claimed that the hidden recesses of the mind could not be reached. Many techniques contained "fancy motions" and "unnecessary steps;" it became a "complicated mess." I interpret these circumstances in a few ways. The first is as the frustrated student who tries to make things happen instead of flowing with what happens, like in sparring. Secondly, it makes me think of the "talking fights" of some anime; "I'll obliterate your Iron-Toe-Boot-To-The-Head technique with my Inverted-Knuckle-Duster-From-Hell technique!" I don't know why, but this kind of scenario comes to mind. It's the choosing of a technique, rather than letting "it" hit. 3. The Stage of Artlessness The last of the Three Stages of Cultivation is the one that is strived for: The Stage of Artlessness (not alertness…). This is the stage in which one has trained during The Stage of Art to the extent that one no longer has to think, according to Teri Tom. She quotes that this is the stage in which "it hits all by itself!" (pp. 34). Lee says that now techniques are performed on an almost unconscious level without interference from the mind (pp. 25). Now things have come full circle, and "Now that I've understood the art, a punch is just like a punch, a kick just like a kick." Likewise, in the Third Stage of Development of Gung Fu, a "simplified" way of self-defense had emerged after "endless exhaustive experiments and profound thought on the original highly complicated method of combat" (pp. 22). Lee states that the techniques were stripped of wasted, unnecessary motions, down to their essential purpose, to a stage of simplicity. It was interesting for me to read about what I think are parallel developments that Lee describes, in how he claims Gung Fu developed through what I interpret as the Three Stages of Cultivation that an individual practitioner would progress through in his/her own martial arts journey. Doing this research has also helped me to see where Lee's "a punch is just like a punch" quote comes from and it gives me a more accurate interpretation of what it means. I hope that my musing here has created some sense of meaning in working toward "Artlessness." References Lee, Bruce, Ed. John Little "The Tao of Gung Fu: A Study in the Way of Chinese Martial Art" pp. 22, 25 Tom, Teri, "The Stage of Art," Black Belt Magazine, V. 47, n. 5, pp. 34, 36

I do agree that each individual needs to make adjustments based on physical abilities particular to them to maximize a style. "Creating" is always has kind of a taboo connotation in MA circles. What would be wrong with doing and teaching TKD and BJJ and just calling them that, instead of coming up with a new name?