bushido_man96

I voted maybe, because the belt doesn't mean as much to me as it once did. I'll be honest, when I started, I liked the idea of testing, moving up, and earning that next belt. It was motivational. Now, training itself is motivational, not the ranks.

I think it would be a good motivational thing. And at the test, when it finally comes, the instructor could tell the student, "Congratulations, go get your belt off the wall. You've earned it." Why not?

Good luck and keep us posted!

Welcome aboard!

Welcome to KF!

I agree, and keep most of my self-defense geared kicks simple and low. But, it is fun to kick high, and to spin around and stuff.

I see a lot of the hands flapping around in Olympic-type TKD matches. Instead of concerning themselves with blocking, they worry more about countering off the attack. It also appears to me they use the hand movement to facilitate the movements of the kicks, but I'm not sure of that is the case or not.

I've enjoyed my time with Hapkido so far, and think it has lots to offer.

I think this is a good point. The goals of the practitioner are going to play a big part in selectin what they want to do, and instead others are worrying about what styles are "represented" in MMA.

Having it "in writing" with accredited backing is always nice to see. But, it isn't always the most important thing, either. The knowledge gained is what's important, and if it is high quality, then I wouldn't want to pass it up because it lacks organizational backing.

Its interesting reading this today, as I was reading Cook's Shotokan Karate: A Precise History, and recall Funakoshi saying how Karate used strikes to "supple" up an opponent and then using a throw to further debilitate them. I would definitely like to see more throws or takedowns worked into my TKD classes.

I suggest napalm. Lots of it.

Here is the way I look at it; you will need to know how to do both. Use the Aikido classes and training to learn how to "move with" the attacker, as that is what Aikido seeks to do alot: utilize the attacker's energy. However, the attacker won't always be giving you that energy, and sometimes you will have to make your own to accomplish what you want. That's where your Kempo training will help out. A problem I still have a bit with Aikido is I either end up pushing them or pulling them along to make it work, generating more of the energy than they provide. Its taking time, but its coming along.

I've never done any "Hapkido sparring," although I think it would be a good thing to develop, especially as hard as it can be to apply a joint lock on a less than cooperative opponent.

Thanks for the review, tallgeese. The only books on BJJ I've got are the ones written by the Gracies, and I've been pleased by all of them. But, I see others out there, and am never sure of which ones to pick up. This helps, especially since my knowledge is so limited.

I don't know. I don't really take on a different character or culture in the TKD school. I do blow off a bit of steam at times, but usually, its just another part of a day for me.

I'd give it more that one class before discounting it entirely. I think there would be a lot of good things to come out of Wing Chun, given the chance.

It could be a cost thing, too.

I definitely view Iaido and Western Swordsmanship arts as historical Martial Arts. I do think that the concepts you learn in them can apply to present day, even if you only find a stick in your hands to defend yourself with. There are definitely better, more modern weapons with which to defend oneself with. Ah, but it does. XMA techniques are based from many basic techniques and many basic kicks. They are just put in a different context.

I'd say FOCUS has to come from not only paying attention, but then applying, and being mindful about the application, and work to improve it.

I think it is a good way to test technique. It is done in a static setting, with no one else trying to foul up the technique, and although it is never this ideal, it is a good way to help show yourself and others what the technique is capable of.

I feel you there. Its tough when it seems like nothing changes. I think it was Einstein who said that do the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity, or something like that. I've done many training sessions where it is just me and one other guy, and we usually do a combination of Combat Hapkido and general DT applications for our job. We usually do a good job of putting stuff together and not getting bored, but when we do get someone different in there with us, it does change the attitude of the session a bit. I also agree with ps1, that you've got to go in positive, and put out that positive energy to get the session rolling.

RW: I agree that those methods seem like the long way to learn how to do techniques. But, they do help to develop power in the limbs that do the techniques, and develop mechanics that transfer into the shorter way of doing the techniques. I'd much prefer to learn them in the more efficient manner like done in Boxing. However, I do think they were for self-defense first, and as more formalized training became standard, these things started to take shape.

They wouldn't have felt bad for hurting you, that's for sure. If you would have assumed that you could have gotten by on less force, then you may have been overpowered, and who knows what would've happened then. Its always easy when hindsight is 20/20.

I think part of that will come from what you want out of the Martial Arts and what you look for in a teacher. If you're looking for a good fighter, then that might be your guy. There are so many people who teach in different ways, and so many that learn in different ways, one person's idea will differ from another's.