bushido_man96

No, I'd say that there really isn't. What the Koreans did do is really take kicking and make it their own. But to claim 5000 year lineages to TKD....nothing to substaniate that.

Yeah. Those were the "blood and guts" era, wasn't it?

If your primary focus is self defense, then you shoud focus primarily on self defense. I agree with Bushi that an instructors job should always have this as a priority, but its not the main reason. Self improvement is the main reason. WNM When I signed up for TKD, I wasn't interested in self-improvement. I was interested in self-defense. I still don't go to TKD for self-improvement purposes. I do get physical self-improvement out of it, but I don't really take away anything spiritual or cultural. In our Aikido classes, there is more of that, but I don't put a lot of credence in it. I listen to what they have to say, and then make my own judgements.

Well, it depends on what you want out of your training, too.Well said, but I had tried both, and it maybe the instructors as well, but I think one had better combat applications than the other. Not that I am putting one down. I am stating a preference from my observations. I agree with your observations, too. I prefer my Combat Hapkido applications to my Aikido ones, but still enjoy the Aikido training.

I think the specialization came about for the most part when jutsus started being replaced by "do" in the East. In the West, sports diversified. Boxing, which used to be more of an all-inclusive style, added gloves to be safer, and eliminated the throws. Eventually, you see the introduction of the Queensbury Rules, and the establishment of weight classes. Strikes were eliminated from Wrestling for the likely reason to make the sport more competitive and athletic.

On the same page as Bob is, though, I think he means that by the journey being perpetual, you keep setting new goals, and keep striving....therefore, avoiding complacency.

If this is done like you say, then I think it can be a good thing. I think that too many people view it as teaching kids to fight, though, and I'm not sure the mainstream would fall in with that too well.

Toughening the body over time is beneficial, so long as it is done properly. When bone becomes denser, this is a good thing, especially in the later years of life. But, things like shin kicking trees until you can't walk, and deforming knuckles, would not be along the lines of what I would consider doing at my age.

One would hope, at least.

That's why a more gradual conditioning would be favorable. Not the kind that tends to deform the look of the fist.

I think his study was in the Japanese styles, but so where those of Hwang Kee and General Choi.

I'm familiar with what they are, but never followed them. I did know of a guy that did fight in the PKA, and was an instructor in the ATA.

This has been my experiences in my TKD training, as well. There is usually an acknowledged "respect" for kicks, especially when they are pulled off to the head, no contact is made. Sometimes, students will ignore this, and the next kick may find its mark. What I have also seen is that this kind of sparring can allow practicality to go out the window, giving way to the "flicky" stuff that you mention. No, but I do think that it is a good instructor's job to make it a by-product of the training.

11-4-09 TKD class: 6:00 - 7:00. It was good to get back to class tonight.

Well, it depends on what you want out of your training, too.

That's a good thought to consider. But Wrestling, like many other styles of today, is a specialized Martial Art, focusing on takedowns and grappling, essentially. Styles like Karate and TKD are more specialized in stand-up; TKD especially with kicking. And Boxing is the pinnacle of hand specialization. Wrestling's western heritage has brought it up in a more competitive aspect, like Boxing, than Eastern styles have.

This is a nice post, with lots of good thoughts to consider. I do think that complacency can become a problem in the Martial Arts, and many other endeavors for that matter, especially when one is not challenged on a regular basis. I try not to become complacent in my training, often times to the point of constanly wondering if I am good enough at all. The best thing for complacency is a reality check, I would venture to guess.

I think that risk of injury is higher, yes, depending on the rules used, and the safety equipment. Kids using MMA gloves and hitting each other in the face is not good for them.

It sounds like they value expansion, too. Not that it is a bad thing, but asking to recruit other experienced MAists to farm them out, sounds a bit fishy...

I have to agree. back in earlier eras, certain conditioning had to be sought. However, not everyone can be conditioned or have positive results via conditioning as another. In other words, conditioning may not help certain people. There are long term detremental effects from conditioning, that in present society, is not warranted in a social norm. As an example, there is a 5th dan at our headquarters school that doesn't do hand technique board breaking, because he is a doctor by profession. He can't afford to mess up his hands on a board break, so, he is allowed to other techniques.

I think this tends to be the unfortunate opposite extreme when it comes to dojo-relationships. I know, some are wondering how being tougher on someone would be bad for them...but when it is noticibly different treatment than anyone else in the class, it can have the same affect as those that sensei8 talked about.

Agreed. It seems like a times the defensive training against grabs is watered down. The way we teach these techniques at my school is with beginners we do teach it in a static manner, so that they can learn the basic concepts of what to do. Once they reach an "intermediate" rank we start to remove some of the static portions of the self defense practice, and by the time you are testing for black belt, the gloves are off, so to speak. Not only are the "attackers" pushing and pulling you, we require the defender to not just break the grab, but to incorporate at least 3 additional strikes and a takedown into their defense. I think that this is the way to go about it. Students need to know that it is really going to be a bear of a hold to break, and that it is going to hurt really bad, in all likelyhood. Adding realism to it will make the difference in training.

I do agree with the proficiency levels that professionals fighters train for, and that it will be a boon to them, should they need to defend themselves. I do think that we are beginning to see more and more that self-defense instructors put more of a point on improving physical fitness levels to help in self-defense. You also see more MMA types skills seeping into SD training.

Good points, tufrthanu. Although I have done some work, it has been at close range, what we call "slap leather" or "Rambo" drills. We usually do them with rubber band guns, which adds a touch of realism to the scenario.

Thank goodness KC was on bye. During that time, they did manage to suspend LJ for a while. He won't be in KC for much longer. I'll be surprised if he plays the rest of this season.