bushido_man96

Typically, that stuff isn't going to get you the results you want, in a healthy way. The best thing to do is watch your caloric intake, and exercise. Always has worked, and always will work. And no side effects.

I hear lasik sugery works wonders.

I look toward the direction I am going when stepping into the block, then focus forward upon completion of the block. Then, I look toward the next block, and so on. I found a Jitte Kata video here, Bob: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAiAm0W-zgw Yes, its the same block. In my TKD school, we actually call them Mountain Blocks, as opposed to W-shaped Blocks.

Muay Thai clinch.

To elaborate on Sensei8's thoughts on visiting a dojo, I would try to do so without calling and setting up an appointment; just drop in. That way, you see what goes on from day to day, and not a special demonstration of what black belts might get to do.

I have come to not appreciate this statement much. Why discount all the learning that takes place before it? I think that learning is learning, and later learning builds on early learning. I like to think of it as just a continuum. I do think that it is difficult to quantify what exactly a "black belt" is. Everyone has different talents and abilities, and it is up to them to figure out what it is, and how to grow into it. Not everyone will have great technique, but some without may be great at applying concepts and strategies, and so on. Sometimes, I think the styles that really have it all figured out are the ones that don't use rank at all.

BJJ actually has more in common with Judo than JJJ, especially in its training methodology (randori-friendly). Maeda brought Judo to the Gracie family, but referred to it as Jujitsu because his instructor, Kano, was very much against the idea of challenge matches and the like. So as not to anger or offend Kano, Maeda referred to it as Jujitsu, and then the Gracies learned it, emphasized the grappling as opposed to the throwing, refined it, and then the challenge matches came, etc, the rest is history. So, rather than being "one small piece," I actually see it as a specialization in an area that came out of JJJ. Judo, specialized in the throwing aspect, and BJJ, in the grappling aspect. Originally, Aiki-Jujitsu was the unarmed system used by the Samurai class. It was never a point of focus, really, as it was a fall back should the weapons be lost or bound, etc. So, a Samurai, on average, would have spent more time in honing sword and other weapon skills, and less time on Aiki-JJ. The arm bars and what not were likely still there, and some things probably changed over time, especially after the sword was no longer a point of concern.

Could you possibly extrapolate a little more please! With my limited experience with Aikido thus far, I would agree. There are a lot of intricacies in Aikido, from the types of movements you make, to the giving/taking energy, and things like that. Of course, schools do vary, and some may have a process that translates things faster than others. What I have experienced so far is a lot of technical points in the moves; also, the philosophy of not using much offensive attack at all makes it more difficult to translate, in my opinion.

I think that it is something useful, to a point. The problem with backing up too much is that you don't gain any advantage by it. But, if you can back up faster than your opponent is advancing, then you can set up a counter to go back towards them.

I like most of the components of the first video, but I would definitely consider striking with the hands more prior to securing the hands. Kicking low, groin or knee, rather than the body, and I liked the outside movement, provided he doesn't keep ahold of the hair. Otherwise, you help them take a chunk of it out. I didn't like the second video at all. It looked ackward, and the instructor didn't do a good job of making me feel like it could work. In the third video, I didn't like the idea of going so low at the beginning of the technique. It might be ok, if your really limber, but I would take a different route.

I'm not saying that I disagree with you, but how and where do you set the standards? For TKD and Judo, is black belt reserved soley for those who can compete and win in national and international competitions? For BJJ, those who can win in submission matches? Would achieving full splits and exceptional flexibility be a requirement, as well? I think that there are a lot of different factors that go into ranking, and not all factors fit all people the same way. That's why I ask how one thinks the standards should be set.

Actually, it also entailed throws and pins at one point, as well. I think that this is something that should be considered in the judging and reffing of the matches. Perhaps moving grapplers back to the center of the ring, and starting them in a top/bottom type of setup like what is used in Wrestling. If inactivity continues on both sides, then a standup should be initiated, or something to that effect. What is viewed as "grappling inactivity" should also be looked into, as well.

So how do you feel that your focused BJJ training is coming along, tg? Do you feel like you are seeing noticible progress?

It is interesting to see how the addition of protective equipment change different styles. Olympic TKD has been another good example of this.

I didn't think you left the impression of being rude or anything like that, emjay. Your post was good. I just found a spot to expand on, is all. Solid post.

The punching does look different. The punches have a swooping look to them, and look like they wouldn't provide much power.

I don't know that it would matter, really. Violence is violence, and the things that should be considered are getting away, and staying safe. Hopefully, I'll get to see the videos; I can't watch them right now.

I can see the point that you are making here, and I don't disagree with it. However, I don't think that questions like the one the parent was asking should be avoided, nor should an instructor roll their eyes when these questions are asked. The students, and largely now days, the parents, are the consumers here, and I think it is fair to help answer any questions they have about what they are stepping into.Usually, as things go along, different understandings of what the studetns are doing come along. This is great, because that is the point where this kind of training begins to become more of a passion, and less of "buying a product." Not everyone understands this in the beginning, so we should have open minds to different points of view.

Battle infers war and war is fought by many. I was referring to individuals. In fighting to survive, heart has the most to do with it. It is not always the man who has prepared the most. Since you are into movie quotes, let me quote another movie for you: "Victory belongs to those who believe in it the most and believe in it the longest". I don't recall it being a movie quote. I didn't hear it in a movie, anyhow. But, battle can refer to two individuals, or a large group. Its all combat. Hands, feet, knives, or guns, etc...its all battle, and preparation is a huge part of it. Otherwise, training wouldn't be important, and the various styles of fighting that we all love to discuss would not have come into vogue. If this really were the case, then it would not benefit any of us to study the fighting arts, because in the end, its all based on will. Nor would it be any use to spend all the money that we do no training the military, or law enforcement officers, because in the end, it would all come down to the will to live. I personally don't believe that to be the case. Physical and mental preparation are very important when it comes to survival. This isn't really a cut and dried situation. What if the mugger is doing so because he is starving, and wants money to eat? Self-preservation is a huge motivator. Likewise, the person being attacked is going into self-perservation mode, as well. So you see, you can have two people on different ends of the spectrum, but both have lots of will to meet their ends. Where a true traditionalist might not get into a fight unless his/her life depends on it, I don't think an MMA fighter would, either, outside of the ring.

8-19-09 Warm-up: 5 minutes on elliptical. Bench press: 205x5x5 Crunches: 25x4 Push-ups: 30, 23, max sets 1/2 sit-ups: 25..no foot brace Weighted crunches: 60x12x2 Dumbell military press: 30x15x3 Dips: 9, 8, max sets Bike: 12 minutes at 90 rpms.

The best would be to consult with your instructor, and ask for details. Then, drill those little things until you get them down, and then add them altogether, and practice some more.

Sometimes, philosophies and Martial Arts don't go together. It really depends on the person, and what they are seeking out. I would say that it is easier to narrow your fields a bit as you get started, so that you can then begin to set more focused and attainable goals. I wouldn't say that you shouldn't seek all that you ask for, but it will take time, and by having a plan and a path for it, will make it easier on you. One of the best things you can do is research. Check out different sources, and do some reading. Make sure that what you think you are seeking is actually what it is, if that makes any sense. And welcome to KF.

I think that this is less likely to happen to MMA, because it, as a whole, isn't worried about being tied into a "way of life," wearing certain uniforms to class, and following ettiquete and an established pattern of curriculum that started in the late 1800s and early 1900s. It is always moving and changing, and its focus is on what makes one successful. Therefore, I think it is more likely that MMA will be more prone to bringing in new ways of doing things, and different things to do. Just my thoughts here. I don't see a problem with this, nor do I think it is a reason for traditionalists to be against MMA. In a capatilistic system, the customer has the right and the privilege to seek out what it is they want. If the customer sees MMA, and wants MMA, then they seek it out. If they don't want TMA, then they won't seek it out. However, the other side of this is the product or service that is offered, and what its quality is. If the customer doesn't feel that the MMA gym they have sought is of good quality, then they will turn elsewhere; perhaps a TMA gym. This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes of all time: "Battle does not favor the righteous, or the just; it favors the prepared." In the end, philosophical beliefes and morals don't enter into the meat & potatoes of it.

I don't think that this is true. Certain personal philosophies are all about these things; it just so happens that certain people, who studied the Martial Arts, decided to mix their personal philosophies into their MA classes, in an attempt to bring their students on board with them. Funakoshi and Ueshiba come to mind here. It just so happens that many practitioners like the idea, and bring it along, regardless of previously "clean living" or not. I think that MMA teaches this, too. In fact, when someone better does come along, it becomes common knowledge, and goes on their professional record. Not many MMA fighters will go the path of a Rocky Marciano. Even Machida, as good as he is, will eventually lose, too.