bushido_man96

This is the wisdom that I have always adhered too...as it should be. I just hope that I can do that, eventually... But I am trying! I posted a response to this in the other thread, but it bears repeating, I think. I feel that the goal of MA practice is to learn applicable self-defense; fighting, in other words. I feel that if I don't come away with some aspect of self-defense application in my MA training, then I am not training in a Martial Art.

I tend to view MA practice in the same light that tallgeese does, as a self-defense art. So, groin kicking is a good, vialble target to be practiced on. However, you have to be careful in practice. Like tg mentions, I think it is important that proper gear be worn, and that it not be done all the time. Like he said, it is not a hard skill to learn, but to be aware of it is important. Practice on it is good, but it has to be a monitored, protected practice; after all, we don't want guys ending up with permanent problems because every class calls for a mandatory groin kick. Now, for some specificities....(wow, what a good word.... ) This is where you begin to see some of the developments of Martial Arts practice today. Often times, kumite or sparring, especially in competitions, become a test of skill against skill. In as much as that goes, sometimes good targets are outlawed to increase the skill level involved. For example, Olympic TKD likes to focus on kicks, so you see very little hand usage, and lots of kicks, especially some higher ones. A lot of Karate styles like to call point when one good, solid technique is demonstrated with exacting skill. Kyokushin likes knockdowns and power, and even the MMAs extol skill through the ranges of usage (standing, ground, clinch). But, you will notice that in all of them, even the MMA, that the groin kick is typically outlawed. Reason being, to test skill, and to allow the matches to have some length to them. But, this is different from self-defense, where that one shot may be what you want to get away. Here is where I think that there shouldn't be a division between Martial Art and self-defense. If your Martial Art doesn't teach self-defense applications, then I don't view it as truly being a Martial Art. Although it is true that everyone takes the MAs for different reasons, I think that no matter what, the practitioner should come out of the classes with knowledge of self-defense. If they don't, then I don't think it is a Martial Art. I think that this can go both ways, depending on the person. Everyone will react differently. Some walk right through it, and others will drop like a rock. Still, its worth a try. If it hits, its a hit, and can lead to other hits. Some guys have iron jaws....but I'd be willing to bet that the groin isn't as tough as that...unless they are one of those crazy guys you see on TV late at night pulling a truck with there.....you get my point. I'm sure some will chime in soon. But, I have seen from personal experience, that a groin kick to a female can have similar results as to a male. Its still a pressure point on a female.

Yes, JusticeZero, that is what I was getting at. I guess the question would be, "Do you feel that learning good technique is more important than learning the application of the technique(s) learned?"

I saw most of the episode of Samurai vs. Viking. I didn't care for the setup that much. The weapon analysis and demonstrations were cool, but I don't think they did the applications worth a hoot. This was the line-up: Viking........vs...........Samurai Long Sword.........Naginata............mid range weapons Great Ax.............Katana..............close range weapons Shield.................Kanabo..............special weapons Yumi...................Spear................long range weapons This just totally fuddles me, for several reasons. The main reason is because they both carried a friggin' sword! Why not compare them in sword combat? And why not compare spear to naginata? They only issued the spear with the Viking in its throwing aspect. And although leathal there, it has usage as a polearm. The Samurai also carried a spear. I also think that Vikings used some bow and arrow, so there again, the comparisons aren't consistent. In the end, it looked like they tried to do something like that show that NatGeo did on various MA technique studies (can't remember the name). In the end, they gave the overall victory to the Samurai (which most around here know how I feel about the presumption of the view of Samurai supremacy bias), but I think that in the end, the counts weren't done as accurately as they could have been.

Yeah, this tends to be the kind of setup done for most of the seminars that I have attended for LEO defense stuff. Its a good way to take it, too.

Thanks. I appreciate it.

I fall along these lines here. If he is teaching good, sound, usable self-defense, then I don't see any reason that he can't. Now, whether or not he can really promote as a Shotokan practitioner, I don't know. But, the knowledge that you can gain is what is important; more so than a certificate of rank from an organization.

I agree with tallgeese; you should have as many as you need to learn what you want to learn. If I was to get into a school that told me they would not honor my choice to study elsewhere, then I'd say see ya later. After all, its MY journey through the MAs, not my instructor's. I've written an article on this very subject, titled Martial Arts "Monogamy". It pretty much sums up my thoughts on this issue.

Too funny!!!

Just keep stretching. You could also look into proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching as well, to try to get you over a hump. It is a bit more involved, though, and works best with a partner.

Nice find, Kuma. Very nice.

You're welcome. In the past, I'd print off daily log sheets, in which I could put the date at the top, and had the time slots on down the lines of the page. If I did something, I'd note it between the hours I did it. I kind of used it as motivation to fill in as much time as I could on MAs, whether working out, reading, etc. It can be helpful, but I can be more specific with my notebook, and its handier as well.

4-14-09 100 Push-ups Week 5, Day 1: 17, 19, 15, 15, 25 (max 20) = 91.

I agree with what tallgeese is saying, too, because in my case, I do some things that don't correspond to my TKD training, and therefore, have no function in my TKD classes. I could still have my instructor order for me, but he doesn't usually order anything unless he has enough to be worth the shipping costs. So, in some instances, it is worth it to go on your own. For school functions and purposes, though, then going through the instructor might be better in the long run.

Yes, the archives are awesome!!!

If you want to get an accurate idea of where TKD really came from, the book A Killing Art, The Untold History of Tae Kwon Do, by Alex Gillis. He lays out the truth about where TKD actually came from, and how it was put together. The ITF and the WTF do not like each other, and each has tried to claim that it has the "true" TKD, with the "true" history. The truth of the matter is that TKD is not a derivative of Subak, or Taekkyon, or Hwarangdo. TKD is a seperate creation and entity, being created only in the latter half of the last century. When General Choi actually started teaching the MAs to his soldiers, he originally taught them what he learned through Shotokan Karate, which he was a 2nd dan in.

Story: http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=4068202 I'll miss him. He was probably my favorite fighter to watch.

So.....if this is the case in teaching, and if bunkai is supposed to relate to the self-defense applications of the katas, then does this affect when you start to teach actual self-defense applications?

In reading this, I kind of see where you don't necessarily go along with the processes of someone like Abernethy or Anslow in deciphering the bunkai of katas.....am I close?

This subject came to mind during a conversation with my instructor (which tends to bring up a lot of my topics). He is a big believer in technique, and so am I. He pushes basics, and forms, and the one-steps (billed as self-defense techniques), and sparring comes last in class, for around 10 to 15 minutes (if we get to it at all). I don't mind doing basics and forms, and I think that having good technique is important. But his data is collected from his days in coming up through the ranks, competing as a black belt, and doing very well. He was the middle weight champ at a yearly tournament in Kanas City for 10 years straight, which is quite a feat, and hasn't been duplicated to date. One of his fellow classmates was the heavyweight champ at the same tourney for about as many years in a row, and he also went on to be a professional kickboxer. So, these guys had some talent. But, I don't feel that their experiences parallel those of every other practitioner. I think that good applications are a big part of learning to spar and defend oneself successfully. We have quite a few students in the class that are openly irritated with sparring; they don't like to do it, and I think it is because they don't have many good experiences with it. Instead of getting chances to work sparring drills, like counters, two-person ring drills, and generally sparring enough to learn and become comfortable with applying these techniques, we "just spar." It has been my experience in these situations that the more aggressive and dominant types will excell in this kind of setting, whereas the more timid will fall by the wayside. I am a big believer in technique; its half the battle. But, the other half is application of that good technique. Working the strategies to go with the techniques, and make them effective, is the best of both worlds, in my opinion. What is everyone else's opinions on this?

Hey, I'm a Meatloaf fan, too. Not many around that are, from what I can see.

I think that this could be an issue, and if it is, then one would notice it because it is an out-of-character disposition. If you see someone down that usually isn't, then I'd say yeah, maybe cut them some slack, because they may be having a bad day. But, at the same time, I think it is important to try not to let your personal life effect your gym time. I know it can be tough at times, and it is ok to have a bad day. But, it should be controllable.

I agree here. Take the stance that you want to use, and work from it. If you have to switch stances in sparring to kick instead of punch, you are setting yourself up, because the opponent will figure out what you will have coming. You should be able to develop your kicks and punches from the same position. Now, during your technique combinations, you may transition from one stance to another, and that is fine. Just keep in mind that if you have to transition out of necessity, then you give away your game. This can be bad for self-defense, too. Find a stance that you feel that you can defend efficiently from, and then work your techniques from there.

Hey, I'm on a roll now!

Well, that's tough. I think that the knife naturally lends itself to being used as a weapon, so much so that it has been specialized over the years to be used specifically as a weapon (combat knives, daggers, etc). The hammer, although formidable, doesn't lend itself as readily to defense, in my mind. It isn't balanced very well, and can't be carried as well as a knife can; especially the folders. You could make the arguement that the hammer has specialized as well, like the larger medieval warhammers and such, but by and large, I think that the knife would serve one better. I think that if you strapped on a tool belt, and carried a hammer and a knife everywhere you went, and kept a little notebook in that belt to tally each time you found an opportunity to use the hammer, and the opportunity to use the knife, I think that the knife would come up the most. Thus, the reason I think that its use as a weapon has arised, as well.