bushido_man96

I don't buy into the Dim Mak idea either. I just don't see enough out there to prove it is true.

I like the knee strikes, but we tend to work them more in our DT classes and Hapkido than we do in TKD. Some of our forms have a knee strike, but we have never explored any applications with them. I do think that our chest protectors would allow us to get some level of contact with a knee to the body, so its an idea. Cung Le had some interesting scenarios in there, and I liked the way that he set up its usage.

I had not seen the DSi yet. It looks like it has a ton of potential. I love the DS Lite. Nice find, Patrick.

Man, that is freaky-cool!

My DT buddy has a collapsable set of chucks. They are neat, but a little rattley.

Hey, it is what it is. A mill-grinder handle is what it is. Whether it is squared or tapered is of little significance, as well, I would think. Although a squared one might leave cooler notches in the other person's head.

That isn't how I am accustomed to using the shield. The shield is there for protection, and if you don't keep in front of you, it won't protect you. I also don't see much need for the shoulder roll, either. There is just too much that could go wrong there. Also, if you are truly working the sword and shield, it is really a two-weapon system; the shield is a nasty weapon, too. Here is a good text that gives some good, basic intorductory information on the use of sword and shield: http://www.thearma.org/medsword.htm ....and another nice title, specializing in the sword and buckler: http://www.revival.us/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=112

2-26-09 100 Push-ups Week 4, Day 3: 23, 28, 23, 23, 33 = 130. I think I am ready for an exhaustion test again. TKD class: 6:00 - 7:00. Before class, I worked on my 3rd dan form, focusing on some touchy spots that have been giving me fits. During sparring, I had a pretty good round with one of the 1st dans, and did some things that I don't usually do. I thought it went well.

Thanks for the link. I had thought that the dive-bomber and the Hindu were the same...I thought wrong...

There is a good point in here that I would like to elaborate on. When you spend time in class "just sparring," I have found that those that are naturally good at it, or better at it than most, tend to spar with that competition frame of mind, to beat the other person all the time. Not that this is a bad thing, but I do think that one should take the time to work on different aspects of sparring in order to help those out that aren't as good or talented at it.

That is interesting, but I would stick with the collapsable batons. Working them with Escrima is a good idea, and will translate seemlessly, I think. The tactical lights are a good idea, too. Do you plan on carrying these things on a regular basis?

Well, the lack of popularity of it is one problem. I know that there are some Medieval re-creationists that have worked on the style, but they are pretty spread out, and the groups tend to be relegated to larger cities. If you check out https://www.thearma.org, you will get pointed in the right direction.

I think it is workable. However, to echo Tiger's concerns, it is important that the presense of younger practitioners doesn't effect the training of the adults.

Classroom teachers have found that the more teaching conforms to an organization's desires, the more creativity goes out the window. An example can be "teaching for the test" that the organization wants, but education (all that it implies) can suffer from a narrow focus; a stilted study can result. I can see creativity being applied in the martial arts by the teacher who will prepare students for testing, but also introduce that which is not organization-directed and yet has merit. This is the "truer" teacher. I agree here, Joe, and I have a personal experience for it. My daughter's middle school right now is in the process of gearing up for the state assessments. So, instead of continuing with their regular teaching and curriculum, they are focusing all their time on what is on the assessments, which I think is wrong. The assessments are meant to see where the school and system is a whole, compared to nationwide standards. By teaching to the assessment, it skews the results, but in the end, makes them look good as a school that "performs exceptionally when compared statewide on the assessments." That is excellent. Well said.

I think that the teacher should be able to adapt the content to needs as they arise. However, I think that it is important to do this within one's realm of knowledge. An organization may set a curriculum that is tested by, and that is fine; but it doesn't have to be the only curriculum taught in any MA class setting. I think that yes, a teacher should be willing to listen to what the students want to learn, and be willing to cater to that want, if it: 1.) fits the goals of what the teacher has for his school, 2.) is something that the teacher knows and can do, or knows someone that can present it, and will do so, and 3.) the teacher doesn't show up to class each time and says "so what do you want to work on today?" Now, allow me to elaborate... 1. From our discussions, John, I don't think that you would be interested in spending a class period, or a block of classes, in teaching students to kick to the head, and to work on the nuances of technical aspects associated with high kicks (kicking to the head). Although it may be "fun" for the class, it will likely take up valuable time for applicable self-defense skills, which many people don't look at high kicks as. 2. It would not behoove me to attempt to teach ground fighting and defense skills to my class, if that is what they wanted, simply because I know just about jack squat on the subject, other than what I read. However, if I know of someone that is experienced in the field, then I should be willing to defer to the knowledge of someone else to help teach something to my class that I cannot. 3. I do think that it is the responsibility of the teacher to show up with a class planner, so-to-speak. The teacher should have some kind of idea of the subject matter that he is approaching for the day, week, block, etc. However, flexibility in planning is what leads to my explanation to #1. I think that as new ideas and training advances are made, then yes, they should be evaluated and tested to see if they will benefit the student body as a whole. They may not need to be incorporated at the expense of other things, but be combined and used together, if applicable. If not, then new may need to replace old. As for having a broad and deep understanding of the subject matter, I think is a definite yes.

Thanks for the continued evaluation, tallgeese. Its good to see that it is holding up under continued duress.

Thank you for the advise. I'll add that title to my list of those to pick up.

It sounds like you had an enjoyable experience, and that is one of the main things. If you learned something, then you did not come away empty handed.

I think that you are spot on about the way sparring is taught in most schools, JusticeZero. Most sparring matches tend to start at a determined distance, and the mutuality of the endeavor is not always conducive to that of what an attack is like. When most attacks happen, there isn't really any "close the gap" strategy; it is usually already closed, with the bad guy already on top of you.

I've wondered that myself.I watched the last half of it, and the farther along it went, the less I wished I'd watched. All they should be allowed to say is "thank you" when they take that award....

I hope Tekken is good, too. I think that Zelda would have some promise, if Peter Jackson gets to do it.

I have found a good chocolate chip cookie recipe recently, and have been making them. Usually, I do the eating rather than the cooking, though. I'm a mess in the kitchen.

I just finished Cussler's Skeleton Coast, and have started Serpent. I am also reading A Killing Art, The Untold History of Tae Kwon Do. Really interesting stuff there.

That's awesome!

That is good news.