bushido_man96

2-9-09 8:00 - noon: DT class for the jail employees. I felt that the class went really well, and we had some good comments and good reception. For a lot of our guys, this was their first exposure to anything hands-on, and it went really well. It did open up some eyes.

You guys mention giving up the back a lot. I think that is the one area that the sport aspect of Wrestling really hurts. I call it the "pin mentality." I think that once they can get it in their heads that it is ok to defend from the back, then I think that is when they can really open up and take off. That is just an observation that I have made, though, and it may not be that way at all. Thoughts?

Could you give an example of what these things would be, in your eyes? My list of that is a mile long. Check it out. I've had teachers tell me to move faster and not tell me how. I've had teachers tell me that I have a bad strategy while I was beating them with it. I've had teachers tell me to stretch and warm up on the same level as the rest of the class when I was easily twice as flexible as all of them. I've had teachers tell me not to use certain kicks when those kicks were in the curriculum. I've had teachers tell me that tag and step-sparring is a good way to develop self defense instinct. I've had teachers tell me that their style is "too deadly" and that's why they don't spar in class. I've had teachers tell me that simply because I was a lower belt I was physically incapable of doing things like breakfalls, handsprings, flips, splits, certain kicks, certain throws - in some cases of that I was already better than the teacher at it. I've seen teachers make students warm up way past their level and expect them to keep up (I'm all for making people work ultra hard but there's that and there's excessive). There's more but I can't remember them off the top of my head. It's when I see and/or hear things like this that martial artists and instructors lose a lot of points with me. Thanks for the list. That clears it up for me.

I do recall that video. But, what I am mentioning, is the televised appearance in an MMA competition, like the UFC, or the Affliction, or even the UFC Fight Nights on cable. But thanks for bringing that up, Joe. It does provide some cross-examination material.

When I spar, I tend to close my fists a lot. But for Combat Hapkido and DT training, I find them opened up a lot more for trapping and such. I do think that open hand has more options available for follow up.

Like tg mentioned, its a matter of knowing your local and state ordinances and laws. A good idea, especially if you are an MA instructor in your community, which is business for your community, would be to have a chat with the Chief of Police and talk to him about what you teach, how you teach it, and familiarize him with the things you have and do. That way, you can come up with some acceptable way of transporting and using said weapons.

In Medieval Europe, many of the movements of the quarterstaff also translated well to the movements of the sword, too. Its a good weapon to learn, becaues so many movements transfer so well, and you can't really beat the range.

Skill will play a major role, there is no doubt there. Both are fairly short-range weapons, too, but the kama will win out on the range.

I think that there is a difference between a "good" stance and a "deep" stance. A sitting stance is deeper than a back stance, but it isn't so deep that I can't move from it. However, I won't fight from it, either. By "deep," I mean overly deep to the point of being showy. Also, stances are transitional, anyway. It isn't a position that is meant to be held for any length of time, other than when performed in a kata or form. Many judoka and grapplers can drop their center of gravity without having to get into a deep stance with their feet 2x shoulder width apart. Its a transitionary movement that you get into and then get out of, and move into the next phase of what you are doing.

Cross and Joe have a good deal of information going there; I think from what cross is describing, there is a difference between posturing and then crossing the line to attacking. Posturing is something that is popular in the animal kindgom, and humans do it, too. The puffed up chest and loud talking/yelling are usually more akin to posturing than an actual impending attack. Its an attempt to intimidate someone into submissiveness. They end up being the dominant male, without having to even touch you. On the flip side, if you see someone approach you that tends more to hunch down a bit, and rolls his shoulders up, then that is the guy who is probably going to take a shot at you; he won't be talking much.

Every so often, I like to revisit the Wrestling aspect of the grappling styles. How many here have had Wrestling experience, like in high school, and now do a different grappling style? Or, how many still Wrestle? How has Wrestling helped in learning a different grappling style? How has it hindered? What are some of the best things you have taken away from your Wrestling training?

That's a good start, hapkido princess. It should get better from there.

I don't think that would necessarily work out. It is going to depend on the dojo, and I doubt it would work out.

Even if you can't get an hour in at home, 15 minutes here and there can benefit you, if anything else, by helping with memorization.

I still get nervous at testings, even after 15 years of training! Just breath, relax, and be confident in what you have learned. Let us know how it has turned out for you.

As a military officer, don't you consider some of what you do Martial Arts oriented? It may not be all hand-to-hand, but it is something.As an Electronics Technician in the Coast Guard I don't very much consider 99.9% of what I do MA oriented. I can't even get approval from my command to qualify for my pistol or rifle ribbon since it isn't really pertinent to my position. I see. That is a bummer. I apologize. I agree. You can refine many things by taking your training to different places. Yeah, its tough to practice side kicks while walking around at work, but you can practice things like awareness and threat possibilities.

I think we get into semantics at some point here. "Expert" should not mean "perfect." However, if you are confident in what you know, and your ability to teach and relate the nuances of what you are teaching, then you are likely an expert. That doesn't mean that you may not have to consort a reference on something from time to time; that is a natural thing. Here, I feel, that we don't ever really stop being students. I think that there is always something to learn, or review, etc. Now, if it does come to a point when you continually pull a "duh" in front of the classes that you teach, then it might be time to look into some re-training.

I think that at times you can find those that have a knack for teaching, but for the most part, it is necessary to have experience in what you plan to teach in order to teach it effectively.

Our organization holds a testing every 2 months for colored belts. However, I don't think I like this idea that much. Once you hit 1st dan, you have to wait 1 and a half years to test for 2R, then you have to test for 2D within 6 months, or fall back to 1D. From 2D to 3R, the wait is 2 and a half years, then another 6 months to test for 3D. At that point, it is 3 and a half years to 4, then 4 and a half to 5th, and so on. I think I would prefer to see at least 3 months between colored belt testings, and maybe some more time at the higher ranks, like brown belt. However, our school's curriculum consists of learning forms, one-steps, and then sparring for testings, and board breaks for higher ranks. Class time consists of basics, forms, one-steps, and sparring. The curriculum just isn't that deep. This bothers me, a lot.

Could you give an example of what these things would be, in your eyes? Even in this case, I would be leary. At times, we tend to get very caught up in how we view our instructors, and then how they view someone else. I think that it is important to listen, learn, meet, and then make our own decisions on who earns our respect and who doesn't. I agree here, but would replace the work respect with the word courtesy. Again, I don't feel that anyone has to repsect me right off the bat. I would appreciate the courtesy be shown to me, though.

In this case, I don't think that a defendant would have too much to fear.

What you describe here as basics, to me, seems to be more of an all-encompassing group of techniques. To me, the basics include the straight punch, the high block, the down block, the middle block, the knifehand strike, and the front, round, and side kick. From there, we build off of these to do more advanced techniques. You are correct though; the advanced techniques build off of the basic techniques. However, I don't think that one should have to move up from the basics, if they don't feel the need to, unless a curriculum expresses otherwise. The section that I put into bold is something I'd like to elaborate on, too. We have similar curriculum in our Combat Hapkido, and I see similar progressions in the DT program that I have been exposed to. I see them as the basics applied in various ways. So, you learn your wrist lock, say, from the wrist grab. Then, as you move on, you learn how to apply the wrist lock from other attacks and responses. Its part of the learning curve; if you could only apply your wrist lock from one scenario, then I don't it would be a very effective or efficient technique.

That jab can take a smaller toll, but it's got an impact to it, can be repeated easily, and lends itself to setting up the adversary for stronger strikes. I find it more logical to use what has a greater chance of success, and go for follow-ups, than use riskier moves in a real life situation. I agree with your assesment on the jab. This is precisely why it is such a utilized tool. I don't think that this is the case. As much as I would like to be able to put every high-flying kick that I know to use if needed, each one is just not as efficient or as effective as simpler techniques like the straight punch and round kick to the thigh. Degree of difficulty has to be one of the considerations to take into account when delivering a technique. Nor can you apply what one person does or is capable of doing across the board to everyone else in the world. It takes too many assumptions into account.

Every year, there is an analysis put out (I can't remember who does it) that tells what make of autos is the most-often stolen. I think last year one was a Toyota Corolla....the kind I drive!

I don't think that we will ever see this; not because some of us feel the idea is bunk, but because those that claim to have such abilities insist that they will not ever use it for anything so trivial as winning a competition. So, the proof that we all desire to see will never be allowed to happen.