bushido_man96

Ah, its no big deal, really. Welcome to the Forums, by the way!

I see your point, cross.

I don't think a social atmosphere necessarily leads to a McDojo. Neither does it mean it leads to dating. Some people just have different styles.

You could do grip training and forearm training. Those may help you out. When you punch the heavy bag, you should probably wrap your wrists, to keep them from getting injured. Welcome to the Forums!

Mine shows through on the other side. I guess I just never stopped to worry about it. The embroidery is done through the whole belt.

No problem! That is why I threw that out there. I am kind of a patron of the Western Martial Arts, so I like to throw out information when I get the chance. Welcome to the Forums!

I am not talking about people in the old days who studied purely one art. I am talking about these days when most people cross train. Also I don't think you can especially count the Gracies in the early days, as basically the UFC was a vehicle for BJJ back then.This paradigm here can be likened to what is called "brandnaming" in business/marketing. Take the WeedEater, for example. It was the first brand to make the line trimmers that we all call weedeaters. That was everyone's first exposure to it. Then, when Toro made a "line trimmer," everyone just referred to it as a "weedeater." Kleenex has the same kind of relation with "facial tissue." BJJ made its name at the right time in MMA competitions, and therefore, it gets this kind of recognition. Really, you just can't read too much into it. In fact, why couldn't BJJ be considered a "traditional art?"

When I think of "deadly techniques," I think of very debilitating moves, like striking the neck, digging into the eyes, or maybe even using your surroundings (oncoming traffic?) if need be. Breaking limbs could fall under the category as well, I guess. I think that there is a difference between a fight and self-defense. By the word "fight," I picture 2 guys dancing around each other, trying to pick each other apart. By "self-defense," I picture a vicous attack against the (perceived) unprepared, and then trying to survive the situation by any means necessary.

This is where the knowledge of the Use of Force continuum comes into play, and being able to justify your actions as well. It isn't about just training the techniques; it is also about training yourself mentally and emotionally to know if and when it is necessary to use them.

I think that you make some good points. However, there is just one that I would argue...the fact that all styles came from China. There just isn't enough evidence to support that. Chinese style may have had influence on Japanese and Korean styles, but not on styles in Europe or Africa, or in ancient Greece. Otherwise, I can see your points.

I see where you are coming from, but I still don't really agree. If you have questions, I think you should ask. I think it means that you want to be sure. I don't think it means anything negative about the personality of the person, or their lack of ability to perform and learn, in my opinion.

I couldn't agree with you more, cross.

I think that at times, the way you describe "forcing" something is much the way that some others would refer to as "training" something. It is true that there are some techniques done in the Martial Arts that are not reflexively natural. However, it does not mean that they can't become valuable when trained to use them. I see what you are saying with the square peg/round hole analogy, and it makes sense to me. In fact, I think that it is a good point at times. However, there are some benefits that come from training beyond just the reflexive actions. Now, I do feel that limiting yourself to something that is stylized in and failing to explore the other options that are out there, can be detrimental to one's training. Branching out, and experimenting to see what works is important.

That is good advise. If you get popped a few times, you start to lose that feeling about you. You just need to spend more time doing it, and forcing yourself to commit. It will come with time.

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks.

Great information, and great posts by all!

That sounds like a fun class to be a part of, ps1. I don't take a lot of face punches in my training, so I try to work on it from time to time. It is tough at times. I get into the habit of anticipating, and it usually gets me hit, and then I blink more. 5-23-07 Back/shoulders: Assisted pull ups: plate 13x10, plate 12x10, 12x10 Back hyperextensions: 3x15 Dumbbell hang clean and press: 40x10, 8, 8 Conditioning: Jump rope: 5x1 min. rounds. Punch out/kick out rounds: 3x30 sec on punches, then right into 3x15 sec on kicks. I did the punches, and then the kicks, and then rest for 1:30. Then, I had a good 10 minute stretch. In class, from 6:00 - 7:00, I did low rank forms and one-steps, 7 forms in all. I also had the kids doing kicking combinations in between the forms and one-steps work.

The only camps I know of in Thailand are Muay Thai camps. I don't know about the Ninja one. Welcome to the Forums!

Try doing the twist kick with the instep, as opposed to pulling the toes back. It works very nice this way, and it helps when it is done lower.

Yes, ps1, Ho Sin Sul is self-defense. I have seen schools that teach one-steps, which are required for self-defense, and then teach seperate self-defense techniques, which are not required for testings, but are practiced anyways. Why some TKD schools don't focus more on them, I don't know for sure. Many of the more sport-oriented schools will focus more on sparring, and less on the self-defense. Some schools will incorporate in Hapkido, and get self-defense that way.

Nice drill, ps1. Thanks for the props, too! (It makes me feel good to think that I actually know what I am talking about from time to time ).

That is an interesting video. Thanks for digging that up.

This is a good question, lordtariel, and a hard one to answer. Even the people who you might refer to as "professionals" still have to deal with this. There isn't a very high percentage of LEOs out there that have really actually had to dispatch somebody. When you compare the stats, to the number of LEOs employed, and the number that have actually had to take a life. I think that ps1 and USCMAAI made very good points in their posts, about being justified when using the techniques. Level of force has to be kept in mind. Here is a different scenario for you. My dad, when he was an LEO in a small Kansas town, had something very bad come down on him one night. Bad guy, with a gun pointed to my dad's head, at close range, and my dad with no weapon out. He had to talk the guy down, and he managed to do it. He lived with that pretty well afterwards. He told me that later on, he met up with that guy on the street, off-duty, and had a real heart-to-heart with that individual. That is definitely not a situation that I would ever want to be in. I don't know if it has anything to do with this thread, but it is something to think about. If someone is intent on killing you, do you really want to be the victim? Should you feel sorry for them? They won't to you.

That is a nice, thought, however, the grappler will probably be more skilled at taking someone to the ground than we (as in TKD people, you and me ) would be at defending the takedown. That is how Royce Gracie was able to dominate the early UFCs. Everyone thought that they could avoid the takedowns, but in the end, it all ended up the same way. You really have to spend some significant amount of time training against the grappling to get really good at defending it. Not to say it can't happen, though. However, knowing how to take someone down is the best defense against a takedown.

Well, kicking while you are on the ground can go into ground fighting...however, this is the phrase that threw me: That doesn't really sound like ground fighting, but more like kicking someone while they are on the ground. Not to say that you can't do it, but I don't think it is really classfied as ground fighting.