bushido_man96

Thanks for the clips, Mike. I can see how some of those moves fall into place.

Cool, where at? I am just a state away. Are you a Husker, too?

You bring up some good points, ps1. However, and it could just be me, but I am not sure that the weapon would be that big of a difference. When defending sword on sword (at least for the European), the contact would be made from one blade to the other at around a 45 degree angle, and then push into a counter thrust or strike. I am not sure that there would be enough force-on-force sword contact for either of the blades to be broken. Unless the blades were really of that poor quality. Something else that is interesting to consider is the fact that each of the warriors would have been skilled in the use of other weapons as well. For most of their existence, the Samurai weapon of choice was the spear, as opposed to the sword. The spear was also a popular weapon in many other cultures, including the European knights. They could have met in the lists and gone weapon for weapon.

Great post. These things seem like common-sense thing to teach when it comes to self-defense, but it is usually the last thing ever taught in a class, if it is ever taught. Perhaps we should change our approach to mental first, and then physical.

This is true. However, if the student feels proud about what he has learned and accomplished, and then does something to have his rank stripped, hopefully the integrity would kick in for him to realize that he should change his attitude, and thus fix the problem. Kind of like the Samurai/Ronin paradigm.

Keep in mind that this is not a "which style is best" discussion, or a style-bashing discussion. The discussion is focused on the practitioner, and not an art. There are a lot of good points being made so far, and I want the discussion to stay positive. Thanks.

Congrats, Patrick!

When armor really increased, with full suits of plate, many times half-swording techniques would come into play to help make a more controlled thrust with the blade. Also, the edges were not focused on as much, and would be more used to bludgeon and dent the armor, as opposed to cutting with the edge. However, even with the advent of plate armor, not every warrior on the field would end up wearing a full suit of plate; it was just too expensive to outfit an army that way. So, you would still have soldiers wearing mail armor, which was more vulnerable to the cut and thrust style of fighting.

Where are you based out of, Mabon?

I can understand that you feel good about what your brother accomplished. However, part of success and pride in competition, I feel, is being able to compete within the guidelines of the rules and win. I know that it seems silly that some events want to discard face punches, but when that is the case, then you should tailor your tournament training for the environment that you will be competing in. It would be kind of like going into a boxing competition, and then kicking your opponent in the groin repeatedly; it may be a win in your mind, but it was outside the context of the rules.

I think that is very cool of your instructor to do that, USCMAAI. I don't know of many instructors that actually push you to go study other styles to get educated in the various ranges of combat. Learning to use a firearm is also a very wise idea, I think.

That is a very nice post. I like the 5 phases that you discuss, and I would love to hear some more information on that concept. On a sidenote, I have felt for quite some time now that no matter what an instructor's teaching goals/focuses are, that good self-defense should be a by-product of the training.

I would prefer to strike first. I don't feel like waiting around to get hit.

The best martial artist? Let's make this thread about who you personally think is the best, i.e., your personal favorite..

This can be beneficial, to both parties involved. It helps to keep the forms fresh in the minds of the lower ranks, and can foster the importance of being able to teach what you have learned. Of course, not every school will function this way, either, and the technical level won't be as high as that of the instructor, but that is something the instructor himself/herself can fix. In our school, the instructor expects each student to be able to help out a lower ranked student if they ask for it on forms or one-steps. He likes for us to stay sharp on older material. When a student can't show a low rank his form, the instructor lets them know!

These are good suggestions. I would also suggest some modeled type of sparring. Have one student designated to throw a technique. When he throws it, have the other student perform a designated movement and counter-attack. This will help them to see what they can or should do when a certain attack comes at them, helping to develop a stimulus-based response. After some time of doing this, have them spar. You can even limit the attacks in the sparring to those practiced. As they improve, you can work up to combination work and defense, etc.

This is a good point. Sometimes a 'forced recovery' such as this is the only recovery we end up allowing ourselves, because we become so neurotic about our training.

I had never seen the curved ones. That is different. As for the others, it really is preference. If you don't like vacuuming up wood splinters after a testing, then go with the rebreakables. However, I have found that the rebreakables require you to be more accurate when targeting your techniques. The other question is how long will they last before they start to give from being put back together so much? Personally, I like the good old wood boards. More inconsistency, and better challenge, and much more rewarding when you hear that wood snap (in my opinion).

Hello. This has been a long and interesting discussion. At this time, though, I do believe that the thread itself has run it's course. Much of the same discussion continues to recycle, so therefore, with nothing new being added, I feel it is time to close this thread. Thanks.

We don't have any required Ho Sin Sul, but we do have required one-steps. Lately, I have been analyzing them, and thinking of ways to "evolve" them into self-defense techniques.

That is a great attitude to have. The Martial Arts journey is our own, and we should enjoy the view along the way, instead of worring about how fast we get there. I finally found that Bruce Lee quote I was looking for: "In every passionate pursuit, the pursuit counts more than the object pursued."

When I first started training, these were the reasons behind the kihap explained to me as well.

You bring up a good point. I, too, was a former student in the ATA, and I never had any really bad experiences there, and I felt like I had good instructors. However, as ninjer pointed out, the desparity between the groundfight and the stand-up is there. You have to know how to ground fight to defend it. Training methodology is a very important part of what you get out of your training. You will fight the way you train. In battle, you don't rise to the occassion, you sink to the level of your training.

Nice article. Thank you for sharing!

5-16-07 At 5:00, I did some more bag work, for about 15 minutes, continuously. I really focused on a jab/cross/hook combination, making sure to get my hips into each of the strikes that I did. It really started to wear on my arms, too, which felt really good. Taught Orientation from 5:30 - 6:00. One of the kids was having a little trouble with the idea of actually going into the regular class. So, I talked it over with him, and convinced him that it will all be ok. I think that once he gets in there, he will be ok with it. We had Kicking Class from 6:00 - 7:00, although it really wasn't kicking class today. I warmed up by reviewing some high rank forms, including 2 brown belt forms and 2 black belt forms. Then, we worked on our one-step based flow drills. It was a lot of fun, and it really made everyone think.