bushido_man96

If you can teach a level of control, I don't think any of these ages are too young. Kids start wrestling at around the age of 7, if not younger. The problem is teaching the joint locks/submissions. If you can get them to control them, it won't be a problem.

Congratulations! And I am sure your instructor is very confident in your skill level and abilities, and has no doubt that you will not only excel, but prove to be a good example to other students at the school. By the way, I like the way you describe your school and instructor. It sounds like he truly enjoys showing people the way.

I hear you there. There are only two schools were I live. One is karate, the other is the TKD school I go to.

I wouldn't say you are stuck in a rut, more like you are specializing in your style.

Try googling something in that area, like Crane or Mantis style.

Did you ever see Jeff Bagwell play baseball? His batting stance was a really deep horse stance. There is one to emulate!

That's a good response, Jiffy. Economy of movement, I think is what Bruce called it. Addressing drunkenmonkeyblackbelt: by saying you want to get your body into better "karate" shape, I assume that it means you are built a little like me. Here is me: 5'7", 240 - 245, and I ain't no football player. I am not really fat, but I am not really muscled out, either. But, when unfamiliar people see me move and kick, I sometimes get the eyebrow raise. I have a martial arts buddy who told me that "guys that big shouldn't move that fast." I am not bragging, but what I am saying is that you shouldn't worry about how your body looks so much as you should worry about how it functions. If you are looking to reshape a little, try some cardiovascular exercise, about 20-30 minutes a day, 5 days a week. This should help.

Just for fun, lets take these two modes of fighting as a basis, and see what combinations are available to you, or you have trained in, and talk about their compliments and pros/cons. I'll start with TKD as a striking style, because that is what I have studied for the past almost 14 years. And I'll add wrestling (high school style), as that is about the only style of grappling available to me. TKD is great because it teaches good solid blocking and striking skills. Great kicks, even though they teach a lot of high kicks. My thought on this is that if you can kick high, then you can kick low if you need to. Good combination training too. Along with the kicking is the benefit of flexibility, as most TKD schools have a good stretching routine. Flexibility helps to prevent injuries to muscles. Also, in TKD you can learn to block and counter, or to counter without blocking, although most of this countering is done soley with kicking techniques. Wrestling is great for several reasons. Conditioning is one. Wrestlers are some of the most conditioned athletes in the world. Wrestling practice can be done much in the same manner as judo, full speed, and with fairly safe outcomes. As a wrestler, you can get a good solid base to working on takedowns, escapes, and groundwork. The only downfall to wrestling in this style is that it mostly works toward a pin or scoring points, as opposed to locking and submitting. This is just an example. Try to keep it to one striking style, and one grappling style, just for the sake of argument. And I know that there has been a very extensive thread about karate containing groundfighting/grappling, and I don't want this thread to be another one of those. So, for the sake of argument, we will consider karate primarily (but not soley ) a striking/stand-up style. Let me know what you think!

That is great. Just the right amount of force was used, and no one was seriously injured. As far as I can tell, Frank did what he felt was right. And he tried so hard to avoid confrontation. Good for him.

That's a good post there. We all grow differently. Although we are all on the same journey, we all have seperate paths that get us to our goals.

That website is much more toned down. Like you could actually find what you are looking for.

My instructors always say: "a block is a strike, and a strike is a block." For what it's worth. jka_guyana: good luck to you on your endeavor. It sounds like you have quite the task before you.

Hey, were cool. I agree with you. My current instructor is fairly indifferent on the subject.

I have trained bare foot for 14 years, and have never had athlete's foot, let alone any other infection, or HIV, or anything of the sort.

I agree with you, Martial Arthur. I can't stand reality TV. What is real about it, anyway?

If it is partner stuff you need to work on, then you should find a likely candidate, and start training them so they can work with you. By doing this, you will also learn a lot about teaching, which is an invaluable experience in and of itself.

why not? Increasing your max strength, also known as limit strength is excellent for fighters. you are increasing your power output, which has its obvious advantages. I'm sure it's not uncommon for fighters training for a fight to spend at least 4 weeks of their cycle to increasing limit strength. I've seen it talked about in boxing circles. Also, most workouts are based off of reps performed at a percentage of 1 rep max. Therefore, testing a 1 rep max every 3 months or so will let you know if you should increase the weight in your rep training.

I have used the ICHF videos to review material, but I have practiced it in class before as well. I think videos are great if it similar material as to what you have trained in before. I wouldn't buy videos to train to get a 'black belt in such art' or anything like that.

Fast food is kind of my bain. I try to regulate, but I have such an appetite anyways....oh, I don't know.

I agree with you here. That is why I try to include both equations for power when I start discussing it. Both are important, and it is important to know what you have to work with as well.

While I agree that someone who knows little about the ground should attempt to bite, claw ect... However, let me first point out that a blue belt represents only about 1-2 years of training. Additionally, we have methods to deal with people who bite (or attempt to) such as moving to the across side position. From this position pressure can be applied such that the head is effectively immobilized. Reaching of any kind (be it for the groin or otherwise) usually ends up in nasty consequences. Small joint maneuvers (wrist locks and whatnot) are effective, as you pointed out, but we practice them also. I'm not saying what you propose is not correct, I have practiced Shotokan for some time. I believe karate has very effective self defense techniques, not to mention the amazing tradition and cultural lessons it tells. However, elbows_and_knees is exactly correct that ground fighting is all about position. Once you get into the proper position, you can beat anyone. Shotokanwarrior, you make the same assertions that people, myself included, did during the first few UFCs (the only things outlawed were biting and eye gouging). The grapplers dominated because they got into the most superior positions. That said... Karate does, as Alsey wrote, teach the nage waza (throws) and kensetsu waza (joint manipulations) and Shime waza (chokes & strangulations), but does not, as elbows_and_knees pointed out, it does not teach how to gain the most dominant position on the ground. There are several plausible reasons for this. I submit the following possibilities for dispute: 1. Those who had developed the kata had never ended up in a less dominant position and, therefore, never considered the possibility. The techniques in the kata were enough for them to appropriately dispatch their opponent. 2. The techniques in the kata are set up to place you in the dominant position to begin with. Most of the nage waza allow a person to perform a take down and end with a joint manipulation or strong strike. 3. Some of the more ancient techniques are based on battlefield combat. Staying on the ground was not a good idea when weapons were in use. Plus their armor made ground combat a little cumbersome. So they were always trying to utilize techniques that avoided having to go to the ground to begin with. Grappling was a last resort, just like today's combat situations. Please do not think I'm saying the above are historical fact. Just possibilities I came up with off the top of my head. But, none the less, karate kata do contain many grappling techniques. These are very good points that you make here. I, too, feel that the groundfighting we know of today is more rooted in earlier sport wrestling like that which was practiced in ancient Greece. It was not heavily trained due to the weapons fighting that was used in combat. If they came in close, disarms or arm locks were utilized, or maybe a trip/throw (i.e., stand up JJJ). But going to the ground was a bad idea. The true basis of today's groundfighting probably originated with Jigoro Kano and his theories and techniques for practicing judo. You could also relate it to the roots of folk/high school wrestling.

if you make a low kick against an untrained fighter, you will probably hit them if your techniques is good. if you try the same low kick on its own against a pro, he will most likely avoid it. you have to do something else against a pro: you have to deceive, combine moves etc. that's the difference in technique i'm talking about. as for grappling, there are different levels of it. with some basic grappling knowledge i can beat most untrained people on the ground. but i won't be able to beat an experienced grappler. Yes, the pro is trained to avoid low kicks....and a lot of other things. But hey, so am I. I just don't get to train 6 hours a day. Now, a pro Thai boxer, he will be able to defend it well. A pro boxer, maybe, maybe not. You have to be able to formulate strategies quickly, to use your strengths and counter their weaknesses, and to hide yours. I just don't think you want to tell your fellow karate students that if they get attacked by another martial artist that they are in trouble.

quote alsey: unless of course combat starts closer than long range striking distance, or your opponent moves in close. If combat starts out close, then you are already that much closer to their eyes or other soft targets. Do you remember how close Tyson and Holyfield were when Tyson bit his ear? quote alsey: untrained fighters are still extremely dangerous. however, because they are untrained you don't need to use complicated techniques to defeat them. this doesn't mean that fighting them is necessarily any easier than fighting a trained fighter, it simply means that the methods you will need to use are not as advanced. If I have to defend myself against a pro or an untrained fighter, I am going to use simple techniques anyways. Punches, kicks low, maybe a grab or two to twist them up, but nothing that I would view as overly complicated. Keep it simple. You could view grappling techniques as complex movements. They require a lot of fine motor skill development, and in my opinion, grappling skills require more training to develop than other, more rudimentary fighting skills.

Exactly. That is the arguement I have been making for this particular kick, and that is why I prefer it.

Practicing self-defense is very important, and I think that a lot of schools relegate self-defense to bunkai or one-steps, and then call it good, and move onto the fighting. Self-defense must be practiced with some form of spontaneity in order to become more proficient at it. This kind of practice can also help to improve adrenale-stress training.