username8517

Not sure if anyone else has seen previews for this upcoming show on the Discovery Channel. It's basically the same premise as Human Weapon - two hosts travel to different countries to learn the native martial arts and then fight in a challenge match at the end. However, from the previews I've seen it looks like the challenge matches are much more hardcore (no pads for example). The season premires on January 4th (supposedly), but the first episode I could find after 1/4 is on the 5th. There's a sneak peek episode (Kung-Fu) being ran on 12/28 @ 10:00 pm and then repeated on the 29th @ 2:00 am. Then the next listing I can find is 1/5 (Kali/Escrima) @ 3:00 pm

There was a nice "write-up" about Commander Coal that I ran across a while ago on another site. His challenge (which he offered money if he could be hit) was taken up on and ducked by Coal a couple of times. His military experience and credibility has also been called into question. Edit--just went hunting for the article and realized I was a tad off. What I remembered was a thread from 2005 on another website in which Commander Coal himself popped in and then danced about the issues. Also his challenge wasn't actually ducked from what I saw skimming back through the forum, rather it had the stipulation that only his students could take him up on the $50,000 challenge.

Although I consider myself a striker I do have some grappling experience and after defending the impending punch and armbar was the first thing I thought of.

Karatedork, There are benefits to drinking alcohol in moderation. Here is an article from MayoClinic.com stating benefits of drinking alcohol in moderation. And here is a article from the National Council of Alcohol and Drug Dependence (NCADD) stating that while there may be some benefits to drinking alcohol, you must do so in moderation, and take into account the potentially negative affects if you're considered high risk. All in all, I believe alcohol is alright as long as responsiblity and moderation is practiced. P.S.--Personally I think some forms of alcohol takes quite good.

I'm guessing that the reason the camps are only in the summer is because that's when schools are out. These camps then give kids something to do for a week (or give the parents someone to babysit their kids for a week). And as you state, us adults that would have a desire to attend these camps would find ways to get this done like taking vacation or personal time from work. Therefore, it makes sense from both a student base and finanicial perspectives to host these in the summer when the ability to draw from a larger pool of candidates is present.

Agreed. A good kata workout, even will proper and controlled breathing, will make you a little winded as you are exerting your body in small bursts at a time over an extended period of time. But I certainly don't think you should be fatigued/tired after every since one (i.e.--you only do one and you're tired).

I don't quite agree with this statement. You can generate a good amount of force throughout a kata without getting tired after every one. The key is to relax your body until the last moment before impact, relaxing those muscles until the next move, and utilizing the proper "breathing timing" as Killer Mike refers to it.

To expunge on what Youngman says, the majority of hall of fames out there will let people effectively buy their way into their associated hall of fame. There are a few legitimate hall of fames out there, but those are few and far between. Also, unless the person got their Phd in Martial Arts from mainland China, there is no such legitimate degree. Only recently in the US has a handful of colleges introduced bachelor's programs for martial arts.

I have a run down of my 2nd Dan testing Here

As someone who's taken FMA (Doce Pares to be exact) to compliment their striking (Okinawan Karate), I can say that this is correct. Now obviously my experience with one style in the FMA realm cannot account for all styles, but BM summed it up well. Also, bear in mind that some styles, such as Balintawak focus almost solely on the escrima with empty-hand being more important than knife work, which is entirely non-existent. While Sayoc is focused almost entirely on the knife (or three) with empty-hand being touched on incase you lose your last knife (and when I say your last knife I mean I have met more than a few Sayoc practioners who advocate never leaving the house without at least two knives on them at all times). But to take it back to the general FMA branch, yes the moves can be transitioned easily if you know what your doing. Since the biomechanics of an attack or block while weilding an escrima will be different and empty-handed, I can see the logic behind the instructor wanting students to wait 3-6 months before transitioning to empty hand techniques. He/She is probably wanting to ensure that all students who walk in through the door have a stable grasp on the basics before complicating things for you. For clarification, what I mean by complicating things is that when people first begin FMA, they tend to be very rigid and robotic in their moves. This is because people tend to focus solely on their weapon(s) in their hand, putting too much effort in getting the basics down (not that this is wrong, its how most MAs are done). But as you start to get the basics down, your movements will start to become more fluid in application, giving the ability to move around. If you do go and watch a class or two at the school, watch closely if they do any kind of partner drills - you'll definately see a distinction in both ability and fluidity between those that stand in one place and run through the drill and those that circle, move back and forth, and transition from high to low level attacks/blocks. Now the reason I bring that up is to create a reference point for this - for empty hand techniques, you should aim to be more fluid than when you are weilding an escrima or knife. A good portion of the empty hand techniques you will learn will be elbows, knees, and takedowns. Given that those are close range weapons, you will have to rely on your ability throw a few punches and immediately flow in for one of these close range attacks. Can they strike hard with these empty-handed techniques? Depends on the school in question and how they train. But then again, the same can be said about any martial art - I know of at least 1 karate dojo in my area that advocates not putting hip into an attack, believing that the power of a punch should come from the shoulders and arms. Now, given that in FMA, empty hand techniques aren't as prevalent as they are in karate, Muay Thai, and boxing to name a few, a solid generalization that they aren't as refined or crisp can easily be made. If you just didn't feel comfortable with the empty hand techinques in FMA, I would recommend cross-trainin in Silat as well. The strikes in Silat compliment nicely with FMA work.

Nor do I. What I am trying to point out is the difference between the two blocks. What you described in your previous post was blocking with the wide meaty side and then rotating your arm into an end position after contact was made - transversing from the double bone upon intial contact and ending in single bone position. A single bone block is contacting solely with the radius bone. Whether you feel more comfortable or not with which block is not a debate I'm wanting to get into. Rather I was merely trying to point out that the double bone block as discussed in the article and the "traditional" single bone blocks are not the same, even if they end in the same position. It would be like person 1 can drive a car facing north at point A for one mile and end up at point B. Then person 2, starting from the same point A, can drive a car facing south in reverse for one mile and end up at the same point B claiming both trips were the same. Both will start and end in the same position but the drives were not identical. Also, just on a side note, if a single bone block is perform, the striking area is with the radius bone in your forearm, you wouldn't break your wrist if performed correctly.

Tai sabaki is practiced in Shorin-ryu as well. But the purposes of blocks all fall back to intention of the defender. Ideally, the best defense is to not be in range. But if you are out of their range, odds are they're out of yours as well unless you have a destinctive reach advantage. That would make an immediate (or simultaneous) counter strike nearly impossible. I am gong to have to disagree merely based on technicalities. The end position would be the same, but the actual block would be different. If you are connecting with the double bone method and then rotating your forearm, the initial contact is going to be with the thick meaty part of your forearm. The rotation to end in the same position would only serve as an attempt to guide their arm away as you state. This blocking method will reduce the initial impact of the block as your muscles absorb some of the impact and lessen the amount of energy you would transfer to your opponent. The single bone method advocates creating that initial impact with the side of your forearm so your radius bone impacts your opponents arm, transferring more energy and force into your opponent's limb. Similar, yes. The same, no.

Turns out where this author teaches at is about twenty mintues from my house. I might have to stop up some time and check his class out. Personally, I don't put a lot of credence in the double bone block myself for a few reasons. First, as the author states, the top of the forearm is padded with thick muscle. While this is most certainly true, in the Okinawan styles I've studied (both past and present), I was never taught to execute a block for the purposes of meeting an attack and stopping it. Rather, blocks were used for intercepting attacks and striking, preferly through, the opponents limb(s) at the same time. Which leads into why traditional Okinawan blocks are performed with the single bone. Since all blocks are actually strikes, the single bone with less muscular structure on the sides, provides a better striking surface than using a wider flater thicker (read: more cushioning between bodies to re-absorb energy your body would be generating) double bone block. By utilizing a smaller striking area, the forearm allows for more of a slicing action over that of a clubbing by a double bone block. Think of it why don't you use the side of a sword or strike your opponent, its certainly wider than the blade. Also, the author states that the double bone block has an advantage because of the skeletal and muscular structure of the body. Since the double bone block he displays in photo for an upper block is much more similar to the upper blocks I'm used to seeing and doing, I'm going to gloss over that as although there are differences, I think he's on the right path with that . Taking it to the middle block, I will concede that the muscular structure of a double bone block is stronger than a single bone, however since blocks are not static in nature, the muscular structure of your body will have a lesser of an impact on whether a block is successful. Muscular resistance from a static position can help gauge biomechanical advantages, but the largest factors in whether a block will be successful will fall back to both intent and force generated. The same thing goes with the lower block as well. Even the story the author relates about breaking his forearm falls into this category. When the author slipped on the wooden bridge his intention was not to drive through the wooden railing, rather his intention was to catch himself to prevent the fall or, failing that, absorb the blow. I would be willing to bet that his attempt to catch himself, while it may have followed the path of a lower block, didn't have anywhere near the force behind it that it would have had he actually executed a block. This did allow more energy to travel directly to the bone creating the break. Had the author actually used a double bone like method to catch himself, he might have not suffered as serious of an injury upon the fall (as it would be more fitting to absorb the energy over a single bone). Take it back to the sword example and why you don't block or strike with the flat of the blade. It's not the intention of the weapon. Can the double bone block be effective, absolutely, especially when your aim is to block and absorb rather than strike back. Should it be a staple blocking mechanism - not in my opinion (note: I know the author is not stating this either, just making a point).

I'm going to have to disagree with you. If you're outnumbered, you're going to be at a severe disadvantage, regardless if the opposition is built or not. All it takes is one blindside shot, regardless of how effective it is, to throw you off and create a moment of weakness. Also, even if there is only one, you should find away to avoid the fight. Just because it's only one guy doesn't mean you should take unneccessary risks. What if that one guy has a knife hidden that you can't see before the fight starts? What if that one guy has a buddy around the corner? What if that one guy is better than you? What if that one guy get a lucky shot in and breaks your jaw? What if. . . . Always try and remove yourself from the situation and defend yourself only when absolutely neccessary.

Johnlogic121, could you please validate the claims that were made: - The style is successful is because when I created it I was already America's top research scientist - Over 90% of police department precincts have been trained in this style and they are seeing 95% victory in their fights - Figures and statistics showing that the correllation between percentage chance of a police officer being assaulted during an arrest and consequencely, what perentage of those are life & death situations - SCARS trained civilians have a 60% success rate - The US Military, using Bujinkan Ninjutsu, only had a 40% success rate - French have started to apply Montgomery Style Karate with a success rate of 99.8% - Britain also uses the style with a 99% success rate - US beats standard Russian espionage agents 98% of the time and beats Chinese martial artists 96% of the time - China has used some espionage to gain some of our source material documents but does not have the entire style - US Intelligence forces beat world class agents around 97% of the time - Police officers with eight one hour classes are beating contemporary martial artists 95% of the time - We tend to kill opponents with average of ten strikes in an average duration of five seconds flat - The military used to say that contemporary military arts took thirty strikes on average to kill an opponent - Currently, the CIA considers it the best style in the world Also, I was wondering if you would please address the claims made previously. I have quoted my previous post (listed below) so all questions I have are together in one post. Furthermore, you briefly mentioned that you didn't have a website for me to look at, do you have any medical documentation or research reports you could point me to? Finally, since you have mentioned potentially releasing information to the public, could I please obtain a copy of your 40-manual so I may review it and present an substantiated opinion on Montgomery Style Karate for others. Thank you in advance.