DokterVet

They kind of suck? Compared to whom? K1 is Japan's biggest sport, meaning it probably pays more than any combat sport outside of western boxing. So these are among the best strikers in the world.

You don't think it's at all conceivable that an opponent would find an opening while you intend to hit him? Shouldn't you train for the worst-case? In kihon and kata yes. I usually dont kiai at all when sparring(unless im performing a finishing technique). I certainly wouldnt kiai in a self defence situation. Why do something in kihon and kata that has no actual use? Why? EDIT: FIXED QUOTE

I realize there is another thread on the first page about kiai, but this is a specific and different question. Do you open your mouth (ie sepparate your jaws) when you kiai? If yes, do you believe that this leaves you more succeptable to knockout and/or concussion if struck in the chin? Are the benefits of kiai worth the risk?

You could just speak english. That might help.

I think worn belts look pretty bad anyways. I'm not impressed.

I keep reading about this guy but haven't managed to see any of his fights.

Sorry bud, in the early UFCs, strikes to the neck and groin were fully allowed. As for eye gauging, if that would benefit anyone, it would be skilled grapplers who manage to get a dominant position on the ground. Watch Fred Ettish (6th Dan) fight in UFC 2 and see how well these super deadly techniques worked out.

Yes, a very effective martial art.

I attended a seminar in it once. I believe it's a derivative of jiu-jitsu that focuses on self-defence techniques that are not suited to competition (finger locks, etc)

What exactly is the injury? Would you be able to grapple?

Miss Universe goes to my school (Ryerson University). Therefore my school > your school.

Interesting post, Shorin Ryuu. I disagree with the philosophy that a every punch will begin with grabbing the opponent and pulling him toward you, and that such a technique should be seen as a fight ender. But I suppose if one subscribes to those ideas, then the reaction hand makes some sense.

Pushups for endourance; you need to add weight (backpack, or do bench press with weights) for strength gains.

100% on back leg. Good for front leg snap kicks, 0 mobility.

Interesting topic. Here's my perspective, as someone who trained in karate regularly for 8 years, and is starting to change his training methods. I see the reaction hand as doing more harm than good. Wouldn't ensuring that you hold your hand up to guard your face teach you to maintain control as well? With the added benefit of engraining the habit of protecting your face? "So you are aware"? Well the teacher can tell you to be aware of such a technique without sacrificing the form of the basic punch can't he? Instructor to student: "Be aware that you can grab and pull your opponent." He can then have the students drill such a technique with a partner. Also, without drilling with a partner (actually grabbing an opponents arm) simply 'being aware' won't help a slight bit. So why not train these as two seperate techniques (punching in free-moving range vs punching while grabbing). You explain how a practitioner would learn more by adding an extraneous motion - pulling back a reaction hand - that is not a part of the technique in practice, than practicing the technique with proper form? This should be the most common situation in which one would throw a punch. So why not drill it this way when practicing basics? So drill blocking and punching and grabbing and punching. How does establishing the habit of pulling the fist to the side of the body help one perform such techniques? To sum up the pros and cons of practicing reaction hand when punching the way I see it: Pros -"maintain control of both arms while you're performing techniques" (HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE - see above) -"So you are aware that you can grab and pull your opponent with the hand that isnt attacking/defending " (QUESTIONABLE BENEFIT - see above) - "Learn the mechanics of the techinque" (QUESTIONABLE - see above) -Makes cool snapping noise when done wearing a gi (AWESOME!) Cons - Exposes face - Forces next attack to come from the hip I look forward to comments. EDIT: fixed problem with quote

Try HIIT. Do a search on the internet for it, you will find plenty of information. It is better than aerobic excersize for both conditioning, and fat loss. Agreed with others though. No such thing as toning. If your goal is to be 'toned,' the best way will be using bodybuilding methods (bulk/cut cycles). Try https://www.wannabebigforums.com for good information on every type of lifting.

I think focusing on the physicallity is better. I've had too many teachers that like to just talk to us about karate instead of having us do karate. You can philosophize all you want, and spend your time analyzing everything, but the guy that spent that time practicing a punch is going to whup you.

For effective fighting using striking, I reccomend boxing, muay thai, san shou or a full-contact karate style such as kyokushin. You need something that stresses hard contact, realistic distance (no pulling punches half a foot away from your opponent), and conditioning. None of those, however, have weapons, so you might want to take a weapon style in addition to one of those.

An MMA schools prepare you to compete in the sport of Mixed Martial Arts. If they don't do that, and are just teaching a bunch of arts without that intention, I wouldn't use the term MMA.

Getting you to the ground in a dominant position won't kill you, but once he gets you there he can proceed to pummel you all he wants. So learn how to reverse that position.

Muay Thai guys generally train harder and more often than most other martial artists because they are training for fights they know are going to happen. In the ring you learn what it feels like to get hit and to hit someone else. If you are better conditioned than the other guy you have alot better chance of surviving, thats how it can be more effective than arts which arnt sport orientated. I agree with cross. Muay Thai, Judo, Wrestling, Boxing, Kyokushin, and Brazillian Jujitsu are all sports, yet they are all revered as highly effective fighting styles. In competition-oriented martial arts, techniques are refined and improved through survival of the fittest. The practitioners also get to practice in a full-resistance environment, where they will gain most of their fighting ability. However, in the case of a bouncer, I know that Small Circle Jujutsu techniques are very useful, because they include a lot of techniques that can be used to escort people, and get people (who aren't neccessarily trained fighters) to do what you want without knocking them out. So if you want to be able to throw down and fight as well as possible, I reccomend one of the styles I listed above as 'sport martial arts,' or a MMA school. However, if you want to be able to dissolve situations, I reccomend small circle jujitsu, perhaps supplemented with a more combatitive style incase you're forced to fisticuffs.

Yeah Tank is a born fighter, but he also had another advantage that some people don't give him credit for. The man was incredibly strong. He had a bench press of over 600 lbs. So although he wasn't exactly your typical MAist, he did train very hard to develop his strength and power. That said, Maurice Smith and others have since shown him what great MA skills can do.

I use variations of push/pull/legs splits with free weights except for a few exceptions. I'll use machines for some things - for instance, recently I've switched to pull-downs instead of pull-ups because I wansn't progressing due to lack of a backpack in which to add weight. But as soon as I get a backback I can fill with weights, I will go back to pullups. Rep ranges are usually 5-7 for my biggest lifts, then supplement with some 8 -12 rep work with alternate excercises.

I disagree. A good grappler will stand a good chance of being able to take a hit, grab ahold of you, and take you down, even if you are a skilled striker. But there are strategies you can use. Bas Rutten, who fights a lot of wrestlers as a pro MMA fighter, suggests not throwing jabs. He says an experienced fighter will slip the jab, or just take it, and enter grappling range. When you throw a technique, make it HURT him bad. Here's a quote from Rutten: "...if I jab Mark Coleman or Randleman or any good good wrestler out there, they will take MY * down (as all the other jabbers) and do the ground and pound. If I hit somebody only with power shots, they HAVE to defend first, otherwise the get KO'd. See? Just hit them hard." Source: http://www.sherdog.net/forums/showthread.php?t=143419&page=5&pp=20 I'm sure others can come up with more advice as well.

Kyokushin karate has done very well in K1 (which is mixed striking arts). Recently there was a kyokushin challenge to other K1 fighters and Kyokushin won all of the matches. I don't have a link but I will look for it. One cannot say the same for shotokan. The battle for striking supremacy has largely, for the past 50 years, been between kyokushin and Muay Thai. Kyokushin focuses on full contact sparring/drills, unlike most other karate styles, including shotokan. However, in MMA, Muay Thai has become the default striking system and most pro MMAists use Muay Thai. I have never practiced Kyokushin, but from what I have seen and read, I would bet on a kyokushin black belt winning a fight against a comparable fighter from another karate style. One benefit from training in full-contact karate would be that you would be used to fighting in close-range, whereas semi-contact or no-contact karate tends to have you fighting in an unrealistically long range. So I would say that kyokushin would have the advantage in dealing with proper fighting ranges. That said, kyokushin is a striking system, which, as we've seen in MMA, can be nullified by grappling. As can Shotokan (I don't know who told you otherwise). So it would be good to practice some ground fighting and clinch work in another style (neither are included in kyokushin tournaments, but might be drilled in-class, I don't know).