AndrewGreen

No, no, no. You guys have it all wrong. Washing your belt is fine, washing your jock strap is what washes away all your accomplishments

This sort of quote just seems so strange to me.... Do it with any other type of property. I am just looking forward to wearing out my new car naturally after I have had it a few more years. I am just looking forward to wearing out my Golf Clubs naturally after I have had it a few more years. I am just looking forward to wearing out my bed naturally after I have had it a few more years. Why? Then you have to but a new one. I'd want a belt that doesn't wear out, one that looks new no matter what happens to it. I look forward to things in the martial arts, but never wearing out a good piece of equipment...

How does a belt show hard work? It will wear out if you do nothing but stand and bark orders everyday. Would you continue to wear an old uniform with rips and yellow pits? That would show hard work. I just don't get it, what proves hard work is stepping onto the mat and going at it, not some old smelly worn out belt. It is a symbol of experience, but a false one, and a rather disgusting one. Also what message to you think it sends to potential members, ones who haven't had this strange custom taught to them? A worn out belt certainely doesn't look very professional, it looks like a worn out belt. What would you think about a sales man with a worn out tie? Experienced? Slob? Poverty?

I think it is disguisting, buy a new belt. Would you continue wearing something in that conition to work because "it shows experience"? An old belt is a sign of someone who needs to buy a new belt, thats it. Although some have turned it into a strange ego thing.

Well I run a school, so I'm on the other end of this. Very few of my students know my rank, I have no desire to get any more. Didn't have any desire to get what I got either... I very rarely even wear a belt, basically just for grappling with a gi. Dan rank should be irrelevant, what does they guy know and what can he do and how well can he pass it on to you? If his biggest credential is a old smelly belt, then go look somewhere else cause that all you'll likely ever get training with him.

It's no secret. I was told by a very high ranking individual from Okinawa that the single bone block is basically a misunderstanding. The block is with the muscle part (2 bone) and rotates over on the follow through to the single bone block position. But contact is made with the two bone position. The impression I got was that this was pretty much common knowledge over thier. And of course Isshin ryu does the 2 bone block (without the follow through to single bone position) and that is where my karate training is from. I don't really care for the "traditional" method of blocking though, and don't teach it outside of kata. The motion may be useful to practice, but applying it as a block doesn't work very well in my experience.

Weapons first would have made more sense if the weapons where intended to be used. Why teach a person unarmed if he will be carrying a sword? Teach the weapon, then if there is time left teach hand fighting. But we don't have weapons on us, and hopefully won't be getting into many armed fights... Anyway the reason it is usually reserved for higher ranks, despite what the "given" reason is, is retention. If after a year and a half you are getting bored and thinking of doing something else maybe you'll stay if they offer a weapons class that you can attend after a few more months. That is something "special" and a reward, not everyone gets to do it and it is really cool so maybe you'll keep paying. The basic idea is that people loose interest if they do the same thing over and over again long enough. If you want to keep them you can offer them new things along the way (belts, weapons, grappling classes, etc.) and hopefully they will stay thinking once they get the next new thing, it will be better. Then they get it and it is... for a little while, then the new thing gets old.... I think it has to do with most schools that teach weapons as a "advanced skill" also happen to be kata, or technique based schools. Kata is great, but there are only so many kata. Once you know them all, you know them all. Weapons can be taught right from start, I do it. And really just about any weapon. I would have no problem starting a person on a 3 sectional staff if that was what they really wanted. For kata most start with staff or nunchaku though, partially because I have lots of those and most don't already have their own weapons on the first day. And Partially because staff is the main weapon in kobudo and has the most kata and the first nunchaku kata is fairly simple. Same thing for sparring, some prefer staff, some sticks, some sai, some nunchaku, some 3 sectional staff, etc. Do what you want. But what I do is not standard. My weapons students start sparring in thier first class, usually with a stick or staff. For drills they sometimes use whatever weapon they want, sometimes a specific one. They also get to choose which weapons they learn kata for. Although I would suggest padded weapons to start with for everything except kata and hitting the bag initially. Or maybe a light rattan and some padding, but padded weapons are cheaper and less intimidating

A few "other" and an all of the above. I go through phases

And I could give a walk through of how to gain a clinch, but what would be the point? Like MA points out, anything can be countered on paper.

No, might be, might not be. Politics has nothing to do with it. Providing they teach good material associations are irrelevant.

I think the difficulties of a communicating with text are showing up. Either you know something about staff work that I have yet to come accross or are not really grasping what I mean by jamming/clinching. This does happen, lots, if it is allowed. And a staff in a clinch or on the ground is pretty hard to use.

I was a stick jock in the SCA for about 2 years. Every weekend I was out on the field with a big stick fighting. My preferred weapon was the great-sword, which has many of the same charicteristics. tuck the staff against your chest and movie it with a combination of waist movement and using the far arm (from what ever is jammed) to work the lever. The amount of power available to you should overcome most anything that's jamming. I think you misunderstand what I mean by jamming. Go to a clinch, doesn't matter how much power you can get if you can't move your weapon. Same if it gets grabbed. Also does SCA go continuous or stop on hits?

I'd say I'm more "having fun" orientated. And for me that means sparring, on the feet, ground, strikes, no strikes, weapons, no-weapons, etc. Point fighting doesn't really do much for me, niether does kata competition. I like my kata, but more as something that I find relaxing, not a competitive dance routine. I'd say fighting is the most intense form of excercise you can do. Roll hard for 10 minutes with someone at your level without sweating, now add strikes. I've done some other things, and for me martial arts is the best all round fitness program I have been involved in. Yes weight training and running and other things can help. For many those are a part of the martial arts training. Guess it depends on your school, I have had grappling and wrestling training as a part of my program since I opened my school. Same for weapons sparring, which is also a lot of fun. That is only one way to do sport in the martial arts. How about just switching from point fighting to MMA sparring. It's more fun, and in my experience safer in many ways.

What do you teach? or are you just referring to karate? Why can't a 13 year old know this? Completely subjective. Size does matter, which is why those kids can't fight. An 8 year old can choke out an adult, they just would not be able to position themself to do so because of their size disadvantage. Time - Take 4 years if you start at 30, but 12 years if you start at 6, no matter how good you are. Respect - Respect to the kids to acknowledge their abilities. I said why give it to them if it is not performance you are testing as testing other things is subjective. If it is a mental thing then they shouldn't need the belt. Belts where designed to seperate competitors. Sure, why not. But their are different types of performance. Tank Abbot performed poorly in his UFC comeback. Sport karate, wushu, Muay Thai, BJJ, MMA - all performance based, but very different sort of performance.

I'm missing your Logic. It's OK to give them the skills, just not to recognize them as having the skills? Give them the car, driving skills, the ability to drive it, just no cool jacket that says they can drive? A black belt is not a license, it is a recognition of an accomplishment. If those are your views why train kids at all?

Ok. Nope, don't care, claim whatever rank you want. If you decide you're 12th dan I won't argue, but that doesn't mean I think you're any good. If not performance what do you test for? If its not performance based don't give them any belt. Can you hold you're own against someone of Shaq's size? How about a NFL player? Does this mean that small adults can't get black belts? How do you judge someones mental development? What about adults that are just not very bright? Kid's that are? I'm really curious, how do you assess someones mental development at your belt tests? Are you a licensed Physcologist? It's about having their accomplishments recognized in the same way as everyone else. If belt colour is the recognition it should be the same for everyone, regardless of age. Now if you want to have some sort of physcological testing as your requirements thats your decission, its your school. But most Martial arts instructors are not qualified to test this.

Kicking is a secondary skill, punching is a primary skill is one way of looking at it. Punching works without kicks. Kicking without punches on the otherhand... Anything that puts you on one leg is dangerous. You are off balance and can't sprawl effectively. The range of kicking (on its own) is also hard to maintain unless you are fighting someone who is also trying to kick you.

Ummm... What if it is a performance based style? What if they can fight well at their size? What about 28 year olds that don't have "mental responsibility"? What exactly do you mean by "mental responsibility"? And what does it have to do with the colour of a belt?

Most often you know when a fight is about to happen. Very few people will just attack without warning out of no where. If they do you'll need to know how to take a hit, or get out of a bad position. NHB does this. Concrete will help the grappler. It will hurt more to get thrown on it and hurt more when he's on top which is where he will be because that is what he trains to do. How come bad guys alway have friends and good guys are always alone? One might start thinking the best way to make new friends is to become a bad guy... Obstacles which can cause you to end up on the ground? Nothing can be done about this. "Traditional" styles can't address this any better. Best train them too, lots of sparring. Seperated, in a clinch and on the ground. Different people mean different things by ma-ai. Please explain. Very hard to hit, unless you can control the fight. Who is in a better position to eyegouge, the guy on the top or the bottom of a knee mount? Again Traditional styles can't do any better, NHB is as close as you can get in a controlled environment. Most of these are somewhat true, but MMA type training does better at training for them then traditional styles. How do you know this? Why would you even assume this? Today we have far more resources, far more people working at it, safety equipment, full time martial artists, publicized competitions, etc. Sports science has come along way since then, we have better training methods, better diets, better trainers, etc. This fascination with the "ancients" and their being the best and most knowledgable is wrong. I just see it as the same sort of thing that kept western science back in the middle ages, an assumption that Aristotle was right and no one can know better. He was wrong, Coppernicus was wrong, Gallilieo was Wrong, Newton was wrong, Einstien was wrong and so was every other scientist that ever lived. That doesn't mean we are neccessarily smarter, we might be, but we have far more resources then them. We should be better then they where. However, there are modern training methods that can complement and enhance older forms definitely. I am a firm believer in aliveness training (and am not anti NHB actually ) Sarcasm eh Andrew...? fireka- yeh there is a lot of emphasis on blocking which actually doesnt work very well. If you are interested have a look at the kata bunkai to see that what is usually translated as a block can be a disengagement from a grab, a strangle, a strike etc. Its fascinating and will take your art up a level. Regards Rich

Couple of things, A jujitsu fighter against a non-grappling person will benefit from the cement. They will be on top mounted, side mounted or knee mounted. And they will be doing.... STRIKING, pounding you into that cement until you turn your back to avoid those strikes and then choke you out. Also you don't always get to stay on your feet. You get rushed, tackled, trip, slip, or whatever and your on your back with a guy on top of you. Thats about the worst place you can be, and training what to do when your there whould be a top priority because of that.

Yes it is, but it is harder to get used to. Beginners tend to find themself jammed up really easily by someone with a shorter weapon which is much easier to use without much training. A staff requires a lot more practice, in handling and footwork to be able to defend against an agressive opponent. It is very easy to close into a clinch against a staff then it is a short weapon, because at that range a staff is difficult to use. One hand to grab the staff, the other is free to strike with the shorter stick. Disarming - Yes it can be done, but its not easy and not something you look for, its something that if the opportunity is thier you take. The most common disarm that gets pulled off for us is close in tight, and grab their stick up against yours (like your holding two sticks) ideally with their fingers in the middle, and do sort of a downward strike behind them to get it away.

Just out of curiousity, How much sparring with a staff against other weapons have you done? This has not been my experience. In close a staff usually looses. It gets grabbed or jammed and you get hit.

If you're studying a weapons style thats kind of hard isn't it?

Then make the distinction for us. Traditional karate does contain all of those things, but that doesn't mean its training methods are effective at making them functional. Tae bo contains a lot of different strikes, think they'd do well in a kickboxing match because of this?

This whole topic tends to bring out some strange logic in people. Some of the big reasons for not giving a child a black belt: - They lack the maturity of an adult. So what, what does that have to do with the colour of their belt? If you feel a person is too immature to learn certain things then don't teach that person. But don't teach them and then refuse to recognize that they know it. Maturity should not be a requirement for a belt. It is impossible to measure and I would expect anyone who was told that they where to immature to have their accomplishments recognized to walk out right there. - They can't fight with an adult. Of course not, they are smaller. Could a 4'11" 90lbs adult fight with most adults? Nope, so they can't get a black belt either? They should walk out right there too if told that. Kids can fight just as well as adults, against someone thier own size. - It will get to their head. Only if you make it into something more then it is. Should kids not be allowed into major competition in other sports because winning will get to their head? Will getting a black belt get to their head more then winning gold at a national or international compeition? Even a provincial/state competition? Should we ban anyone under 18 from compeition as well? A black belt is really nothing special. It is a position of skill/experience/tenure within a group. It has no meaning outside of that group. If a school awards black belt after 6 months that is there call asnd there is nothing wrong with that. If they average 10 or more years, that is fine too. Are the president of your local chess club, the president of Microsoft and the president of the United States all at the same level of influence? But they have the same title? and then there is the bite the bullet response. Not really it mostly shows they want to have the belt more than they actually want to learn karate. Why would anyone put up with being treated like this? What it shows is that they are being discriminated against and treated unfairly and they should leave. Joe over there is (insert minority of choice) and should not get as high of pay. If he chooses to leave it shows that he doesn't really care about the company and is only interested in the money. Joe works harder then Bob, does a better job then Bob, has been there longer then Bob and is just a better employee in every sense. Bob gets promoted and Joe doesn't. Why? Because the job requires you to be 42 and Joe is only 38. Fair? It is not about being more interested in the belt, it is about being treated fairly and having your accomplishments recognized like everyone else. It is all just an ego thing. Many adults have a hard time with the idea of a child outranking them, or being of the same rank. So excuses are made to make youth ranks "inferior" to adult ranks. We get "junior" ranks and other things which show the inferiority to adult ranks. What 17 year old wants to be a "junior" anything? and why should they? But we are not in the military, it is not rank in that sense. treating it as such will only lead to problems. It is a reward system, not a rank system. So here is another question, Why should we give adults black belts? Shouldn't they be mature enough to not need the pat on the back of a new belt? Most are there for fitness or self-defence, does getting rank have anything to do with either of these objectives?