# What good is sport martial arts?



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 2, 2011)

If you are involved in martial arts competitions, what do you see as far as the;



Positive aspects of competition?
Negative aspects of competition?
What are the tangible rewards of winning a competition i.e. trophy, medal, money etc?
What is the starting age for competitions you are in or have seen?
Are the competitions you participate in expensive or economical?
What type of competition do you participate in i.e. full contact, point etc?
Thank you.


----------



## ETinCYQX (Jun 2, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> If you are involved in martial arts competitions, what do you see as far as the;
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I understand that some people train exclusively for "the streets" and have no interest in competition. I have yet to write off anyone who trains exclusively self defense and yet every other day someone says something like "competitive martial artists can't fight". Funny how that works.


----------



## Manny (Jun 2, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> If you are involved in martial arts competitions, what do you see as far as the;
> 
> 
> 
> ...



1.-Positive aspect? it builds confidence on the person, 
2.-Negative aspect? Politics, the winner is not always the best fighter/competitor.
3.-In my country the people fights in tournamnments for a piece of metal (not money) the tangible reward is something to show (trophy or medal) and know that day one was the best.
4.-I think the best age to star competing is 5-6 years old, in the peewe diviosn the blows are not as hard and the children take it as a funy game and tehn start to achieve confidence.
5.-The competition in my country is not expensive if you keep it locally or regionally, the competitions became expensive if you need to travel to another states or countries.
6.-I did  some WTF style sparring competituion when I was a teen, now I am center and chair referee and belive the blows in the black belt divison are pretty hard.


Manny

Manny


----------



## miguksaram (Jun 2, 2011)

Here are some articles I have written on what sport martial arts can teach you:

*Learning about defeat*
Not long ago, I was at a  tournament with some students. One of our older students, who was 15,  had been training tirelessly for this event. All his free time was spent  at the school running his form over and over.  Throughout the season,  he had been finishing in fourth or fifth place.  His goal was to finish  in the top three. When it was his turn to compete, he went out there and  gave it his all. It was probably the best I have ever seen him compete.  When he stepped off the mat, he was pleased with his performance.  However, when the judges read off his scores, it wasn&#8217;t enough to land  him in the top three as he had hoped. 

    I instantly saw the disappointment on his face and began to walk over  to him with the goal to console him on his loss. As I began to walk  over, I was stopped by our head instructor. He wanted me to leave him  be. Baffled at this I asked why. He explained that the student needs to  let it sink in. It was best for him to console himself first. My  instructor went on to explain that the student needs to understand that  we do not always win even if we try our hardest. However, a trademark of  someone who will become a champion is determined by what they do on  their own after they have been defeated. By consoling him, he will only  feel sorry for himself longer than he should or give excuses on why he  did not win. He advised me to let the student make his way to us and  when he informs us of his result, simply ask him what he needs to do in  order to do better next time. This is a way to take his mind off of his  defeat and help him set a new goal to help him win next time. I did as  my instructor asked and allowed the student to just be. Eventually he  came around and told us the result and, as I was advised, I asked him  what he needs to do for next time. He came up with several items right  away that he needed to fix. When I saw him the next day at class he was  right back at drilling and fixing his mistakes.

    It is natural to comfort those close to us, especially when they did  not succeed in a goal that they were working very hard for. As a coach,  you want your players to keep a healthy attitude after losing a match  and go back to training harder for the next event. As a teacher, you  want your students to study a bit harder if they fail a test. As a  parent, you want your children to just try again if they do not succeed  the first time. Some would call this tough love, though it is tougher on  the coach, teacher or parent than the person they are trying to help.  When all is said and done, sometimes it is best to just let them be and  allow them to build their character by coping with the defeat on their  own.

*Compete to achieve*

June 20th and 21st of 2008 marks the date for the 43rd  Annual AKA Grand Nationals tournament, one of the oldest tournaments  still running in the United States today.  Adults and kids from all over  North America and Europe will travel to Louisville, Kentucky, the site  of the event, to participate in this annual martial arts competition and  with it just around the corner I can&#8217;t help but recall debates about  competition in the martial arts.  Now there is always an ongoing debate  somewhere on the internet about the pros and cons of having such  events.  More than not, the biggest complaint I hear over and over from  the con side of the debate is that these types of events actually  degrade martial arts or causes the martial arts to become watered  down.   I recently had the privilege to sit down with six young athletes  who participate in sport martial art tournaments, just to see what  drives them to do compete. (See upcoming September issue of Taekwondo  Times for the article)

The more I spoke with them about competition, the more  it reinforced my belief in how competition is very healthy and a much  underrated part of the martial arts.   That is not to say that if your  school doesn&#8217;t do competitions, then your school is no good, far from  it.  What I am saying is that there are many good things that can come  out of competition in the martial arts.  What better way to practice the  building blocks success such as perseverance, self confidence, self  discipline and respect than to be put in a situation where you have to  utilize those building blocks to help achieve victory? 

And remember, victory is not determined on if you win or  lose, it is determined on how you yourself have progressed as a  person.  When you see that you are able to better yourself in just one  area in life, utilizing these building blocks, you begin to apply them  in other areas of your life like your job or school or personal  relationships.  If you are like me, you are one of the many, many people  who hate to do public speaking.  To help overcome the nervousness and  fear associated with it, I simply resort to looking at it like a  competition.  I practice what I need to present prior to the event so  that it becomes second nature to me.  If it is something that will be  cause for discussion I think of all the points and counter points that  will be brought up.  Then, when the time comes, I just step into the  ring and do my best.  After all, if I can jump around and yell in front  of strangers wearing those crazy pajamas we call uniforms, then stepping  up in front of my peers in a business suit really isn&#8217;t that hard. 

So if you have the opportunity, join in on a local event  in your area, if nothing else just for the fun of it. Regardless if you  win or lose, competition can always teach you something about yourself  as a person, if you are willing to learn.  Sometimes, it is not always  what you would like to learn, but, it will always be something that will  allow you to grow. "


----------



## StudentCarl (Jun 2, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> If you are involved in martial arts competitions, what do you see as far as the;
> 
> 
> 
> Positive aspects of competition?


Dealing with pressure; having a goal/outcome/deadline to work toward; meeting other positive, competitive people; having to adapt to win; learning and being inspired by those more skilled and talented; learning that getting beaten and getting defeated are totally different things; the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat beats being a mushroom.




> Negative aspects of competition?



None, once you understand that it is a forge for growth that some people use more effectively than others. Poor sportsmanship, overzealous parents, etc. are people who have more to learn. Everyone has their own path.




> What are the tangible rewards of winning a competition i.e. trophy, medal, money etc?



A sweaty uniform and pads, some new bruises, greater humility.




> What is the starting age for competitions you are in or have seen?



5-6 years old. Interesting that you don't ask for an upper end.




> Are the competitions you participate in expensive or economical?



Once you factor in training, gear, travel, admission/registration, it's not cheap. Local tournaments are cheaper, but you get less value once you're past beginner. Like anything, there are good and bad out there.




> What type of competition do you participate in i.e. full contact, point etc?



Full contact, forms.

Comment: It's interesting that you ask these questions to address the posted topic. The "good" is in the eye of the beholder: It depends on what you're looking for.


----------



## Carol (Jun 2, 2011)

I don't compete, but from what I have seen in friends that do, there are definitely advantages.

One is fitness, staying in shape, getting in better shape.  Whether one looks at that from a health standpoint or a defensive standpoint.  Greater cardio fitness = greater testosterone in both men and women = greater ability to withstand pain.

Another is the friendship and camaraderie....including  meeting new people and having more training partners to bang around with.  You also get the perspective from people that are on different paths.  Someone I have traveled with has said "I've sometimes learned more in hotel lobbies before or after the seminars than I have in the actual seminar".  I bet the same can apply to competition as well.

Plus I think training motivates people to hit the mats and keep going in the arts.  

Ultimately I think the main reason why people compete is because they enjoy doing it, and that's perhaps the best benefit of all.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 2, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Positive aspects of competition?


Competitions require that you prepare for them by training harder and train with resisting opponents.  
Competions allow you the opportunity to have matches with people from outside of your school.
They can be fun.



Kong Soo Do said:


> Negative aspects of competition?


Cost, mostly.  And you get all of the same drama that occurs in other competitive sports.  



Kong Soo Do said:


> What are the tangible rewards of winning a competition i.e. trophy, medal, money etc?


Tangible rewards?  Aside from those you mentioned, there is certainly a character building element, as well as increased confidence that comes from actually competing and not just sparring with all the usual suspects.



Kong Soo Do said:


> What is the starting age for competitions you are in or have seen?


Seen kids as young as five or six compete.



Kong Soo Do said:


> Are the competitions you participate in expensive or economical?


Haven't competed for a while.  If you stay local, they tend to be inexpensive.  If you travel, it becomes expensive.



Kong Soo Do said:


> What type of competition do you participate in i.e. full contact, point etc?


Full contact continuous with taekwondo.
Full contact, stop once a point is awarded with kumdo/kendo

Daniel


----------



## KELLYG (Jun 2, 2011)

I competed in a tournament a couple of weeks ago, among local schools in our area.   Our school has both sport TKD And traditional TKD.  I am more into the art side than the sport side. Tournaments are something that I rarely do.  I had a good time and did well.  A couple of things that I observed while competing that I normally would not see in our school type setting.  

I am uncomfortable in a public eye, much like public speaking, and was able to overcome this and still preform well. 
It allowed me to compare my skill set against others that I do not train with regularly. 
I got to meet some really cool people that are in the art.  
I got a lot of surprised looks sparing, when the majority of my division were at least 20 years younger and lbs lighter and I could still keep up with them and not get totally spanked. 
Since I normally train in an all adult class, it was nice to show the younger crowd that I do have a set of skills that I work hard to get them.  
The pride on my instructors faces when I did better than they had expected.

So all and all it was a good experience.  That does not mean that I am on the tournament trail but every now and again I'll get to go out and play.


----------



## Namii (Jun 2, 2011)

I just recently competed in my first tournament. It was a local one, and I did weapon forms. I learned alot in the short minute on the mat. It challenged me to do the forms in front of a bunch of complete strangers. Im uncomfortable speaking/doing things in front of large groups. Just in that was a personal challenge and that helped me grow. Also meeting new people, and seeing what others are like in their arts. And when I get to sparring for TKD, it will be good to spar with people that arent in your class/from other schools/arts. Sparring with the same people over and over in class gets predictable as you learn their fighting style and personality. Of course also it was fun..(once the nerves calmed down)


----------



## puunui (Jun 2, 2011)

ETinCYQX said:


> I understand that some people train exclusively for "the streets" and have no interest in competition. I have yet to write off anyone who trains exclusively self defense and yet every other day someone says something like "competitive martial artists can't fight". Funny how that works.



Exactly. I don't know why self defense oriented practitioners are so opposed to competition oriented or even exercise or family oriented practitioners, since competition, exercise or family practitioners (the overwhelming majority of martial arts practitioners) have nothing against what self defense oriented practitioners do.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 2, 2011)

KELLYG said:


> I am uncomfortable in a public eye, much like public speaking, and was able to overcome this and still preform well.


 
I like this one.  Of all the great on-topic replies, this one stood out.  Thank you for sharing it.


----------



## puunui (Jun 2, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Positive aspects of competition?



Many. Most of all, it is a great vehicle for self discovery. 




Kong Soo Do said:


> Negative aspects of competition?



None. 




Kong Soo Do said:


> What are the tangible rewards of winning a competition i.e. trophy, medal, money etc?



Tangible increase in skill, ability, experience, knowledge, relationships, motivation to continue training, etc. Rewards are even greater when you "lose". 




Kong Soo Do said:


> What is the starting age for competitions you are in or have seen?



5 or 6 years old. 



Kong Soo Do said:


> Are the competitions you participate in expensive or economical?



Used to be reasonable; national events now expensive; international (for national team members) free, or at least used to be. 




Kong Soo Do said:


> What type of competition do you participate in i.e. full contact, point etc?



Competition under the WTF Rules.


----------



## ETinCYQX (Jun 2, 2011)

puunui said:


> Exactly. I don't know why self defense oriented practitioners are so opposed to competition oriented or even exercise or family oriented practitioners, since competition, exercise or family practitioners (the overwhelming majority of martial arts practitioners) have nothing against what self defense oriented practitioners do.



I don't want to say paranoia, but it almost seems like a bit of an obsession with the worst-case.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 2, 2011)

ETinCYQX said:


> I don't want to say paranoia, but it almost seems like a bit of an obsession with the worst-case.


 
Too be honest, I've seen it the other way around far more times.  I don't know if it is a lack of self-esteem, a mis-perception or what.  Fortunately many SD focused practitioners have publically stated that people take the arts for many reasons that are valid.  Generally the biggest concern I see from my SD peers is the sports-only club advetising that they teach SD as a commercial gimmick.  That is intellectual dishonesty and does a dis-service to the student.

If a martial art is a hobby only to a person, done to get into shape and off the couch then I say great!  If it is for sport competitions only and gets them out from in front of the T.V. then I say great.  And if someone is looking for a vehicle for personal protection and joins an appropriate school that actually covers SD, then I say great as well.


----------



## puunui (Jun 2, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Generally the biggest concern I see from my SD peers is the sports-only club advetising that they teach SD as a commercial gimmick.  That is intellectual dishonesty and does a dis-service to the student.



How many "sports only" clubs do you run into out there? Personally, I can think of only two, which cater towards elite athlete training, and frankly, the subject of "self defense" never comes up. Do you have an example of a "sports only" club, because frankly, I don't see too many out there, just the two I mentioned, both of which are run by former national team members.


----------



## ETinCYQX (Jun 2, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Too be honest, I've seen it the other way around far more times.  I don't know if it is a lack of self-esteem, a mis-perception or what.  Fortunately many SD focused practitioners have publically stated that people take the arts for many reasons that are valid.  Generally the biggest concern I see from my SD peers is the sports-only club advetising that they teach SD as a commercial gimmick.  That is intellectual dishonesty and does a dis-service to the student.
> 
> If a martial art is a hobby only to a person, done to get into shape and off the couch then I say great!  If it is for sport competitions only and gets them out from in front of the T.V. then I say great.  And if someone is looking for a vehicle for personal protection and joins an appropriate school that actually covers SD, then I say great as well.



I would not call it a "hobby" to me and I have to admit your insinuating that grates on me slightly.

When I say I like to compete, what it means is I like to fight full contact with another student of a similar ability level. I don't see how that diminishes self-defense. Like literally every other WTF high color or black belt in the world, I know all the little tricks for controlling an attacker too. The wrist locks, the chokes, the sweeps and the armbars. So does puunui I'm sure.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 2, 2011)

ETinCYQX said:


> I would not call it a "hobby" to me and I have to admit your insinuating that grates on me slightly.


 
That was not an insinuation.  I wasn't even thinking about you when I typed it.  Read the entire statment in context please, to some the martial arts ARE a hobby.  It is something they do two days a week to get out of the house and active.  To some, it is only for sport and the thrill of competition.  To others it is a means of personal protection.

Why would you even think of taking that personally???


----------



## ETinCYQX (Jun 2, 2011)

Let's see...Because I was quoted in the post, because you said exactly this _

If it is for sport competition only and gets them out from in front of the TV_ 

And because you've more or less dismissed everything but self defense training as just for fun. I didn't say "hey, I need a hobby" and start martial arts for a sport like a sedentary kid plays basketball or soccer. I started martial arts before my sixth birthday. But, whatever, I can be wrong.

Let's move on to something more useful to this discussion. Do your students train live? As in, randori/sparring/free practice/rolling/whatever you want to call it?


----------



## puunui (Jun 2, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Read the entire statment in context please, to some the martial arts ARE a hobby.  It is something they do two days a week to get out of the house and active.  To some, it is only for sport and the thrill of competition.  To others it is a means of personal protection.




You've also said that you can learn "self defense" at a single eight hour seminar.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 2, 2011)

ETinCYQX said:


> Let's see...Because I was quoted in the post, because you said exactly this
> 
> _If it is for sport competition only and gets them out from in front of the TV_
> 
> ...


 
Yes, I did quote you so that I could reply to the quote.  But I was not singling you out as a hobbyist.  That was a general statement of why many people train.  I then went on to those that train for sport and SD.  None of that was directed at you as an individual, nor did I say that any of them were wrong.  If a person takes up the martial arts as a hobby to become active...how can that be wrong?  

This is one of those times when the written word fails to convey the tone or meaning or is taken to mean something that it is not.  So don't take it personally as it wasn't meant that way.



> Do your students train live?


 
Yes.  As I've mentioned in one of my other threads, we train scenario based.  What this means is that we take a common situation and then train for a common altercation using that situation.  For example, sometimes we train inside a vehicle (carjacking).  Sometimes on a stairwell.  In a hallway or alley.  On pavement, asphalt and grass.  Between vehicles or wall or trees.  The starting position isn't always standing either.  Sometimes we start from a definate position of disadvantage.  One of my favorite is on the ground against a wall.  Starting from a standing or strong position is fine, but 'what if' your sucker punched and your down and have to 'start' your defense from there?  Well...let's train for it and see what our options are.  I like dim light training.  I like multiple attacker training.  

Things of this nature not only make the training interesting, but it promotes and enhances our thought proccesses.  For example, if you've never trained on the ground EVER (talking to anyone in general) and then you find yourself defending on the ground you are in unfamilar territory.  But if you've trained to defend from the ground over and over then you aren't behind the 8 ball if/when it happens.  



> You've also said that you can learn "self defense" at a single eight hour seminar.


 
Yes, this is a fact.  Darren Laur/Peter Boatman's edged weapon defense instructor's course is only 16 hours.  The regular course (for line Officers) is only 8 hours.  Refresher training was every 12 months but it was found that it could be back off to 18 months without issue.  In otherwords, it was gross motor skill based and retained in long term memory.

WWII combatives as taught by William Fairbairn, Sykes, Pat O'Neill, Applegate etc was only around 8-24 hours (or as little as 8-16 depending on the source) but has been found to be retained in long term memory for decades and still viable by users even at an advanced age.  

Now to be clear, none of it is magic.  A person has to apply themselves to get some benefit.  But the benefits remain for an incredibly long time simply because it was so simple to learn and so simple to remember.


----------



## ETinCYQX (Jun 2, 2011)

Not taking it personally, no worries.

While I applaud the scenario-specific training, I really was inquiring if you guys train full contact, i.e with resistance like a sparring match


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 2, 2011)

ETinCYQX said:


> Not taking it personally, no worries.
> 
> While I applaud the scenario-specific training, I really was inquiring if you guys train full contact, i.e with resistance like a sparring match


 
Good, I'm not looking to make an enemy 

Yes, as full out as is safetly possible.  

One of the things I personally detest...once a person is trained, is throwing a half-hearted punch two feet to the side of their head and leaving the arm there so they can grab it and pull off their favorite cool lock/flip/throw etc.  That isn't doing anyone any good.  It is teaching the bad guy to miss and giving the good guy a false sense of security.  When they meet Mr. 'Don't-give-a-damn-about-your-cool-move' that doesn't know he's suppose to miss and leave his arm out there, and instead is throwing a barrage of punches at their face....it is a whole different ball game.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 3, 2011)

puunui said:


> You've also said that you can learn "self defense" at a single eight hour seminar.


Learn it?  Sure.  Would the students retain anything meaningful?  Not a chance, and certainly not enough to defend themselves with.

Daniel


----------



## ETinCYQX (Jun 3, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Good, I'm not looking to make an enemy
> 
> Yes, as full out as is safetly possible.
> 
> One of the things I personally detest...once a person is trained, is *throwing a half-hearted punch two feet to the side of their head and leaving the arm there so they can grab it and pull off their favorite cool lock/flip/throw etc.  That isn't doing anyone any good*.  It is teaching the bad guy to miss and giving the good guy a false sense of security.  When they meet Mr. 'Don't-give-a-damn-about-your-cool-move' that doesn't know he's suppose to miss and leave his arm out there, and instead is throwing a barrage of punches at their face....it is a whole different ball game.



None of us are. 

The highlighted text has been my biggest issue in a lot of dedicated self-defense systems. I always envisioned the way I'd practically apply a self-defense course as using "Uke and Tori" in a style almost like a Judo kata with more resistance.


----------



## miguksaram (Jun 3, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Learn it?  Sure.  Would the students retain anything meaningful?  Not a chance, and certainly not enough to defend themselves with.
> 
> Daniel


What would you base this assumption on?


----------



## tinker1 (Jun 3, 2011)

My point of view is that the purpose of sport in martial arts is to have fun.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 3, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> > puunui said:
> ...


What assumption?

Daniel


----------



## miguksaram (Jun 3, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> What assumption?
> 
> Daniel


The assumption that if a student went to an 8 hour seminar that they would not be able to retain anything nor use anything learned at the seminar to defend themselves.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 3, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> The assumption that if a student went to an 8 hour seminar that they would not be able to retain anything


Actually, I said "retain anything meaningful."



miguksaram said:


> nor use anything learned at the seminar to defend themselves.


I said 'not enough to defend themselves with,' not that they couldn't use anything to attempt to defend themselves.

Such a class would provide a good base to start from, but for student who doesn't know self defense (i.e. a student with no previous training), a single eight hour seminar will not be enough to get them to the point where they can actually defend themselves with any sort of reliability. Eight hours is not enough to establish any kind of muscle memory with regards to technique. 

Also, for a person with no prior training, an eight hour seminar will likely be too much information for them to absorb, which is why they will not retain anything meaningful.

Given eight hours, if I were fluent in Korean, I could teach an Korean person to phonetically read English. But they will not retain anything meaningful because in order to effectively read, you have to be able to do more than just sight-sound letters. 

On the flip side, I learned to phonetically read hangeul in less than eight hours. I have spent the past year improving my knowledge of Korean language, but have not taken a formal class. Guess where my fluency in Korean is? 

So yes, I can 'read' Korean if you count being able to read it phonetically. No comprehension outside of MA terms, commands used in the dojo, and a small assortment of words and phrases (hello, goodbye, thankyou, your welcome, see you tomorrow and see you next week). I would hardly call that 'reading.'

The student of an eight hour seminar might remember helpful things, such as don't be jabbering on the phone while you walk to your car in the mall parking lot at night, don't park your car in the darkest corner of the parking lot, etc., but those are not specifically self defense. More along the lines of good sense.

But if you are talking about defending oneself in a violent attack, a single eight hour seminar is not going to literally teach you self defense in any way that will enable you to retain it in any meaningful quantity.

If you have in mind a karate black belt going to such a seminar to learn self defense, that is different; they've hopefully spent the last two to four years learning self defense. They already know how to defend themselves. The seminar may help them to better connect their training to scenarios that occur outside of the school and may give them some useful tips, but at that point, they are building upon knowledge that they already have.

Again, what assumption? 

Daniel


----------



## mastercole (Jun 3, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Good, I'm not looking to make an enemy
> 
> Yes, as full out as is safetly possible.
> 
> One of the things I personally detest...once a person is trained, is throwing a half-hearted punch two feet to the side of their head and leaving the arm there so they can grab it and pull off their favorite cool lock/flip/throw etc.  That isn't doing anyone any good.  It is teaching the bad guy to miss and giving the good guy a false sense of security.  When they meet Mr. 'Don't-give-a-damn-about-your-cool-move' that doesn't know he's suppose to miss and leave his arm out there, and instead is throwing a barrage of punches at their face....it is a whole different ball game.



Do you and your students train under the constant threat of being knocked out by any type of full force blows to the head?  Meaning, are students allowed to knock each other out during any part of these training sessions?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jun 3, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Do you and your students train under the constant threat of being knocked out by any type of full force blows to the head?  Meaning, are students allowed to knock each other out during any part of these training sessions?


We train this way to a degree. If we are doing any defences against a head punch, for instance, the attacker has to throw the punch full speed with accuracy and actually try to hit their opponent. Basically, if you dont move/defend you will be hit very hard or maybe knocked out. I found this out the hard way recently and ended up with a black eye from my 7th dan instructor. There were no hard feelings from my end, because if I ever have to use this stuff for real the 'bad guy' will be trying to knock me senseless. Other physical activities train this way so I have no problems with MA adapting the same philosophy. A cricketer does not spend hours in the nets batting against slow bowling because they know when a real game happens the bowler will bowl at 150klm/h. When rugby league players do tackling practice they hit hard, same as in the real game. I have no problems with MA training this way.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 3, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Do you and your students train under the constant threat of being knocked out by any type of full force blows to the head? Meaning, are students allowed to knock each other out during any part of these training sessions?


 
Yes, depending on the drill, and the level of the student.  In these instances safety equipment is used as well as a saftey person to intervene if necessary.  It is good to go full bore, but not to the point that someone is needlessly hurt.  We all have families and jobs etc.  

In all my years of training, I can only remember a few instances of minor injuries.  And they weren't even in a full out session.  In one, two of my assistance were training throws and got to close to the wall, the result of which was a hole in the wall.  But it was only dry wall so no one was injured.  In another, we were doing handstand push ups and one student accidentally struck another with his foot when going back to his feet.  
 The last one involved me personally. I was doing some light sparring with one of my students who was a pretty good kicker.  He tried to put a solid side snap kick into my ribs.  Because of some other training I've received, my instinct is to raise my leg and take the kick on my shin (as I cover that side of my body) because I've conditioned it over the years in some hard style training with coke bottles, bowling pins, tire and shin kicks etc.  Well, his snap kick met my shin block and it opened up a pretty good gash on his leg.  I felt pretty bad but was a little impressed as I hadn't done leg conditioning in many years.  

But no one fortunately ever got knocked out or really hurt.  We try to be as real as possible, but also maintain as high a level of safety as possible.  Maybe an occassional bruise or pulled muscle but that's really been about it.


----------



## puunui (Jun 3, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Because of some other training I've received, my instinct is to raise my leg and take the kick on my shin (as I cover that side of my body) because I've conditioned it over the years in some hard style training with coke bottles, bowling pins, tire and shin kicks etc.  Well, his snap kick met my shin block and it opened up a pretty good gash on his leg.



We like people who defend by lifting their leg up like that. When you are up like that, it is very difficult to move, and generally your weight goes back, with the motion of the raised leg.... It opens up all kinds of responses once we see that tendency.


----------



## puunui (Jun 3, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> The last one involved me personally. I was doing some *light sparring* with one of my students who was a pretty good kicker.



Why the "light sparring"? Isn't that a sport thing? I thought you were all about self defense?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jun 3, 2011)

puunui said:


> Why the "light sparring"? Isn't that a sport thing? I thought you were all about self defense?


We, too, are all about self defence but light sparring still has its place and is an important part of the curriculum. We use light sparring to work on footwork, distancing, reflexes, trying new things that you may not attempt in hard contact and generally 'learning' to spar. We use hard contact to figure out what actually works for us personally. The two can co-exist, there is no problem with that. Just because a club's main focus is self defence does not mean that 'light' sparring occasionally does not have its place. Students also need to be eased into hard contact, you cant expect a white belt to pad up and jump in the ring and go hard straight off as that can lead to poor technique, confidence problems and injuries.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 3, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> We, too, are all about self defence but light sparring still has its place and is an important part of the curriculum. We use light sparring to work on footwork, distancing, reflexes, trying new things that you may not attempt in hard contact and generally 'learning' to spar. We use hard contact to figure out what actually works for us personally. The two can co-exist, there is no problem with that. Just because a club's main focus is self defence does not mean that 'light' sparring occasionally does not have its place. Students also need to be eased into hard contact, you cant expect a white belt to pad up and jump in the ring and go hard straight off as that can lead to poor technique, confidence problems and injuries.



Good explanation.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 4, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Yes, depending on the drill, and the level of the student.  In these instances safety equipment is used as well as a saftey person to intervene if necessary.  It is good to go full bore, but not to the point that someone is needlessly hurt.  We all have families and jobs etc.



How about knockouts during freestyle, non-pre arranged segments, I would call it free sparring.

Are students allowed to go for the knockout in freestyle, non-pre arranged sparring or segments?


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 4, 2011)

mastercole said:


> How about knockouts during freestyle, non-pre arranged segments, I would call it free sparring.
> 
> Are students allowed to go for the knockout in freestyle, non-pre arranged sparring or segments?



We may have a slightly different perspective or picture when saying freestyle sparring.  To some, that would be two people facing each other at perhaps arms length distance and waiting for a signal to begin.  Then they try to punch or kick each other.  Or something along those lines.  That is one perspective.

We are different in some regards.  I'm not sure freestyle sparring is an apt description, but it is fine for the example.  We might begin a scenario walking into a room and the lights are dimmed and then the person is attacked from the side.  Or, we might start to good guy already on the ground wedged into a corner with the bad guy standing over him/her.  We might start it sitting in a car or sitting in a chair or standing at an ATM or a counter.  Each scenario is different.  In one, it may be a carjacking at knife point.  In another a couple of 'drunks' that have walked into the store and start hassling you.  The bad guy is going to try to do whatever the bad guy is going to do in real life (within reason for safety considerations).  If he's using a 'knife' it might be a magic marker or one of the knifes with the white chalk at the end or one of the knives that shock you when contact is made.  If he's a drunk he might try to plow you over with wild haymakers.  

Sometimes we'll film it for later review which is a good training tool.  Learn from mistakes in training instead of in real life.  So far, bumps and bruises and the occasional getting 'racked' but nothing major.


----------



## WC_lun (Jun 4, 2011)

There are may advantages to sport martial arts.  They promote physical health, in many cases respect for other people, give an outlet for competition, promote confidence, share an interest with others, promote internal drive, and develop an eye for range and speed.  Other than these things, sport martial art are usually also just plain fun.  The only issue I have with sport arts is when they are promoted to students as something they are not.  For example, when Olympic type TKD is promoted as an effecient, safe,  and effective self defense art.  Its a great sport, but does not qualify as effecient or safe as a self-defense platform.  Though the physical skills learned would be helpful.


----------



## Master Dan (Jun 4, 2011)

We require students to compete at least once per year inorder to advance in rank. Competition as well as demonstrations introduce stress and a measure of unknown factors that help the student to mature and grow as well as learning to function under fire which is helpful in developing confindence for self defence.

While almost 100% of our students have placed at something over the last 16 years when competing wining is not the focus but effort, respect for self and officials and doing your personal best is what matters.

For us traveling to even the closest tournament cost at least a $1,000 dollars and over $2,000 to go to another state so we choose to go to cultural open tournaments like all NW which is two tournaments in one TKD and all styles weopons and both contact and point fighting so the students can get exposure to other people and styles. 

Next is the area where can the students have access to the most things to do Zoo, Movies, swimming, Culture ect. 

I have alot of abused students even to adult that need to gain the ability to defend themselves in some cases even crying under stress during competition but in the end or second round of fighting the result is being able to overcome that and function so they are not a victim the rest of their lives which unfortunately many choose to be and die at young ages or in and out of institutions the rest of thier lives.

Martial art should be balanced using any and all methods to serve the needs of the whole person but age and health apropriate. rediculous having people over 40 over 50 told they must fight like a 20 year old? They should learn how to work with what they have and build on that. Healthy full contact helps develop deliberate penetrating technique crutial to self defense simple strait forward best thing I have heard lately is you do what you practice ,exactly


----------



## Master Dan (Jun 4, 2011)

I train all my students that can to use head kicks regardless of age and rank becasue if they never do that for say 6 years then all of suddent can they wont have the skill set? also if all are doing it then the reflex of protecting the head comes with that but we also train hands as well combined with everything. 

However I do not believe in excessive contact to the head for minors so controled contact to the head is required.

Self defense is all about control being able to put what you want exactly where you want and how. People that depend only on blindly all out blasting at general areas may or may not do the job and is only good for a time or a season which fades.


----------



## Master Dan (Jun 4, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Too be honest, I've seen it the other way around far more times. I don't know if it is a lack of self-esteem, a mis-perception or what. Fortunately many SD focused practitioners have publically stated that people take the arts for many reasons that are valid. Generally the biggest concern I see from my SD peers is the sports-only club advetising that they teach SD as a commercial gimmick. That is intellectual dishonesty and does a dis-service to the student.
> 
> If a martial art is a hobby only to a person, done to get into shape and off the couch then I say great! If it is for sport competitions only and gets them out from in front of the T.V. then I say great. And if someone is looking for a vehicle for personal protection and joins an appropriate school that actually covers SD, then I say great as well.


 
Just to throw in another perspective as to motivations of people and why they choose to stay or not realted to SD and Sport. The GM of Enerie Reyes Senior taught that when people first come in looking for SD and back in early 70's Sport was thought of as SD ( public perspetive) he said that it was motivated by Fear and Hate and that in the process of training a person forgets Fear and Hate as soon as they are tired so something else must replace that and a good instructor teaches Spirit. If there is a Spirit of MA in the Dojang that carries a person beyond Tired beyond Fear and Hate they will stay if not they will leave.


----------



## puunui (Jun 4, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> We are different in some regards.  I'm not sure freestyle sparring is an apt description, but it is fine for the example.  We might begin a scenario walking into a room and the lights are dimmed and then the person is attacked from the side.  Or, we might start to good guy already on the ground wedged into a corner with the bad guy standing over him/her.  We might start it sitting in a car or sitting in a chair or standing at an ATM or a counter.  Each scenario is different.  In one, it may be a carjacking at knife point.  In another a couple of 'drunks' that have walked into the store and start hassling you.  The bad guy is going to try to do whatever the bad guy is going to do in real life (within reason for safety considerations).  If he's using a 'knife' it might be a magic marker or one of the knifes with the white chalk at the end or one of the knives that shock you when contact is made.  If he's a drunk he might try to plow you over with wild haymakers.



Which one of the above scenarios were you engaged in when your student tried to side snap kick you and you raised your leg up to block? I ask because the situation you described with the side kick block sure sounded like a "sport" tournament type situation to me. Also, if you only have eight hours to twenty four hours in which to train a student in self defense to the point where he/she will retain that ability for 18 months, I would think you wouldn't be doing this type of "sport" light sparring. I remember conversing with Peyton Quinn and I don't remember if his course incorporated "light sparring" or not. I think not because he was into his bulletman gear, which would allow full contact, not light contact.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 4, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> We may have a slightly different perspective or picture when saying freestyle sparring.  To some, that would be two people facing each other at perhaps arms length distance and waiting for a signal to begin.  Then they try to punch or kick each other.  Or something along those lines.  That is one perspective.
> 
> We are different in some regards.  I'm not sure freestyle sparring is an apt description, but it is fine for the example.  We might begin a scenario walking into a room and the lights are dimmed and then the person is attacked from the side.  Or, we might start to good guy already on the ground wedged into a corner with the bad guy standing over him/her.  We might start it sitting in a car or sitting in a chair or standing at an ATM or a counter.  Each scenario is different.  In one, it may be a carjacking at knife point.  In another a couple of 'drunks' that have walked into the store and start hassling you.  The bad guy is going to try to do whatever the bad guy is going to do in real life (within reason for safety considerations).  If he's using a 'knife' it might be a magic marker or one of the knifes with the white chalk at the end or one of the knives that shock you when contact is made.  If he's a drunk he might try to plow you over with wild haymakers.
> 
> Sometimes we'll film it for later review which is a good training tool.  Learn from mistakes in training instead of in real life.  So far, bumps and bruises and the occasional getting 'racked' but nothing major.



In such a scenario training, I would have no concern for my safety at all because I know, like you stated, the scenarios are (within reason for safety considerations) and no one is really trying to knock me out.

Let me better explain and give an example of true adrenal stress where the OODA thing comes in to play, in a big way.

Adult black belts from various locations get together most every weekend for training, which usually includes full contact sparing with absolutely unpredictable full force blows. Knockout is allowed and encouraged, just like in a match.

Some coaches make standing offers to their fighters, like, $100 if you can get a knockout today, and everyone in the room knows it.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 4, 2011)

WC_lun said:


> There are may advantages to sport martial arts.  They promote physical health, in many cases respect for other people, give an outlet for competition, promote confidence, share an interest with others, promote internal drive, and develop an eye for range and speed.  Other than these things, sport martial art are usually also just plain fun.  The only issue I have with sport arts is when they are promoted to students as something they are not.  For example, when Olympic type TKD is promoted as an effecient, safe,  and effective self defense art.  Its a great sport, but does not qualify as effecient or safe as a self-defense platform.  Though the physical skills learned would be helpful.



What is your personal experience in Olympic Taekwondo?


----------



## WC_lun (Jun 5, 2011)

mastercole said:


> What is your personal experience in Olympic Taekwondo?


 
I trained in it when I was a teenager and have trained some of the bad habits learned in it out of quite a few students as an adult.  I am not bashing Olympic style TKD.  I think it takes skill and is great for what it is.  However, I am also a big believer in you will fight how you train.  If you are figting on the street and your hands are down at your waist because that is the way you have trained for years, you are going to have issues defending yourself.  Also. while higher kicks can make a great impact, they are not effecient, no matter how you cut it.  

I would never go into a match with an experienced Olymic style TKDist and expect to do well under that rule set.  I don't train that way and they are very good at what they do.  Why do some sport martial artist think they can just go into other sports or the street and be successful, when they will run into the same issues.  They don't train the same way and in many cases the opponent they would face is actually good at what they do.  That doesn't mean that some of the training would not be helpul, but again, you will fight how you train.


----------



## ETinCYQX (Jun 5, 2011)

You're forgetting that "how we train" includes another black belt level opponent and the threat of getting knocked out. While for the most part I agree with you, sport TaeKwonDo is not exactly a game of soccer. It's still a combat sport.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 5, 2011)

mastercole said:


> In such a scenario training, I would have no concern for my safety at all because I know, like you stated, the scenarios are (within reason for safety considerations) and no one is really trying to knock me out.



I think I understand what you're saying here.  As a clarification, not all of the scenarios are known ahead of time.  For example, it may or may not be an edged weapon scenario.  It may or may not be a multiple attacker scenario (even if multiple 'possible' assailants are present).

And there is another consideration I should have mentioned earlier;  a scenario that doesn't involve going hands-on at all.  A scenario that tests avoidance and/or escape and/or evasion and/or de-esculation skills.  We shouldn't always train the situation is hands-on but cover as many possible outcomes as is practical.



> Adult black belts from various locations get together most every weekend  for training, which usually includes full contact sparing with  absolutely unpredictable full force blows. Knockout is allowed and  encouraged, just like in a match.



I like this, particularly if the BB's are from different systems.  Good training can come from cross-training.  For a twist, when your students are sparring...give one a knife (safety of course) and have them work it into the attack.  Or allow one or both to go for an improvised weapon.  Or, just as I posted above, start the sparring where one can simply walk away, close a door or whatever to stop the situation from even happening rather than just going to blows.  

Start one of them down on the ground, wedged against the wall.  Put them outside on the grass.  Or on the asphalt.  In a small room (to simulate an elevator for example).


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I think I understand what you're saying here.  As a clarification, not all of the scenarios are known ahead of time.  For example, it may or may not be an edged weapon scenario.  It may or may not be a multiple attacker scenario (even if multiple 'possible' assailants are present).
> 
> And there is another consideration I should have mentioned earlier;  a scenario that doesn't involve going hands-on at all.  A scenario that tests avoidance and/or escape and/or evasion and/or de-esculation skills.  We shouldn't always train the situation is hands-on but cover as many possible outcomes as is practical.
> 
> ...



OK, so your students are not encouraged to knock each other out, there for there is no threat of real serious physical harm in your SD classes.

So this begs the question, if there is no real threat of serious physical harm in your classes, well, there is no real experience in dealing with a real serious threat. That is not SD oriented in my book.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> OK, so your students are not encouraged to knock each other out, there for there is no threat of real serious physical harm in your SD classes.
> 
> So this begs the question, if there is no real threat of serious physical harm in your classes, well, there is no real experience in dealing with a real serious threat. That is not SD oriented in my book.


Since when did being SD oriented require that one be under threat of serious physical harm during class time?

SD oriented _should_ mean that the students train to deal with a variety of situations that are analogous to what they may encounter in an actual violent attack outside of a sporting context.  Many of those skills will overlap with what one would see in sport, with both sport and SD each containing elements that the other will not.

Both types of training are highly beneficial.  One is not better than the other.  They are simply different schools of thought regarding teaching.

Daniel


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> OK, so your students are not encouraged to knock each other out, there for there is no threat of real serious physical harm in your SD classes.
> 
> So this begs the question, if there is no real threat of serious physical harm in your classes, well, there is no real experience in dealing with a real serious threat. That is not SD oriented in my book.



I'm not sure how you've managed to make the leap to this conclusion?  My students do what is necessary to end the threat in a training environment while an atmosphere of safety is maintained.  Going for the 'knock-out' or for points is a sports thing because....what else are they going to do?  In SD, the situation is evaluated and the appropriate course of action determined.  That may entail retreat (though in many states, such as my own it is not a legal requirement.  That doesn't mean that it still isn't a tactically wise course of action).  For example, when your training your students is a typical 'free sparring' session;



Do they always 'go for the knock-out'?  Is so, they've limited there response options.
Do they have the option and/or opportunity to retreat?
Do they have the option of using an improvised weapon?
Does there opponent have the option of pulling a weapon (planned or improvised)?
Does there opponent have the option of having his buddies jump in to help?
Are your students required to observe certain rules?
Do your students always train inside the Dojang?
Do your students always were their uniform?
Do you take your students outside at all?  In normal street clothing?  On grass, asphalt, sidewalk, slippery surfaces, in the woods, a hallway, an elevator, a set of stairs etc?
If you aren't taking full advantage of all of the above then you might be preparing the student for a great sporting match, but not realistic SD.  Although any physical activity brings about a physical risk, there is more to SD than going for a 'knock-out'.  

My students may very well try a stun and run, attempt a knock-out blow, a joint lock, a throw, a choke or whatever may be appropriate to the situation.  Using a BOB we can go for the eyes, throat or groin.  Or train for hard brachial plexus strikes etc.  

*Another very important consideration that you aren't taking into account: * While it is entirely possible to knock someone out with a well placed kick, it is one thing to be warmed up and stretched out and wearing loose clothing in the Dojang.  It is quite another to try it in a dress in high heels, a pair of tight jeans, with a handful of groceries, a duty belt etc when you're not warmed up and stretched out.  

Secondly, and even more importantly, when your students are 'going for the knock-out', I'm fairly confident that head gear and gloves are worn.  Feel free to correct me if your students don't wear safety gear.  Now a blow to the head with a fist in a SD situation isn't the smartest tactic.  The chance of injuring the hand on someones head is fairly substantial even with a well placed strike.  That is why boxer as an example tape their hands and wear gloves.  I'll say it again, the chance of injuring your hand on someone's head/face is fairly substantial.  If this occurs, depending on the severity of the injury, it could very well limit your options for further SD.  Anyone here ever try to manipulate a weapon with broken knuckles?  Or a cell phone, or car keys?  I've broken a knuckle before and my range of motion in that hand was limited for an extended period of time.  Given that manual dexterity is already limited while under duress, you've just made it even harder by busting a knuckle or two, or spraining your wrist on someone's face.  And there is no way to know ahead of time whether or not he'll actually be knocked out.

This also doesn't touch on the possibility of blood borne pathagens the bad guy may be carrying.  And now you've put yourself in a position of cutting your knuckles on his teeth or 'bleeding' him from the mouth or nose.  

All in all, teaching your students to 'go for the knock-out' by using there hands to the head is not wise for the variety of reasons I've listed.  You are actually putting them at risk while at the same time limiting there overall SD options.  This is the difference between someone that is sport oriented and someone that is SD oriented.  No disrespect intended, but these are extremely real considerations that sport methodology does NOT take into account.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I'm not sure how you've managed to make the leap to this conclusion?  My students do what is necessary to end the threat in a training environment while an atmosphere of safety is maintained.  Going for the 'knock-out' or for points is a sports thing because....what else are they going to do?  In SD, the situation is evaluated and the appropriate course of action determined.  That may entail retreat (though in many states, such as my own it is not a legal requirement.  That doesn't mean that it still isn't a tactically wise course of action).  For example, when your training your students is a typical 'free sparring' session;
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm sure you have a great curriculum, it sounds that way, however, I am really trying to get to one point.  If there is no real threat of being knocked out (head or body shots), there is no real training, period, it's all just fluff. If your students don't have someone really trying to take them out, which is what it sounds like to me, then it's unrealistic.

You can not work on a bunch of soccer scenarios and drills, on sunny days, in the rain, on a rough field, it tight shorts, etc, and then think that person is ready to magically be able to jump in and play the game in real time, in a real situation.  You have to play soccer, under the real stress of action to learn soccer.  Self Defense is no different, you have to REALLY defend yourself in order to get any good at it.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Since when did being SD oriented require that one be under threat of serious physical harm during class time?
> 
> SD oriented _should_ mean that the students train to deal with a variety of situations that are analogous to what they may encounter in an actual violent attack outside of a sporting context.  Many of those skills will overlap with what one would see in sport, with both sport and SD each containing elements that the other will not.
> 
> ...



Since the beginning of time. 

If there is no REAL threat of harm (full contact sparring), then basically no REAL physical and psychological self defense learning is taking place, like I said, it's all just fluff, sounds and looks good to the customer.

And I'm not talking about class, I'm talking about my students who are fighters who train during off hours.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I'm sure you have a great curriculum, it sounds that way, however, I am really trying to get to one point. If there is no real threat of being knocked out (head or body shots), there is no real training, period, it's all just fluff. If your students don't have someone really trying to take them out, which is what it sounds like to me, then it's unrealistic.


Centuries of training methodology say otherwise.



mastercole said:


> You can not work on a bunch of soccer scenarios and drills, on sunny days, in the rain, on a rough field, it tight shorts, etc, and then think that person is ready to magically be able to jump in and play the game in real time, in a real situation. You have to play soccer, under the real stress of action to learn soccer. Self Defense is no different, you have to REALLY defend yourself in order to get any good at it.


Except that this analogy presupposes that REALLY defending yourself requires that the person you are training with is REALLY trying to knock you out.  

Violent criminals attacking you are not going for the knock out.  They're going for the kill.  This is why two man dueling does not equate to realistic self defense either, even *if *your partner is trying to knock you out.

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Since the beginning of time.
> 
> If there is no REAL threat of harm (full contact sparring), then basically no REAL physical and psychological self defense learning is taking place, like I said, it's all just fluff, sounds and looks good to the customer..


 
Two man dueling does not equal self defense. Not in the real world anyway. Sparring does not equal nor approximate actual self defense either.

Sparring allows you to practice techniques with a resisting partner in a free form setting. 

Given the long term negative effects of repeated knock outs, any school that is actually _encouraging training partners to KO one another_ in regular training is one that I would discourage anyone from attending.

Perhaps I'm reading you wrong, but what you _seem_ to be saying is that threat of KO needs to be ever present or at least a regular part of training. 

If that is not what you are saying, please clarify. 



mastercole said:


> And I'm not talking about class,


I was. My initial statement was: Since when did being SD oriented require that one be under threat of serious physical harm during class time?

And I'm pretty sure Kong Soo Do is talking about class as well. 



mastercole said:


> I'm talking about my students who are fighters who train during off hours.


Then what are you talking about? The vast majority of students' martial arts experience is in class. 

Your students who are "fighters who train during off hours"; what are they training for? MMA? WTF sport TKD? Underground street fighting?

If you're talking WTF sport, do these same students practice full contact striking while wearing zero protective gear?  

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Since the beginning of time.
> 
> If there is no REAL threat of harm (full contact sparring), then basically no REAL physical and psychological self defense learning is taking place, like I said, it's all just fluff, sounds and looks good to the customer.
> 
> And I'm not talking about class, I'm talking about my students who are fighters who train during off hours.



Sorry, but the chances for 'REAL harm' do not occur in every drill, at every stage of training, even within organizations such as the military where presumably the need for training efficacy is at the highest.

There are other counter examples as well.  Do people always train with live knifes for example and try to cut each other up?  Do jujutsu people always 'spar' with an intent to break and damage each other?

Obviously not.  The introduction of risk into a drill is an important part of intelligent, well-designed training, yet it would be incorrect to state that it is a component that should always be present.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

WC_lun said:


> I trained in it when I was a teenager and have trained some of the bad habits learned in it out of quite a few students as an adult.  I am not bashing Olympic style TKD.  I think it takes skill and is great for what it is.  However, I am also a big believer in you will fight how you train.  If you are figting on the street and your hands are down at your waist because that is the way you have trained for years, you are going to have issues defending yourself.  Also. while higher kicks can make a great impact, they are not effecient, no matter how you cut it.
> 
> I would never go into a match with an experienced Olymic style TKDist and expect to do well under that rule set.  I don't train that way and they are very good at what they do.  Why do some sport martial artist think they can just go into other sports or the street and be successful, when they will run into the same issues.  They don't train the same way and in many cases the opponent they would face is actually good at what they do.  That doesn't mean that some of the training would not be helpul, but again, you will fight how you train.



Training at the local level, is sort of like playing ball in the local Little League.  I guess when I talk about WTF fighters, I think about international/world level fighters.

Elite WTF fighters have superior movement skills, there hands are exactly where they feel they need to be, good luck thinking you could run in and punch one of them. Unless you are training like they do (or like Mayweather), it won't happen.

Why is it that non-athletic recreational martial artist somehow feel their "experimental" training drills will somehow magically come through for them on the street, much more so than the martial arts athlete who trains 2 hours in the morning, 2 hours in the afternoon and 2 to 3 more hours in the evening 5 to 6 days a week, and competes under he threat of sever bodily injured (and even possible death).  Like you said, you will fight how you train.


----------



## tinker1 (Jun 6, 2011)

The opponents you encounter in class or in tournament do not equate to any individual you may run into in a self defense situation.

In tournament people are grouped by gender and size / weight.  In a SD situation (my opinion) fools that start something are usually bigger and stronger, and they believe that you are an easy target.  Basically, they're cowards - many are at least.  They will usually start something with someone smaller than they are whom they believe they can easily take advantage of.  Also, they will likely have backup - unless they are unusually confident of their abilities to overcome you.

Big 250 pound men will attack 100 pound women.  You can do that in sparring, but to drill that way in a class situation would be difficult.. unless you have a red man suit.

In a robbery situation an individual may brandish a gun and stand at a distance.  Or they may flash a knife to intimidate you.  OR there will be more than one of them.

Many years ago my Uncle was robbed at an ATM by a man with a gun.  My Uncle tossed his wallet to the man and tried to run away, but the robber shot him in the head.  Fortunately my Uncle survived and was (generally) fine afterward.

I'm not really clear on how you could have "no rules" in a class room situation.  At tournament "no rules" would turn into a blood bath.  But in a real SD situation "no rules" - rules.  That's the way of it.

Also, there is the issue of experience level.  In a class or a tournament, you are dealing with trained martial artists.  On the street this may not be so.  And while we all may believe that a martial artist has the advantage over someone not trained - and mostly I believe we do - there still is the risk of the unexpected.

Further, many times you don't see the first blow coming.  Back when I was in High School I was leaving class one day, and as I walked out through the class room door into the main hall, someone hauled off and hit me.  It was hard enough to drive me back into the class room.  I quickly shook it off and launched myself through the door again.. but found just a jumble of people - so I had no idea who hit me.

A friend of mine was standing at a bar one night and got hit with a beer mug.  No provocation, no warning.  It dazed him, but he was able to move to avoid his attacker until his head cleared enough for him to put the other guy down and out.

So I really don't understand how you can really say that your training matches a real world street situation.  Unless that is... you take your students to bars and get people to start fights with them.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Centuries of training methodology say otherwise.



OK, how do you train your students for SD then?


[/QUOTE]Except that this analogy presupposes that REALLY defending yourself requires that the person you are training with is REALLY trying to knock you out.[/QUOTE]

Sure it does, if they are just tapping you, it's all fun and games, no threat.  

[/QUOTE]Violent criminals attacking you are not going for the knock out.  They're going for the kill.[/QUOTE]  

You never know what a violent criminal is thinking. You can assume they will probably harm you, in some way or another, and that falls into the category of a REAL physical threat, unlike walking into a room or putting groceries in your trunk scenarios and having your non-threatening classmates grab your arm and keys on a snowy day.

[/QUOTE]This is why two man dueling does not equate to realistic self defense either, even *if *your partner is trying to knock you out. Daniel[/QUOTE]

Let's see, mugger attacks man in McDonald's parking lot. Man fights back. Well, here we have a two man duel don't we?  I'd place my money on the martial arts athlete, who is use to real stress in the fight, over the scenario trained martial arts enthusiast in this one..........


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Training at the local level, is sort of like playing ball in the local Little League.  I guess when I talk about WTF fighters, I think about international/world level fighters.
> 
> Elite WTF fighters have superior movement skills, there hands are exactly where they feel they need to be, good luck thinking you could run in and punch one of them. Unless you are training like they do (or like Mayweather), it won't happen.
> 
> Why is it that non-athletic recreational martial artist somehow feel their "experimental" training drills will somehow magically come through for them on the street, much more so than the martial arts athlete who trains 2 hours in the morning, 2 hours in the afternoon and 2 to 3 more hours in the evening 5 to 6 days a week, and competes under he threat of sever bodily injured (and even possible death).  Like you said, you will fight how you train.



It is a false comparison you are setting up.  It is not a question of asking who is better to apply certain specific skills, the world class athlete or the average Joe?  It is a question of setting up specific scenarios with desired outcomes and then training towards those goals.

Who is going to be more effect in avoiding a knife thrust or slash that starts within a range of 3 feet?  Someone who trains daily for such an eventuality or a TKD player training to win matches under some rule set?

It is about the training rather than the fitness of the individuals involved.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> OK, how do you train your students for SD then?


Lets hear how you train yours in class first.

Daniel


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

tinker1 said:


> The opponents you encounter in class or in tournament do not equate to any individual you may run into in a self defense situation.
> 
> In tournament people are grouped by gender and size / weight.  In a SD situation (my opinion) fools that start something are usually bigger and stronger, and they believe that you are an easy target.  Basically, they're cowards - many are at least.  They will usually start something with someone smaller than they are whom they believe they can easily take advantage of.  Also, they will likely have backup - unless they are unusually confident of their abilities to overcome you.
> 
> ...




My point is that in any situation, the ATM, the 250 man attacking the skinny person, the sucker punch at the bar, the martial art athlete is always going to be in a better position to successfully fight and physically and mentally defeat their attacker, than say the non-athlete martial arts student.  But that being said, I do not believe that any martial arts instructors, myself included can teach SD to anyone, training them as martial arts athletes just gives them a better chance in a SD situation.


----------



## tinker1 (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> My point is that in any situation, the ATM, the 250 man attacking the skinny person, the sucker punch at the bar, the martial art athlete is always going to be in a better position to successfully fight and physically and mentally defeat their attacker, than say the non-athlete martial arts student.  But that being said, I do not believe that any martial arts instructors, myself included can teach SD to anyone, training them as martial arts athletes just gives them a better chance in a SD situation.



I agree completely.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> > Except that this analogy presupposes that REALLY defending yourself requires that the person you are training with is REALLY trying to knock you out.
> ...


So tell me, is full contact sparring the only training tool that you use?  And do you do so with zero protective gear and only allow a limited set of targets and attacks?

If you do not train that way, then your statements are a tad hypocritical.



mastercole said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> > Violent criminals attacking you are not going for the knock out. They're going for the kill.
> ...


I'll grant you that.  My point was that KO is generally not the goal in a violent attack.



mastercole said:


> Daniel Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> > This is why two man dueling does not equate to realistic self defense either, even *if *your partner is trying to knock you out. Daniel
> ...


No, we don't.  You apparently are unfamiliar with what a duel is.



mastercole said:


> *I'd place my money on the martial arts athlete*, who is use to real stress in the fight, over the scenario trained martial arts enthusiast in this one..........


Not without more information.  Is the mugger armed?  Is he a hardened criminal who has done hard time?  Is the athlete from suburbia and the mugger from Compton?  Most importantly, is the mugger armed?

Daniel


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Lets hear how you train yours in class first.
> 
> Daniel



You can avoid my question, it's certainly your right


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> If your students don't have someone really trying to take them out, which is what it sounds like to me, then it's unrealistic.



I really don't know why is sounds that way to you?  I don't really think you've fully grasped everything I've tried to communicate with you.  No disrespect intended. From what you've indicated of your free sparring, from a SD perspective, it is very unrealistic because it doesn't seem to take into account the considerations I've listed in this (and other threads).  I'm sure it is great sport training, and nothing wrong with that.  But it isn't SD as it is extremely limited in its considerations, again, as I've listed above.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 6, 2011)

Master Cole,

Just so that we're comparing apples to apples (or to see if we're comparing apples to oranges), do you teach from a sport or SD perspective?  Do you consider it both at the same time?  Tell me of a typical free sparring session.  

Thank you.


----------



## tinker1 (Jun 6, 2011)

Since you 2 are having a lover's spat (LOL - just kidding), I'll offer my POV on SD training.

Typically MA students are already in great physical condition.  They are probably also used to / able to withstand a hard shot (take a punch and come back).

So my view then is that SD training is more about the mind than the body.  They are already tough physically, now I only need to train them to handle the unexpected.

For example, in TKD sparring we typically don't encounter grabbing, or someone giving us a bum's rush and a tackle.  These are outside the scope of "normal" TKD training.  So I work on training the mind.

We go over how various joints on the body bend - where there is pain - how to inflict pain and how to release yourself from someone else grabbing you.  I teach dirty fighting.  "Monkey steals the peach", "eye of the Sphinx", neck wrenches, the "shark bite", eye gouging, ear popping, groin ripping, knee breaking.. all that.

Most important I try and teach my students to SEE what's available.  If I just teach technique after technique without thought to confusion and chaos of street SD, then I am doing my students a disservice.  I want my students to SEE their opponents vulnerabilities and be able to take advantage of them.  I want them to develop SD intelligence, and to play dirty and cheat their way out of a nasty situation, then quickly leave the scene.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> So tell me, is full contact sparring the only training tool that you use?  And do you do so with zero protective gear and only allow a limited set of targets and attacks?



I'm going answer questions posed to me, unlike you.  Everything our fighters do is centered around full contact training methods.  Do your fighters train in full contact methods?



Daniel Sullivan said:


> If you do not train that way, then your statements are a tad hypocritical.


 
My fighters train with the standard WTF gear during full contact encounters.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I'll grant you that.  My point was that KO is generally not the goal in a violent attack.



Now you are changing your story, but that cool, I understand. I have a question for you. Are you qualified to teach self defense?



Daniel Sullivan said:


> No, we don't.  You apparently are unfamiliar with what a duel is.



I am familiar with both of these definitions.

Duel [doo-uhl, dyoo-]

1. a prearranged combat between two persons, fought with deadly weapons according to an accepted code of procedure, especially to settle a private quarrel.

2.any contest between two persons or parties.

What is your point?



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Not without more information.  Is the mugger armed?



An armed mugger gives the recreational martial arts enthusiast some kind of advantage over the martial arts athlete?  hummmm. 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Is he a hardened criminal who has done hard time?



Again, is the part time recreational martial artist in a better position (than the martial art athlete) to deal with the hardened criminal from cell block 6? 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Is the athlete from suburbia and the mugger from Compton?  Most importantly, is the mugger armed? Daniel



LOL.  OK, a mugger from Compton should worry more about the part time recreational martial arts enthusiast than the martial arts athlete knockout specialist... I don't think so.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I really don't know why is sounds that way to you?  I don't really think you've fully grasped everything I've tried to communicate with you.  No disrespect intended. From what you've indicated of your free sparring, from a SD perspective, it is very unrealistic because it doesn't seem to take into account the considerations I've listed in this (and other threads).  I'm sure it is great sport training, and nothing wrong with that.  But it isn't SD as it is extremely limited in its considerations, again, as I've listed above.



I fully grasp it. Those points you listed above are nothing new. I've been on the receiving end and the teaching end of all that, and I can tell you it's fluff, all the unpredictable scenarios, two people coming at you, fake knives and foam bats, etc.  Until a person has had to fight under serious brutal conditions, they have no clue how they will react when someone really tries to hurt them. 

What you or anyone won't do it set up a situation where a person has free range to knockout the defender during an attack.  Why?  You can't, you would you get sued and everyone would quit the course, in horror.

What you are not grasping is the whole learning to deal with full force blows thing.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Master Cole,
> 
> Just so that we're comparing apples to apples (or to see if we're comparing apples to oranges), do you teach from a sport or SD perspective?  Do you consider it both at the same time?  Tell me of a typical free sparring session.
> 
> Thank you.



Here is the deal.  I feel that no martial arts instructor can teach SD, not you, not me. The only way to really learn self defense is to live day after day in a situation and culture where you have to defend yourself. It has nothing to do with martial arts, at all. This is my personal experience.

My point is, that a martial arts athlete has the physical and psychological advantage in a SD situation, over that of the martial artist enthusiast that is not an athlete.  Neither of them has "learned" SD, but one has the advantage over the other.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 6, 2011)

Hey, folks...  we all have different ways of training.  Let's try to discuss them with some courtesy rather than venom, OK?


----------



## Balrog (Jun 6, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> If you are involved in martial arts competitions, what do you see as far as the;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
1.  Increased confidence.  Improved reaction time.
2.  The rabid, Little League mentality of the parents of the junior competitors.  Far, far too much emphasis on XMA and its dance routine ilk.
3.  Tangible?  You get a trophy/medal/ribbon/whatever.
4.  Much too young.  I personally wouldn't start junior competition until around age 8 or so.
5.  I think they are reasonablly priced.  It's usually the travel that get expensive.
6.  Point


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Here is the deal.  I feel that no martial arts instructor can teach SD, not you, not me. The only way to really learn self defense is to live day after day in a situation and culture where you have to defend yourself. It has nothing to do with martial arts, at all. This is my personal experience.
> 
> My point is, that a martial arts athlete has the physical and psychological advantage in a SD situation, over that of the martial artist enthusiast that is not an athlete.  Neither of them has "learned" SD, but one has the advantage over the other.



You don't see the mental inconsistency in what you've written?  You are arguing that SD is only learned in some daily survival of the fittest environment, like a Lord of the Flies setting.  Yet then you also add on that a MA athlete has an advantage... Only where exactly does a MA athlete supposedly develops his advantage?  From his training I would think, unless we believe they sprout up from dragon's teeth sown in the ground.

So, you are in fact arguing that your training methodology gives some value for SD... Unfortunately you don't give the same courtesy to people who train using other methodology, even though they are specifically addressing common SD scenarios such as mugging and knife attacks.  Instead, you play athleticism as a final card, thinking that it trumps everything else and also mistakenly assuming that others don't train as hard as your own in group.

Rather fallacious thinking, I'm afraid.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I'm going answer questions posed to me, unlike you.


Didn't avoid.  I asked you to share first.  I will happily answer your question in another post, however. 



mastercole said:


> Everything our fighters do is centered around full contact training methods. Do your fighters train in full contact methods?
> 
> My fighters train with the standard WTF gear during full contact encounters.


Do they also train according to WTF tournament rules?  If yes, then do they also train under any additional set of conditions?  Regarding my fighters, I will answer that in a separate post.



mastercole said:


> Now you are changing your story, but that cool, I understand. I have a question for you. Are you qualified to teach self defense?


I'm qualified to teach hapkido.  Whether or not you consider that a 'yes' is up to you.



mastercole said:


> I am familiar with both of these definitions.
> 
> Duel [doo-uhl, dyoo-]
> 
> ...


Okay, for clarification then, when I say 'two man dueling', definition one is the one to which I refer.  While the term may be applied colloquially to general contests, when dueling is specifically discussed, particularly when being compared to a violent attack, it is definition one that is operative.



mastercole said:


> An armed mugger gives the recreational martial arts enthusiast some kind of advantage over the martial arts athlete? hummmm.


What are you responding to?  I never brought up recreational martial artists nor have I compared them in any way to competitive athletes, elite or otherwise. 



mastercole said:


> Again, is the part time recreational martial artist in a better position (than the martial art athlete) to deal with the hardened criminal from cell block 6?


Again, what are you responding to?  



mastercole said:


> LOL. OK, a mugger from Compton should worry more about the part time recreational martial arts enthusiast than the martial arts athlete knockout specialist... I don't think so.


Okay, lets establish what subject we're discussing.  What do recreational martial arts enthusiasts have to do with this?  I thought that we were talking about the athlete vs. the mugger.

Daniel


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I fully grasp it. Those points you listed above are nothing new. I've been on the receiving end and the teaching end of all that, and I can tell you it's fluff, all the unpredictable scenarios, two people coming at you, fake knives and foam bats, etc.  Until a person has had to fight under serious brutal conditions, they have no clue how they will react when someone really tries to hurt them.
> 
> What you or anyone won't do it set up a situation where a person has free range to knockout the defender during an attack.  Why?  You can't, you would you get sued and everyone would quit the course, in horror.
> 
> What you are not grasping is the whole learning to deal with full force blows thing.



Again, I can't fathom why you would assume such a thing in regards to SD training, particularly how I've describe it?  Certainly not from my description of SD training.  I think you have a pre-conceived idea that is coloring your viewpoint.  

I sounds like you and your students 'free spar' by starting about 6 feet apart and then trying to hit and/or kick each other hard.  That's fine in and of itself, but it isn't true SD when considering the full range of responses.  I've asked you a few times how you 'free spar'.  Your avoiding a response so my above conclusion is based upon your overall general comments.

Assuming I was 'free sparring' you or one of your students.  Would you have an issue if;



I got in close and used an elbow to the jaw or temple?
Pulled an edged weapon?
Grabbed for an improvised weapon such as a chair or other blunt object?
Swept their legs?
Threw them into something hard like the wall?
Popped them in the brachial plexus and then put them in a joint lock?
Had a couple of my buddies jump in?
Took them to the ground?
Instead of 'sparring' in the Dojang, could I ask them to go out into the parking lot between some cars or in the back alley or the closest stairs?
Could I ask them to start on their side on the ground wedged in the corner of the room?
Could I turn out most or all of the lights?
Could I throw some water in the middle of the floor and then have them start in the wet spot?
Could I throw some loose change in their eyes (while wearing appropriate eye wear of course)?
Could I do any of the above in combination and without warning?
And yes, someone with experience can very effectively teach SD.  If someone doesn't think so, well with the greatest amount of respect, I'll simply ask that they don't put their own limitations on me.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> You don't see the mental inconsistency in what you've written?  You are arguing that SD is only learned in some daily survival of the fittest environment, like a Lord of the Flies setting.



Lord of the Flies?  I think that is a fantasy movie, the settings I am referring to are real. As an example, you can find them in just about any urban ghetto.



dancingalone said:


> Yet then you also add on that a MA athlete has an advantage... Only where exactly does a MA athlete supposedly develops his advantage?  From his training I would think, unless we believe they sprout up from dragon's teeth sown in the ground.



Yes, from hard, full contact based training, not theatrical pretend scenarios.



dancingalone said:


> So, you are in fact arguing that your training methodology gives some value for SD...



It gives an advantage over the enthusiast participant, any "likely" SD value is "likely" small.



dancingalone said:


> Unfortunately you don't give the same courtesy to people who train using other methodology, even though they are specifically addressing common SD scenarios such as mugging and knife attacks.



I'd rather have the reality discussion.  "Oh that's nice, how cool, sweet, etc", is not what we are doing here, I thought we were talking about our view of self defense?  I think most of us are being courteous, and we are all big boys I assume?  I mean, I don't feel a single person has to agree with anything I write, and I'm not insulted, so let's just stick with facts and opinions.



dancingalone said:


> Instead, you play athleticism as a final card, thinking that it trumps everything else and also mistakenly assuming that others don't train as hard as your own in group. Rather fallacious thinking, I'm afraid.



My own personal experience tells me that martial arts athletes, train longer hours and harder and thus have superior skills as compared to the SD/recreational/enthusiast general martial artist. I don't see that as fallacious at all, how could you?  I see it as fact


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> You can avoid my question, it's certainly your right


As I said, I was not avoiding answering; I simply asked you to answer first.

You really didn't.  You responded with this: 
_


mastercole said:



			Everything our fighters do is centered around full contact training methods. Do your fighters train in full contact methods?

My fighters train with the standard WTF gear during full contact encounters.
		
Click to expand...

_ 
Which is fine, though it really doesn't describe training methodology.

As for my own methodology, 

*In hapkido:*
I start students off with basic strikes and blocks, footwork drills, stance work, and some basic hoshinsul.  Beginning hoshinsul includes escapes from and counters to same side wrist grabs, how to perform a basic wristlock, arm bar, leg sweep, hip toss, and over the back throw. I focus a lot on unballancing the opponent.  In addition, students learn to roll and fall.  Strikes are either performed in the air or against focus targets and bags.

As students advance, they learn more advanced strikes, escapes and counters to different grabs and holds, both standing and seated, more advanced footwork drills, and more challenging rolling and falling. 

I make it a point to connect what they are doing with the sorts of encounters that they are likely to have; anything from school bullies to drunks at the bar, and to the kind of unarmed attacks an attacker is likely to use.

I employ five step, three step, and one step drills, and free sparring after the students have gained a measure of control.

*In kumdo:*
My student learn the eight basic cuts.  They do a lot of repetitions of basic strikes and blocks, footwork drills, posture and stance drills, and distance drills.  They practice hyeong using a mokdo and sparring drills using the jukdo.   



mastercole said:


> Do your fighters train in full contact methods?


In hapkido, I don't call them fighters because we do not 'fight' competitively.  Students begin free sparring with light contact.  Once they have demonstrated control and are comfortable, students practice full contact.  We use WTF taekwondo style protective gear.

The hapkido association that I am in does not have HKD tournaments, but after many years of taekwondo, I feel that a full contact element is necessary.  We essentially use WTF TKD rules with allowances for kicks to the outer thigh and outter calf, sweeps, takedowns, and some joint locks.  Yes, there is a possibility of a KO in our full contact sparring. 

Kumdo/kendo sparring is full contact.  Student usually don't start actual sparring for about eight months to a year (around 6th geub/green belt usually).  We both spar and fight under FIK rules.

Daniel


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Didn't avoid.  I asked you to share first.  I will happily answer your question in another post, however.
> 
> 
> Do they also train according to WTF tournament rules?  If yes, then do they also train under any additional set of conditions?  Regarding my fighters, I will answer that in a separate post.
> ...



It's simple, I was responding to you.  Here is what you wrote, and my responses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Sullivan  
Not without more information. Is the mugger armed?<<

An armed mugger gives the recreational martial arts enthusiast some kind of advantage over the martial arts athlete? hummmm. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Sullivan  
Is he a hardened criminal who has done hard time?<<<

Again, is the part time recreational martial artist in a better position (than the martial art athlete) to deal with the hardened criminal from cell block 6? 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Sullivan  
Is the athlete from suburbia and the mugger from Compton? Most importantly, is the mugger armed? Daniel<<<

LOL. OK, a mugger from Compton should worry more about the part time recreational martial arts enthusiast than the martial arts athlete knockout specialist... I don't think so.

You still have not answered my questions, but I do understand.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> It's simple, I was responding to you. Here is what you wrote, and my responses.
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Daniel Sullivan
> ...


Again, what does a *recreational martial arts enthusiast* have to do with the scenario? 

I thought you were asking me to choose between the mugger and the athlete. You said you'd put money on the athlete. I said I'd need more info and provided some of the questions that I would have with regards to predicting the outcome of the encounter. Again, when did a recreational MA enthusiast enter the picture and when did we start comparing competitive athletes to recreational MA enthusiasts?

If I have either misread your scenario or if you were asking something else, please clarify. 



mastercole said:


> You still have not answered my questions, but I do understand.


Methinks we were composing our posts at the same time. 

See my last post. If any of your questions are still unanswered, specify which ones and I will endeavor to answer them.

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Lord of the Flies?  I think that is a fantasy movie, the settings I am referring to are real. As an example, you can find them in just about any urban ghetto.



It was a simile.  I can drop the literary references if you must make them a distraction from the discussion.




mastercole said:


> Yes, from hard, full contact based training, not theatrical pretend scenarios.



Again, you assume a lot.  There's a decent amount of real data about how violent encounters typically unfold.  Some of it has been mentioned before here, including the so-called Habitual Acts of Violence and other models that owe from it.  Using this research as a starting place for development of SD case studies, for example, would hardly qualify as theatrical.  Heck, even if someone is a bouncer, which some here are or have been, he will have been exposed personally to a myriad of violent scenarios which HAVE unfolded in real life.



mastercole said:


> It gives an advantage over the enthusiast participant, any "likely" SD value is "likely" small.



Well, that's fine and good if that's what you provide and your students want that.  Others are definitely training for different goals with different levels of effectiveness through methodology unused by yourself.

I would imagine their results would likewise differ.




mastercole said:


> I'd rather have the reality discussion.  "Oh that's nice, how cool, sweet, etc", is not what we are doing here, I thought we were talking about our view of self defense?  I think most of us are being courteous, and we are all big boys I assume?  I mean, I don't feel a single person has to agree with anything I write, and I'm not insulted, so let's just stick with facts and opinions.



Courtesy goes hand in hand with taekwondo.  At least the version I learned.




mastercole said:


> My own personal experience tells me that martial arts athletes, train longer hours and harder and thus have superior skills as compared to the SD/recreational/enthusiast general martial artist. I don't see that as fallacious at all, how could you?  I see it as fact



Again, you frame it in such a way as to 'win' your argument.  Take the same level of physical conditioning and honing and then apply it to someone training specifically against scenarios like a drawn knife or a 'football' tackle.  Suddenly your whole athlete argument disappears as it should.  As I've stated, it should be a comparison of specific training drills and methodology, rather than some nebulous view of athlete vs. 'enthusiast'.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> As I said, I was not avoiding answering; I simply asked you to answer first.
> 
> You really didn't.  You responded with this:
> 
> ...



I am going to take it good faith then that you are not familiar with WTF style/Shihap Kyorugi. Today, it is all over the net and you can find many training videos. I took a quick look and found a few that should give you an idea of what most TKD athletes (and mine) do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XFHrtuVdk8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZKB5n-cr60&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xfivDk9L8Q&feature=related



Daniel Sullivan said:


> As for my own methodology,
> 
> *In hapkido:*
> I start students off with basic strikes and blocks, footwork drills, stance work, and some basic hoshinsul.  Beginning hoshinsul includes escapes from and counters to same side wrist grabs, how to perform a basic wristlock, arm bar, leg sweep, hip toss, and over the back throw. I focus a lot on unballancing the opponent.  In addition, students learn to roll and fall.  Strikes are either performed in the air or against focus targets and bags.
> ...



I am very familiar with Hapkido. That all sounds great. A well established curriculum.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> In hapkido, I don't call them fighters because we do not 'fight' competitively.  Students begin free sparring with light contact.  Once they have demonstrated control and are comfortable, students practice full contact.  We use WTF taekwondo style protective gear.



Lot's of styles use our gear these days. I assume that when these students get to the point where they can fight full contact, they are fighting full contact against another person, correct?  If so, that would be fighting competitively. 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> The hapkido association that I am in does not have HKD tournaments, but after many years of taekwondo, I feel that a full contact element is necessary.  We essentially use WTF TKD rules with allowances for kicks to the outer thigh and outter calf, sweeps, takedowns, and some joint locks.  Yes, there is a possibility of a KO in our full contact sparring.



Well there you go, if you do this, I feel your students will have an advantage over the non-full contact student should a SD situation arise.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Kumdo/kendo sparring is full contact.  Student usually don't start actual sparring for about eight months to a year (around 6th geub/green belt usually).  We both spar and fight under FIK rules. Daniel



A few years back I watched a regional Kendo championship at Cleveland State University, and it was serious bad a$z stuff.  Kendo and Kumdo both competing at this event. I keep asking my friend who owns a Taekwondo school in the next town to join this Kendo club with me, but he and I are pretty busy.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

Just to clarify, this ...


mastercole said:


> OK, so your students are not encouraged to knock each other out, there for there is no threat of real serious physical harm in your SD classes.
> 
> So this begs the question, if there is no real threat of serious physical harm in your classes, well, there is no real experience in dealing with a real serious threat. That is not SD oriented in my book.


 
...and this...



mastercole said:


> Since the beginning of time.
> 
> If there is no REAL threat of harm (full contact sparring), then basically no REAL physical and psychological self defense learning is taking place, like I said, it's all just fluff, sounds and looks good to the customer.
> 
> And I'm not talking about class, I'm talking about my students who are fighters who train during off hours.


...are what I have been trying to discuss with you.  The comparisons between the part time recreational enthusiast and the serious competitive athlete is, at least for me, another discussion entirely.  Not sure if you have been debating this with another poster(s), but it is not what I was asking you about.  Somehow, it seems to have made its way into our exchange.

Simply to nip that in the bud, here is my opinion; take it for what its worth.  

The harder one trains and practices and the better one conitions themselves, the better their chances of surviving a violent encounter.

The more good sense and good habits a person developes in their daily life, the less likely they will be to end up in a violent encounter.

I really don't think that what you train in is nearly as important as training well in whatever it is that you train.  The best thing that an MA instructor can do for their students with regards to self protection is to instill good sense into them regarding how they go about their lives, none of which are related to physical defense in an attack.  This will help them to avoid needlessly putting themselves at risk of being in a violent altercation or of being the victim of a crime of opportunity.  It won't eliminate the possibility, but it will certainly reduce it.

The best thing that an instructor can do for their students to prepare them for a violent encounter is to instill sound basics and to pressure test the students so that they will not freeze up if they are confronted with a violent attacker.

The reason that competitive fighters have an edge in a violent encounter is not because they are knock out specialists (not all sport MA is striking based and thus a KO is not always a possible outcome) but because they practice what they do regularly and are constantly trying to get better.  They practice by themselves, in a class setting, and against resisting opponents in both training and in competition.

In short, the competitor is less likely to freeze up and in a better position due to superior conditioning to survive the encounter.

Not all martial arts have a competitive element, but most will allow for what I described above.

Also, not all schools are equal, regardless of the art or of whether or not there is a competitive element.  A crappy school tends to produce students with crappy skills.

Really, my point of disagreement with you revolves around your contention that aspects of training that do not involve threat of physical harm are just fluff for the customers.

Daniel


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Again, what does a *recreational martial arts enthusiast* have to do with the scenario?
> 
> I thought you were asking me to choose between the mugger and the athlete. You said you'd put money on the athlete. I said I'd need more info and provided some of the questions that I would have with regards to predicting the outcome of the encounter. Again, when did a recreational MA enthusiast enter the picture and when did we start comparing competitive athletes to recreational MA enthusiasts?
> 
> If I have either misread your scenario or if you were asking something else, please clarify.



I am stating that the martial art athlete has an advantage over the non-athlete martial artist, in any these SD situations.




Daniel Sullivan said:


> Methinks we were composing our posts at the same time.
> 
> See my last post. If any of your questions are still unanswered, specify which ones and I will endeavor to answer them.
> 
> Daniel



Answered.


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I am stating that the martial art athlete has an advantage over the non-athlete martial artist, in any these SD situations.



And Chuck Norris (or insert other MA idol/icon of your choice) would beat up anyone.  

Big deal.  This still has nothing to do with the discussion that one can or can't train for SD within a martial arts school environment.  You say no.  I say yes.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I am going to take it good faith then that you are not familiar with WTF style/Shihap Kyorugi. Today, it is all over the net and you can find many training videos. I took a quick look and found a few that should give you an idea of what most TKD athletes (and mine) do.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XFHrtuVdk8&feature=related
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZKB5n-cr60&feature=related
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xfivDk9L8Q&feature=related


I am familiar with it and practice it. Haven't competed in about two years, mainly due to time constraints.




mastercole said:


> I am very familiar with Hapkido. That all sounds great. A well established curriculum.
> 
> Lot's of styles use our gear these days. I assume that when these students get to the point where they can fight full contact, they are fighting full contact against another person, correct? If so, that would be fighting competitively.


I guess that it depends on how you define "competitively."  We don't go to competitions and compete and we don't have a point system.



mastercole said:


> Well there you go, if you do this, I feel your students will have an advantage over the non-full contact student should a SD situation arise.


Yes, but non contact vs. full contact is not where I disagree with you.

The reason that I asked you to describe your training methodology first was not to avoid the question but to see if I actually disagree with it. It is entirely possible that we are on the same page, so I did not want to mischaracterize your teaching methodology without at least knowing what it is.

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I am stating that the martial art athlete has an advantage over the non-athlete martial artist, in any these SD situations.


Okay, that is a different topic.  You phrased it as mugger versus athlete, with your money being on the athlete, not as 'who would fare better against the mugger; the athlete MA-ist or the non athlete MA-ist. 

My response of 'not enough info' was relating _strictly_ to mugger vs. athlete.

I don't see this as having a clear cut answer because not all arts have a competive element but many that don't have other ways of achieving the same end.

The question of the serious competitor versus the weekend warrior isn't even a question in my opinion; the weekend warrior will never be as prepared as someone who trains hard four to six days a week and practices outside of class regularly, whether or not they are competing.

Daniel


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Just to clarify, this ...
> 
> 
> ...and this...
> ...



I was debating martial art athlete vs the non-athlete martial artist, in SD situations.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Simply to nip that in the bud, here is my opinion; take it for what its worth.
> 
> The harder one trains and practices and the better one conitions themselves, the better their chances of surviving a violent encounter.
> 
> ...


 
I pretty much agree with most of what you state here.  But how do you effectively pressure test your students without unpredictable full contact against opponents?



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Really, my point of disagreement with you revolves around your contention that aspects of training that do not involve threat of physical harm are just fluff for the customers. Daniel



No, my point is that stuff labeled as SD specific training that does not involve the REAL threat of physical harm (and the psychological stress that goes with it), is fluff. Our students can learn Hapkido, Taekwondo, Karate, etc, but we should not lead them to believe they are now qualified in SD.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> .
> I don't see this as having a clear cut answer because not all arts have a competive element but many that don't have other ways of achieving the same end.
> 
> Daniel



What would be that other way of achieving what the martial art athlete achieves?  Not talking about medals and awards.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mastercole  
I am stating that the martial art athlete has an advantage over the non-athlete martial artist, in any these SD situations.



dancingalone said:


> And Chuck Norris (or insert other MA idol/icon of your choice) would beat up anyone.



What are you talking about?

We were not talking about idols and icons. The subject was martial art athletes, they are in most every MA school, (not movie stars) compared to the non-athlete martial artist in SD situations.



dancingalone said:


> Big deal.  This still has nothing to do with the discussion that one can or can't train for SD within a martial arts school environment.  You say no.  I say yes.



Sure it does, we have all been talking about it for hours now.


----------



## puunui (Jun 6, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I really don't know why is sounds that way to you?  I don't really think you've fully grasped everything I've tried to communicate with you.  No disrespect intended. From what you've indicated of your free sparring, from a SD perspective, it is very unrealistic because it doesn't seem to take into account the considerations I've listed in this (and other threads).  I'm sure it is great sport training, and nothing wrong with that.  But it isn't SD as it is extremely limited in its considerations, again, as I've listed above.



Speaking of extremely limited, I think one of the big differences between competition and self defense is that in competition you are training for something that you know will happen, whose skill may approximate your own. In self defense, you are training for an event that will most likely never happen, unless you get paid to be in such situations. If I am a soccer mom, why do I have to train like I am fighting one of Iraq's Republican Guard or a VC, looking suspiciously around every corner and at every person assuming they are some sort of threat? Who wants to live like that?


----------



## puunui (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> The question of the serious competitor versus the weekend warrior isn't even a question in my opinion; the weekend warrior will never be as prepared as someone who trains hard four to six days a week and practices outside of class regularly, whether or not they are competing.



How about the athlete or the person who takes an 8-24 hour weekend course on self defense every eighteen months or so? Who in your opinion is more prepared? That is the real discussion and the position of Kong Soo Do, that he says the 8-24 hour person is better prepared than an athlete.


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Quote:
> What are you talking about?
> 
> We were not talking about idols and icons. The subject was martial art athletes, they are in most every MA school, (not movie stars) compared to the non-athlete martial artist in SD situations.
> ...




Sigh.  On the chance that you are NOT being disingenuous, I will make a serious reply.

You have asserted multiple times on various threads that martial arts instructors can't and don't teach self-defense.  That is my primary point of contention with you.  It may be that you don't, preferring to focus on other things (nothing wrong with that), but you make a blanket statement for everyone else too.  You also cloud the whole line of discussion by engaging in this absurd comparison of 'athletes' vs. 'enthusiasts', effectively stating that an athlete will always outdo a lesser gifted person, yet that's not even what other people, myself included, are arguing at all.

So let's make it easy.  This is my worldview:
*
You will have a higher rate of success in accomplishing a specific task if you have trained for it instead of not, all other things being equal.*

Thus, if we take two identical people and one has trained to defend himself against a sideways knife slash and the other has trained to win a WTF rules TKD match, I believe the first people will have better success vs. a sideways slash from a knife.  Just as I believe the second person will fare much better comparatively in a TKD match.

This is not rocket science.  It's common sense.  Trying to confuse the issue by comparing results from an elite athlete vs. Average Joe is only that, clouding the issue.  This should be a discussion about training methods such as Kong Soo Do has described and whether they lead to martial artists that are prepared for SD encounters.

And in my opinion, yes we can train SD within martial arts schools effectively.  Effective training means the introduction of risk and regular full contact striking and grappling at some point, but it does NOT mean that knock outs should be a possibility in EVERY single training session.  Just as knife fighters do not always cut each other, so too is SD training graduated in intensity.  You ramp up to level 10 and you also ramp down too.  You don't go to level 10 instantly and stay there all the time.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by mastercole
> Lord of the Flies? I think that is a fantasy movie, the settings I am referring to are real. As an example, you can find them in just about any urban ghetto.<<<<
> 
> It was a simile. I can drop the literary references if you must make them a distraction from the discussion.



The only distraction I see here is the one you provided. Best to just stay on task then.



dancingalone said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by mastercole
> Yes, from hard, full contact based training, not theatrical pretend scenarios.<<<
> 
> ...


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

puunui said:


> Speaking of extremely limited, I think one of the big differences between competition and self defense is that in competition you are training for something that you know will happen, whose skill may approximate your own. In self defense, you are training for an event that will most likely never happen, unless you get paid to be in such situations. If I am a soccer mom, why do I have to train like I am fighting one of Iraq's Republican Guard or a VC, looking suspiciously around every corner and at every person assuming they are some sort of threat? Who wants to live like that?



Now that was funny!   LOL!   Imagine that poor soccer mom....


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I was debating martial art athlete vs the non-athlete martial artist, in SD situations.


Understood, but I was not.




mastercole said:


> I pretty much agree with most of what you state here. But how do you effectively pressure test your students without unpredictable full contact against opponents?


Two things get pressure tested: the technique and the student. The technique can be learned by anyone, but until you have to use it against a resisting opponent, it is just a physical exercise. With strikes, the student needs to plant the blow against a moving target that is actively trying not to be hit, eight via blocks, or avoidance, and who is trying to hit back. 

With grapples, it is impossible for the student to get to a point where instead of muscling through, the technique is doing the work (so to speak), without a resisting opponent. 

A resisting opponent allows for refinement of technique, whether your opponent is one of the usual suspects or someone you have never met.

The student is pressure tested in that they have to not panic as someone else comes at them intent upon either striking them or taking them down in some fashion.  While they many not be under threat of real bodilly harm, nobody wants to get whacked on and knocked over by some other guy at will, and nobody wants to have nothing that they do work. 

In order to have randomness, students within the class rotate between other students who are of varying sizes and of differing genders. When I teach for KMA, Inc., the kwanjang has two schools plus three smaller studios that have a relationship with him (of which my own studio is one of), so students from all five studios get together on a semi regular basis to train together. 

I also have a friend who owns her own school and is in a different HKD federation, and we try to get together with her and her students periodically as well.

It isn't overly formal, but it does provide a fairly diverse group.



mastercole said:


> No, my point is that stuff labeled as SD specific training that does not involve the REAL threat of physical harm (and the psychological stress that goes with it), is fluff.


Which is where we disagree, though I will say that I have seen a lot of stuff billed as "self defense" that should not be labeled as such. 

I don't think that there is any way to truly replicate the psychological stress that goes with the threat of real physical harm in a school, or even a competitive, setting. You can only go but so far in replicating the threat of real physical harm without setting up an environment where people will be permanently injured or worse on a consistent basis. 

In a school or competitive environment, there is always someone there to keep things from going too far. Even in the ring, you go in knowing that your opponent is matched in age, weight, gender, and belt level, and that even if you get KO'ed, you really are not under threat of real physical harm. 

My goal as an instructor is to make sure that the techniques and responses are ingrained into the student so that they can use them without thought should the need arise. Hard sparring helps to eliminate the freezing that can happen, and prepares the student to be able to take a hit. 



mastercole said:


> Our students can learn Hapkido, Taekwondo, Karate, etc, but we should not lead them to believe they are now qualified in SD.


I agree with you here, but I don't look at it as 'my students are now qualified in SD' so much as they now have tools that they can use should the need to defend themselves arise, and they train regularly in the use of those tools.

As to what gets labeled "SD," it is, at least the way that I and many others here look at it, a question of application. Doesn't mean that the technique set is entriely or at all different from what might be used in a competitive setting.

For self defense, I am a fan of a smaller number of individual techniques practiced consistently. WTF sport TKD certainly meets that standard. So too does boxing.

Also, I am of the opinion that competitive athletes can adapt to their environment. Some people disagree with me, and will throw out the story of some poor sap who is undone "on the street" because of some habit picked up in competition, but personally, I think that these are the exceptions rather than the rule.

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> No you assume a lot, I know all about real life violence and I have scene all the latest and greatest scenarios models and gimmicks for SD. They are great tools for the MA business owner and if you play it right you can make some extra cash. But my point is, if it is marketed as SD, it's fluff.  You can not teach SD, you acquire it from your environment.



In other words, how do you teach street smarts?


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> No you assume a lot, I know all about real life violence and I have scene all the latest and greatest scenarios models and gimmicks for SD. They are great tools for the MA business owner and if you play it right you can make some extra cash. But my point is, if it is marketed as SD, it's fluff.  You can not teach SD, you acquire it from your environment.



Environment is intertwined with training.  That is why we try to SIMULATE conditions as realistically as possible.  That is why it's worthwhile to research common violent scenarios so we can try to replicate and train against them.  We will NEVER be again to duplicate actual real violence completely - I think everyone would acknowledge that.

But you seem to be saying if you're not receiving knocks on the street and giving them out in return, your time has been misspent.  I can not disagree any more strongly with that.  



mastercole said:


> You assume I never used it. Did I say that?



Do you deny at all that you seem to be repudiating self-defense training?  Sure sounds like you are saying SD training is a waste of time, if MA instructors can't teach it by your own words.




mastercole said:


> What version was that?



Does it matter?  Jhoon Rhee Texkwondo if you must know.  You might like the hard-sparring aspect of it.  We pounded each other pretty good back then.



mastercole said:


> Actually the argument stands, thanks to you!  If that non-athlete recreational weekend warrior enthusiast decided to kick their training up a hundred notches or so, guess what they would transform into.......drum roll...... a big mean fighting machine, martial arts athlete!



How about addressing my point about the effectiveness of training for specific outcomes?




mastercole said:


> You might think so, but I don't think so and I have stated why.



Yes, you're talking in circles.  "Athletes are better than enthusiasts because they are more athletic."  Never mind the point that if you take the exact same person and train him in SD skills in lieu of his current tournament curriculum, he'll be good in SD skills and probably not so good in TKD match skills.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

puunui said:


> How about the athlete or the person who takes an 8-24 hour weekend course on self defense every eighteen months or so? Who in your opinion is more prepared? That is the real discussion and the position of Kong Soo Do, that he says the 8-24 hour person is better prepared than an athlete.


If taking the course every eighteen months or so is *all* that they are doing to keep their skills sharp, then they are not only less prepared than the athlete, but they are less prepared than the part time recreational MA enthusiast who goes to class once or twice a week. They may be even less prepared than the person who simply does nothing because they will have the illusion that they are more prepared than they actually are. 

A competitive athlete who takes the same course with the same frequency will, all things being equal, be better prepared than the competitive athlete who does not.

Just to clarify, I do not consider simply training in WTF sparring a couple of times a week as part of a TKD class to qualify one as an athlete, competitive or otherwise: that person is enjoying the lifestyle benefits of the class and is simply training to that end. An athlete is training towards a specific goal of competitive sport, such as how ATC or Terry describe the competition teams at their schools.

Now, in fairness to KSD's position, I think that he is referring to LEO (not even sure it was in the US) who take the innitial class and then an annual or every 18 month refresher course. Not being LEO, I don't know what kind of regular training they do, so whether or not such a class is simply supplementing their existing training or comprising the entirety of it I don't know.  Presumably, there is a degree to which the nature of the job will keep one's skills sharp as well.

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 6, 2011)

puunui said:


> In other words, how do you teach street smarts?



Drilling specific technical skills such as how to handle a grab followed by a right haymaker is part of it.  The movement becomes engrained and second nature to the student.  An important part of that process is pattern recognition and spatial understanding.  Those ultimately become key components to what we call street smarts.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 6, 2011)

puunui said:


> In other words, how do you teach street smarts?



Exactly. I learned and earned my street smarts years ago. But the more I am away from it, the weaker I get. It's like that scene in Apocalypse Now where Martin Sheen's character US Army Captain Willard is stressing out in that dingy hotel room in Saigon, doing kungfu and drinking Jack, on R&R waiting for a mission and he says:

*Willard:* [voiceover] Saigon... ****; I'm still only in Saigon... Every time I think I'm gonna wake up back in the jungle.

*Willard:* When I was home after my first tour, it was worse. I'd wake up and there'd be nothing. I hardly said a word to my wife, until I said "yes" to a divorce. When I was home after my first tour, it was worse. [grabs at flying insect] 

*Willard:* When I was here, I wanted to be there; when I was there, all I could think of was getting back into the jungle. I'm here a week now... waiting for a mission... getting softer. _Every minute I stay in this room, I get weaker, and every minute Charlie squats in the bush, he gets stronger._ Each time I looked around the walls moved in a little tighter.

If you really need self defense, I don't think you can find it doing kungfu in a hotel room in Saigon and more that Captain Willard did, nor in a martial arts school. I'm convinced you have to be in the bush to get stronger.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 6, 2011)

tinker1 said:


> The opponents you encounter in class or in tournament do not equate to any individual you may run into in a self defense situation.
> 
> In tournament people are grouped by gender and size / weight. In a SD situation (my opinion) fools that start something are usually bigger and stronger, and they believe that you are an easy target. Basically, they're cowards - many are at least. They will usually start something with someone smaller than they are whom they believe they can easily take advantage of. Also, they will likely have backup - unless they are unusually confident of their abilities to overcome you.


 
These are legitimate considerations.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 6, 2011)

mastercole said:


> Elite WTF fighters have superior movement skills, there hands are exactly where they feel they need to be, good luck thinking you could run in and punch one of them.
> 
> Why is it that non-athletic recreational martial artist somehow feel their "experimental" training drills will somehow magically come through for them on the street, much more so than the martial arts athlete who trains 2 hours in the morning, 2 hours in the afternoon and 2 to 3 more hours in the evening 5 to 6 days a week, and competes under he threat of sever bodily injured (and even possible death). Like you said, you will fight how you train.
> 
> My point is that in any situation, the ATM, the 250 man attacking the skinny person, the sucker punch at the bar, the martial art athlete is always going to be in a better position to successfully fight and physically and mentally defeat their attacker, than say the non-athlete martial arts student. But that being said, I do not believe that any martial arts instructors, myself included can teach SD to anyone, training them as martial arts athletes just gives them a better chance in a SD situation.


 
Your comments indicate that you are operating entirely within a sport-model context. To begin with, 'running in' on your proposed WTF fighter, how will he do against multiple attackers? An attacker(s) that pull a weapon? In a very small, closed in environment? Inside his car? On the ground? When he's not stretched out and warmed up in street clothing? 

He would be at a disadvantage because he's not trained for any of these situations. 

I'm not sure what 'experimental training' you're referring to? Scenario based training is a staple of L.E., military and SD schools all over the world. It works well, which is why they continue to train this way. Many non-athletic practitioners are in as good a shape as their sport counter-parts. And though physical conditioning is important for a variety of reasons, a SD attack doesn't have rounds. The goal is to end the situation as quickly as possible and appropriate. According to the most recent data that we have from our training section, the average altercation lasts 7 seconds with injury usually occuring within the first 3 seconds. This is averaged from both on-duty as well as private citizen altercations i.e. domestics. Being able to go several rounds of several minutes each is nice, but not usually necessary from an SD perspective. We have to keep these things in perspective.


----------



## terryl965 (Jun 6, 2011)

***********DISCLAIMER*******DISCLAIMER*********

***SCARCASIM***********SARCASIM***************

Nothing ever comes good out of sport TKD just like all sports only pansy do them. There is absolutely no value in playing a game when life and death is concern, because you know every single person encounter three four maybe even five of those a week. And for the record if they are not then they are all just wimps..

*          ***NO BACK TO YOUR REGULAR SCHEDULE PROGRAM****


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Your comments indicate that you are operating entirely within a sport-model context. To begin with, 'running in' on your proposed WTF fighter, how will he do against multiple attackers? An attacker(s) that pull a weapon? In a very small, closed in environment? Inside his car? On the ground? When he's not stretched out and warmed up in street clothing?
> 
> He would be at a disadvantage because he's not trained for any of these situations.


Given what I have seen that passes for weapon defense in most schools, probably not at any greater disadvantage than anyone else.

As far as the other situations, the principles of fighting don't change all that much from one scenario to the next.  Training for specific situations is certainly nice bonus, but ingraining the principles solidly allows for flexibility without having to be prepared for each specific situation.  While I think that there are some common sorts of scenarios that should be trained for, and there are certainly some environment specific situations for which specialized training would be needed (LEO, military, etc.), for the most part, solid principles and good sense and habits should be more than enough for most people.  



Kong Soo Do said:


> I'm not sure what 'experimental training' you're referring to? Scenario based training is a staple of L.E., military and SD schools all over the world. It works well, which is why they continue to train this way. Many non-athletic practitioners are in as good a shape as their sport counter-parts. And though physical conditioning is important for a variety of reasons, a SD attack doesn't have rounds. The goal is to end the situation as quickly as possible and appropriate. According to the most recent data that we have from our training section, the average altercation lasts 7 seconds with injury usually occuring within the first 3 seconds. This is averaged from both on-duty as well as private citizen altercations i.e. domestics. Being able to go several rounds of several minutes each is nice, but not usually necessary from an SD perspective. We have to keep these things in perspective.


The benefit of being able to go multiple rounds has benefits that go beyond just fighting multiple rounds.  Endurance in general, for one, which is handy in escaping, the ability to maintain a cool head while under pressure for another.  Most importantly, though, going multiple rounds trains you to see things through to the end, even if you feel like giving up.

So, yes the goal is to end it as quickly as possible, but at the same time, there are also benefits to competitive sparring, just as there are benefits to scenario based training.

Daniel


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Given what I have seen that passes for weapon defense in most schools, probably not at any greater disadvantage than anyone else.


 
I agree that many weapon defense programs are inefficent, overly complicated or even dangerous to attempt.  However, there are some very good weapon defense programs that have a very high % rate of success.  They could be an addition to most any art and in some cases even a stand alone system from an SD perspective.



> As far as the other situations, the principles of fighting don't change all that much from one scenario to the next.


 
I'm going to 'somewhat' disagree with you.  Although a punch in a mugging is the same as a punch during a date-rape attempt (given equal placement), other factors come into play as I've mentioned above.  Given common situations, we can take a person through and familarize them with various aspects that can later be usable while under duress.  



> The benefit of being able to go multiple rounds has benefits that go beyond just fighting multiple rounds. Endurance in general, for one, which is handy in escaping, the ability to maintain a cool head while under pressure for another. Most importantly, though, going multiple rounds trains you to see things through to the end, even if you feel like giving up.


 
I do not disagree with you on this as I feel being physically fit is important.  But a person training for SD can be just as fit as an athlete, even if the altercations isn't likely to last as long.  As I've mentioned, we do things like Pyramids and other conditioning programs.  For me, this is in addition to the power lifting and body building routines I do 3-5 times per week.  So as far as physical fitness, yes I'm a big believer in it.  And I impart that training mind set to my students.  

They are very familar with Pyramids, hand stand push ups, dive bomber push ups etc


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 6, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I agree that many weapon defense programs are inefficent, overly complicated or even dangerous to attempt.  However, there are some very good weapon defense programs that have a very high % rate of success.  They could be an addition to most any art and in some cases even a stand alone system from an SD perspective.


Yes, there are some good weapon defenses.  I question the 96% rate of success; where do you get your figure?



Kong Soo Do said:


> I'm going to 'somewhat' disagree with you.  Although a punch in a mugging is the same as a punch during a date-rape attempt (given equal placement), other factors come into play as I've mentioned above.  Given common situations, we can take a person through and familarize them with various aspects that can later be usable while under duress.


Yes, which is why I say that scenario based training is a nice bonus.  But there are always other factors.

Which is why the principles are more important than learning a string of specifics; no matter how many you train for, there will always be more specifics that you haven't trained for.

The major benefit that I see to scenario based training is that it makes a good teaching tool for helping students to connect the principles with practical application, but I think that a few fairly general and common scenarios are enough for most people. 



Kong Soo Do said:


> I do not disagree with you on this as I feel being physically fit is important.  But a person training for SD can be just as fit as an athlete, even if the altercations isn't likely to last as long.  As I've mentioned, we do things like Pyramids and other conditioning programs.  For me, this is in addition to the power lifting and body building routines I do 3-5 times per week.  So as far as physical fitness, yes I'm a big believer in it.  And I impart that training mind set to my students.
> 
> They are very familar with Pyramids, hand stand push ups, dive bomber push ups etc


Conditioning is not specific to athletes and sparring for multiple rounds need not be confined to competitive sport.

Daniel


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 6, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Yes, there are some good weapon defenses.  I question the 96% rate of success; where do you get your figure?



I'm not sure where the 96% rate is coming from that you mentioned?  



> Which is why the principles are more important than learning a string of  specifics; no matter how many you train for, there will always be more  specifics that you haven't trained for.
> 
> The major benefit that I see to scenario based training is that it makes  a good teaching tool for helping students to connect the principles  with practical application, but I think that a few fairly general and  common scenarios are enough for most people.



I agree with you completely about training principles.  And to be clear, I'm not talking about a thousand different scenarios.  But I like to include enough that cover 'typical' situations.  And as many different, 'common' training environments as possible.  First for the practicality, secondly because it makes training interesting as well as educational.  I remember the first time I turned out the lights and had the class perform drills and forms in dim light conditions


----------



## mastercole (Jun 7, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Quote:
> The benefit of being able to go multiple rounds has benefits that go beyond just fighting multiple rounds. Endurance in general, for one, which is handy in escaping, the ability to maintain a cool head while under pressure for another. Most importantly, though, going multiple rounds trains you to see things through to the end, even if you feel like giving up.<<<
> 
> I do not disagree with you on this as I feel being physically fit is important. But a person training for SD can be just as fit as an athlete, even if the altercations isn't likely to last as long. As I've mentioned, we do things like Pyramids and other conditioning programs. For me, this is in addition to the power lifting and body building routines I do 3-5 times per week. So as far as physical fitness, yes I'm a big believer in it. And I impart that training mind set to my students.
> ...



I don't think he is saying it's just the fitness that does it. It's the experience of fighting, it's the fighting part, round after round of unpredictable attacks, mental stress, physical adrenal stress, getting hurt and having the will power and tenacity to continue on until it's over, not giving up, you know the things that you can not get from jumping jacks, sit ups, push ups etc.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 7, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Conditioning is not specific to athletes and sparring for multiple rounds need not be confined to competitive sport.Daniel



This is like stating that pink is black.  You still refuse to accept the definition of an athlete, one you provided!

A person who starts regular physical exercise to condition them selves for possible SD scenarios, is an athlete as they are engaged in an athletic pursuit, according to the first point of definition of an athlete, as we saw earlier.

Likewise, if a person is engaged in "sparring" with a partner they are engaging in a competitive sporting activity, whether it be in a tournament, or in a basement or backyard dojo.  They are by nature competing against another person!

Definition of Sparring: spar n. 1. sparring match, pugilism, fight, contest; see boxing, dispute, sport


----------



## mastercole (Jun 7, 2011)

ath·lete (at&#824;h&#8242;l&#275;t&#8242. noun 1. *a person trained in exercises*, games, or contests requiring physical strength, skill, stamina, speed, etc.

ath·lete (&#259;th&#712;l&#275;t&#716. noun 2. *A person possessing the natural or acquired traits, such as strength, agility, and endurance, that are necessary for physical exercise* or sports, especially those performed in competitive contexts.

In both definitions, the first point of definition is for the person who trains in physical exercises.

Both definitions 2nd points of definition go on to explain the term "athlete" *could also* be for sport, games, contest or competitions, but as we see, not exclusive to those activities as it can be a term for a person who just exercises


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 7, 2011)

mastercole said:


> This is like stating that pink is black. You still refuse to accept the definition of an athlete, one you provided!
> 
> A person who starts regular physical exercise to condition them selves for possible SD scenarios, is an athlete as they are engaged in an athletic pursuit, according to the first point of definition of an athlete, as we saw earlier.
> 
> ...


 


mastercole said:


> ath·lete (at&#824;h&#8242;l&#275;t&#8242. noun 1. *a person trained in exercises*, games, or contests requiring physical strength, skill, stamina, speed, etc.
> 
> ath·lete (&#259;th&#712;l&#275;t&#716. noun 2. *A person possessing the natural or acquired traits, such as strength, agility, and endurance, that are necessary for physical exercise* or sports, especially those performed in competitive contexts.
> 
> ...


It is not a question of acceptance but of communicating with others.  I am aware of the general definition, but I am also aware of the fact that, rightly or wrongly, most people in MA draw a distinction between a "Martial artists" and an athlete.  That distinction being one who trains for "the art" and one who trains for competition.

Believe me, there is a myriad of terminology that I would love to see changed, beginning with martial artist, but there comes a point where I need to decide whether or not I wish to communicate effectively with the people on the board.

Using athlete in the most general sense of the word does nothing more than confuse the conversation.

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 7, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I'm not sure where the 96% rate is coming from that you mentioned?


It comes from responding late at night and seeing % as 96.  Sorry about that.



Kong Soo Do said:


> I agree with you completely about training principles. And to be clear, I'm not talking about a thousand different scenarios. But I like to include enough that cover 'typical' situations. And as many different, 'common' training environments as possible. First for the practicality, secondly because it makes training interesting as well as educational. I remember the first time I turned out the lights and had the class perform drills and forms in dim light conditions


Nothing wrong with any of that, and I am certainly not saying that you shouldn't do it.  Only that those sorts of things are a nice bonus.

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 7, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I don't think he is saying it's just the fitness that does it. It's the experience of fighting, it's the fighting part, round after round of unpredictable attacks, mental stress, physical adrenal stress, getting hurt and having the will power and tenacity to continue on until it's over, not giving up, you know the things that you can not get from jumping jacks, sit ups, push ups etc.


That is exactly what I am saying.

Daniel


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 7, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I don't think he is saying it's just the fitness that does it. It's the experience of fighting, it's the fighting part, round after round of unpredictable attacks, mental stress, physical adrenal stress, getting hurt and having the will power and tenacity to continue on until it's over, not giving up, you know the things that you can not get from jumping jacks, sit ups, push ups etc.



I've highlighted some parts of your quote that I feel are incorrect.  Here's why;

*unpredictable attacks - *what's so unpredictable?  The opponent is  either going to throw a punch or a kick.  Unless where now grappling in  TKD matches?  Or pulling weapons?  Or having a few buddies jump in to  help?  Or throwing something?  Or grabbing for an improvised weapon?

*physical adrenal stress - *I'm sure there is a bit of stress with  all those people watching you.  That can in no way be compared to the  stress and duress of fighting for your life.
*
getting hurt* - Well it isn't likely that they'll get much more than a bloody nose.  Oh, a serious injury could occur.  But they aren't going to get cut with an edged weapon, shot, or hit with a baseball bat now are they?

*will power and tenacity to continue on until it's over* - Till what is over?  A match that lasts a few minutes?  Not exactly on par with fighting for your life, particularly if your injured.  

*Jumping jacks?* - Would not know, I don't do jumping jacks.  I do a super 8 pyramid.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 7, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> It is not a question of acceptance but of communicating with others.  I am aware of the general definition, but I am also aware of the fact that, rightly or wrongly, most people in MA draw a distinction between a "Martial artists" and an athlete.  That distinction being one who trains for "the art" and one who trains for competition.
> 
> Believe me, there is a myriad of terminology that I would love to see changed, beginning with martial artist, but there comes a point where I need to decide whether or not I wish to communicate effectively with the people on the board.
> 
> ...



I don't think most people in MA draw a distinction between a martial artist and a martial artist athlete. I believe that such thinking has a small cult following and is a tiny minority of practitioners. During my interactions with folks locally, statewide, nationally and internationally, I rarely run across such thinking.  When I do run across it, it's usually folks that don't get out much and keep to their tiny circle of like-minded associates.

Just because something (possibly erroneous) is accepted by a group does not mean we should go along with it. Why go along with the crowd when the crowd is wrong?


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 7, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I don't think most people in MA draw a distinction between a martial artist and a martial artist athlete. I believe that such thinking has a small cult following and is a tiny minority of practitioners. During my interactions with folks locally, statewide, nationally and internationally, I rarely run across such thinking.  When I do run across it, it's usually folks that don't get out much and keep to their tiny circle of like-minded associates.
> 
> Just because something (possibly erroneous) is accepted by a group does not mean we should go along with it. Why go along with the crowd when the crowd is wrong?



I disagree and I actually believe you to be in the minority when trying to use the terms martial artist and athlete as synonymous and interchangeable ones.  

The fact that individuals can fit both categories does not mean that they are the same thing.  Far from it.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 7, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I've highlighted some parts of your quote that I feel are incorrect. Here's why;
> 
> *unpredictable attacks - *what's so unpredictable? The opponent is either going to throw a punch or a kick. Unless where now grappling in TKD matches? Or pulling weapons? Or having a few buddies jump in to help? Or throwing something? Or grabbing for an improvised weapon?


Pretty sure that by unpredicatble, he means unscripted.  Thus, while you may be aware of the range of attacks permitted, your opponent can use them at random as he or she sees fit, perform fake outs, feints, etc.



Kong Soo Do said:


> *physical adrenal stress - *I'm sure there is a bit of stress with all those people watching you. That can in no way be compared to the stress and duress of fighting for your life.


Nor can anything that goes on in a school environment.  



Kong Soo Do said:


> *getting hurt* - Well it isn't likely that they'll get much more than a bloody nose. Oh, a serious injury could occur. But they aren't going to get cut with an edged weapon, shot, or hit with a baseball bat now are they?


This will not occur in a school environment either unless you really are cutting with a sharp implement, shooting real bullets, or hitting your students with a wood or aluminum baseball bat.  Or maybe waterboarding your students.



Kong Soo Do said:


> *will power and tenacity to continue on until it's over* - Till what is over? A match that lasts a few minutes? Not exactly on par with fighting for your life, particularly if your injured.


Closest you will get to fighting for your life in a structured and safe environment is some kind of sparring.  There are only but so many ways to train this.  Sparring/competitive fighting/whatever you wish to call it, depending on the art, is the most reliable way to do this.



Kong Soo Do said:


> *Jumping jacks?* - Would not know, I don't do jumping jacks. I do a super 8 pyramid.


  Love pyramid exercises. 

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 7, 2011)

mastercole said:


> *I don't think most people in MA draw a distinction between a martial artist and a martial artist athlete.* I believe that such thinking has a small cult following and is a tiny minority of practitioners. During my interactions with folks locally, statewide, nationally and internationally, I rarely run across such thinking. When I do run across it, it's usually folks that don't get out much and keep to their tiny circle of like-minded associates.


Very possible.  Generally, it is not an issue for me when I am not on the internet.  On many boards, however, the distinction is definitely made by what seems to be a large percentage of people, particularly in the TKD section.  



mastercole said:


> Just because something (possibly erroneous) is accepted by a group does not mean we should go along with it. Why go along with the crowd when the crowd is wrong?


Not a question of going along with it, but one of choosing my battles.  If I am going to use a term in a way that is distinct from the way that the rest of the board is using it, I just make sure to clarify how I am using the term first.

Daniel


----------



## mastercole (Jun 7, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I've highlighted some parts of your quote that I feel are incorrect.  Here's why;
> 
> *unpredictable attacks - *what's so unpredictable?  The opponent is  either going to throw a punch or a kick.  Unless where now grappling in  TKD matches?  Or pulling weapons?  Or having a few buddies jump in to  help?  Or throwing something?  Or grabbing for an improvised weapon?



I was talking about sparring as training, not for a tournament, you can include grappling, bitting, kicking, punching whatever as long is it is all out, but you don't go all out, you go safe. Again, all the stuff you do is predictable, meaning, the student knows they are going to come out of the scenarios, whatever happens, OK.  Otherwise, no one would stay or come back.



Kong Soo Do said:


> *physical adrenal stress - *I'm sure there is a bit of stress with  all those people watching you.



I guess if you have stage fright it would stress you to have folks looking at you?



Kong Soo Do said:


> That can in no way be compared to the  stress and duress of fighting for your life.



Having a good fighter move in on you and blast your ribs and head so hard your teeth jar and you see white flashes will ramp the stress up to those levels very similar to fighting for your life, as a matter of fact, in case you have not experienced much of that type of sparring yourself, it shuts most people down where everything goes out the window and they begin to freeze. The the fighter can easily come in for the final knockout, of course, that is where it might be wise to stop and discuss what just happened and what to do to get past the freezing up part, adding some SD value to sparring 



Kong Soo Do said:


> *getting hurt* - Well it isn't likely that they'll get much more than a bloody nose.  Oh, a serious injury could occur.  But they aren't going to get cut with an edged weapon, shot, or hit with a baseball bat now are they?



If they don't have experience rolling with strikes and develop real tenacity from that, they never get past the freezing up part as soon as anything goes down. That is why scenarios fail.



Kong Soo Do said:


> *will power and tenacity to continue on until it's over* - Till what is over?  A match that lasts a few minutes?  Not exactly on par with fighting for your life, particularly if your injured.



Acting out scenarios is not fighting for your life. Actually it's not fighting at all. Sparring is fighting. I recommend fighting match after match, 3 minute rounds, over and over for several hours, against elite fighters, not just some local trophy hunter, that will give you a good starting point for developing tenacity/will power and learning not to freeze up, of give up.



Kong Soo Do said:


> *Jumping jacks?* - Would not know, I don't do jumping jacks.  I do a super 8 pyramid.



I eat wheaties (healthy) and play bocce ball (for exercise) too, but it don't help my SD.


----------



## Rumy73 (Jun 7, 2011)

A huge gap here exists between understanding the difference between theory-based training and preparing for specific, real-life situations. I have always taken the view that school  are teaching a general template that provides a student with tools to adapt to real-life situations as they arise. This training has both limits and benefits. A good teacher will explain these and will reinforce to students that in real fighting there are no rules or limits. Survival is the goal. This approach is correctly assumes that every single eventuality cannot be foreseen. However, by instilling certain principles and conditioning the body, the person has tools to react effectively. Now, it is the person who must carry it off.


----------



## mastercole (Jun 7, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I disagree and I actually believe you to be in the minority when trying to use the terms martial artist and athlete as synonymous and interchangeable ones.
> 
> The fact that individuals can fit both categories does not mean that they are the same thing.  Far from it.



I think everyone knows you have martial artist, and then you have martial artist who train to develop their athletic ability, those are called martial arts athletes.  You see them everywhere. Geez I can even name a few:  Floyd Mayweather, Randy Couture and Steven Lopez and many, many more that we don't know their names. They exist, surprise!

My travels for martial arts, around the USA and the world prove that it is the minority that tries to make a separation among martial arts practitioners. That is why I always recommend that martial art types get out and about more to find out what is going on in the big pond and not assuming it's the same as what is happening in the little pond


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 7, 2011)

mastercole said:


> My travels for martial arts, around the USA and the world prove that it is the minority that tries to make a separation among martial arts practitioners. That is why I always recommend that martial art types get out and about more to find out what is going on in the big pond and not assuming it's the same as what is happening in the little pond



Puunui says you have a background in TMA.  I might likewise suggest you reacquaint yourself with it as the things you say stem entirely from the world of competitive MA you are experienced with.  

<shrugs>  If you're around Olympic stuff 24-7, I'd imagine everything would start looking like a sport...

And before we start down this dark path, there's nothing wrong with sports or athletic contests.  My beef with your perspective is that you claim all martial arts are sports and therefore athletics.  No way, no how.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 7, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Love pyramid exercises.
> 
> Daniel



I do a 'super 8' pyramid.  And the nice part is that you can include patterned or random MA punches, kicks or blocks with them as well


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jun 7, 2011)

I have a question for Master Cole (or anyone really that would like to answer) pertaining to free sparring from a perspective of defense in a real world altercation;

When you have two students free sparring, they are punching, kicking, fake outs, feints, maintaining distance etc.  Would this be correct?  Is there anything else?


----------



## mastercole (Jun 7, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Puunui says you have a background in TMA.  I might likewise suggest you reacquaint yourself with it as the things you say stem entirely from the world of competitive MA you are experienced with.



I am deeply involved with the oldest traditional martial arts, more than you can imagine.



dancingalone said:


> <shrugs>  If you're around Olympic stuff 24-7, I'd imagine everything would start looking like a sport...



I am also deeply involved with "Olympic stuff, more than you can imagine.



dancingalone said:


> And before we start down this dark path, there's nothing wrong with sports or athletic contests.  My beef with your perspective is that you claim all martial arts are sports and therefore athletics.  No way, no how.



You say no way, no how?  What about all this?

I am just passing on to you the point of view supported by the All Japan Aikido Federation and it's Doshu, take a look:

"The World Combat *Games* are a stage for the martial arts and combat sports.They showcase Olympic and non-Olympic martial arts and combat sports, among them *Aikido*, Boxing, Judo, Ju-Jitsu, Karate, Kendo, Kickboxing, Muaythai, Sambo, Sumo, Taekwondo, Wrestling, and Wushu. *Featuring the best athletes of each sport*, *the Combat Games are a top-quality sporting event.*

Maybe you should contact the Doshu and complain?

Also, the Goju-Kai in Japan disagrees with you. This if from their events schedule:

They also use the terms "athletes", "championships" and such...... 

http://www.karatedo.co.jp/gojukai/english/index.html

July 29-30 Lecture for Oversea Instructors and *athletes*
29(9:00-17:00)  -  30(13:00-16:00) 

Also, *TOURNAMENTS* their *Athletes* will be attending:

http://www.karatedo.co.jp/goju-ryu/english/e_index.html

May 11 - 17th 5th Asian Pacific IKGA Championships Bangkok, Thailand 
Aug  27 - 28th JKGA Championships Yoyogi stadium, Tokyo 

Maybe you should write the Kancho and complain, here is his Hombu address:

Goju-kai Office
2-21-6-808 Higashiikebukuro, Toshima-ku, Tokyo, Japan
075-0082
TEL: +81-3-5951-1165


----------



## mastercole (Jun 7, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I have a question for Master Cole (or anyone really that would like to answer) pertaining to free sparring from a perspective of defense in a real world altercation;
> 
> When you have two students free sparring, they are punching, kicking, fake outs, feints, maintaining distance etc.  Would this be correct?  Is there anything else?



Not exactly that way. Maintaining distance is not a good description, and a lot more needs to be added.

When fighting, my athletes (not students) are making hundreds of actionable judgments per second, and acting on issues of timing, distance, attack and defense, and, forcing the same issues against their opponent in such a forceful way that if that opponent makes the slightest error of judgement, or displays indecision, the attacker will punish them with multiple wanton, continuous and powerfully brutal bone jarring blows, using gross motor skills, attempting head or body knockout in order to shut down their decision making process and find them unable to defend against the attacks, and no longer able to initiate attacks.

I think that is it.


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 7, 2011)

mastercole said:


> I am deeply involved with the oldest traditional martial arts, more than you can imagine.
> 
> I am also deeply involved with "Olympic stuff, more than you can imagine.



I don't feed the need to compare length, but thank you for the opportunity.




mastercole said:


> You say no way, no how?  What about all this?
> 
> I am just passing on to you the point of view supported by the All Japan Aikido Federation and it's Doshu, take a look:
> 
> ...



You've already embarrassed yourself on the other thread by posting this.  Either you missed my reply or you're still under the impression that what you've posted supports your case in any way.  On the contrary.  Here is the post link where I responded:  http://martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1402464&postcount=190

A little education and reading will go a long way here.



mastercole said:


> Also, the Goju-Kai in Japan disagrees with you. This if from their events schedule:
> 
> They also use the terms "athletes", "championships" and such......
> 
> ...




You really are unaware of the nuances in Okinawan karate, aren't you?  Not sure why you think a brief about Goju-kai competing in tournaments would be of any relevance here. 

Stop already and stick to what you know.


----------



## jks9199 (Jun 7, 2011)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful.

jks9199
Super Moderator
*


----------



## mastercole (Jun 7, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> You really are unaware of the nuances in Okinawan karate, aren't you? Not sure why you think a brief about Goju-kai competing in tournaments would be of any relevance here.
> Stop already and stick to what you know.



So now it's Karate and not To-Te?  Which is it.


----------



## dancingalone (Jun 7, 2011)

mastercole said:


> So now it's Karate and not To-Te?  Which is it.



I am done, sir.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jun 7, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I have a question for Master Cole (or anyone really that would like to answer) pertaining to free sparring from a perspective of defense in a real world altercation;
> 
> When you have two students free sparring, they are punching, kicking, fake outs, feints, maintaining distance etc. Would this be correct? Is there anything else?


Yes, but as with Mastercole, I am going ot comment on distance.  Students are taught to make use of distance.  

I'd say that a better term than maintaining distance would be managing distance.

Daniel


----------

