# What age do you stop sparring?



## andyjeffries (Jan 4, 2012)

Master Cole posted this in another thread:



> That said, today at age 51, I no longer spar and I doubt I ever will.



And I thought it made an interesting topic, so rather than take that thread off-topic I've started a new one.

I'm 37 and spar fairly irregularly (due to having a bad knee, knee op, recovery) and now it's likely to be less so because I've left the club I learnt at am "going it alone".  I've found a nearby 4th Dan that I'm going to meet up with about once per month so I'm sure we'll do a bit then.

So, while sparring is a lot less prominent in my Taekwondo life than it was in my early 20s (I hated poomsae back then, but now I love them!), I don't think I'll ever want to stop completely.

What about everyone else?  Do people generally stop sparring at a particular age/rank?  Is this just something personal to Master Cole?


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 4, 2012)

I dont think anyone should ever stop Sparring.
I do, however, think that one should be able to Spar in a much softer, more coordinated way should they need to. And should necessity Require, Shadow Spar.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2012)

A couple of years ago we brought a fighter across from America to fight on one of our MMA shows, he was nearly 60 then, I believe he has only just given up fighting. He's amazingly fit and only his grey hair gave away that he was older than he looked. Skip is a lovely man too.

http://realfighting.com/skip_hall.php


----------



## jedtx88 (Jan 4, 2012)

I'm sure it varies wildly, I know of two elderly instructors who still spar in my area.


----------



## seasoned (Jan 4, 2012)

It depends on your motivation toward sparring.
When younger, for me, it was very aggressive and competitive. It had nothing to do with training and everything to do with besting your opponent.

Fast forward to middle age where your mind set should change along with your approach. At this point you will still get something out of it, but any injuries will take longer to heal.


At 68 years old, don't kid yourself. Never stop training, but that training should be geared toward efficient technique with little wasted movement. At this point you will have much to teach and nothing to prove.


----------



## miguksaram (Jan 4, 2012)

They can take my sparring gear when they pry it from my cold dead hands. ha.ha.ha..

At age 41, I just made our national sparring team.  I would love to say that I spar frequently but work, teaching and family limits my time.  I do my best to get in some sessions at least once a week.  I do not see myself going to the Olympics or winning the Warrior Cup at AKA Grands.  However, it is fun and I enjoy doing even at this age.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 4, 2012)

I started sparring at age 49 (last year, in other words).  I don't know when or if I will stop, but at the moment, I enjoy it.  I just so happen to like beating the crap out of kids.


----------



## sfs982000 (Jan 4, 2012)

I feel sparring is critical in training and no one should stop sparring, with that being said should you adjust how you spar as you get older, absolutely.  For me at this point in my life, sparring is less me going full blast against an opponent as it is trying to work on my technique and timing.


----------



## Buka (Jan 4, 2012)

I think it varies. Health, fitness, the particular type of sparring you or your school does. I think it's also dependent on who you have to spar with and how well you know them. 

As long as it's fun to the person in question, keep it up. I'm trying to think of the oldest person I've ever sparred with. Mid sixties maybe. But only because there's not that many older guys in our clubs.


----------



## Manny (Jan 4, 2012)

I must admit it, I don't sparr..... very ofthen. If I recall last year I sparr three or four times no more, so you guess it, I sparr very little on ly whren I go to teens class or when I am preparing for examination (test) or during testing. Right now I have two students a marroon belt and a blue belt, some times I do light sparring with them just to show some techs and that's all.

I did very little point sparring in kenpo karate classes too.

Right now I am teaching, and I focus in self defense and poomsae and yes sometimes I teach sparring.

Manny


----------



## Gemini (Jan 4, 2012)

I stopped competing when I was 45 because I felt it was too difficult to both coach and compete at a high level. I still spar on occasion, but just for teaching purposes. Under other circumstances, I don't see any reason to stop. I still love watching the old geezers like me coming into the ring and for the most part, they're the most respectful of each other because they they know what it takes to train at that age.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 4, 2012)

Sparring for me was always about improving my self defense/fighting skills and I participated in full contact sparring and training most of my life.  Doing that, I found what I was looking for, after time it quenched my thirst and fulfilled my desire to learn and improve. This journey was never about tournaments, I had little personal interest in tournaments.

Light sparring, or modifying your sparring for an injury, being out of shape or old age, is not sparring. To me, if you are not sparring with full force, full contact, for the duration, you are not sparring.
When a person gets to the point where they can no longer participate in full contact sparring, sparring for them, personally is over.  They can still continue to learn the principle of sparring, and the training methods for sparring.

In my schools students participate in sparring drills, which include promise sparring (no contact to very light contact). For students promise sparring is just a warm up preparation for actually sparring (full contact), for those few who actually participate in sparring. All of that is training for sparring, but not sparring itself.

I tell every student that if they are not participating in full contact sparring, in addition to sparring training, they are not developing their personal self defense fighting skills.
I tell older students or injured students that Taekwondo is for health, and never to participate in sparring, or even sparring drills if they are not up to it, however, they should learn the principles of sparring and the training methods.

 Sure, these days I practice a little on the talyunbong (makiwara) & Powair water bag, practice Poomsae and Taekkyon, some rolls and falls, occasional breaking, kubudo weapons and occasional sparring drills, etc, but, never actual sparring.

As far as being an instructor, I do that on occasion too. I also have instructors who teach at my schools, instructors who have excellent skills, way beyond what my skills ever were. My job now is to use my knowledge and resources in order to provide my students with the best possible training methods. I have no delusions that all those methods will come directly through me.

I also have no delusions that me sparring with my students would make them better. I am amazed when I hear instructors who were 1) never elite fighters themselves, or 2) never produced elite fighters say that. I teach students drills and skills to practice with each other. When and if they show potential, then they can spar with elite fighters where they will actually learn correctly, from the beginning.

I don't want a student to pick up on my bad habits. I would be horrified if I noticed, or some else could notice that one of my students had Al Coles style. Thankfully none of my students do, they have the international style of Taekwondo and completely blend in with the greater Taekwondo community.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 4, 2012)

I'm  50, and I spar at least once a week (not counting the tussles at work...). I don't see any reason to stop. We sparred last night, as a matter of fact. I was paired with a 17 yo 1st Dan, a 40-something Chodanbo, and a 15 yo 3rd geup. The oldest active student in our school is a 68 yo 6th geup and she spars. No, she's not matched up against 17 yo Dans, but she spars.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 5, 2012)

mastercole said:


> Sparring for me was always about improving my self defense/fighting skills and I participated in full contact sparring and training most of my life.  Doing that, I found what I was looking for, after time it quenched my thirst and fulfilled my desire to learn and improve. This journey was never about tournaments, I had little personal interest in tournaments.



Me too...



mastercole said:


> Light sparring, or modifying your sparring for an injury, being out of shape or old age, is not sparring. To me, if you are not sparring with full force, full contact, for the duration, you are not sparring.
> When a person gets to the point where they can no longer participate in full contact sparring, sparring for them, personally is over.  They can still continue to learn the principle of sparring, and the training methods for sparring.



Now, this is a very interesting perspective.  We spar light-moderate contact most of the time (unless someone is preparing for a competition at which point we have stepped it up to full contact during their prep period).  Personally, I would consider any form of sparring (light to moderate/decent contact) to be sparring, not just full contact.

For us though, sparring is a part of the curriculum, but we emphasise poomsae more (we don't have any currently active competitors).

Thanks for posting your thoughts, it completely clarifies your earlier comment in my mind and I now understand and can see where you're coming from.

At the club I trained at, for example, children would never spar with each other (even light contact), just with adult black belts.  In the club I run, they will be sparring with each other, with hogu and head guards (still light to moderate contact unless someone wants to compete) - but when they reach yellow belt (it's a new club) so they know the basics of all the kicks, footwork, feints and covering.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 5, 2012)

Dirty Dog said:


> I'm 50, and I spar at least once a week (not counting the tussles at work...). I don't see any reason to stop. We sparred last night, as a matter of fact. I was paired with a 17 yo 1st Dan, a 40-something Chodanbo, and a 15 yo 3rd geup. The oldest active student in our school is a 68 yo 6th geup and she spars. *No, she's not matched up against 17 yo Dans, but she spars*.



Ah but old and sneaky beats young and fit everytime!


----------



## puunui (Jan 5, 2012)

mastercole said:


> In my schools students participate in sparring drills, which include promise sparring (no contact to very light contact). For students promise sparring is just a warm up preparation for actually sparring (full contact), for those few who actually participate in sparring. All of that is &#8220;training for sparring&#8221;, but not sparring itself.




I still enjoy light or even medium sparring.  do not see a need to do match level sparring at this point in my life. Light or medium sparring gives me a check on where I am as far as my body goes, if my reactions are slowing, and that sort of thing. I also still enjoy taking a good shot. I still very much enjoy doing hogu drills, especially being the receiver. Doing hogu drills provides a level of conditioning and training that is not available through other methods. What I am leaning away from is paddle drills. Personally, I do way less paddle kicks, especially roundhouse kicks, than when I was younger. I feel like doing excessive paddle drills leads to knee injuries, especially when you are older. I still use the paddle for ax and spin hook.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 5, 2012)

Without a major injury I dont think anyone should stop sparring. Sparring is just too big a part of tkd. It would be like saying "I want to play rugby, but I dont want to tackle" or "I want to play tennis, but I wont do a back hand". Obviously as we age we have to adjust our sparring methods and in particular who we spar, I have just trained with far too many guys in their older years who still spar regularly to ever think there is an age limit where you have to stop. In fact, I train with a couple of guys in their sixties who still love to spar hard.


----------



## Cali Gal (Jan 5, 2012)

Old and sneaky it is.  Experience is definitely and advantage but the fittest guys usually wins.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 6, 2012)

I think it is huge mistake to convert to so-called "light sparring only."

The problem with converting your sparring to - light contact only - is that you get lax, adjust to non-lethal non-committed techniques coming at you, and giving back non-lethal non-committed strikes. You get relaxed and no longer hone the killer instinct. It's like War Games with slow fighter jets, slow ships and out in the open tanks. A real war breaks out and gets everyone killed, they were caught off guard by the speed and brutality of the real deal.  That is why I say if you are not sparring full contact all out, you are not sparring.

To help somewhat eliminate that problem, I feel Taekwondoin, if they can, should drill at full contact, which is full speed and full power.  This will keep your time and distance true.  As Glenn said, it will also keep you rolling with the punches, which is maybe the most important element to physical/mental self defense.

If you can no longer roll with the punches so to speak, you are toast if you get attacked by a tough fighter, unless of course you shoot him first.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 6, 2012)

mastercole said:


> I think it is huge mistake to convert to so-called "light sparring only."
> 
> The problem with converting your sparring to - light contact only - is that you get lax, adjust to non-lethal non-committed techniques coming at you, and giving back non-lethal non-committed strikes. You get relaxed and no longer hone the killer instinct. It's like War Games with slow fighter jets, slow ships and out in the open tanks. A real war breaks out and gets everyone killed, they were caught off guard by the speed and brutality of the real deal.  That is why I say if you are not sparring full contact all out, you are not sparring.
> 
> ...


I agree regarding 'light sparring only'. I have friends who train at clubs who always do light sparring, with occasional medium contact sparring and the result isnt good. We do light sparring occasionally and its a great way to try a few new ideas out and test distancing and timing etc, but it also gives you a totally different mind set because you know you cant get hurt so you can try all sorts of things you'd never try in full contact. Full contact sparring requires a bit more reality in your mindset, I use light sparring to help with new ideas, but I certainly use a much more refined technique when our instructor lines all the black belts up and says "go as hard as you can" (which is usually once a week).


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 6, 2012)

puunui said:


> I still enjoy light or even medium sparring.  do not see a need to do match level sparring at this point in my life. Light or medium sparring gives me a check on where I am as far as my body goes, if my reactions are slowing, and that sort of thing.



I find that light or medium sparring also gives me a mental workout.  Although sparring with elite level athletes is I'm sure a game of speed and reaction, at the general club level it's more like a strategic chess game.  Trying to condition them long term (more than a single kick, but still within a "round") to a certain thing that you predict they will react in a certain way so that you can capitalise on it.  That sort of thing.



puunui said:


> I also still enjoy taking a good shot. I still very much enjoy doing hogu drills, especially being the receiver. Doing hogu drills provides a level of conditioning and training that is not available through other methods.



This is one of those things where I'm not sure if I'm using the same terminology as everyone else.  When you are doing hogu drills, do you mean just wearing protectors and doing an "attack-counter" scenario (sometimes getting more complex in to "attack-counter-countercounter", but the point remains).  Or are you just wearing a hogu and letting your opponent hit you (like you're a stationary bag) with paddles inside your hogu (or double hogu)?



puunui said:


> What I am leaning away from is paddle drills. Personally, I do way less paddle kicks, especially roundhouse kicks, than when I was younger. I feel like doing excessive paddle drills leads to knee injuries, especially when you are older. I still use the paddle for ax and spin hook.



That's interesting.  I've always quite enjoyed padding drills and don't tend to get injured doing them*, but I guess the time may come.  So how would you just drill roundhouse kicks?  In the air?  Always on a hogu?  Something else?

* That said, the only time I've serious injured my knee (resulting in a year's very reduced training and an operation) was while doing a paddle kick, but it was more of the fact we were temporarily training on carpet it was too slippy for bare feet and I switched to Taekwondo shoes during a set of tornado kicks - my foot gripped a lot more on that time and wrenched my knee.  I blame the transition to shoes/carpet more than the paddle for that (I'd have done it if I wasn't kicking a paddle).


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 6, 2012)

mastercole said:


> To help somewhat eliminate that problem, I feel Taekwondoin, if they can, should drill at full contact, which is full speed and full power.  This will keep your time and distance true.



So, out of interest, how often do your non-elite taekwondoin students drill/spar at full contact?  Is it every time (never anything less)?  Multiple times per week?

I'm just interested as I'd have always been worried about injuries (minor knocks continuously taking people out of training and major injury concerns).

(P.S. did you get my email?)


----------



## mastercole (Jan 6, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> So, out of interest, how often do your non-elite taekwondoin students drill/spar at full contact?  Is it every time (never anything less)?  Multiple times per week?
> 
> I'm just interested as I'd have always been worried about injuries (minor knocks continuously taking people out of training and major injury concerns).
> 
> (P.S. did you get my email?)



They always drill full speed/full force. Then they drill "promise sparring" which could be called "light contact" sparring I guess.  Then depending on the cycle of training and how injuries are doing, they might spar (full contact) 1 to 3 times a week.  When we have an elite fighter from Korea staying here for several months, it's more. 

At the peak of the cycle it's something like this, 6 days a week;

morning 2 hours workout/track/weights/waterbag
afternoon 2+ hours skills/drills athletic development
even 2+ hours drills/promise spar/sparring

regular students never experience this. it's just for extremely dedicated adults, no kids.


----------



## Buka (Jan 6, 2012)

mastercole said:


> I think it is huge mistake to convert to so-called "light sparring only."
> 
> The problem with converting your sparring to - light contact only - is that you get lax, adjust to non-lethal non-committed techniques coming at you, and giving back non-lethal non-committed strikes. You get relaxed and no longer hone the killer instinct. It's like War Games with slow fighter jets, slow ships and out in the open tanks. A real war breaks out and gets everyone killed, they were caught off guard by the speed and brutality of the real deal.  That is why I say if you are not sparring full contact all out, you are not sparring.
> 
> ...



I don't think I've ever disagreed with anything more.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 6, 2012)

buka said:


> i don't think i've ever disagreed with anything more.



ok


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 6, 2012)

mastercole said:


> regular students never experience this. it's just for extremely dedicated adults, no kids.



So what do you regular students do?  Do they only do "promise sparring" or do they still do full contact every time, just not 3 sessions per day?

Thanks for the information, very interesting.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 6, 2012)

All i can say about 'full contact' sparring is that if it's really full contact, and I hit you solid, bones will be broken.  Is that what you want me to do to you?  Seriously, full-contact on an uke is insane.  Most of us and definitely me are way too strong to be hitting people full power whom we do not wish to go to the hospital.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 6, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> All i can say about 'full contact' sparring is that if it's really full contact, and I hit you solid, bones will be broken. Is that what you want me to do to you? Seriously, full-contact on an uke is insane. Most of us and definitely me are way too strong to be hitting people full power whom we do not wish to go to the hospital.



As I have mentioned before, I don't study TKD or Karate. My TKD days were brief and a long time ago. Contact in sparring was not allowed other than in blocks. You were expected to get closer and closer as your skills improved, but never make contact. That said, you were expected to use full speed and power, but not hit, including being able to pull a strike if needed because of a shift by you or your opponent.

The idea was that if you trained yourself so you could stop 1/4 inch from your opponent, if you wanted to, you could stop 1 inch (or more) inside your opponent. I would not have liked to have been hit by the strikes I could throw (legs or hands), much less those who were better/more powerful, than I was.

I guess we could discuss this a lot and never really convince each other to change. But I agree with Bill on this. YMMV


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 6, 2012)

oftheherd1 said:


> As I have mentioned before, I don't study TKD or Karate. My TKD days were brief and a long time ago. Contact in sparring was not allowed other than in blocks. You were expected to get closer and closer as your skills improved, but never make contact. That said, you were expected to use full speed and power, but not hit, including being able to pull a strike if needed because of a shift by you or your opponent.
> 
> The idea was that if you trained yourself so you could stop 1/4 inch from your opponent, if you wanted to, you could stop 1 inch (or more) inside your opponent. I would not have liked to have been hit by the strikes I could throw (legs or hands), much less those who were better/more powerful, than I was.
> 
> I guess we could discuss this a lot and never really convince each other to change. But I agree with Bill on this. YMMV



We definitely hit each other in the dojo; we don't pull punches.  We don't hit with full power, but we also don't love-tap.  We adjust power based on our partner's preferences; if they say to throw harder or faster, then we do, and if they tell us to back off a bit, we do that too.  If a person is hitting too hard, we ask them to back it down; but we also give what we get; if you hit hard, you get hit hard.  If we want to throw full-power, we throw next to the head or body instead of landing the blow.  For example, I would practice body blows by punching my partner in the body.  But if I was practicing uppercuts, I'm not going to punch them in the face.  I'll throw it full power but next to their head.  It does require focus, and brown belts and up in my dojo are expected to have enough focus to throw full power without hurting anyone.


----------



## RobinTKD (Jan 6, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> All i can say about 'full contact' sparring is that if it's really full contact, and I hit you solid, bones will be broken.  Is that what you want me to do to you?  Seriously, full-contact on an uke is insane.  Most of us and definitely me are way too strong to be hitting people full power whom we do not wish to go to the hospital.



You practice Isshin-Ryu do you not Bill? I agree with what both you and Master Cole say, but you're both sparring to a different rule set. Isshin-Ryu is quite a 'brutal' (for want of a better word) art, with as much focus on hand strikes in sparring as leg strikes. Master Cole on the other hand I believe trains and teaches in KKW Taekwondo, so I imagine his full contact sparring would be to WTF rules, using chest/head protection, not using punches to the head etc. We train full contact, more like Kyokushinkai than ITF Taekwon-Do it has to be said, but we use foot and hand protection.

In terms of landing a full power blow, well even when sparring full contact, I've probably only managed it a handful of times, usually with a back kick, because when your opponent is constantly moving it's much harder to land a punch or kick at full breaking power. There should always be a level of control involved too, I can pull a full power punch and stop it before it makes contact, and yes, I'd never use say a full power ridge hand against someone, because I'd probably break their jaw, but once again, that's where control comes into it. Also, the ability to take a hard punch/kick is as important as dishing them out.


----------



## Manny (Jan 6, 2012)

puunui said:


> I still enjoy light or even medium sparring.  do not see a need to do match level sparring at this point in my life. Light or medium sparring gives me a check on where I am as far as my body goes, if my reactions are slowing, and that sort of thing. I also still enjoy taking a good shot. I still very much enjoy doing hogu drills, especially being the receiver. Doing hogu drills provides a level of conditioning and training that is not available through other methods. What I am leaning away from is paddle drills. Personally, I do way less paddle kicks, especially roundhouse kicks, than when I was younger. I feel like doing excessive paddle drills leads to knee injuries, especially when you are older. I still use the paddle for ax and spin hook.



I agree you don't need to kill the parthner to say you are doing full combat sparring, even light sparring is sparring for me, and yes wrap around the hogu and do kicking drills is very good to condition one's head to recieve a full blow.

Manny


----------



## SPX (Jan 6, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> A couple of years ago we brought a fighter across from America to fight on one of our MMA shows, he was nearly 60 then, I believe he has only just given up fighting. He's amazingly fit and only his grey hair gave away that he was older than he looked. Skip is a lovely man too.
> 
> http://realfighting.com/skip_hall.php



Hey, I remember reading about that guy.

I'd love to hear more about your experience with him. . .


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 6, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> So, out of interest, how often do your non-elite taekwondoin students drill/spar at full contact?  Is it every time (never anything less)?  Multiple times per week?
> 
> I'm just interested as I'd have always been worried about injuries (minor knocks continuously taking people out of training and major injury concerns).
> 
> (P.S. did you get my email?)


You'd be amazed how few injuries there are between people who have always sparred full contact, they have a genuine respect for being hit. My original instructor always said that he would rather see us evade 10 strikes than land 10 strikes. Its all good and well to say that in full contact sparring you will just hit someone and break bones, but spar against people who always spar full contact and it is a lot harder to actually connect because they have always sparred knowing full well that if they get hit they will stay hit. We have people come and train with us who have only ever known light contact sparring and you can always guarantee that on their first night they will get knocked down, over and over again, because their distancing, reflexes, timing, and even the techniques they throw are all based around the fact that they know they cant actually get hurt. I know when we do 'light contact' I jump around all over the place throwing a sea of tornado kicks, spin kicks, jumping kicks etc, then our instructor changes it to full contact and things change big time. Obviously, as a black belt, if Im sparring someone of a lower level I tone it down. For full contact to work well, sparring people of similar level is vital. But I can tell you that in 6 years of doing full contact, I could count the serious injuries Ive seen on one hand (not including the usual bumps and bruises obviously). We also spar under a set ruleset, you cant just go in with throat strikes and eye gouges and groin kicks etc.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 6, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> All i can say about 'full contact' sparring is that if it's really full contact, and I hit you solid, bones will be broken.  Is that what you want me to do to you?  Seriously, full-contact on an uke is insane.  Most of us and definitely me are way too strong to be hitting people full power whom we do not wish to go to the hospital.


As I touched on in my last post, matching people up for full contact is very important. If you are so big and strong then obviously we wouldnt match you up with a teenager who weighs 60kg soaking wet. We also wear a hogu and leg and instep guards, and gloves. With big boxing gloves punching into a hogu it would have to be a gret punch to break ribs, either that or your partner is clearly not evading properly and is just standing there waiting to get hit, in which case the two opponents havent been matched up very well. I know when I spar good black belts they are so quick they move in the blink of an eye which makes nailing them with a perfect punch or kick very very hard to do.


----------



## SPX (Jan 6, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I know when we do 'light contact' I jump around all over the place throwing a sea of tornado kicks, spin kicks, jumping kicks etc, then our instructor changes it to full contact and things change big time.



A LOL-worthy description.  But I hear what you're saying.  I have noticed a general trend that as danger increases, techniques decrease.  Light contact TKD or karate?  Jump kicks, spin kicks, kick to the head, drop down and do the splits like Van Damme to mock your opponent after landing one of the aforementioned kicks. . .  Bar fight?  Punches.  

And then adjust between those extremes for everything else.

Still though, you gotta admit, sparring under a contact level/ruleset that allows for flashiness and flying through the air can be pretty fun.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 6, 2012)

SPX said:


> A LOL-worthy description.  But I hear what you're saying.  I have noticed a general trend that as danger increases, so do the techniques.  Light contact TKD or karate?  Jump kicks, spin kicks, kick to the head, drop down and do the splits like Van Damme to mock your opponent after landing one of the aforementioned kicks. . .  Bar fight?  Punches.
> 
> And then adjust between those extremes for everything else.
> 
> Still though, you gotta admit, sparring under a contact level/ruleset that allows for flashiness and flying through the air can be pretty fun.


Quite true, but bar fight = punches?, not always. Ive seen many a fight end with a kick, I dont mean crazy flashy kicks and I dont mean someone with no training flailing their leg out like they are kicking a football. I went to school with a good tkdist, he was very fast and very powerful. Every fight I saw him in ended very quickly with him landing a front or side kick somewhere between knee height or just below the ribs, the other guy would drop and roll around in agony while he walked away. A couple of years ago I was at restaurant and a fight broke out in the carpark. There was a lot of pushing and shoving and then one guy threw a punch, the other guy evaded the punch and landed a side kick immediately to the other guys solar plexus. I dead set thought he had killed the other guy. I later found out the 'kicker' was a tkdist. Kicks work big time as long as they are 'realistic' and not some lame *** attempt at at a 540 kick or something.


----------



## SPX (Jan 6, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Quite true, but bar fight = punches?, not always. Ive seen many a fight end with a kick, I dont mean crazy flashy kicks and I dont mean someone with no training flailing their leg out like they are kicking a football. I went to school with a good tkdist, he was very fast and very powerful. Every fight I saw him in ended very quickly with him landing a front or side kick somewhere between knee height or just below the ribs, the other guy would drop and roll around in agony while he walked away. A couple of years ago I was at restaurant and a fight broke out in the carpark. There was a lot of pushing and shoving and then one guy threw a punch, the other guy evaded the punch and landed a side kick immediately to the other guys solar plexus. I dead set thought he had killed the other guy. I later found out the 'kicker' was a tkdist. Kicks work big time as long as they are 'realistic' and not some lame *** attempt at at a 540 kick or something.



I was just drawing a contrast between extremes.  I do believe that kicks can be used effectively in a self-defense situation, even a fast and strong headkick.

I have heard a lot of people say that they would not kick in an SD situation, though.  But everyone has their own ideas about what's best.  Some say don't kick at all.  Some say don't kick above the waist.  Some say don't kick to the head.  Etc. . .


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 6, 2012)

SPX said:


> I was just drawing a contrast between extremes.  I do believe that kicks can be used effectively in a self-defense situation, even a fast and strong headkick.
> 
> I have heard a lot of people say that they would not kick in an SD situation, though.  But everyone has their own ideas about what's best.  Some say don't kick at all.  Some say don't kick above the waist.  Some say don't kick to the head.  Etc. . .


I think whether or not you would kick in a 'real' situation' depends on if you are a 'kicker'. When I was younger I did karate, we did some kicking but there was not a lot of emphasis on kicking and to be honest I really dont think I would have used a kick to defend myself. These days, after 6 years of tkd and a lot of extra training in my own time, I would consider myself a kicker and I honestly think if I was being attacked I would kick, almost as an involuntary action. I feel comfortable kicking, my kicks are stronger and more accurate than my punches (even though we do a lot of punching) and kicking just comes naturally to me now. I think kicking gets a bad wrap because far too many people do 6 months of tkd and get in a fight and try to kick. There is a massive difference between a competent tkd black belt kicking and just some regular guy throwing their leg out wildly. A kick from someone who knows what they are doing is devastating.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 6, 2012)

SPX said:


> I was just drawing a contrast between extremes.  I do believe that kicks can be used effectively in a self-defense situation, even a fast and strong headkick.
> 
> I have heard a lot of people say that they would not kick in an SD situation, though.  But everyone has their own ideas about what's best.  Some say don't kick at all.  Some say don't kick above the waist.  Some say don't kick to the head.  Etc. . .


Fighting in a Street sense can range from wild hooks with the odd swing of the leg, to Right Hooks whilst trying to grab with the Left Hand, to 6-10 Punch flurries, to trying to throw each other with quick hooks thrown in, to any number of things. The way I see it, as long as Youre doing what comes best to YOU, it will have a good chance of working. I, personally, wouldnt Kick above My Chest Height. I prefer Punching, mostly Parallel Height, switching idiopathically between Straight, Hook, and Shovel Hook type hits, with the odd Uppercut. And I dont really use any Kicks besides Front Kicks, with Side Kicks thrown in about as often as Uppercuts. Theres also Spinning Back Fists, which I would use like a Sledgehammer.

And Im practically certain You could find Me ALOT of folks who would use a Round Kick/Roundhouse Kick over a Front Kick any day, where I tend to avoid them. I prefer Punching Parallel to actually aiming at anything. I figure, itll hit anything from the Head to the Solar Plexus. Others swing mainly at the Head. Others for the Midsection.
Much in the same way, Im sure High Kicks come better, and more readily to some People. Therefore, if thats what comes to them, its what They should do, rather than confusing their Instincts.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 6, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Fighting in a Street sense can range from wild hooks with the odd swing of the leg, to Right Hooks whilst trying to grab with the Left Hand, to 6-10 Punch flurries, to trying to throw each other with quick hooks thrown in, to any number of things. The way I see it, as long as Youre doing what comes best to YOU, it will have a good chance of working. I, personally, wouldnt Kick above My Chest Height. I prefer Punching, mostly Parallel Height, switching idiopathically between Straight, Hook, and Shovel Hook type hits, with the odd Uppercut. And I dont really use any Kicks besides Front Kicks, with Side Kicks thrown in about as often as Uppercuts. Theres also Spinning Back Fists, which I would use like a Sledgehammer.
> 
> And Im practically certain You could find Me ALOT of folks who would use a Round Kick/Roundhouse Kick over a Front Kick any day, where I tend to avoid them. I prefer Punching Parallel to actually aiming at anything. I figure, itll hit anything from the Head to the Solar Plexus. Others swing mainly at the Head. Others for the Midsection.
> Much in the same way, Im sure High Kicks come better, and more readily to some People. Therefore, if thats what comes to them, its what They should do, rather than confusing their Instincts.


When I hear people say that "head kicks can never work on the street", I always think of this one guy I train with. He is a little over 6 foot, looks unathletic and is slightly overweight. He will stand there and just kick people in the head at will. I hate sparring him because although I know Im quicker than him and I know he will just try to kick my head off, he still just kicks me in the head whenever he wants to. My instructor once said to me that the scariest thing about sparring this guy is that whenever he isnt kicking your head, its because he doesnt want to. It always leads me to think that if he kicks me at will, and I know thats what he will do and Im waiting for it and I am trained to avoid it, just imagine him agaisnt some regular guy on the street who has no idea that this guy is a 'head hunter' and has no real training to defend a head kick. When people say head kicks cant work, I always think of that guy.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 6, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> When I hear people say that "head kicks can never work on the street", I always think of this one guy I train with. He is a little over 6 foot, looks unathletic and is slightly overweight. He will stand there and just kick people in the head at will. I hate sparring him because although I know Im quicker than him and I know he will just try to kick my head off, he still just kicks me in the head whenever he wants to. My instructor once said to me that the scariest thing about sparring this guy is that whenever he isnt kicking your head, its because he doesnt want to. It always leads me to think that if he kicks me at will, and I know thats what he will do and Im waiting for it and I am trained to avoid it, just imagine him agaisnt some regular guy on the street who has no idea that this guy is a 'head hunter' and has no real training to defend a head kick. When people say head kicks cant work, I always think of that guy.


Much in the same way, I know someone who likes Sliding Side Kicks. Even though He virtually always uses them, well, why dont You try 'just blocking/evading it' 
Its easy to say that, but Situationally, it aint so easy. Like Head Kicks.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 6, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> Or are you just wearing a hogu and letting your opponent hit you (like you're a stationary bag) with paddles inside your hogu (or double hogu)?



Never stand still and let your partner hit you, when exchanging full contact drills, you are trying to catch the time, distance, etc, and move with the hit, rolling with the punches so to speak, like the sweet science of boxing. It's always best to start out with double hogu and use the hands to stretch it out away from your body, then later go to one. Some elite fighters take off the hogus and drill full contact.  But always check with your doctor before attempting any of this methods


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 6, 2012)

mastercole said:


> Never stand still and let your partner hit you, when exchanging full contact drills, you are trying to catch the time, distance, etc, and move with the hit, rolling with the punches so to speak, like the sweet science of boxing. It's always best to start out with double hogu and use the hands to stretch it out away from your body, then later go to one. Some elite fighters take off the hogus and drill full contact.  But always check with your doctor before attempting any of this methods


Do You mean like this? (Also, the first part of the Video is different to about 2/3 of it. So be a bit patient with the start  )


----------



## mastercole (Jan 6, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> So, out of interest, how often do your non-elite taekwondoin students drill/spar at full contact?  Is it every time (never anything less)?  Multiple times per week?
> 
> I'm just interested as I'd have always been worried about injuries (minor knocks continuously taking people out of training and major injury concerns).
> 
> (P.S. did you get my email?)


<<<

Today, my regular students never spar. 20 years ago, they had no choice. It was spar or don't come back. Today, they just do drills, and fun drills at that.  People off the streets start getting hit hard in class, they usual never come back.  You will go through 100 to find that 1 that will like it.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 6, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> All i can say about 'full contact' sparring is that if it's really full contact, and I hit you solid, bones will be broken.  Is that what you want me to do to you?<<<
> 
> Yes, if you wanted to participate in off hours hard training you would be asked to hit as hard as you possibly could, and receive the same, not matter your size. If students are taught correctly, they will move with the force of the blow correctly and be fine, with no broken bones. If they are trained incorrectly, and don't learn to roll with the strike, I can see were they would be injured. That is the science of full contact fighting.
> 
> ...


----------



## mastercole (Jan 6, 2012)

SPX said:


> A LOL-worthy description.  But I hear what you're saying.  I have noticed a general trend that as danger increases, techniques decrease.  Light contact TKD or karate?  Jump kicks, spin kicks, kick to the head, drop down and do the splits like Van Damme to mock your opponent after landing one of the aforementioned kicks. . .  Bar fight?  Punches.
> 
> And then adjust between those extremes for everything else.
> 
> Still though, you gotta admit, sparring under a contact level/ruleset that allows for flashiness and flying through the air can be pretty fun.



I've been going to high level international Taekwondo events for decades, and I have never seen anyone flying through the air doing flashy kicks.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 7, 2012)

SPX said:


> I was just drawing a contrast between extremes.  I do believe that kicks can be used effectively in a self-defense situation, even a fast and strong headkick.
> 
> I have heard a lot of people say that they would not kick in an SD situation, though.  But everyone has their own ideas about what's best.  Some say don't kick at all.  Some say don't kick above the waist.  Some say don't kick to the head.  Etc. . .



If you can not escape an attacker you might have to, punch, kick, bite, elbow, stab, shoot, whatever, to defend your self (life), and only do so when it is apparent that you have to.

To say when to kick, and when not to kick in a fight is, well, both wrong. You won't know until the time comes and the opportunity presents itself, if it ever does.


----------



## SPX (Jan 7, 2012)

Nice thoughts, Ralph and Cyriacus. . .

Personally, I like to kick.  When I was younger I used to work all kinds of kicks, and the ones where you were simultaneously flying through the air and spinning were my favorite.  I can still do a lot of those kicks, but haven't not actually used them in a combative situation in a long time, I would not feel comfortable using them--or most kicks--in a real situation.  I would personally prefer a very strong base, with good hands.

With that said, I miss kicking.  For anyone who has been lurking in the karate section, you may know that I'm about 90% joined up with a wado-ryu group.  I'm excited about that, but having watched a few classes (full admission here that I really don't know much about wado-ryu), I already know that I'm going to miss the kicking of TKD.  I've actually wondered if maybe I should try to do both TKD and karate at the same time.

In any case, one thing I will say is that if you're going to kick on the street, then make sure you have at least a basic grappling game.  Because even an unskilled drunk might be able to catch your kick or just barrell into you at the right moment and end up on top of you.  You don't want to be a fish out of water at that point.


----------



## SPX (Jan 7, 2012)

mastercole said:


> I've been going to high level international Taekwondo events for decades, and I have never seen anyone flying through the air doing flashy kicks.



Our definition of "flashy" may be different, but I've definitely seen some jumping techniques even in the Olympics.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 7, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Do You mean like this? (Also, the first part of the Video is different to about 2/3 of it. So be a bit patient with the start  )



Those are mostly light drills. Some hits maybe landing hard, tough to tell. Modern training drills are a bit different.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 7, 2012)

SPX said:


> Nice thoughts, Ralph and Cyriacus. . .
> 
> Personally, I like to kick.  When I was younger I used to work all kinds of kicks, and the ones where you were simultaneously flying through the air and spinning were my favorite.  I can still do a lot of those kicks, but haven't not actually used them in a combative situation in a long time, I would not feel comfortable using them--or most kicks--in a real situation.  I would personally prefer a very strong base, with good hands.
> 
> ...


I think the same goes for a puncher though. I think the chances of a 'good' kicker having their leg caught and getting dragged to the ground is less than an 'average' puncher getting barrelled over or having a punch caught and dragged to the ground. I really dont think kicking has a higher degree of risk. Again though, Im talking about good kickers, not some guy from up the pub who did 6 months of karate in highschool.


----------



## SPX (Jan 7, 2012)

I would certainly agree that ANYONE should have a capable grappling game.  I have about 6 month's worth of judo and, while I definitely do not consider myself any sort of grappling wizard, I feel very confident that I could handle any untrained person who was relatively close to my size who decided to clinch with me.  Whether puncher or kicker, I do feel that at least some basics are essential.

As for "good kickers," I'm sure they have less of a chance of getting a kick caught, but it doesn't change the fact that if your body is only being supported by one leg, then it's significantly easier for you to get taken down.  While kicking, your mobility is severely decreased, and it takes much less to unbalance you.  This is just physics, and certainly not a knock on your skills or on TKD.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 7, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I think the same goes for a puncher though. I think the chances of a 'good' kicker having their leg caught and getting dragged to the ground is less than an 'average' puncher getting barrelled over or having a punch caught and dragged to the ground. I really dont think kicking has a higher degree of risk. Again though, Im talking about good kickers, not some guy from up the pub who did 6 months of karate in highschool.


Im inclined to Agree - We do some Takedowns VS Punches and Kicks. Kicks are easier to Grab, but Im confident in that if I can get a hold of someones Wrist, that I can go from there, should I choose.



SPX said:


> I would certainly agree that ANYONE should have a capable grappling game. I have about 6 month's worth of judo and, while I definitely do not consider myself any sort of grappling wizard, I feel very confident that I could handle any untrained person who was relatively close to my size who decided to clinch with me. Whether puncher or kicker, I do feel that at least some basics are essential.
> 
> As for "good kickers," I'm sure they have less of a chance of getting a kick caught, but it doesn't change the fact that if your body is only being supported by one leg, then it's significantly easier for you to get taken down. While kicking, your mobility is severely decreased, and it takes much less to unbalance you. This is just physics, and certainly not a knock on your skills or on TKD.



I Agree about needing to know Grappling to a point, at least. I learn it in TKD, and most good Dojangs Teach it, KKW, ITF, or otherwise. Perhaps not Wrestling Esque Grappling like what Youd find in BJJ - But lets not go into that 

That said, Kicking is, I believe, easier to Grab, but Harder to do a Takedown from. Because whilst They may only have one Leg, They also have more options to turn it against You. With an Arm Takedown, You can immobilise both Legs, whilst rendering it very hard to resist, due to the constrained Arm. If You grab someones Leg, You need to take into account that all of their Body Weight is now concentrated on One Leg, giving it a great deal of Stability. If taken out, its down and out, most likely. But try holding someones leg up, and just kicking at their supporting Leg. Youll hurt it, but it wont go out. Inevitably, Youll end up doing a Takedown with Your Hands, just like You would if Youd grabbed their Arm. Rereading this before I post it, I cant really put it any more clearly than, Id suggest that both have about the same likelyhood of Success, except that a Grabbed Leg = Two Free Arms. Id prefer, if I grabbed a Leg, to follow up with a Strike, *then* a Takedown.

That said, Ive also Thrown some folks with a weak Center. Having done Judo, Im sure You know what I mean. This also equates to variables, such as how strong Your Opponents Center is. This may force You to overcompensate in a SD Situation.

Just My Contribution to the Discussion.


----------



## SPX (Jan 7, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> That said, Kicking is, I believe, easier to Grab, but Harder to do a Takedown from. Because whilst They may only have one Leg, They also have more options to turn it against You. With an Arm Takedown, You can immobilise both Legs, whilst rendering it very hard to resist, due to the constrained Arm. If You grab someones Leg, You need to take into account that all of their Body Weight is now concentrated on One Leg, giving it a great deal of Stability. If taken out, its down and out, most likely. But try holding someones leg up, and just kicking at their supporting Leg. Youll hurt it, but it wont go out. Inevitably, Youll end up doing a Takedown with Your Hands, just like You would if Youd grabbed their Arm. Rereading this before I post it, I cant really put it any more clearly than, Id suggest that both have about the same likelyhood of Success, except that a Grabbed Leg = Two Free Arms. Id prefer, if I grabbed a Leg, to follow up with a Strike, *then* a Takedown.



From your description, my guess is that a lot of the grappling that you've been trained in is more of the hapkido/aikido variety.  Honestly, I don't know much about throwing from a wrist lock or that sort of technique beyond what I've seen in demonstrations and whatnot.

In judo, we talk a lot about "kazushi," or unbalancing the opponent.  In fact, when two judokas go to war with each other, the first part of battle is setting your opponent up for a fall.  That's largely what all the pushing, pulling and yanking is about before a throw happens.  You're trying to take away their base so that you can successfully execute a technique.  You have 8 directions of kazushi--front, back, the sides, and the four angles.

If you have someone on one leg, they have already done most of the work for you in achieving kazushi.  Their base is severely compromised.  There's no need to chop the leg out from under them because they're a top heavy object.  You merely need to push or pull them in any one of the eight directions to get them off balance and successfully execute a throw or takedown.  

If you watch an MMA fight, kickboxers are much more reticent to throw a kick when fighting a good grappler because it's much easier to defend the takedown when they have both feet solidly planted on the ground.

Personally, when I did judo, I never did get great at executing a lot of the high-level throws against resisting opponents.  If I had stayed in it longer I'm sure I would've gotten better, but I was always a lot more comfortable with clinch throws, like the hip toss or more greco-esque stuff like getting my arms around them like a bearhug, dropping my weight underneath theirs, and then picking them up and slamming them.  

I think that what I would suggest for TKDists is to make sure you are comfortable if someone closes the distance.  Since there's no clinching in any style of TKD, and no face punches under the WTF rules, it's easy to get used to not having someone up in your face.  When you go back and watch the early UFCs--when it really was style vs style--grapplers were always able to close the distance eventually, and I think that even a motivated and aggressive brawler stands a chance of timing his attack right to get into a range that takes your kicks away.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 7, 2012)

SPX said:


> From your description, my guess is that a lot of the grappling that you've been trained in is more of the hapkido/aikido variety.  Honestly, I don't know much about throwing from a wrist lock or that sort of technique beyond what I've seen in demonstrations and whatnot.
> 
> *Im gonna have to disagree. Having seen Hapkido, this is very little like it. I think Ive learned two Wristlocks, and theyre for use after taking someone down. Not as a setup. Im talking about literally grabbing someones Arm with one hand, and most of the time, their Torso with the other. Failing that, their Neck. It just happens to be easiest to grab the Wrist instead of the Forearm. I have no bloody idea what thats akin to, but then, I dont really see a need to read into it.*
> 
> ...



Just My Contribution. As of now, Im enjoying This Thread.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 7, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Just My Contribution. As of now, Im enjoying This Thread.


I agree, good thread. I think I have seen (in real life) more take downs as a result of a wild haymaker throwing all momentum forward and leaving the thrower of the punch completely off balance, than I have from kicks. Its funny, in most fights Ive seen people throw this massive air swing of a punch lunging all their weight forward with absolutely no thought of what to do if that punch doesnt connect (which it usually doesnt) and then their opponent very easily steps to one side, gives them a very light shove and the guy goes flying into a heap on the ground. A friend of mine who used to get into heaps of street fights back in the day used to always tell me that 90% of the people he fought had one thing, a wild right punch. After that they had nothing, no second punch, no kick, no grabs, nothing. He said that prior to the fight starting he would just watch their right hand because he knew after it swung at him they had absolutely no plan B whatsoever. The more fights I see, the more this seems to be the case.


----------



## lifespantkd (Jan 8, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I agree, good thread. I think I have seen (in real life) more take downs as a result of a wild haymaker throwing all momentum forward and leaving the thrower of the punch completely off balance, than I have from kicks. Its funny, in most fights Ive seen people throw this massive air swing of a punch lunging all their weight forward with absolutely no thought of what to do if that punch doesnt connect (which it usually doesnt) and then their opponent very easily steps to one side, gives them a very light shove and the guy goes flying into a heap on the ground. A friend of mine who used to get into heaps of street fights back in the day used to always tell me that 90% of the people he fought had one thing, a wild right punch. After that they had nothing, no second punch, no kick, no grabs, nothing. He said that prior to the fight starting he would just watch their right hand because he knew after it swung at him they had absolutely no plan B whatsoever. The more fights I see, the more this seems to be the case.



While reading this thread, I thought of this quote from "Knack Self-Defense for Women": 

"Statistically the most common attacks a man faces are 1) a big haymaker and 2) an attempted tackle. Women are more likely to be attacked by 1) being approached from behind, grabbed, and dragged to the ground or 2) being approached from the front, grabbed, and dragged to the ground. Because of this, the clinchh range is an essential part of training for both genders." 

And, these are only the "higher level" attacks, in my view. Not accounted for in those statistics are the attacks on women that are demeaned and normalized in many cultures by calling them "unwanted advances" or "unwanted advances of a friendly drunk." Having any part of one's person grabbed, in my view, is not an "unwanted advance," it is an attack.

I'd welcome thoughts on what such statistics means for women Taekwondo practitioners who study Taekwondo, in part, to improve their skill at self-defense. Particularly for short, lightweight women such as myself. 

Thank you!

Cynthia


----------



## StudentCarl (Jan 8, 2012)

lifespantkd said:


> I'd welcome thoughts on what such statistics means for women Taekwondo practitioners who study Taekwondo, in part, to improve their skill at self-defense. Particularly for short, lightweight women such as myself.
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> Cynthia



Hi Cynthia,
Here's my two cents:
I relate to this more from a sparring perspective than general Taekwondo because this involves strategy and tactics. What matters most is that this is a physical mismatch, and the smaller person (whether male or female, adult or child) cannot afford to get grabbed or absorb blows from a relative giant. First some general "self-defense" comments:
1. Size matters A LOT. Big people are more massive and tend to have more muscle; they have more reach; they can usually absorb more impact and keep going.
2. Mobility can only save you from size if you have escape space and good footwear/footing.
3. You can't exchange blows or stay in a "fight". 
     a. If you get hit first, you might be done...so you must first make him miss hitting or grabbing. Protect your head, but
         remember that him grabbing and controlling you may be a win for him if you don't have an answer.
     b. Strike decisively and break contact (get away) (See 4a below)
4. After awareness and avoidance of a big, strong person getting their hands on you, next best is:
     a. attack targets that end the fight and can't be covered with muscle or bone--eyes and throat are best targets (groin is inconsistent stopper)
     b. use a weapon with which you have skill; have a weapon and/or have trained with expedients.
     c. if a situation is going violent, hit first. Many think self-defense means the other guy gets the first swing. That's wrong (though there is legal detail to this 
        that one needs to understand)
     d. fight like you life depends on it (it might) and never quit. Get mad, loud and dangerous.
     e. the mental part of d. must be trained and is often a weak spot with women. If you haven't, you should envision yourself sticking a pen in someone's eye 
         and envision the blood and goo that results...and get okay with the idea that you ARE WORTH doing that so you get to go home again.

For the general Taekwondo student:
Fitness is essential for survival, so any regular training will improve a person's athleticism. Training with size mismatches (with a larger partner who has self-control) can help small people better understand the issues and learn some answers. This is obviously not 'the basics'. I would broaden this topic to call it dealing with size mismatches, as it applies equally to children and even to us 'normal-sized' men when facing someone seriously large. I have sparred with people 4-5" taller and 50# heavier; it does require a different approach and that can be trained. A good way to train this is to work with a skilled large person who has the self-control to give you the real challenges without hurting you. I would not do this with anyone inexperienced because the reality IS intimidating. BUT...you have to face it to deal with it effectively.

Nice question.
Carl


----------



## lifespantkd (Jan 8, 2012)

StudentCarl said:


> Hi Cynthia,
> Here's my two cents:
> I relate to this more from a sparring perspective than general Taekwondo because this involves strategy and tactics. What matters most is that this is a physical mismatch, and the smaller person (whether male or female, adult or child) cannot afford to get grabbed or absorb blows from a relative giant. First some general "self-defense" comments:
> 1. Size matters A LOT. Big people are more massive and tend to have more muscle; they have more reach; they can usually absorb more impact and keep going.
> ...



Thank you very much, Carl. This is great. 

My take as I have read this discussion about the value of sparring in self-defense is that people's answers really depend on 1) who they are and what their advantages are (e.g., height, reach, mass, speed, strength, skill set, street fighting experience vs. dojang sparring/grappling experience) and 2) what they perceive they are likely to encounter in a real life attack. If we're going to teach non-huge, non-naturally intimidating practitioners who are not unusually athletically gifted--you know, ordinary men, women, and children whose reasons for studying Taekwondo include self-defense in the real world--how to defend themselves, I don't see it as being possible only through full-contact sparring, as important as that experience is, for exactly the reasons you describe that relate to size mismatch. Some of you may walk around with little fear of being perceived as a target simply because you are male and large. Those of us who are petite women live in a completely different world because inherent characterstics that we cannot change result in others seeing us as potential victims: we are shorter with less muscle mass--often substantially so--and we live in a societies whose institutions and individual members often, though not always, devalue us solely based on our gender. We are simply not likely to end a fight with a single punch after getting swung at by a hay maker. Our attacker is going to stalk us, lay in wait for us, or--worse yet--be in a close relationship with us. As a mental health care provider, I know that the statistics on violence against women, including sexual assault, are horrifying and I have seen the devastating impact that such violence has on the lives of individual women as well as their families (take a look at http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims for just a glimpse into this social disaster). I am 100% sure, that as useful as the lessons of full-contact sparring are for all of the excellent reasons put forth in this thread, they are not enough for women or anyone else with a significant size mismatch. Add aging, injury, or disability to the mix and full-contact sparring may not even be an option. Surely other approaches to teaching self-defense are also urgently needed. So, how do we do this effectively in the Taekwondo dojang?

Cynthia


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 8, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I agree, good thread. I think I have seen (in real life) more take downs as a result of a wild haymaker throwing all momentum forward and leaving the thrower of the punch completely off balance, than I have from kicks. Its funny, in most fights Ive seen people throw this massive air swing of a punch lunging all their weight forward with absolutely no thought of what to do if that punch doesnt connect (which it usually doesnt) and then their opponent very easily steps to one side, gives them a very light shove and the guy goes flying into a heap on the ground. A friend of mine who used to get into heaps of street fights back in the day used to always tell me that 90% of the people he fought had one thing, a wild right punch. After that they had nothing, no second punch, no kick, no grabs, nothing. He said that prior to the fight starting he would just watch their right hand because he knew after it swung at him they had absolutely no plan B whatsoever. The more fights I see, the more this seems to be the case.


The other thing is, when Theyre not overcommitting, and I think this is a big one; Not Well Trained Fighters dont want to get hit. They do not want to be struck, but they want to strike. So They lean out.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 8, 2012)

When it comes to self defense, size and strength matters----------------------to the un-experienced person.

The more experienced one becomes in the training methods of full contact sparring, the less size and strength matter. Actually, if one continues to train hard for a long period of time, it gets to the point where it does not matter at all.

Sure a quick eye poke, or attempt to strike the throat might work, but it's a roll of the dice. Personally, I always wanted better odds.  What happens when that large, powerful brute decides to start landing punches on the un-experienced persons face?  Is that un-experienced person going to suddenly find the skills to evade, absorb, and counter the full contact blows?  Blows they have NEVER trained to deal with?  I don't think so.  All the scenerios, kata bunkai, etc are going to go down the tubes with that first hard bone jarring hit.


----------



## StudentCarl (Jan 8, 2012)

lifespantkd said:


> ... If we're going to teach non-huge, non-naturally intimidating practitioners who are not unusually athletically gifted--you know, ordinary men, women, and children whose reasons for studying Taekwondo include self-defense in the real world--how to defend themselves, I don't see it as being possible only through full-contact sparring, as important as that experience is, for exactly the reasons you describe that relate to size mismatch. ...Surely other approaches to teaching self-defense are also urgently needed. So, how do we do this effectively in the Taekwondo dojang?
> 
> Cynthia



I'm a relatively junior (in TKD) guy in a fairly small city in Michigan, so take this with a cup of salt. I think each master must focus his/her own school as he/she sees fit, but at the school I attend most people are looking for a blend of exercise and confidence (which includes some level of self-defense skills), though we have a fair sized competition team primarily focused on Olympic style sparring. Our focus with the newer student is fitness and coordination improvement through learning Taekwondo. At the lower levels, our focus on self-defense is technical (response to specific attacks) with some teaching of self-control and avoidance. Two good approaches, if you want to take the next step, would be 1) holding a one-day weekend seminar to gauge interest and refine curriculum, or 2) do some simple scenario training in select classes where you have these students. I think that the best defense-oriented teaching is principle-focused rather than technique focused. And like good TKD classes, it's more participation than observation. Being a relatively smaller woman, I think you have half of the team needed to develop and teach this, the other half being a large, skilled-with-control man. I suggest that you find such a partner and then work to test techniques and tactics. Your seniors will likely be a great help with this. You and your partner need to define and refine a curriculum targeted to mismatch situations where the larger person is the aggressor. You can test bits of it in #2 above, and when you're ready, do #1 and put on a seminar.  Although I grouped kids and women in an earlier comment, the program for each would need to be different. If you don't have access to them, you may need some additional equipment including helmets with face shields, neck protection, and/or a Red Man suit (full padded armor).

Going back to your comment above: 1) one of the criteria for techniques and tactics you teach is that they need to be simple and useful to the unathletic/ordinary person. Again, if you focus on movement and targeting, this is possible (though both improve with regular TKD class training). 2) full contact sparring is valuable for developing ability to move, perform under stress, and take a hard shot. Depending on how far you go with this training, you should consider how to address these. It is important to be realistic with those who want to do minimal training that it will have less practical value than training that has pressure-testing. In the school I attend, we work to develop skill first with size-matched partners before mixing it up and adding the mismatch issue. The women who raise the above issue, we usually work with individually and take them as far as they want to go.

Please share if you take this further.

Carl


----------



## StudentCarl (Jan 8, 2012)

mastercole said:


> When it comes to self defense, size and strength matters----------------------to the un-experienced person.
> 
> The more experienced one becomes in the training methods of full contact sparring, the less size and strength matter. Actually, if one continues to train hard for a long period of time, it gets to the point where it does not matter at all.
> 
> Sure a quick eye poke, or attempt to strike the throat might work, but it's a roll of the dice. Personally, I always wanted better odds.  What happens when that large, powerful brute decides to start landing punches on the un-experienced persons face?  Is that un-experienced person going to suddenly find the skills to evade, absorb, and counter the full contact blows?  Blows they have NEVER trained to deal with?  I don't think so.  All the scenerios, kata bunkai, etc are going to go down the tubes with that first hard bone jarring hit.



With respect, any technique is a roll of the dice because there is a counter to it. I completely agree that realism in training includes building up to full contact and full speed. Those who want a quick fix are counting on luck to make up for lack of training. I think we need to be honest with students about that, but I do understand Cynthia's question about training for size mismatches with students who aren't interested in regular full-contact training. What do you tell those smaller women who ask for help with this? 

Carl


----------



## mastercole (Jan 8, 2012)

lifespantkd said:


> If we're going to teach non-huge, non-naturally intimidating practitioners who are not unusually athletically gifted--you know, ordinary men, women, and children whose reasons for studying Taekwondo include self-defense in the real world--how to defend themselves, I don't see it as being possible only through full-contact sparring, as important as that experience is, for exactly the reasons you describe that relate to size mismatch. Some of you may walk around with little fear of being perceived as a target simply because you are male and large. Those of us who are petite women live in a completely different world because inherent characterstics that we cannot change result in others seeing us as potential victims: we are shorter with less muscle mass--often substantially so--and we live in a societies whose institutions and individual members often, though not always, devalue us solely based on our gender. We are simply not likely to end a fight with a single punch after getting swung at by a hay maker. Our attacker is going to stalk us, lay in wait for us, or--worse yet--be in a close relationship with us. As a mental health care provider, I know that the statistics on violence against women, including sexual assault, are horrifying and I have seen the devastating impact that such violence has on the lives of individual women as well as their families (take a look at http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims for just a glimpse into this social disaster). I am 100% sure, that as useful as the lessons of full-contact sparring are for all of the excellent reasons put forth in this thread, they are not enough for women or anyone else with a significant size mismatch. Add aging, injury, or disability to the mix and full-contact sparring may not even be an option. Surely other approaches to teaching self-defense are also urgently needed. So, how do we do this effectively in the Taekwondo dojang?
> 
> Cynthia



It is rare today to find the student, or parent that cares anything about self defense, especially those signing up for martial arts lessons. That is not the reason people join martial arts today.

But for someone looking for the self defense value in martial arts, for all of the reasons you stated above, that is why it is important to study deeply: 

- what it takes to punch, kick, strike at your maximum potential power, and be able to apply it under the threat of full contact
- to perfect your timing and distance skills and be able to apply it under the threat of full contact
- to perfect your ability to evade and roll with the "punches", and be able to apply it under the threat of full contact
- to develop a ferocious will power and be able to apply it under the threat of full contact
- to learn the key principles behind these skills sets
- have plan "B". like mace, knife, gun, etc (following the laws of your area)

A well trained person in these key principles can be 5"1 100 lbs and knockout a 250 lbs man. The same well trained person has a much better chance of quickly gouging the eyes of a larger man and follow up with strikes that can disable him allowing for escape.

Once we understand these principles, we will understand physical self defense. People who fail to grasp these principles will forever fantasize about scenarios, plans, meaning of forms, etc in an attempt to solve this problem. And that is a huge waste of time. People have to bite the bullet, face the truth and get down to the real business of physical self defense and stop avoiding it and trying to search out comforting answers. 

Today there is an over abundance of some well meaning individuals, and a lot of snake-oil salesman that are playing on this market of folks looking for the "easy" answer to physical self defense because few people today want to really dig deep into the hard, cold truth of the self defense matter.

It's the same with carrying a gun when a person feels in danger. They hear all these pro's and con's to conceal carry, even when they have a stalker with a restraining order and has made previous assaults against the person, so some people are conflicted and can not seem to adapt their so-called principle to their current dire circumstance. Maybe the police will protect me?... yeah, think again, it happens time and time again, the police show up to photograph the mess.

We have to quit kidding ourselves about self defense.  If we are martial arts instructors who attempt to teach anything about self defense, we need to take a long hard look at our actual real world self defense experience before doing so.  If we find that we do not have A LOT of real world experience, the I believe we have no business attempting to teach self defense to anyone. However, as instructors, leaders of our school, if we want self defense, we can always hire a qualified person to help with that.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 8, 2012)

There was a good thread recently in the 'general' section regarding whether you have to have been in 'real' fights to teach self defence. I personally dont think you have to. My first instructor, by his own admission, has never been in a fight in his life, yet Im as sure as I can be that he is one guy you really wouldnt want to mess with. It is a matter of personal opinon though.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 8, 2012)

StudentCarl said:


> With respect, any technique is a roll of the dice because there is a counter to it.



If a person has little or no full contact training experience, the the odds are highly against then when they roll those dice. If they are highly trained and experienced in the full contact training methods, then the odds are more in their favor.  Big difference.



StudentCarl said:


> I completely agree that realism in training includes building up to full contact and full speed. Those who want a quick fix are counting on luck to make up for lack of training. I think we need to be honest with students about that,



I agree, I am brutally honest with my students, and my juniors about this subject. There is no quick fix.  Even if you decide to carry a gun, there is a lot of training, mental and moral consideration that goes with that as well.



StudentCarl said:


> but I do understand Cynthia's question about training for size mismatches with students who aren't interested in regular full-contact training. What do you tell those smaller women who ask for help with this?
> 
> Carl



I tell them if they are concerned about self defense and REALLY want to improve the physical self defense skills, they MUST participate in the learning of full contact fighting principles. I tell them that if they learn the principles of full contact fighting **which is what they will encounter in an attack ** the issue of size and strength will be reduced, if not eliminated.

That may mean taking their focus completely away from forms, breaking, arm grabs, etc. and applying it fully to physical combat methods.  I also find that almost no one wants to hear that and 99 out of 100 would likely quit, or go somewhere else when told that. 

Of course as a martial arts business owner, you can always insert "but, I can show you 10 ways to get out of a choke and hair pull" to get them to write that check out


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 8, 2012)

I think you are dead right about full contact stuff. If your training doesnt involve a good degree of full contact against resisting opponents then it probably doesnt go a long way toward self defence. We have a training camp once or twice a year on the beach and I remember one year after we finished a session a few of the 6th and 7th dans remained on the bech doing some training so I sat back and watched. They would put one guy in the middle of a circle and one at a time the others would attack. They would attack full speed, full power and would not tell the defender what they were going to do. It may be a kick, a punch, a tackle, they could even kick or throw sand in their face, basically anything goes. It was amazing to watch guys at this level just react instantly and defend full speed against a mystery attack. Most defences were hapkido/aikido style defence followed by strikes. I honestly thought it was as close as you will get to defending yourself for real because it combined the unpredictability of a real situation with full contact. If nothing else, it was great to sit back on a sand dune, have a beer and watch it all happen.


----------



## lifespantkd (Jan 8, 2012)

Thank you very much, Ralph and Al, for your insights. This has been a really useful thread for me. I've learned a great deal from all of your comments.

Cynthia


----------



## SPX (Jan 8, 2012)

mastercole said:


> When it comes to self defense, size and strength matters----------------------to the un-experienced person.
> 
> The more experienced one becomes in the training methods of full contact sparring, the less size and strength matter. Actually, if one continues to train hard for a long period of time, it gets to the point where it does not matter at all.



I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this.  If size doesn't matter to the experience person, then why are weight-classes necessary in combat sports?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 8, 2012)

SPX said:


> I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this.  If size doesn't matter to the experience person, then why are weight-classes necessary in combat sports?


Probably because in combat sports, both competitiors are highly skilled and trained in the same thing and fighting under the exact same rulest, therefore size becomes a huge variable. When two guys go toe to toe on the street its very different, theres no rules and quite possibly the big guy has no training whatsoever and the little guy is 5th dan holding a baseball bat.


----------



## SPX (Jan 9, 2012)

I tip the scales at just over 150 lbs, and if I was in optimal shape, would probably be more like 140.

I don't care what kind of martial arts training I have, I don't want to go toe to toe with some 6'2, 240 lb linebacker guy.  It would be difficult to put him down without hitting a vital area and any one of his haymakers could easily put my lights out.  After that, I'm at his mercy and he can stomp my head in or whatever he wants to do.  

I would definitely not say that size is nullified by expertise if the gap is big enough.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 9, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Probably because in combat sports, both competitiors are highly skilled and trained in the same thing and fighting under the exact same rulest, therefore size becomes a huge variable. When two guys go toe to toe on the street its very different, theres no rules and quite possibly the big guy has no training whatsoever and the little guy is 5th dan holding a baseball bat.



Right. Also, studies of energy generated at the point of impact show that generally, when elite male players are studied, Bantam - Feather - Light weights hit the hardest.  Even with trained fighters I have seen a much lighter weight guy tear a heavy weight apart, just because the lighter guy is quicker with everything. But I have also, rarely, seen heavy weights that move like fly weights, and that is scary.........


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 9, 2012)

SPX said:


> I tip the scales at just over 150 lbs, and if I was in optimal shape, would probably be more like 140.
> 
> I don't care what kind of martial arts training I have, I don't want to go toe to toe with some 6'2, 240 lb linebacker guy.  It would be difficult to put him down without hitting a vital area and any one of his haymakers could easily put my lights out.  After that, I'm at his mercy and he can stomp my head in or whatever he wants to do.
> 
> I would definitely not say that size is nullified by expertise if the gap is big enough.


If you get some huge guy, 6 foot 2inches, rippled with muscles but no fight training at all and he starts a fight in a pub with georges st pierre, I will bet my house and everything in it that st pierre would tear him apart. Plus, if Ive learned one thing in martial arts its that generally the bigger someone is the slower they are and speed means a hell of a lot in a fight. Size is good, but my money is on the little guy with a tonne of fighting skills anyday of the week. In my opinion, size is way over rated.


----------



## SPX (Jan 9, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> If you get some huge guy, 6 foot 2inches, rippled with muscles but no fight training at all and he starts a fight in a pub with georges st pierre, I will bet my house and everything in it that st pierre would tear him apart. Size is good, but my money is on the little guy with a tonne of fighting skills anyday of the week. In my opinion, size is way over rated.



Well GSP is 5'10" and is known to walk around between 190 and 200, so he's not in any way a small guy.  He may not be a huge guy, but he's pretty big.  In general, I think that when you get to welterweight and up, it's a different ballgame.

But what about Urijah Faber?  Most who have met him say he's about 5'4" (even though he's billed at 5'6") and about 150 lbs. in between fights.  I think he would have a very hard time with a 240 lb athletic individual (like a football player), even if that guy had no fight training.  A small body can only generate so much power and can only absorb so much force.  By contrast, a large, muscular person can generate a great deal of power and can absorb a great deal more force.  So the smaller guy is definitely facing an uphill battle from the start, especially when you think that his punches are like .22 caliber bullets, while the bigger guy's are like .45s.  This also is not even to mention what is perhaps a more pertinent point, that most martial artists are part timers who train an average of 3 times a week and are quite far from either GSP or Urijah Faber, who are among the very best fighters in the entire world.

Being a small person, trust me, I very much want to learn how to compensate for my lack of height and size.  And I'm sure that I can learn to do that to a significant degree.  But I'm not under the illusion that karate or taekwondo is going to make me invincible.


----------



## SPX (Jan 9, 2012)

mastercole said:


> Right. Also, studies of energy generated at the point of impact show that generally, when elite male players are studied, Bantam - Feather - Light weights hit the hardest.  Even with trained fighters I have seen a much lighter weight guy tear a heavy weight apart, just because the lighter guy is quicker with everything. But I have also, rarely, seen heavy weights that move like fly weights, and that is scary.........



That sounds like an interesting study, but we both know that Frankie Edgar doesn't want to get into a kickboxing match with Alistair Overeem.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 9, 2012)

SPX said:


> Well GSP is 5'10" and is known to walk around between 190 and 200, so he's not in any way a small guy.  He may not be a huge guy, but he's pretty big.  In general, I think that when you get to welterweight and up, it's a different ballgame.
> 
> But what about Urijah Faber?  Most who have met him say he's about 5'4" (even though he's billed at 5'6") and about 150 lbs. in between fights.  I think he would have a very hard time with a 240 lb athletic individual (like a football player), even if that guy had no fight training.  A small body can only generate so much power and can only absorb so much force.  By contrast, a large, muscular person can generate a great deal of power and can absorb a great deal more force.  So the smaller guy is definitely facing an uphill battle from the start, especially when you think that his punches are like .22 caliber bullets, while the bigger guy's are like .45s.  This also is not even to mention what is perhaps a more pertinent point, that most martial artists are part timers who train an average of 3 times a week and are quite far from either GSP or Urijah Faber, who are among the very best fighters in the entire world.
> 
> Being a small person, trust me, I very much want to learn how to compensate for my lack of height and size.  And I'm sure that I can learn to do that to a significant degree.  But I'm not under the illusion that karate or taekwondo is going to make me invincible.


Its funny you mention football players. Over here in australia rugby league is one type of football that is popular and is generally regarded as the toughest, most physical game on earth (state of origin for example). The guys who play league are huge, muscular and tough as nails. You get a lot of brawls in league (not as much these days) and it always highlights that there is a big difference between being big and being able to fight. Many boxers have played the game and its always funny to see a big guy get put on his *** very quickly by a little guy who actually knows how to fight, billy johnstone comes to mind. I was in town one night and a big pro league player was mouthing off and causing quite a scene, the guy was huge and eventually a small guy (5 ft 5 and about 60-70 kilos) asked him to tone it down which only escalated things. Eventully it came to blows and to the enjoyment of everyone in the club the little guy just floored him and knocked him out cold. The funny thing was that no one went to the big guys aid and people were literally walking over his unconscience body to get to the bar. Turned out the little guy was a muay thai fighter. Difference was, one was big , the other could fight. Being big helps, but it will only get you so far, fighting is a science.


----------



## SPX (Jan 9, 2012)

I like that story.  Since I'm small, I like to think that I can train hard and develop skills that are an equalizer.  

I guess I still have a memory in my head of when a friend of mine (who's about 360 pounds) hit me with a relatively light punch.  He wasn't trying to hurt me or knock me out, I just told him to hit me with a moderate punch to see what it would feel like.  I didn't go unconscious, but my world definitely went black for a second and I was dazed.  If he had hit me full power then I definitely would've been out cold.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 9, 2012)

SPX said:


> I like that story.  Since I'm small, I like to think that I can train hard and develop skills that are an equalizer.
> 
> I guess I still have a memory in my head of when a friend of mine (who's about 360 pounds) hit me with a relatively light punch.  He wasn't trying to hurt me or knock me out, I just told him to hit me with a moderate punch to see what it would feel like.  I didn't go unconscious, but my world definitely went black for a second and I was dazed.  If he had hit me full power then I definitely would've been out cold.


I can relate. I have some big mates who could knock me senseless even with a punch at about 50% capacity. I'd like to think though, that I wouldnt just stand in front of someone like that and give them an easy target if it was for real. The thing is, they still have to catch you. As a mate used to say to me "big guys still have knees", referring to the fact that even a poorly timed, untrained kick to someone's knee will still usually result in a full knee reconstruction


----------



## puunui (Jan 9, 2012)

mastercole said:


> But I have also, rarely, seen heavy weights that move like fly weights, and that is scary.........



Masters KIM Je Kyung and Jimmy Kim come to mind, both Olympic gold medalists.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 9, 2012)

SPX said:


> Being a small person, trust me, I very much want to learn how to compensate for my lack of height and size.  And I'm sure that I can learn to do that to a significant degree.  But I'm not under the illusion that karate or taekwondo is going to make me invincible.



Nothing will make you invincible, except maybe genius.   However, you can learn to maximize your abilities beyond what people normally think is possible.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 9, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> As a mate used to say to me "big guys still have knees", referring to the fact that even a poorly timed, untrained kick to someone's knee will still usually result in a full knee reconstruction



Really?  I've seen a lot of people get kicked to the knee in MMA and often they are fine afterwards (i.e. no visible issue).  These aren't poorly timed, untrained kicks - but those delivered by professional fighters (and often to "big guys").

Anderson Silva often does it.  Jon "Bones" Jones does it.  Lyoto Machida started doing it back to Jones.  A lot of fighters do it when they're on their back and their opponent is standing over them.

There are moves people can claim are dangerous/life threatening/serious/whatever, but quite a few moves are actually tested full contact against big/strong guys in the MMA rings so we can put the debate about them to bed.  Knee kicks - unless they happen to be to an unexpecting opponent - aren't always going to result in serious damage.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> Really?  I've seen a lot of people get kicked to the knee in MMA and often they are fine afterwards (i.e. no visible issue).  These aren't poorly timed, untrained kicks - but those delivered by professional fighters (and often to "big guys").
> 
> Anderson Silva often does it.  Jon "Bones" Jones does it.  Lyoto Machida started doing it back to Jones.  A lot of fighters do it when they're on their back and their opponent is standing over them.
> 
> There are moves people can claim are dangerous/life threatening/serious/whatever, but quite a few moves are actually tested full contact against big/strong guys in the MMA rings so we can put the debate about them to bed.  Knee kicks - unless they happen to be to an unexpecting opponent - aren't always going to result in serious damage.



Out of interest, and this goes to Ralph also;
Are You referring to the classical Instep/Shin VS Knee, or the less common Heel/Ball-of-Foot VS Knee?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> Really? *I've seen a lot of people get kicked to the knee in MMA *and often they are fine afterwards (i.e. no visible issue). These aren't poorly timed, untrained kicks - but those delivered by professional fighters (and often to "big guys").
> 
> Anderson Silva often does it. Jon "Bones" Jones does it. Lyoto Machida started doing it back to Jones. A lot of fighters do it when they're on their back and their opponent is standing over them.
> 
> There are moves people can claim are dangerous/life threatening/serious/whatever, but quite a few moves are actually tested full contact against big/strong guys in the MMA rings so we can put the debate about them to bed. Knee kicks - unless they happen to be to an unexpecting opponent - aren't always going to result in serious damage.



Kicks and strikes to joints are illegal in MMA, that includes the knee. If you aimed a kick at the kneecap you'd be penalised. Kicks in MMA are usually to the thigh a la Muay Thai, body ie liver shot/solar plexus or to the head KO.
The shot that is considered the most dangerous in MMA is the downward elbow to the head and is banned.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 9, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Kicks and strikes to joints are illegal in MMA, that includes the knee. If you aimed a kick at the kneecap you'd be penalised. Kicks in MMA are usually to the thigh a la Muay Thai, body ie liver shot/solar plexus or to the head KO.
> The shot that is considered the most dangerous in MMA is the downward elbow to the head and is banned.


Thanks Tez, I thought that was the case. I havent seen a lot of MMA, but from what I have seen there doesnt seem to be people kicking knees. I cringe just imagining a kick aimed at the top of the knee, either to the side or straight on, the knee just doesnt bend that way. Footballers slightly extend their knee and dont play for weeks, a deliberate kick to the knee is just not good, if its a good kick, well aimed with power, thats just nasty, but any kick is very risky. Just talk to a sports doctor/physiotherapist about it.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 9, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Kicks and strikes to joints are illegal in MMA, that includes the knee. If you aimed a kick at the kneecap you'd be penalised.



*Linear Knee Strikes*
After a discussion prompted by the Silva-Leites bout, the Committee reviewed the issue of linear strikes to the knee joint and agreed that this technique should remain a legal technique.
http://www.abcboxing.com/unified_mma_rules.html

The only reference to joints is "small joint manipulation" being a foul.  Nothing about strikes to joints.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 9, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Out of interest, and this goes to Ralph also;
> Are You referring to the classical Instep/Shin VS Knee, or the less common Heel/Ball-of-Foot VS Knee?



Heel/Ball of Foot vs Knee.

Try to find some video online of UFC 115 (Silva vs Leites) as that's the one the ABC specifically discussed regarding kicks to the knee (and afterwards decided they should remain legal).


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> *Linear Knee Strikes*
> After a discussion prompted by the Silva-Leites bout, the Committee reviewed the issue of linear strikes to the knee joint and agreed that this technique should remain a legal technique.
> http://www.abcboxing.com/unified_mma_rules.html
> 
> The only reference to joints is "small joint manipulation" being a foul. Nothing about strikes to joints.



These are American rules we have no such thing here, we in fact have no ruling body or unified rules at all. If refs here see you kicking a knee you will be warned the first time, second time disaqualified. We don't train to do knee kicks for comps only for SD.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 9, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> These are American rules we have no such thing here, we in fact have no ruling body or unified rules at all. If refs here see you kicking a knee you will be warned the first time, second time disaqualified. We don't train to do knee kicks for comps only for SD.



OK....   I'll respond in two parts:

*Part 1*

You disputed my statement "I've seen a lot of people get kicked to the knee in MMA" with your own "Kicks and strikes to joints are illegal in MMA".

All I'm saying is that I've seen them (I've given enough evidence of this, I'm sure), they haven't done considerable damage/required full knee reconstruction and they aren't illegal in "MMA".  I concede they may be illegal in "UK MMA", but that's not the whole of MMA and my point was simply that they happen and they aren't as serious as they are often made out to be.

That was the discussion at hand.  Can you deny that they are legal in at least some parts of MMA (e.g. the UFC, Strikeforce and their US ilk)?  And that these kicks have taken place without requiring full knee reconstruction?

*Part 2*

That said (the on topic portion), regarding them being a disqualification offence in the UK - I raise this for interest : 

http://www.fightukmma.co.uk/event-rules/ seems to show the Unified MMA Rules as their rules (and don't disallow joint kicking, only small joint manipulation)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAMMA#Rules (hardly authoritative I know) says they use the Unified MMA Rules as their rules

http://www.ultimatewarriorchallenge.co.uk/varcont.php?id=UWC%20RULES only shows the Unified MMA Fouls as their rules.

While I don't 100% dispute your superior knowledge based on the fact you do MMA and I am just a spectator; I am disappointed that there is a standard for MMA rules (seemingly in America and in the top UK organisations) but referees decide to disqualify contestants based on things not in the rules.  I would hope there would be a dispute procedure in place for this - and the referees involved should be disciplined for it!


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> OK.... I'll respond in two parts:
> 
> *Part 1*
> 
> ...



You have to understand there is no governing body in the Uk for MMA, we bascially do exactly what we want. Whether that's good or bad is open to a debate somewhere else.
Kneekicks come under the 'not sporting behaviour' rule, there's a few other things that aren't considered sporting as well and while not in the rules it is clearly understood by all. At the rules meeting fighters will be told what's not acceptable and kneekicks are one of those things. In the FightUKMMA this is rule 22, in BAMMA again rule 22, UWC rule 21. It's there, you didn't know it. I believe this is also in the rules for UFC etc, it's just they've decided kneekicks are sporting, we don't.

You can appeal to the promotion is you feel a ref has been unfair, it will be looked at and all sides have their say.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 9, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> You have to understand there is no governing body in the Uk for MMA, we bascially do exactly what we want. Whether that's good or bad is open to a debate somewhere else.
> Kneekicks come under the 'not sporting behaviour' rule, there's a few other things that aren't considered sporting as well and while not in the rules it is clearly understood by all. At the rules meeting fighters will be told what's not acceptable and kneekicks are one of those things. In the FightUKMMA this is rule 22, in BAMMA again rule 22, UWC rule 21. It's there, you didn't know it. I believe this is also in the rules for UFC etc, it's just they've decided kneekicks are sporting, we don't.
> 
> You can appeal to the promotion is you feel a ref has been unfair, it will be looked at and all sides have their say.



Surely BAMMA can't use rule 22 (unsportsmanlike conduct basically) for this, given that they specifically state they use the Unified MMA rules and they explicitly allow it.

Also, you missed replying to Part 1 ;-)

Cheers,


Andy


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> Surely BAMMA can't use rule 22 (unsportsmanlike conduct basically) for this, given that they specifically state they use the Unified MMA rules and they explicitly allow it.
> 
> Also, you missed replying to Part 1 ;-)
> 
> ...



Unified as in what? We don't have any organisations that are 'unified', it means nothing to be honest, there's no licencing, no laws, no anything that says the rules have to be 'unified' ones. Just words. Here, each organisation is on it's own, has it's own rules which maybe are copied from the UFC or maybe not each ref and promotion will decide what's allowed. The fighters are told at the rules meeting what is allowed and what's not, 'unified' means nothing other than what the promotor wants it to mean, you can't make them keep to anything. If they don't want kneekicks or heel hooks etc they won't have them, end of story.

Okay, using kneekicks, apart from being unsporting, they are quite difficult to do properly in MMA, I would suggest the ones you saw weren't done properly so there wouldn't be any injury.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 9, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Unified as in what? We don't have any organisations that are 'unified', it means nothing to be honest, there's no licencing, no laws, no anything that says the rules have to 'unified' ones. Just words.



I'm beginning to wonder if you're continuing this just for the sake of arguing...  Considering that I'm treating this as a virtual pub and we're two brits debating this over a virtual pint, I'll continue too...

Do a Google search for "Unified MMA Rules".  Keep the quotes (so Google keeps it as a phrase not individual words).  There is a set of rules (linked to earlier on the ABC site) which is called the "Unified MMA Rules".

There's a video of "Big" John McCarthy explaining them that is for me the second link.

Come on, are you seriously saying you've never heard the phrase "Unified MMA Rules"?  When people say "Unified MMA Rules', capitalised as such, you can be fairly sure they're referring to a named set of rules rather than a generic unified set of rules.



Tez3 said:


> Here, each organisation is on it's own, has it's own rules which maybe are copied from the UFC or maybe not each ref and promotion will decide what's allowed. The fighters are told at the rules meeting what is allowed and what's not, 'unified' means nothing other than what the promotor wants it to mean, you can't make them keep to anything. If they don't want kneekicks or heel hooks etc they won't have them, end of story.



I understand this, but they've happened and haven't caused full knee reconstruction and aren't "illegal in [all of] MMA".  Agree?



Tez3 said:


> Okay, using kneekicks, apart from being unsporting, they are quite difficult to do properly in MMA, I would suggest the ones you saw weren't done properly so there wouldn't be any injury.



OK, then this also helps refute the point from Ralph where he says "the fact that even a poorly timed, untrained kick to someone's knee will still usually result in a full knee reconstruction".  If we can have elite MMA fighters (and I personally don't like Anderson Silva, but he is UFC champion and is arguably considered by many to be one of the best pound-for-pound fighters in the world) who can't execute them properly against someone they are evenly weight-matched with, then surely an average skill martial artist relying on them against a bigger tough guy is on a hiding to nothing.

We've debated the rules and I've shown they are legal in at least some (most) MMA competitions and I've shown that they happen in professional elite MMA matches without serious side effects.  Is there anything left to debate on this?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2012)

I'm not continuing this for the sake of arguments sake. However I don't think you understand MMA here. Each promotion is owned by the promoter, there is no governing body, there are no laws that say we have to be licenced, there is nothing laid down anywhere that says how a fight night has to be run, we don't even need to have medics. MMA in the UK is run by consensus, if the fighters don't like the promotion they don't fight on it. The unified rules are used by promoters here as a guideline, they will add or subject as they wish, I know promoters that hate heel hooks so they are out, another doesn't like neck cranks so they are out, none of us like knee kicks so they are out. Other promoters have stomps to the head in, if you don't like them you don't fight on their shows. There's nothing anywhere that says 'unified rules' have to be followed, hell we don't have anything that says any rules have to be followed! Just because the promotion says unified rules doesn't mean they are followed to the letter and are the same as the UFC, it's a guideline of what to expect. Before the fights start after the weigh in there are rules meetings where everything is explained, what's allowed, what's not. You can even ask to have things taken out or added, if your opponent agrees that will be the rules for that fight, fighters often want spinning back fists taken out. 

If you have the money you can set up your own MMA fight night, you can ref, your auntie can judge along with your dog. You can have rules or not, you can have rules that say no punching if you wish, you can have what you like, the only thing stopping that show would be whether you'd get fighters on it.

The UFC is a business, a promotion, their rules aren't the last word in MMA, its their rules along with what is allowed in America by their licensing people.The allowing of kneekicks in UFC was only allowed after a specific fight, it's a bit like stopping someone and doing them for drunken driving then deciding because a celebrity was done, it was unfair and the laws would be changed. The UFC isn't MMA, just because they allow it doesn't mean MMA does, I think the thousands of MMA promotions all over the world who run MMA comps with illegal knee kicks are more likely to speak for MMA than one big and rich promotion that tries to impose its rules on everyone else does. Grassroots and international comps don't have knee kicks, the UFC does, it says more about them than it does about MMA.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 9, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> I'm not continuing this for the sake of arguments sake.



OK.



Tez3 said:


> However I don't think you understand MMA here. Each promotion is owned by the promoter, there is no governing body, there are no laws that say we have to be licenced, there is nothing laid down anywhere that says how a fight night has to be run, we don't even need to have medics. MMA in the UK is run by consensus, if the fighters don't like the promotion they don't fight on it. The unified rules are used by promoters here as a guideline, they will add or subject as they wish, I know promoters that hate heel hooks so they are out, another doesn't like neck cranks so they are out, none of us like knee kicks so they are out. Other promoters have stomps to the head in, if you don't like them you don't fight on their shows. There's nothing anywhere that says 'unified rules' have to be followed, hell we don't have anything that says any rules have to be followed! Just because the promotion says unified rules doesn't mean they are followed to the letter and are the same as the UFC, it's a guideline of what to expect. Before the fights start after the weigh in there are rules meetings where everything is explained, what's allowed, what's not. You can even ask to have things taken out or added, if your opponent agrees that will be the rules for that fight, fighters often want spinning back fists taken out.
> 
> If you have the money you can set up your own MMA fight night, you can ref, your auntie can judge along with your dog. You can have rules or not, you can have rules that say no punching if you wish, you can have what you like, the only thing stopping that show would be whether you'd get fighters on it.



I do understand all that.  However, remember how this conversation got started.  It was claimed that knee kicks "usually" result in "knee reconstruction".  I claimed that I had seen them in [some subset of] MMA and they hadn't resulted in this.  You seemed to disagree saying it was illegal, and I believe I have proved that it is legal, at least in some competitions in some parts of the world (e.g. the UFC, the largest - in financial terms - MMA organisation in the world).



Tez3 said:


> The UFC is a business, a promotion, their rules aren't the last word in MMA, its their rules along with what is allowed in America by their licensing people.The allowing of kneekicks in UFC was only allowed after a specific fight



That's the thing, no it wasn't only allowed after a specific fight.  It has always been allowed in Unified MMA Rules.  It was explicitly clarified and confirmed acceptable after UFC 115 because it was so obvious in that fight.  They clarified that it is still acceptable.



Tez3 said:


> it's a bit like stopping someone and doing them for drunken driving then deciding because a celebrity was done, it was unfair and the laws would be changed.



As I said though, it's not a rule change to allow it, it's confirming that it's _still _legal after that fight.



Tez3 said:


> The UFC isn't MMA, just because they allow it doesn't mean MMA does, I think the thousands of MMA promotions all over the world who run MMA comps with illegal knee kicks are more likely to speak for MMA than one big and rich promotion that tries to impose its rules on everyone else does. Grassroots and international comps don't have knee kicks, the UFC does, it says more about them than it does about MMA.



It says more about Unified MMA Rules than UFC or MMA.  Most MMA organisations around the world, as I understand it (and from a google search), use the Unified MMA Rules as codified by the Association of Boxing Commissions.  Come on, this isn't some mickey mouse organisation in America making up a set of rules and saying "this is the world standard", it's a set of rules that most promotions around the world use.

Anyway, we can argue back and forth about the rules and who uses them, but it's not getting us anywhere.

Can we at least agree, based on the evidence at hand that being able to use strong knee kicks against a larger/stronger opponent is harder and aren't as devastating as some people would claim?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> OK.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're sure about that? It doesn't allow women to fight on UFC, changes it's rules to suit itself, threatens to sue anyone  and everyone etc etc, I could on but it would take a page or two and people wouldn't be happy, just because it's rich doesn't make it good. Most MMA promotions around the world are the same as ours with nothing to do with boxing boards of control, in fact most of them want us banned.

As for knee kicks, if we consider them unsporting in MMA don't you think that's because they cause damage? I can use a good front kick on someones knee and it will bend the 'wrong way', that's why we teach it in SD, it's easier for me to do a low kick like that than a high kick, the larger the opponent the bigger the knee/target. My instrcutor has used them before in situations than warranted them.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:
			
		

> It says more about Unified MMA Rules than UFC or MMA. Most MMA organisations around the world, as I understand it (and from a google search), use the Unified MMA Rules as codified by the Association of Boxing Commissions. Come on, *this isn't some mickey mouse organisation in America* making up a set of rules and saying "this is the world standard", it's a set of rules that most promotions around the world use.





Tez3 said:


> You're sure about that? It doesn't allow women to fight on UFC



Again, you're confusing ABC with UFC.  The ABC Unified MMA Rules don't disallow women from fighting in any promotion, and indeed Strikeforce which does have female fighters also uses the Unified MMA Rules.



Tez3 said:


> changes it's rules to suit itself



When has the ABC changed the Unified MMA Rules to suit itself?  What could it do to change the rules to suit itself?



Tez3 said:


> threatens to sue anyone  and everyone etc etc,



Who has the ABC threatened to sue?



Tez3 said:


> I could on but it would take a page or two and people wouldn't be happy, just because it's rich doesn't make it good



As you might have gathered, and if you re-read my quote carefully, I was referring to the ABC.  "Most MMA ... use Unified ... by the Association of Boxing Commissions".  The ABC isn't a mickey mouse organisation.  The UFC didn't make up the rules, they applied the rules set by the ABC.

The UFC isn't deciding whether to allow knee kicks or not, this is down to an external organisation that sets the rules.

I understand you have a strong dislike for the UFC, I get it.  However, put that aside and we're talking about the Unified MMA Rules as used by all American MMA promotions and the majority of promotions wordwide.



Tez3 said:


> Most MMA promotions around the world are the same as ours


 
Really?  There are more and more taking up the Unified MMA Rules, including as previously posted, some larger UK promotions.  From a Google search, everyone describes them as what the majority of MMA fighters use.



Tez3 said:


> As for knee kicks, if we consider them unsporting in MMA don't you think that's because they cause damage?


 
The problem is "we", is "you" in this scenario.  I've already proved that the ABC (and hence the "majority" of MMA promotions worldwide) don't consider them unsporting and are in fact explicitly within the rules.



Tez3 said:


> I can use a good front kick on someones knee and it will bend the 'wrong way', that's why we teach it in SD, it's easier for me to do a low kick like that than a high kick, the larger the opponent the bigger the knee/target. My instrcutor has used them before in situations than warranted them.



But as you've pointed out, when professional elite fighters try to use them and can't manage to land them correctly, how effective are they really?

If your opponent is going to stand still and look the other way most techniques will work.  If they're fighting back, as we've seen they are less than effective.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> Again, you're confusing ABC with UFC. The ABC Unified MMA Rules don't disallow women from fighting in any promotion, and indeed Strikeforce which does have female fighters also uses the Unified MMA Rules.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Have it your own way, I know nothing, I've only been around since MMA started, been around the UK and Europe what would I know about rules, promotions etc. Remind me again, how many shows have you promoted? How many shows in the UK and Europe have you been to? How many have you worked on? Fine, you've don't believe me so I'm the problem of course, it couldn't possibly be because you don't understand how we use the rules could it despite my explaining it to you? Oh and I suggest you contact the British Boxing Board of Control about MMA, when they've stopped explaining to you why it should be banned you might get a word in. Most boards of control in Europe feel this way btw and have nothing to do with MMA whatsoever. The ABC is an American and Canadian organisation with no say so outside those countries. The rules are as I said, like it or not. Believe me or not, please yourself.


----------



## andyjeffries (Jan 9, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Have it your own way, I know nothing, I've only been around since MMA started, been around the UK and Europe what would I know about rules, promotions etc. Remind me again, how many shows have you promoted? How many shows in the UK and Europe have you been to? How many have you worked on? Fine, you've don't believe me so I'm the problem of course, it couldn't possibly be because you don't understand how we use the rules could it despite my explaining it to you? Oh and I suggest you contact the British Boxing Board of Control about MMA, when they've stopped explaining to you why it should be banned you might get a word in. Most boards of control in Europe feel this way btw and have nothing to do with MMA whatsoever. The ABC is an American and Canadian organisation with no say so outside those countries. The rules are as I said, like it or not. Believe me or not, please yourself.



Man alive, Tez.  I've already acknowledged that you have far more practical experience with MMA than I do and infinitely more UK MMA experience.  That's never under dispute.

You simply seem to be ignoring evidence that goes against your experience.  You also seem to be blinded against the UFC (seemingly because of their business practices).

This started from a discussion regarding knee kicks being useful (for an average recreational martial arts practitioner against a larger/stronger opponent) as they usually have a severe effect.  I said they were less useful as they have been proved in the MMA ring.  I've posted examples of fighters using them, which you've argued they weren't applied correctly (in effect this helps my side of the debate about them being useful in SD, when an expert professional elite fighter can't do them corectly).  You said joint kicks were illegal.  I've posted the rules that show they are explicitly legal, even if it's for a subset of MMA practitioners (arguably one of the largest numbers of practitioners in that country, but still).

Somehow though you seem to think that my limited experience in UK MMA or MMA organising limits my ability to watch MMA fighters use these techniques (a couple of examples already posted) or my ability to read the rules.

Tez, we've always got on well up until this point and I'd rather not ruin that completely, so let's just agree to disagree.  That much I'm sure we can agree on...


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> Man alive, Tez. I've already acknowledged that you have far more practical experience with MMA than I do and infinitely more UK MMA experience. That's never under dispute.
> 
> You simply seem to be ignoring evidence that goes against your experience. You also seem to be blinded against the UFC (seemingly because of their business practices).
> 
> ...




You may read the rules but you don't take it on board when I tell you they are a guideline rather than hard and fast. In Italy they favour Pride rules, when we fight there we say we don't want the stomps to the head, well you would, wouldn't you, they take them out. That's how it is in the rest of the world. It's all up for negociation. 
http://www.sherdog.com/news/articles/Anarchy-in-the-UK-34824

You are used to TMA, where you have your organisation, you have hard and fast rules, the comps are always run by the same people to the same standards. When promoters in MMA say they are using 'unified' rules, it's just a word, it doesn't actually mean they are set in concrete, they are always open to negociation. Promotions say 'unified' rules because these are the easiest to download from the internet and people generally have the idea of what they are as opposed to Pride rules, some promotions will go to the bother of writing out their own but few bother. BAMMA's adoption of 'athletic commision style rules', their words, are a publicity stunt for television coverage, they've said they will be in over the next 12 months from the middle of last year. when Alex Reid fought on there against Tom Watson the rules were agreed between them.  The rules the UFC use incidently are much the same as the ones Lee Hasdell set out for his shows in 1995, the UFC didn't bring in these rules until 2000 so I guess they are actually 'our' rules.

Now, I've never seen a knee kick in the cage/ring so I can't say whether it's being done properly, I assume the ones you've seen weren't done properly by the individual you saw doing it. That doesn't make it true that if it's not used in the cage it doesn't work. Whether a pro fighter can use them would depend on his training, if he's kick boxing and wrestling/BJJ I'd say he probably doesn't know how to do them. I haven't seen them in a MT fight either usually illegal, nor do we use them in karate comps, perhaps they are used in TKD comps? I would expect a karate based fighter to be able to do them though not in a comp. MMA fighters aren't all the same, some can do head kicks some can't, some can do spinning backfists some can't, just because a couple of fighters can't do knee kicks doesn't mean they don't work, you wouldn't say a spinning elbow doesn't work just because a couple of people can't do them. 

I'm not blinded against the UFC, I just know too much about what they do when they are here (as well as what they do in America though someone who has fought out there a few times now) and I know too many people think the UFC and MMA is the same thing. Ask MMA people how many come up to them asking if they do UFC? the UFC is a business like many others, it is not the MCC. 

I don't think we should fall out, so I agree with you there.


----------



## Ludo (Jan 9, 2012)

There appears to be a confusion here, Tez, that "Unified rules" translates to "UFC rules" and that simply isn't the case. The California State Athletic Commission voted in the regulations that eventually became the unified rules of MMA. State Athletic Commissions regulate combat sports in America and in order to put on a legal show in the US you must abide by whatever state's rules you plan to hold the show in. 

What kind of promotion lists a set of rules and doesn't follow them? They have a name for that, it's called hypocrisy.*

Every state that allows MMA in the US follows the unified rules, and some tweaks to procedure concerning weigh ins and attire vary from state to state. Your bias against the UFC is showing more and more as discussions where MMA is brought up occur. Every time the UFC is mentioned you appear to take it as an attack or a personal challenge to reply with as much tongue-in-cheek content as possible. MMA as a whole is a business, if it wasn't there wouldn't be "professional" MMA fighters. It wouldn't be a career choice if it wasn't a business. But I digress.*

You said you have been around since MMA began. I'm sure you mean MMA as it is today as in post UFC 1. While you may know the UK MMA scene it is very clear you have little interest/knowledge of MMA outside of that. Being unfamiliar with the term "unified rules of mma" which were introduced and adopted across the globe circa the year 2000 is yet another piece to that particular puzzle.*

What you may not know is that MMA has roots that stretch back directly as far as one hundred years ago in Brazil and Japan. It was commonly called "Vale Tudo" in Brazil and featured renowned fighters like Carlson and Helio Gracie, Waldemar Santana, Rei Zulu, Ivan Gomez, Mashaiko Kimura(the maneuver's namesake), among others. These bouts took place in all manners from ads put out in newspapers with open challenges for cash prizes, to in a ring in front of a crowd as exhibitions. Varied styles from catch wrestling to Judo to Jiu Jitsu and Boxing, Muay Thai, and Kickboxing specialists looked to match their art with one another.*


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 9, 2012)

Ludo said:


> There appears to be a confusion here, Tez, that "Unified rules" translates to "UFC rules" and that simply isn't the case. The California State Athletic Commission voted in the regulations that eventually became the unified rules of MMA. State Athletic Commissions regulate combat sports in America and in order to put on a legal show in the US you must abide by whatever state's rules you plan to hold the show in.
> 
> What kind of promotion lists a set of rules and doesn't follow them? They have a name for that, it's called hypocrisy.*
> 
> ...





Yeah yeah, have a bash then move on. Assume the Brit is ignorant and knows nothing. Gee imagine my amazement when finding out that Vale Tudo was the forerunner of MMA, I must tell my mates who actually fought in Vale Tudo fights, they couldn't have known what they were doing, nor could I really if I was there too. I'm surprised you forgot to mention Pankration, still done in Greece,( in 1895 they refused to put it into the Olympics) has been for more years than the UFC has been going. Thank you for your lecture, totally unnecessary of course, but it'll make you feel better. Shame you haven't read my posts but there you go. 

Btw as for knee strikes being legal in the UFC, if they weren't illegal why did they need to say they were *now* legal?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 9, 2012)

Interestingly I was just talking to a sports doctor regarding this. Irrespective of the legality of knee kicks in any form of fighting, kicking to the knee is very very dangerous (his words). The human knee joint is not strong and does not like to bend, the average joe on the street is not expecting to be kicked in the knee and is not standing in some sort of stance to protect the knee. The knee is weak, vulnerable and to kick someone there is very bad unless you really want to drop them and dont care about the consequences legally or morally. The fact that the severity of knee kicks even needs to be discussed is amusing in itself.


----------



## puunui (Jan 9, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> This started from a discussion regarding knee kicks being useful (for an average recreational martial arts practitioner against a larger/stronger opponent) as they usually have a severe effect.  I said they were less useful as they have been proved in the MMA ring.  I've posted examples of fighters using them, which you've argued they weren't applied correctly (in effect this helps my side of the debate about them being useful in SD, when an expert professional elite fighter can't do them corectly).




I don't know if I want to get in on this action, especially since it is kind of off topic. But back in high school, my friend squared off with some guy who came flying in with a low side kick to my friend's knee, which bounced off harmlessly. My friend immediately responded while the guy was standing there with his mouth open because his bruce lee death kick failed, threw an overhand right to his jaw, and knocked the guy out cold with one shot. Hapkido has a low side kick, but we aim it at the mid thigh, and not the knee. Anyway, that is my take on the discussion about the effectiveness of kicks to the knee.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 9, 2012)

puunui said:


> I don't know if I want to get in on this action, especially since it is kind of off topic. But back in high school, my friend squared off with some guy who came flying in with a low side kick to my friend's knee, which bounced off harmlessly. My friend immediately responded while the guy was standing there with his mouth open because his bruce lee death kick failed, threw an overhand right to his jaw, and knocked the guy out cold with one shot. Hapkido has a low side kick, but we aim it at the mid thigh, and not the knee. Anyway, that is my take on the discussion about the effectiveness of kicks to the knee.


Power.
Ask an Untrained Individual to throw a Powerful Side Kick to the anything 

Optionally, Aim just Below or just Above the Knee.


----------



## puunui (Jan 9, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Power.
> Ask an Untrained Individual to throw a Powerful Side Kick to the anything
> 
> Optionally, Aim just Below or just Above the Knee.




I don't know if that other guy was trained or not. He was a immigrant from hong kong I believe, and may have taken some sort of martial arts, but probably not too much. He didn't move like he was skilled, more like he was poorly imitating bruce lee with the cat screams and everything. But then again, everyone was imitating bruce lee back then. But the shock and amazement on his face when his kick failed was priceless. He really thought that side kick to my friend's knee would end it, and when it failed, it was like his preconceived concept of self defense or self offense evaporated in that one instant. The thing about kicks to the knee is that you can't really practice it full force, so it is difficult to get a feel for it and how your opponent will respond when actually struck with some force and weight behind it.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 9, 2012)

puunui said:


> I don't know if that other guy was trained or not. He was a immigrant from hong kong I believe, and may have taken some sort of martial arts, but probably not too much. He didn't move like he was skilled, more like he was poorly imitating bruce lee with the cat screams and everything. But then again, everyone was imitating bruce lee back then. But the shock and amazement on his face when his kick failed was priceless. He really thought that side kick to my friend's knee would end it, and when it failed, it was like his preconceived concept of self defense or self offense evaporated in that one instant. The thing about kicks to the knee is that you can't really practice it full force, so it is difficult to get a feel for it and how your opponent will respond when actually struck with some force and weight behind it.


Yeah - I figure that to be lack of Training. I personally Train as if nothing is going to work (Bare with Me). I dont throw some big Power Punch expecting it to suddenly end everything. I use a Powerful Punch because I feel like it at that moment, and immediately follow up. In a SD Situation, Id rather Hit someone really hard, then hit them again, than hit them really hard, find out I hit something like the Jaw instead of the Temple or Chin, and get smacked in the face for hesitating. Same goes for Leg Kicks.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 9, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Power.
> Ask an Untrained Individual to throw a Powerful Side Kick to the anything
> 
> Optionally, Aim just Below or just Above the Knee.


Exactly right, paticularly if their weight is on the front leg which is the leg you're kicking. All it can do is buckle. I can magine it would bounce off if there was no weight on that leg locking it to the ground,but the poundage a sidekick can generate would just destroy the knee joint if kicked just above or below the knee itself while the person's weight is on it.


----------



## Ludo (Jan 9, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Yeah yeah, have a bash then move on. Assume the Brit is ignorant and knows nothing.



Perhaps it's you who isn't understanding what I'm writing this time around, hmm?



Tez3 said:


> Gee imagine my amazement when finding out that Vale Tudo was the forerunner of MMA, I must tell my mates who actually fought in Vale Tudo fights, they couldn't have known what they were doing, nor could I really if I was there too.



Thats pretty passive aggressive of you.



Tez3 said:


> I'm surprised you forgot to mention Pankration, still done in Greece,( in 1895 they refused to put it into the Olympics) has been for more years than the UFC has been going. Thank you for your lecture, totally unnecessary of course, but it'll make you feel better. Shame you haven't read my posts but there you go.



Thats pretty passive aggressive of you. However I'm skeptical that you are indeed 90+ years old to have been around for the beginnings of Vale Tudo. I didn't bring up pankration because you are obviously not old enough to have been around for that. I also didn't mention the open challenges held across europe and the world for that matter between fighting styles such as various martial arts schools and programs in china, or the ninja/samurai in japan, or those battle robots they had on television about fifteen years ago because they weren't directly relevant to MMA today. Vale Tudo involves the same people, or rather the people directly preceeding the people responsible for modern MMA(the Gracies).

And this isn't a lecture, it's a literal comprehension of what you stated in your post since I'm not keen on making the same mistake twice. Let alone twice in a row.



Tez3 said:


> Btw as for knee strikes being legal in the UFC, if they weren't illegal why did they need to say they were now legal?



"Linear Knee Strikes 

After a discussion prompted by the Silva-Leites bout, the Committee reviewed the issue of linear strikes to the knee joint and agreed that this technique should remain a legal technique. "

From that link you didn't bother to click/read before. The question was never that they were legal or not, the question was whether it should REMAIN legal due to it's potentially dangerous nature. It is the kind of thing that could in an instant cripple the knee joint. In following the same basis for outlawing knees and kicks to the head of a downed opponent would be My guess.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 9, 2012)

A sidekick/roundhouse kick will probably generate between 700 and 1500 pounds of force (even more from an elite fighter). The anterior cruciate ligament in the knee can cop just under 500 pounds of force before knee reconstruction. Info courtesy of sports doctor (late reply, but he only just got back to me). So basically even some lame *** sidekick measuring only 300 pounds of force (which my mate's 10 year old son could probably produce) is still going to do a lot of damage to a knee. An adult coloured belt will most probably generate 500 pounds if they're any good. An adult black belt and its good night knee. Im no doctor, this is just the information being forwarded to me from a medical proffessional.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 9, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> A sidekick/roundhouse kick will probably generate between 700 and 1500 pounds of force (even more from an elite fighter). The anterior cruciate ligament in the knee can cop just under 500 pounds of force before knee reconstruction. Info courtesy of sports doctor (late reply, but he only just got back to me). So basically even some lame *** sidekick measuring only 300 pounds of force (which my mate's 10 year old son could probably produce) is still going to do a lot of damage to a knee. An adult coloured belt will most probably generate 500 pounds if they're any good. An adult black belt and its good night knee. Im no doctor, this is just the information being forwarded to me from a medical proffessional.







0:06 - 0:13
Case in point, if one closely observes where the shots hit, coupled with the fact that the Stance takes these types of strikes into consideration.


----------



## SPX (Jan 9, 2012)

I certainly don't think that anyone argues that a well-placed and executed knee kick could cause serious damage.  But just like all round kicks don't break a rib, and all punches don't break a nose, the key is landing it just right for the desired effect.  You certainly can't count on it.


----------



## Buka (Jan 9, 2012)

We all know that some shots hurt us more than others. Some might have higher PSI numbers, some may be faster, some might appear to be nothing more than a flick or a jab. But, every once in a while, you feel that nagging rip/tear/crunch/ring that you KNOW is going to haunt you for a long time.

As for knees, sure, the right strike to the knee is going to mess a person up. But, that's not the primary cause of knee woes. We all step wrong, land wrong, pivot wrong or slip wrong at some point. It's a reminder of how fragile the knee joint can be.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 9, 2012)

SPX said:


> I certainly don't think that anyone argues that a well-placed and executed knee kick could cause serious damage.  But just like all round kicks don't break a rib, and all punches don't break a nose, the key is landing it just right for the desired effect.  You certainly can't count on it.


True, but a less % of roundkicks break a rib and punches break a nose because you have your arms to protect those areas, which almost comes naturally to most people. The knee is far less protected, plus if you have someones attention and they are looking you in the eye, a kick to the leg can easily go unseen easier than an upper body shot. Oh, and by the way, sorry for veering from topic, perhaps this could have been a thread unto itself


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 9, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> True, but a less % of roundkicks break a rib and punches break a nose because you have your arms to protect those areas, which almost comes naturally to most people. The knee is far less protected, plus if you have someones attention and they are looking you in the eye, a kick to the leg can easily go unseen easier than an upper body shot. Oh, and by the way, sorry for veering from topic, perhaps this could have been a thread unto itself


Yes well, we both know that if a seperate Thread was made, noone would use it


----------



## puunui (Jan 9, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> 0:06 - 0:13



That looks like a leg kick instead of a kick to the knee.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 9, 2012)

puunui said:


> That looks like a leg kick instead of a kick to the knee.


All but the last one, Good Sir.
Take into account the angle of his Leg. The Knee Joint covers a fair area. Take a look on yourself.


----------



## SPX (Jan 9, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> True, but a less % of roundkicks break a rib and punches break a nose because you have your arms to protect those areas, which almost comes naturally to most people. The knee is far less protected, plus if you have someones attention and they are looking you in the eye, a kick to the leg can easily go unseen easier than an upper body shot.



I don't disagree.  Personally, I actually think that knee kicks SHOULD be banned in MMA.  Makes me cringe.


----------



## SPX (Jan 9, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Yes well, we both know that if a seperate Thread was made, noone would use it



It would get like 6 replies at most.

Going off topic in a long-running forum thread is an Internet tradition.  You'd be foolish to try to stop it.


----------



## puunui (Jan 9, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Yeah - I figure that to be lack of Training. I personally Train as if nothing is going to work (Bare with Me). I dont throw some big Power Punch expecting it to suddenly end everything. I use a Powerful Punch because I feel like it at that moment, and immediately follow up. In a SD Situation, Id rather Hit someone really hard, then hit them again, than hit them really hard, find out I hit something like the Jaw instead of the Temple or Chin, and get smacked in the face for hesitating. Same goes for Leg Kicks.



I think that is a good way to think about it, that your ace in the hole may in fact, fail. So many people think they have this secret technique that will trump all others, when in fact it might not. I was exchanging techniques with a kodenkan jujitsu black belt once and his techniques simply didn't work on me. Finally he got frustrated and threw an elbow at my head with a loud scream, and I simply blocked it by raising my arm up. He had that same look of bewilderment and stunned amazement when his death blow failed. It was like a deer in the headlights situation.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 9, 2012)

puunui said:


> I think that is a good way to think about it, that your ace in the hole may in fact, fail. So many people think they have this secret technique that will trump all others, when in fact it might not. I was exchanging techniques with a kodenkan jujitsu black belt once and his techniques simply didn't work on me. Finally he got frustrated and threw an elbow at my head with a loud scream, and I simply blocked it by raising my arm up. He had that same look of bewilderment and stunned amazement when his death blow failed. It was like a deer in the headlights situation.


Yep. Its much like Me, and Spinning Backfists. I can put more Power and Speed (mostly Power) into that than any of My other Strikes. ANY OF THEM. And I can make it come out of absolutely nowere. But if I were to use it, I am not reliant on it working. I still practice coming off it and following straight up, and going from there. Because Id rather assume something isnt going to work, than overcommit.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 9, 2012)

puunui said:


> I think that is a good way to think about it, that your ace in the hole may in fact, fail. So many people think they have this secret technique that will trump all others, when in fact it might not. I was exchanging techniques with a kodenkan jujitsu black belt once and his techniques simply didn't work on me. Finally he got frustrated and threw an elbow at my head with a loud scream, and I simply blocked it by raising my arm up. He had that same look of bewilderment and stunned amazement when his death blow failed. It was like a deer in the headlights situation.


I would hope not many people studying martial arts are silly enough to think they have some 'never fail' move, theres just too many variables. Certain strikes though, obviously have a higher percentage success rate, work in more scenarios, cause more damage and can be done without too much telegraphing of what you are about to do. Its probably important to have a few favourite tricks up your sleeve, but nothing will work absolutely everytime obviously.


----------



## puunui (Jan 9, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Yep. Its much like Me, and Spinning Backfists. I can put more Power and Speed (mostly Power) into that than any of My other Strikes. ANY OF THEM. And I can make it come out of absolutely nowere. But if I were to use it, I am not reliant on it working. I still practice coming off it and following straight up, and going from there. Because Id rather assume something isnt going to work, than overcommit.



There was a time when I was really into spinning backfist. That and jumping reverse punch. Spinning backfist is a move in Taebaek, the third Kukkiwon yudanja poomsae. I used to do fifty reps of spinning backfist backwards and forwards, sort of like consecutive double kicks, everyday on the heavy bag, as my twisting warm up. I got that from a friend of mine who used to do it in the mirror with his knife hand. I preferred doing it with my backfist on the bag. Haven't done in a long time, maybe I will try next class.


----------



## SPX (Jan 9, 2012)

puunui said:


> I think that is a good way to think about it, that your ace in the hole may in fact, fail. So many people think they have this secret technique that will trump all others, when in fact it might not. I was exchanging techniques with a kodenkan jujitsu black belt once and his techniques simply didn't work on me. Finally he got frustrated and threw an elbow at my head with a loud scream, and I simply blocked it by raising my arm up. He had that same look of bewilderment and stunned amazement when his death blow failed. It was like a deer in the headlights situation.



LOL.  Indeed.

If there were super-deadly one-shot techniques that worked with such great reliability then most MMA fights would be over in seconds.  

I'm still waiting for a dim mak master in the UFC.


----------



## SPX (Jan 9, 2012)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I would hope not many people studying martial arts are silly enough to think they have some 'never fail' move, theres just too many variables. Certain strikes though, obviously have a higher percentage success rate, work in more scenarios, cause more damage and can be done without too much telegraphing of what you are about to do. Its probably important to have a few favourite tricks up your sleeve, but nothing will work absolutely everytime obviously.



This is one of the things about karate I've questioned.  Traditionally speaking, one of its core principles is "one hit, one kill."  No doubt a lot of people will be stopped by a flush punch to the face, but a lot will not.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 9, 2012)

SPX said:


> This is one of the things about karate I've questioned.  Traditionally speaking, one of its core principles is "one hit, one kill."  No doubt a lot of people will be stopped by a flush punch to the face, but a lot will not.


Well, I think thats all talk, honestly. They say that, yet they Spar with Combinations and Continuity. And Yeah, a Power Punch to the Ribs is alot of pain for your average guy, let alone the hindered movement, so they may be right up to a point. But then, again, they dont practice it like that. Ive heard that said, but never 'seen' it Trained that way.


----------



## mastercole (Jan 10, 2012)

SPX said:


> This is one of the things about karate I've questioned.  Traditionally speaking, one of its core principles is "one hit, one kill."  No doubt a lot of people will be stopped by a flush punch to the face, but a lot will not.



Maybe it came from the Samurai.  One cut, one kill. Karateka of old trained religiously on the makiwara. I believe they were looking for that one technique, one kill idea, like that Samurai. I think Samurai also practiced with Boken against a type of makiwara.  Also, wasn't their first draw of the sword practiced with a first kill in mind?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 10, 2012)

Ludo said:


> Perhaps it's you who isn't understanding what I'm writing this time around, hmm?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If you are following me around just to attack me again I don't appreciate it. You dropped out of the last thread after attacking me on several posts that were getting increasingly strident, it's not good form to follow me here and try to continue your badgering.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 10, 2012)

Now now, People. Rather than bickering over semantics, may I suggest posting only whats necessary? Dont make this about which of You is attacking who, and which is right or wrong.
I suggest You both separately state Your Points, then go from there. Because it seems to Me that Youre both discussing different things, and faulting each other due to interpreting their comments as being relative to Your Topic, if that makes any sense. Post Your Main Points, without talking about each other, and go from there. You are discussing the Legality of Knee Kicks in MMA. From what I gather, Tez is talking about MMA in the UK, and Ludo is imposing one point which He/She wants addressed. But the point at hand was at first, the EFFECTIVENESS of Knee Kicks. Then it became Knee Kicks in MMA, by some means of sorcery. This shouldnt be a very long conversation. Nor should it be an argument. Raise your points about the topic at hand, be it the Effecitveness of Knee Kicks, or the Legality of Knee Kicks in MMA, and seperate to that, Your opinions of each other. 

Could We? Because this current discussion is going nowhere other than leading to slandering each other, regardless of proving each other wrong, or yourselves right. Which does not help the conversation. No offense.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 10, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Now now, People. Rather than bickering over semantics, may I suggest posting only whats necessary? Dont make this about which of You is attacking who, and which is right or wrong.
> I suggest You both separately state Your Points, then go from there. Because it seems to Me that Youre both discussing different things, and faulting each other due to interpreting their comments as being relative to Your Topic, if that makes any sense. Post Your Main Points, without talking about each other, and go from there. You are discussing the Legality of Knee Kicks in MMA. From what I gather, Tez is talking about MMA in the UK, and Ludo is imposing one point which He/She wants addressed. But the point at hand was at first, the EFFECTIVENESS of Knee Kicks. Then it became Knee Kicks in MMA, by some means of sorcery. This shouldnt be a very long conversation. Nor should it be an argument. Raise your points about the topic at hand, be it the Effecitveness of Knee Kicks, or the Legality of Knee Kicks in MMA, and seperate to that, Your opinions of each other.
> 
> Could We? Because this current discussion is going nowhere other than leading to slandering each other, regardless of proving each other wrong, or yourselves right. Which does not help the conversation. No offense.



No probably not and it's libel btw. 

Andy and I were having a discussion which we both agreed we enjoyed, however I will not have a poster follow me from thread to thread which is against the rules here, just so he can personally attack me on every thread time and time again. He is now on ignore, and reported so any further discussion on this is pointless. 

As I said before we don't do kicks to the knee in MMA here so I have no idea how effective they are in the cage.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 10, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> No probably not and it's libel btw.
> 
> Andy and I were having a discussion which we both agreed we enjoyed, however I will not have a poster follow me from thread to thread which is against the rules here, just so he can personally attack me on every thread time and time again. He is now on ignore, and reported so any further discussion on this is pointless.
> 
> As I said before we don't do kicks to the knee in MMA here so I have no idea how effective they are in the cage.


And now You have presented Your Point clearly and fulfillingly  Past events never needed to seep into the thread.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 10, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> And now You have presented Your Point clearly and fulfillingly  Past events never needed to seep into the thread.



It's against the rules here to trail around carrying on the same argument in different threads. I'm not sure about the 'fulfillingly' bit though! does remind me however that it's lunchtime here so I will leave you to carry on the discussion while I do myself a nice baked potato!


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 10, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> It's against the rules here to trail around carrying on the same argument in different threads. I'm not sure about the 'fulfillingly' bit though! does remind me however that it's lunchtime here so I will leave you to carry on the discussion while I do myself a nice baked potato!


Of course it is - I mean that haggling about it in the Thread doesnt make it more or less true.

Now, I am going to ignore Your Potato, and eat a... Drink Water!


----------



## dancingalone (Jan 10, 2012)

SPX said:


> This is one of the things about karate I've questioned.  Traditionally speaking, one of its core principles is "one hit, one kill."  No doubt a lot of people will be stopped by a flush punch to the face, but a lot will not.



A slight correction.  That is one of the core principles behind SHOTOKAN karate.  Other styles, particularly the Okinawan ones, do not share the same philosophy, although certainly most of them consider destructive striking power to be an important asset.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 10, 2012)

dancingalone said:


> A slight correction. That is one of the core principles behind SHOTOKAN karate. Other styles, particularly the Okinawan ones, do not share the same philosophy, although certainly most of them consider destructive striking power to be an important asset.




It's not something I've come across, in Wado we are taught when kicking for example to wait a second or two before putting leg down in case one needs to kick again. Also we use combinations of strikes to make sure your 'target' is down. _Relying_ on one strike seems a bit iffy, good if you can get them down in one but more is better.


----------



## SPX (Jan 10, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> Well, I think thats all talk, honestly. They say that, yet they Spar with Combinations and Continuity. And Yeah, a Power Punch to the Ribs is alot of pain for your average guy, let alone the hindered movement, so they may be right up to a point. But then, again, they dont practice it like that. Ive heard that said, but never 'seen' it Trained that way.



Yes, that's true, but we do see the concept embodied in karate's stop-point competition format.  Whoever gets hit first loses.



mastercole said:


> Maybe it came from the Samurai.  One cut, one kill. Karateka of old trained religiously on the makiwara. I believe they were looking for that one technique, one kill idea, like that Samurai. I think Samurai also practiced with Boken against a type of makiwara.  Also, wasn't their first draw of the sword practiced with a first kill in mind?



I'm pretty sure you're on point here.  I've heard this explanation before and it's the most sensible one that I've run across.  I'm not sure why it is that karate's originator's felt that the concept should carry over from swords to hand and foot strikes, though.  Seems like someone made a miscalculation there.


----------



## SPX (Jan 10, 2012)

Cyriacus said:


> . . . by some means of sorcery.



I lol'd.


----------



## SPX (Jan 10, 2012)

dancingalone said:


> A slight correction.  That is one of the core principles behind SHOTOKAN karate.  Other styles, particularly the Okinawan ones, do not share the same philosophy, although certainly most of them consider destructive striking power to be an important asset.



Indeed.  Thanks for the correction.  Admittedly, most of what I know about karate is related to Shotokan.  Since most karate tournaments--which welcome all styles--employ a one-strike-to-win format, I assumed that most karate styles have that same core principle.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 10, 2012)

SPX said:


> Indeed. Thanks for the correction. Admittedly, most of what I know about karate is related to Shotokan. Since most karate tournaments--which welcome all styles--employ a one-strike-to-win format, I assumed that most karate styles have that same core principle.



Most karate tournaments that I've been to are points competitions, where points are given for strikes. I've not seen a one strike to win comp, sounds as if it could be intense.


----------



## puunui (Jan 10, 2012)

mastercole said:


> Maybe it came from the Samurai.  One cut, one kill. Karateka of old trained religiously on the makiwara. I believe they were looking for that one technique, one kill idea, like that Samurai. I think Samurai also practiced with Boken against a type of makiwara.  Also, wasn't their first draw of the sword practiced with a first kill in mind?




Judo took to that concept as well, where one clean throw (ippon) wins the match. The karate concept of one strike one kill makes more sense if you have a weapon in your hand, like a samurai would. In fact, weapon training in karate is called kobudo or "old martial way", the inference being that the "new martial way" is empty hands, without weapons.


----------



## miguksaram (Jan 10, 2012)

SPX said:


> I'm still waiting for a dim mak master in the UFC.


Forget...as any good Dim Mak "master" will tell you...."My techniques are too deadly for the ring."


----------



## miguksaram (Jan 10, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> If you are following me around just to attack me again I don't appreciate it.


At the very least bring flowers and chocolates Mr. Stalker.


----------



## miguksaram (Jan 10, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Most karate tournaments that I've been to are points competitions, where points are given for strikes. I've not seen a one strike to win comp, sounds as if it could be intense.


Well going along lines with the "one strike one kill" the points at karate tournaments would only be scored if they would merit that type of "one strike one kill" technique.  I.E. - Clean strong techniques with proper intent.  I believe this still holds true for JKA tournaments.  However, sadly enough, the NASKA and sport martial art tournaments seem to slide away from that.  Now any crap shot to a legal target will score.


----------



## puunui (Jan 10, 2012)

SPX said:


> I'm not sure why it is that karate's originator's felt that the concept should carry over from swords to hand and foot strikes, though.  Seems like someone made a miscalculation there.




Because the karate pioneers in Japan were trying to infuse the Japanese bushido spirit and culture into Okinawan toudejutsu when converting karate into a competition activity. The one strike one kill concept was for tournament competition, where one clean blow would be decisive, just like if the contest were with live swords. But like so many other things in karate and the martial arts, that concept was misconstrued into a "self defense" philosophy by those who consider themselves "traditionalists", hence the secret death blow mentality and the subsequent deer in the headlights reaction when the secret death blow doesn't work.


----------



## SPX (Jan 10, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Most karate tournaments that I've been to are points competitions, where points are given for strikes. I've not seen a one strike to win comp, sounds as if it could be intense.



I would imagine it could be.  Personally, I'm not sure if I'd want victory or defeat to be determined by a single strike.  Lots of pressure.


----------



## SPX (Jan 10, 2012)

miguksaram said:


> Forget...as any good Dim Mak "master" will tell you...."My techniques are too deadly for the ring."



I guess if there's ever a fighter whose opponents all start mysteriously dropping dead then we know what's up. . .


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 10, 2012)

SPX said:


> I guess if there's ever a fighter whose opponents all start mysteriously dropping dead then we know what's up. . .



As long as they made the fight last a bit, a promoter's nightmare is when every bout ends in the first minute of the first round! You end up with a lot of long intervals lol.


----------



## SPX (Jan 10, 2012)

As a fan, I can certainly say that the best fight cards have a good mix of explosive knockouts and exciting decisions.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 10, 2012)

SPX said:


> As a fan, I can certainly say that the best fight cards have a good mix of explosive knockouts and exciting decisions.




Decisions not good, you always get one fighter who disagrees lol. The answer to that of course is ...finish it! which sort of fits in with a thread about when you are too old to spar/fight!  If you can't finish it don't start?


----------



## SPX (Jan 10, 2012)

At least with a finish there is no question as to who the real winner is.  That is, unless it's a TKO where the ref jumps in too early, and that causes all sorts of consternation.

Personally, I don't mind a good decision as long as the fight is exciting.  There have been a few legendary fights that have gone the distance, like Henderson/Shogun just recently.


----------



## RobinTKD (Jan 11, 2012)

I know it's a couple of pages ago now, but i haven't been able to get to a computer for the last few days, but in respect to knee kicks, it depend what part of the knee you strike, and what you strike with. I think you'd be more likely to take the knee out with a roundhouse using the ball of the foot to the side of the knee than a side kick to the front. A sidekick to the front will only bend that knee backwards if the leg is already completely straight, which isn't a natural stance for most people, that's why I'd go for the side/roundhouse.


----------



## Buka (Jan 11, 2012)

I've never found a roundhouse using the ball of the foot a high percentage strike to the knee. To exact a distance.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jan 11, 2012)

Buka said:


> I've never found a roundhouse using the ball of the foot a high percentage strike to the knee. To exact a distance.


Are You hitting directly horizontal? If so, thats why


----------



## ETinCYQX (Jan 12, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> A couple of years ago we brought a fighter across from America to fight on one of our MMA shows, he was nearly 60 then, I believe he has only just given up fighting. He's amazingly fit and only his grey hair gave away that he was older than he looked. Skip is a lovely man too.
> 
> http://realfighting.com/skip_hall.php



Off topic I'm sure but I'm about 90% convinced that Skip makes a cameo in Forrest Griffin's book "Got Fight?" when Forrest talked about reffing in Alabama. Guy around that age named Skip fighting in Alabama, almost has to be him I would think.

Sorry for derailing


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 12, 2012)

ETinCYQX said:


> Off topic I'm sure but I'm about 90% convinced that Skip makes a cameo in Forrest Griffin's book "Got Fight?" when Forrest talked about reffing in Alabama. Guy around that age named Skip fighting in Alabama, almost has to be him I would think.
> 
> Sorry for derailing



Skip does live in Alabama, though the last email I had he was working away somewhere sandy as a security consultant. I think he's a good example of the 'keep going' thing, that you only really lose your edge when you stop doing things or slow down. If you keep at what you are doing (within reason I guess!) you can keep going! I watched the Windsor (by the castle) triathlon the other night and a 75 year old year was doing it, got a good time too. He looked young than his age something else I think keeping going physically does for you so I don't honestly think you ever have to give up sparring!


----------



## MariaK (Jan 28, 2012)

At our dojang we spar 10-20 minutes at the end of each class, I mean really each class, no exceptions. Sparring starts with day one of training - it's always full contact and there is no difference whether you are young or old. And yes, we have 50 and 60 year olds who would spar you on a regular basis and some of them (especially former professional fighters) are much way better than any kids who started in their 20s. I mean I still can't understand how people in their late 50s or early 60s can have such flexibility and do head kicks, flying kicks etc. Our master instructor had an ad for the intra-school competitions "all ages (4-100) are encouraged to compete".


----------



## mastercole (Jan 28, 2012)

MariaK said:


> At our dojang we spar 10-20 minutes at the end of each class, I mean really each class, no exceptions. Sparring starts with day one of training - it's always full contact and there is no difference whether you are young or old. And yes, we have 50 and 60 year olds who would spar you on a regular basis and some of them (especially former professional fighters) are much way better than any kids who started in their 20s. I mean I still can't understand how people in their late 50s or early 60s can have such flexibility and do head kicks, flying kicks etc. Our master instructor had an ad for the intra-school competitions "all ages (4-100) are encouraged to compete".



That is interesting, young 20 something athletes are permitted to strike with full force against 60 year old practitioners, breaking ribs and concussion knockouts. amazing, first I ever heard of that.  How often are the elders injured?


----------



## SPX (Jan 28, 2012)

MariaK said:


> Sparring starts with day one of training. . .



I like that.  It's very frustrating to be involved with a school where you have to train for six months before they actually let you throw a punch at someone.


----------



## SPX (Jan 28, 2012)

mastercole said:


> That is interesting, young 20 something athletes are permitted to strike with full force against 60 year old practitioners, breaking ribs and concussion knockouts. amazing, first I ever heard of that.  How often are the elders injured?



Well she did say that some are former pro fighters who frequently school the young bucks. . .  I hope that when I'm 50 I won't be so fragile as to be scared to spar someone younger.


----------



## MariaK (Jan 29, 2012)

Hmm, what's the difinition of full force? I mean we wear protective vests all the time and people get kicked hard - you do not tap the vest. I tried to kick lightly at the beginning (like when I was a white and yellow belt) but was immediately ordered to kick harder because of two reasons: 1) in competitions you will not get scored for such a kick and 2) in real fighting situation this kick will not cause any damage. Maybe it's not full force, you are right, maybe 50% of force, but you feel the kick. Kicks to the head -we are advised on 30% of full force in order not to knock the person out. Regarding injuries - well, no idea. I have been training for about 10 months - nobody was injured except of younger guys - mostly when they hit each other accidently in the face, like breaking lips or hitting jaws. Regarding 50-60 year olds - my guess is that many of these people are doing tkd for years - not starting at the age of 60. My perception is that they are not injured often - younger people are injured way more often.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Jan 29, 2012)

SPX said:


> Well she did say that some are former pro fighters who frequently school the young bucks. . .  I hope that when I'm 50 I won't be so fragile as to be scared to spar someone younger.


My instructor is 50 and I would not to spar him, he would tear me apart. We also have a 6th dan who is 60 in my class and he goes really hard and gives the younger guys a really good run. I certainly dont regard 50/60 year olds as fragile. The older guys are just better at conserving energy and kick and punch real hard so if they hit you, you stay hit.


----------



## SPX (Jan 29, 2012)

Yeah, I guess I'd draw a line between a 50 or 60 year old who has been sedentary for the last several years and is just starting TKD and a 50 or 60 year old who has stayed active and has been doing TKD for over a decade.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 29, 2012)

LOL at those who think 60 is old! Many of those 60 year olds have been doing martial arts for more than a decade, try four decades and counting.


----------



## MariaK (Feb 5, 2012)

Last week we had an intra-school sparring competition and I won the first place (adult colored belt division). I'm 40 years old and had to spar a 22 year old girl in finals. We were of approximeately the same height/weight and started at the same time. So, I guess if you have not started tkd as a child then it does not matter too much whether you began in your mid 20s or 40s - the difference in sparring would not be that much.


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 6, 2012)

andyjeffries said:


> Master Cole posted this in another thread:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I believe it is a personal preference.  Some people like to fight as often as they can.  I am still competing in sparring competition at age 41.  Last month at the AKA Grands there were 3 people who were in the 50 and over division sparring.  So it is just a matter of choice.


----------

