# Martial Arts Home.



## tkizzle05 (Jan 2, 2014)

Hey all, I'm on a new quest I'm looking for a Martial Arts Home.  I went through plenty styles, and love them all, now I just want to settle on one and grow within that organization.

I'm not looking into sports or competition, but purely self-defense as a whole.

I'm now 27, My ultimate Goal at this point is survival, I want to focus heavily on self-defense against impossible odds.  I want to learn weaponry and being 5'9 and 205lbs, my greatest assets right now are my speed and strength.
I like to fight on the outside, in and out very fast dealing 100% damage with each strike.  I'm not a fan of grappling, but I need that in my arsenal should I ever get put on the ground.

I prefer to kick with speed to close the distance.

I Keep in shape and am looking for something that will push me to the limits of my physical abilities. 

I dont mind learning culture and history, that actually interests me a lot.  

Well, I hope you all could lead me to some great things to consider.

Thank you all and happy new year!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 2, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> I'm not looking into sports or competition, but purely self-defense as a whole.


Without the "sport" and "competition" environment, how can you "test" your self-defense skill?


----------



## Drose427 (Jan 2, 2014)

What most people here will tell you is to figure out whats available in your area. What all have you tried and what havent you tried yet? Share what all you've tried and whats offered and it''l be easier to describe our experiences in a way that could you find your Martial Arts Home


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 2, 2014)

I've done Wing Chun/ TKD/ JKD/ Muay Thai/ BJJ/ Karate. 
I also tried Zentai Martial arts for a week, its basically ninjutsu... loved it.

I was looking for something like Tangsoodo or Enshin Karate maybe Kyoukushin or Ninjutsu, but I am now moving to the Indianapolis area.  

You make a good point about testing my skills, but I believe intense saprring against instructors would be sufficient.


----------



## Drose427 (Jan 2, 2014)

I have no clue what indy has, which is bad cause I lived there for years....... but I can aid a little in Tang Soo Do.. I study Moo Duk Kwan Taekwondo, which is nearly identical to many Moo Duk Kwan Tang Soo Do schools we just call it TKD. Our self defense motto is Il Kyuk, one attack, meaning one technique to stop the attack not matter what you have to do. We spar hard and rarely compete. Our biggest focus is SD and sparring can be intense..But my experience could be different than Moo Duk Kwan schools in your area. So far in 3 years, I havent done weapons yet but I know we teach at least staff. I have done knife defense a few times and various typical self defense situations, (collar grabs, bear hugs from behind, etc.) From what I hear, Ninjitsu is usually pretty rounded in their curriculum, (weapons, striking, grappling, etc.)  Also, be aware that sparring is not a good measure of self-defense skill. Sparring has a rule set, set targets and techs that can be used in a controlled environment. While it can help with things like timing and distance, its rarely meant to simulate a real fight.


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 2, 2014)

THanks for the reply, the training you've been through sounds excellent but I would love to use more weapons.  Yeah ninjutsu was amazing, it hurt but I loved it.  I will continue to google gyms that match my criteria down in the fishers/indianapolis area. 
I prefer private lessons, I feel I could get more strict and personal training that way.


----------



## Kframe (Jan 2, 2014)

Indianapolis will have plenty of opportunities. I to live in Ft.Wayne. I just signed up at Zentai.  Not much available here anymore sadly.. Kendletucky used to have a good Muay thai place, but I have no idea if it is still open. (Robert Blakes).   

I have no doubt you'll find what your looking for down in the capital city. In case your interested, there is a American Top team training facility there. http://www.attindianapolis.com/


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 2, 2014)

YOu will enjoy Zentai if self defense is your only goal.  There used to be a TangSooDo dojo around by the speedway go karts place Master Fabian was the instructor, I wonder if he still teaches?

But yeah, I'm not interested in MMA, just Self-Defense, pure fighting for damaging.


----------



## Instructor (Jan 3, 2014)

Best of luck finding a new martial arts home.


----------



## MJS (Jan 3, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> Hey all, I'm on a new quest I'm looking for a Martial Arts Home.  I went through plenty styles, and love them all, now I just want to settle on one and grow within that organization.
> 
> I'm not looking into sports or competition, but purely self-defense as a whole.
> 
> ...



I would look at what's in your area, check each place out, and see if what they offer, meets what you're looking for.  Something else to keep in mind...how far are you willing to travel to get the training you're looking for?  I ask this, because many times, people come on here, asking the same things you are, but put limitations on how far they drive, the cost, etc.  If there was a school that offered what you're looking for, but it was a 1hr drive each way, would you be willing to drive?  

I currently train Kyokushin and I love it!  It's very different, in many ways, from the Kenpo that I trained for 20yrs.  If you're looking for a hard contact style, I'd certainly suggest that.  For weapons...while many arts deal with weapons, if you're looking for a weapon specific art, I'd say check out the Filipino arts, ie: Arnis, Kali, etc.  For the ground...well, any ground art, ie: BJJ, Judo, Sambo, will be a plus.  Nothing says you've got to devote 10yrs to BJJ, so if you wanted to train for a few months, ie: 6mos, a year, and just drill the basics, that should serve you well against the average ground situation.

I agree with KFW, regarding what he said about testing yourself.  Competing is a very good way to test yourself.  A few years ago, I fought in my first Kyokushin tournament.  Despite a loss, I gained a ton of experience.  Now, at 40yrs old, I'm not huge into competing, compared to others at my dojo, but I do enjoy it.  Of course, I also train with people outside of my dojo, so I do pressure test things outside of the competition arena.

Good luck in your search!


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 3, 2014)

Well I found a couple places, one is around the corner from where I will be staying, Fishers, IN http://www.indytangsoodo.com/
The other is Kyokushin but its about 45 mins away, but its worth the drive if it is what I think it is.

When I think of training, I want this http://www.geocities.jp/miuradojostm/IMG_10683.jpg hard sweat, long hours... most dojos give you an hour and call it a day.  
Do you guys have any opinions?


----------



## lklawson (Jan 3, 2014)

I hate to be the one to say it, but, to be 100% honest, the most effective "Self Defense" against "impossible odds" equals weapons.  Weapons are sometimes known as "force multipliers" and they "even up" against what's known as "disparity of force."  Disparity of force is when you're outnumbered, the other side is much bigger and stronger (and maybe better trained), or when the other side has weapons and you don't.  

The most effective personal defense weapon yet invented by man is the firearm.  This is followed, in no particular order, by other weapons such as knives, clubs, swords, spears, etc.

If your "ultimate goal" is "survival" against "impossible odds" then you need weapons.  I'd suggest something like one of the many Filipino martial arts, Silat, or maybe a CQC that focuses heavily on baton and knife (though they tend to be somewhat "shallow" as far as lifetime martial arts training goes, imo).  Follow that up, or better yet, *precede it*, with a healthy dose of handgun self defense courses (available from the NRA and other sources) and a Concealed Carry License in your State.  "God created man, Sam Colt made them equal."

Unfortunately, this recipe doesn't mate well with some of the other stuff you've suggested that you want.  You might have to decide where your priorities lie as far as your long term goals go.

I should also point out that there are other martial systems which teach weapons that may (or may not) be directly applicable to modern self defense.  There are several in the Western tradition even.  However, I suggested, as "go to" arts, the three which I find to be most common and available.

Good luck.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 3, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> I've done Wing Chun/ TKD/ JKD/ Muay Thai/ BJJ/ Karate.
> I also tried Zentai Martial arts for a week, its basically ninjutsu... loved it.
> 
> * I was looking for something like Tangsoodo or Enshin Karate maybe Kyoukushin or Ninjutsu*, but I am now moving to the Indianapolis area.
> ...



I'm trying to think of two arts more different from each other than Kyokushin Ryu and Ninjutsu, but I'm having a hard time.  Aikido and modern Wushu? Tae Kwon Do and German longsword?

I agree with Kirk that you might need to focus your priorities a bit. Also that defeating "impossible odds" generally involves superior weaponry.  (Actually, the preferred method for defeating impossible odds is to never get in that situation in the first place. This is why 95+% of real self-defense has very little to do with fighting skills.)


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 3, 2014)

THanks for the replies, before I tackle weaponry I want to ensure im physically sufficient to handle myself, should I be caught without a weapon.  I do plan on learning weaponry which is why I loved Ninjitsu to me and in my experience that was one of the most direct and self-protection oriented martial art that I was able to be apart of.  Now, I want to learn how to shoot firearms, but having small children and a wife that frowns upon it makes it difficult.  That will happen sooner than later though.  I plan to get into a base martial art, but at the same time do weapons training, I always cross train.

I have taken Kali before and it was some pretty awesome stuff, that and panatukan.


----------



## MJS (Jan 3, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> Well I found a couple places, one is around the corner from where I will be staying, Fishers, IN http://www.indytangsoodo.com/
> The other is Kyokushin but its about 45 mins away, but its worth the drive if it is what I think it is.
> 
> When I think of training, I want this http://www.geocities.jp/miuradojostm/IMG_10683.jpg hard sweat, long hours... most dojos give you an hour and call it a day.
> Do you guys have any opinions?



Go with the Kyokushin dojo. When I first joined up, my teacher told me to take a few trial classes.  He said his training was very hard, and not for everyone.  I said ok, and came back the following day for class.  I figured how hard could it be?  I felt I was in pretty good shape, and had trained for a long time.  Class began.  Everyone pretty much warmed up before class began, so the warm up during class was maybe 5min., and then we got started with the basics.  Let me tell you...I was sweating my *** off!!  I looked at the clock, and though, "Holy ****!  30min in and I'm ready to drop!!"  We then paired up to stretch again.  Then it was time for the conditioning...push ups, squats, leg raises and sit ups.  100 sit ups, non stop.  Everyone counted off sets of 10 until we reached 100.  Then right to the leg raises....2 sets of 20.  Next was push ups...4 sets of 10, then 2 sets of 20 squats.  

His classes are 1hr. long, but you're working...hard!  In my 20yrs of Kenpo, I never sweated like this.  Sad, I know.  Very little rest time during the class.  Everyone is pushed to perform better.  Some days we'll hit the bags/pads, others we'll spar.  He just changed the advanced class to 1 1/2hrs.  I have the option to train 6 days/week if I choose.  I pay $105/mo. for lessons.  My teacher is from Japan, he's tough, he's old school, and he makes you work hard and everyone earns their rank.  The man doesn't hand out belts like a mcdojo.  

Give it a shot.  You might like what you see.   Is there a link to the Kyokushin dojo?


----------



## MJS (Jan 3, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> THanks for the replies, before I tackle weaponry I want to ensure im physically sufficient to handle myself, should I be caught without a weapon.  I do plan on learning weaponry which is why I loved Ninjitsu to me and in my experience that was one of the most direct and self-protection oriented martial art that I was able to be apart of.  Now, I want to learn how to shoot firearms, but having small children and a wife that frowns upon it makes it difficult.  That will happen sooner than later though.  I plan to get into a base martial art, but at the same time do weapons training, I always cross train.
> 
> I have taken Kali before and it was some pretty awesome stuff, that and panatukan.



It certainly sounds like you're very passionate about the arts and training.  This is a good thing!   I was training long before I met my wife, and fortunately, she was understanding and accepting of my training.  Of course, I do my best to have the equal balance, so as to keep the peace! LOL!  Not that she complains when I train, but if I was there more than I'm home, well.... LOL!

One thing though...take your time.  There are a ton of things out there, but there's only so much time in the day.  I'm all for cross training, but I personally limit it to no more than 2 arts.  IMO, anyone claiming to train in 5, 6, 7 different things, in addition to having high ranking BB's in all those arts....well, it turns into more of a jack of all trades, master of none, in addition to being a bit suspect.


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 3, 2014)

Thank you for responding, http://ikcindy.com/ this is the link to the dojo.

Also, I always cross train and yes its limited to 2 things a day depending on the day.  Martial arts and the weight room or martial arts and bodyweight training, or martial arts and weaponry which I hope to do soon.

I am hoping this school trains the old way, I prefer one on one, but if I cant get that I prefer training with people my age , warriors who want nothing but the best a trainer can offer.


----------



## MJS (Jan 3, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> Thank you for responding, http://ikcindy.com/ this is the link to the dojo.



Looks legit.  I'd go check it out, and take a few trial classes.  



> Also, I always cross train and yes its limited to 2 things a day depending on the day.  Martial arts and the weight room or martial arts and bodyweight training, or martial arts and weaponry which I hope to do soon.



Just to clarify, when I mentioned training 2 things, I was talking about 2 seperate arts, ie: Kenpo and Arnis.  IMO, training too much, can lead to confusion and not being able to grasp things with ease.  That's just my opinion though.  Others opinions will vary. 



> I am hoping this school trains the old way, I prefer one on one, but if I cant get that I prefer training with people my age , warriors who want nothing but the best a trainer can offer.



Most of the Kyokushin dojos that I know of, do maintain that traditional sense about them.  My teacher being from Japan is just an added bonus for me.   As for the 1 on 1 training...unless you were to do private lessons, you'll probably be in a group setting.


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 3, 2014)

Yeah, looks worth it to go visit at least. I'll let you know what I observed. I also found a ninjutsu place down in Indy, still waiting to hear back from them though.

Sent from my RM-860_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk


----------



## MJS (Jan 3, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> Yeah, looks worth it to go visit at least. I'll let you know what I observed. I also found a ninjutsu place down in Indy, still waiting to hear back from them though.
> 
> Sent from my RM-860_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk



Let us know how it is if you do go.  I'd be interested in hearing.   As for the Ninjutsu place...that's not an art that I do, so I can't comment whether the place would be good or bad.  However, there are a few people here with a Ninjutsu background that could probably offer suggestions.


----------



## lklawson (Jan 3, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> THanks for the replies, before I tackle weaponry I want to ensure im physically sufficient to handle myself, should I be caught without a weapon.


Fair enough.  Personally, I'd say to start the other direction, with weapons (not necessarily with guns, but sticks and knives can be really handy), but you gotta do it how you think best.



> I do plan on learning weaponry which is why I loved Ninjitsu to me and in my experience that was one of the most direct and self-protection oriented martial art that I was able to be apart of.


Most of the weapons taught in the majority of the Ninjitsu I've seen are more historic artifacts than modern self defense tools.  That said, there are some that are applicable, if the instructor will teach them.  Fist sticks (yawara), short sticks, sometimes knives (depends on the curriculum).



> Now, I want to learn how to shoot firearms, but having small children and a wife that frowns upon it makes it difficult.  That will happen sooner than later though.


Start slow with reasonable expectations.  Here's my advice on firearms, particularly for someone with children and a wife that has reservations about it.  Take the NRA Home Firearm Safety Course first and insist that your wife take it with you.  The NRA, particularly in this course, is *ALL ABOUT* safety.  Heck, it's policy for NRA Certified individuals to specifically *NOT* refer to it as a "weapon."  Instead, it is a "firearm," (a "handgun," "rifle," "muzzle loader,") or just a "gun."  But never a "weapon."

Here's sort of the order that I would recommend:

NRA Home Firearm Safety Course
NRA FIRST Steps Pistol Orientation
NRA Basic Pistol Shooting Course
NRA Refuse To Be A Victim® Seminars
NRA Basics of Personal Protection Outside The Home Course
 
But take the NRA Home Firearm Safety Course first, above all, and do whatever it takes to have her take it with you.  If your children are 10 or 12 you might consider having them take the same safety course with you and your wife.  If they're younger, consider the Eddie Eagle safety material for children which teaches to "Stop," "Don't Touch," "Leave the Area," and "Tell an Adult."

Full disclosure: I am an NRA member and an NRA Certified Range Safety Officer.



> I plan to get into a base martial art, but at the same time do weapons training, I always cross train.
> 
> I have taken Kali before and it was some pretty awesome stuff, that and panatukan.


Good luck.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 3, 2014)

Thank you, this was very informative, its funny because my wife mentioned taking these courses not too long ago. So I'm hoping once she gets a familiarity with the weapons and the safety, then maybe she would be more assent with the idea. 

That said I still will pursue becoming physically lethal before anything else.

Sent from my RM-860_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk


----------



## lklawson (Jan 3, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> its funny because my wife mentioned taking these courses not too long ago. So I'm hoping once she gets a familiarity with the weapons and the safety, then maybe she would be more assent with the idea.


Jump on that opportunity!  The classes are well worth it all on their own and you are right that a familiarity, particularly one such as provided by these NRA classes, often reduces anxiety about firearms and increases acceptance of them.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 3, 2014)

Thanks for all of the advice everyone! Much appreciated.

Sent from my RM-860_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk


----------



## WaterGal (Jan 3, 2014)

From what you've said, it sounds like you want multiple-hour private lessons from a master as your regular workout.  That sounds awesome, but it's not going to be cheap.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 4, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Without the "sport" and "competition" environment, how can you "test" your self-defense skill?



How is competition or sport testing "self defence"?



tkizzle05 said:


> I've done Wing Chun/ TKD/ JKD/ Muay Thai/ BJJ/ Karate.
> I also tried Zentai Martial arts for a week, its basically ninjutsu... loved it.



Well, it's Bujinkan, so.... yeah.



tkizzle05 said:


> I was looking for something like Tangsoodo or Enshin Karate maybe Kyoukushin or Ninjutsu, but I am now moving to the Indianapolis area.


 
So... karate, karate, karate or ninjutsu? Hmm. 



tkizzle05 said:


> You make a good point about testing my skills, but I believe intense saprring against instructors would be sufficient.



Sufficient for what?



lklawson said:


> I hate to be the one to say it, but, to be 100% honest, the most effective "Self Defense" against "impossible odds" equals weapons.  Weapons are sometimes known as "force multipliers" and they "even up" against what's known as "disparity of force."  Disparity of force is when you're outnumbered, the other side is much bigger and stronger (and maybe better trained), or when the other side has weapons and you don't.
> 
> The most effective personal defense weapon yet invented by man is the firearm.  This is followed, in no particular order, by other weapons such as knives, clubs, swords, spears, etc.
> 
> ...



I'm really not a fan of guns at all, but then again, I live in a very different culture when it comes to violence and firearms... and, that aside, I have to agree completely with Kirk here. The bolded line is the most important... and I'll come back to that.



MJS said:


> It certainly sounds like you're very passionate about the arts and training.  This is a good thing!   I was training long before I met my wife, and fortunately, she was understanding and accepting of my training.  Of course, I do my best to have the equal balance, so as to keep the peace! LOL!  Not that she complains when I train, but if I was there more than I'm home, well.... LOL!
> 
> One thing though...take your time.  There are a ton of things out there, but there's only so much time in the day.  I'm all for cross training, but I personally limit it to no more than 2 arts.  IMO, anyone claiming to train in 5, 6, 7 different things, in addition to having high ranking BB's in all those arts....well, it turns into more of a jack of all trades, master of none, in addition to being a bit suspect.



Er.... "anyone", mate? I mean, my main group covers over half a dozen separate and distinct systems, plus the modern approach (which actually brings the total list up to about 10), then I train in another 4 arts outside of that... with reasonable experience in another 6 or so systems... of course, I don't have high rank in any of those... in fact, I don't have any official rank in anything other than the main one....



lklawson said:


> Fair enough.  Personally, I'd say to start the other direction, with weapons (not necessarily with guns, but sticks and knives can be really handy), but you gotta do it how you think best.



Completely agreed. Over here, I'd recommend improvised weapons (EDO's - Every Day Objects, such as water bottles, magazines etc), stick weapons (short staff, hand-stick), and knife (primarily to help inform knife defence skills). If taught as a congruent whole with the rest of the system, then integrating weaponry early is fine... many traditional arts teach weaponry well and truly before unarmed methods....



lklawson said:


> Most of the weapons taught in the majority of the Ninjitsu I've seen are more historic artifacts than modern self defense tools.  That said, there are some that are applicable, if the instructor will teach them.  Fist sticks (yawara), short sticks, sometimes knives (depends on the curriculum).



To a great degree, yep, the Ninjutsu weaponry syllabus' are about historical weaponry... but, depending on the instructor, there might be a fair bit of less historically accurate (or simply modern usages) methods being seen. Most typically, hanbo (half staff) is a common candidate for modern self defence methods, sometimes a walking stick-style cane can be substituted instead. There can be a tendency to use historical weapons in ways that kinda contravene the usage and context of such weapons as well, though... I leave it to others to see what they think of that... I certainly have my opinion... 



lklawson said:


> Start slow with reasonable expectations.  Here's my advice on firearms, particularly for someone with children and a wife that has reservations about it.  Take the NRA Home Firearm Safety Course first and insist that your wife take it with you.  The NRA, particularly in this course, is *ALL ABOUT* safety.  Heck, it's policy for NRA Certified individuals to specifically *NOT* refer to it as a "weapon."  Instead, it is a "firearm," (a "handgun," "rifle," "muzzle loader,") or just a "gun."  But never a "weapon."
> 
> Here's sort of the order that I would recommend:
> 
> ...



Completely seconded! I wouldn't even think about considering firearms for defensive means without this type of training first and foremost.



lklawson said:


> Full disclosure: I am an NRA member and an NRA Certified Range Safety Officer.



Ha, well, I won't hold that against you... 

To the original post:

Honestly, I'm going to advise you to forget all your criteria. Frankly, they're just going to get in the way, or they are fairly irrelevant. I'll go through it to see if I can clarify what I mean.



tkizzle05 said:


> Hey all, I'm on a new quest I'm looking for a Martial Arts Home. I went through plenty styles, and love them all, now I just want to settle on one and grow within that organization.



Okay. The first (and most important) qualifying question when looking at something new is to look at previous experiences and see what you thought of them... so what have you done (you've already listed a few... anything else?), and what did you like or not like about them?



tkizzle05 said:


> I'm not looking into sports or competition, but purely self-defense as a whole.



Okay, what do you understand of self defence and it's requirements or reality? I've noticed that many, if not most martial art schools that talk about being for "self defence" aren't really... what they are are teaching fighting methods, which might or might not be related to the context of modern self defence... but more commonly not.



tkizzle05 said:


> I'm now 27, My ultimate Goal at this point is survival, I want to focus heavily on self-defense against impossible odds.



Er... right. No. There's a reason they're called "impossible" odds.... 



tkizzle05 said:


> I want to learn weaponry and being 5'9 and 205lbs, my greatest assets right now are my speed and strength.



What makes you think those are your assets...?

What I mean by that is that many arts work to defeat strength and speed... so, if that's what you're coming in with, you'll most likely try to use what you consider your "assets", which would leave you missing the way the art you're learning works...



tkizzle05 said:


> I like to fight on the outside, in and out very fast dealing 100% damage with each strike.



So you want to train in a system of "survival... self defence against impossible odds", but you're going to dictate the way you want it to handle such things due to your own preferences, separate and unrelated to the actual system itself? Additionally, moving "in and out very fast, dealing 100% damage with each strike", uh... nope. The moving in and out fast that you're mentioning here is more a sporting/sparring methodology, and "dealing 100% damage with each strike" is simply not the best approach in all situations. To be frank, combining this with the previous comments, it sounds like you're falling into a common trap... fantasising about the way some imagined "fight" would go... the sense of power you think you'd have... and it's just not realistic.



tkizzle05 said:


> I'm not a fan of grappling, but I need that in my arsenal should I ever get put on the ground.



Small note, ground fighting is on the ground, grappling is just anything involving holding the opponent... which can be on the ground, but is certainly not relegated to only ground work. Most traditional systems have almost all their grappling standing.... but really, all you need are a few solid escapes, and an understanding of positioning.



tkizzle05 said:


> I prefer to kick with speed to close the distance.



Again, I'd advise against anything that has you dictating how you want whichever art you end up in to do things. Nothing will be what you're after if you do that.



tkizzle05 said:


> I Keep in shape and am looking for something that will push me to the limits of my physical abilities.



Crossfit. Or a decathlon. 

That said, BJJ gave me one of the hardest, most intense workouts I've had... those guys are fit!



tkizzle05 said:


> I dont mind learning culture and history, that actually interests me a lot.



Cool. Books.



tkizzle05 said:


> Well, I hope you all could lead me to some great things to consider.
> 
> Thank you all and happy new year!



Forget what you want the system to be. Forget what you think your assets or preferences are. Visit as many schools around you as you can. The instructor and the training group are far more important than what is being taught. Judo under a good instructor is better than Bujinkan under a terrible one... and vice versa.


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 4, 2014)

Thank you for your response, I agree with everything your saying.  I guess I am searching for unrealistic specifics, but my heart is only concerned with survival.  I have to be in shape and physically powerful, for that I need to be training daily.  My entire body has to be prepared for a life or death situation, hands, feet, knees.  I might as well become a marine no?  This Budo place seems legit, the wife and I are going to take the NRA Course together but I will either go back to Kali or see what these other arts have to offer as far as weaponry.  In Zentai, we actually practiced knife fighting and gun defense, so its not old weaponry.

And this is where I am torn because I believe Kyokushin gives me the best conditioning out of them all, I've done BJJ/MMA for 2 years and it was fun, but most of the conditioning came fro MMA not rolling.  Again I am not interested in sports so MMA is out of the question.  I already have a great BJJ home should I go back to it.


----------



## MJS (Jan 4, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Er.... "anyone", mate? I mean, my main group covers over half a dozen separate and distinct systems, plus the modern approach (which actually brings the total list up to about 10), then I train in another 4 arts outside of that... with reasonable experience in another 6 or so systems... of course, I don't have high rank in any of those... in fact, I don't have any official rank in anything other than the main one....



Well, I think you know what I'm talking about.   Sure, in the art you do, there're numerous sub-systems, for lack of better wording on my part, contained within the main art.  The difference though, is that in your case, and most likely in the case of the Jinenkan and Genbukan, where the standards are much higher, yeah, I could justify it.  But when you see someone who's in their late 30's-40's, and is claiming 6, 6th. 7th. or 8th degree BB's, well, sorry, but unless you're training 24-7, I'm going to raise the BS flag on that.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 4, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Forget what you want the system to be. Forget what you think your assets or preferences are. Visit as many schools around you as you can. The instructor and the training group are far more important than what is being taught. Judo under a good instructor is better than Bujinkan under a terrible one... and vice versa.



This is really the key and some great advice.  Every art has strengths and weaknesses, and you have to train it properly to learn how to use it to protect yourself.


----------



## SENC-33 (Jan 4, 2014)

Survival RBSD is what I do. You wont find a place that covers everything you want which was my dilemma so I took matters into my own hands and incorporated my training into a home gym in my heated barn. I recruited some like minded individuals and we have been training for several years now. North Carolina has a huge military presence so finding former and/or current soldiers (mostly special ops guys) wasn't a problem. We have been kicking around the idea of moving our gear to a warehouse district and renting some space. Not forming a school but an open invite to people who want to train this way and are willing to pitch in for monthly rent.


This approach could possibly work for you


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 4, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> How is competition or sport testing "self defence"?


You seem like to use the term "self-defense" a lot. I have collected some opinions from another forum about this term. It may be interest to hear other people's opinion about "self-defense". I have no intention to change your mind. Just to point out that not everybody feel the same way as you do.

- It is difficult for a passive person to beat an aggressive fighter. Self defense mentality is in conflict with martial training. Without proper mindset it becomes bad acting.

- Training for self-defense is the catch phrase for people who don't train realistically, but want to convince themselves they are.

- When someone says they are training for self defense, usually they mean that they are learning to fight, but that they don't fight.

- It seems if this is the goal, training track would be a better use of your time than training MA.

- It's best if we can admit that "self defense" is western marketing gimmick. You can't sell TMA to suburban kids by telling their soccer moms you want to brainwash them to create a hardened fighter.

- In all probability, referring to MA as 'self-defense' was far more tasteful to upper-class Victorian-era sensibilities than 'hard, bruising, sweat-wringing training'. For the most part, these were the ones who were first exposed to Asian MA in the West.

- _Self __defense__ is studied by those who do not have time or a want of committing to studying TMA.
_
- It's a fact: 95% of people who say they study martial arts for "self-defense" are paranoid weirdos.


----------



## SENC-33 (Jan 4, 2014)

I have a good reason why sport fighting and controlled sparring should be limited when training "self defense". Sport fighting and sparring is a mutual agreement between 2 people to go back and forth on one another for a disclosed period of time or until one of you cries uncle or taps out.

A proper self defense mindset in my opinion is me strike you without you returning fire. Of course it doesn't always work out that way but win, lose or draw you aren't going to be fighting for 2 minutes or more in a realistic situation. Most conflicts last under 10 seconds and sparring or sport fighting don't really cover that reality.


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 4, 2014)

Wow, interesting perspectives gentleman...

I love all the feedback and welcome it. 

For me, my body must be conditioned, there won't always be a weapon around. Everything else follows, knives, sticks,  guns... 

Also in most martial arts a kick is a kick a punch is a punch, execution and theory may differ, but in short your hitting with your body parts. 

That said, no one can prepare for the unexpected, but once your in a brawl or life threatening situation, knowing how to best use your body/weapons to escape and subdue the attacker helps tremendously.

The Martial Arts is my vehicle to accomplishing this goal the best I can.



Sent from my RM-860_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 4, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> I'm really not a fan of guns at all, but then again, I live in a very different culture when it comes to violence and firearms....



Thank god there are civilized people in the world.....I can only hope my backwards nation can someday get over its gun obsession and do what you Aussies did in the 90's. 

I've shot guns, many guns...grew up hunting, shot em in the military, and even after.....but I've seen too many people suffer the consequences...taken care of too many young patients....seen way too much both in the military and after. I will NEVER, ever carry or handle a gun again. I live without fear of any physical encounters but will always try to avoid them, and more importantly avoid the situations where they can occur....I train because I like it, because I love bushido, for inner growth....inner peace, and strength. 

(This is also why I contribute thousands of dollars every year to enact much tougher gun laws)........YMMV...


----------



## Kframe (Jan 4, 2014)

Spinedoc I contribute just as much to undue your contributions.. Does that make you and I enemies?


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 4, 2014)

Kframe said:


> Spinedoc I contribute just as much to undue your contributions.. Does that make you and I enemies?



Ha, not at all. Everyone, regardless of their views, should be involved and advocate, donate to things they believe in. I don't have any enemies......


----------



## TKDTony2179 (Jan 4, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> THanks for the replies, before I tackle weaponry I want to ensure im physically sufficient to handle myself, should I be caught without a weapon.  I do plan on learning weaponry which is why I loved Ninjitsu to me and in my experience that was one of the most direct and self-protection oriented martial art that I was able to be apart of.  Now, I want to learn how to shoot firearms, but having small children and a wife that frowns upon it makes it difficult.  That will happen sooner than later though.  I plan to get into a base martial art, but at the same time do weapons training, I always cross train.
> 
> I have taken Kali before and it was some pretty awesome stuff, that and panatukan.



Well, I was going to say try to find a FMA but if you have done that then you really have reached a lot of areas of fighting ranges and styles. Why not take what you have and join a MMA school. Try to combine what you have learn over the yrs and see if it works against a different method of fighting which sport mma will have that. 

Also try to find a training partner that is in the military that may be home sometimes that will practice weapon disarmament with you. Even a local police officer need to practice their skills.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 5, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> Thank you for your response, I agree with everything your saying.


 
Okay, cool.



tkizzle05 said:


> I guess I am searching for unrealistic specifics, but my heart is only concerned with survival.  I have to be in shape and physically powerful, for that I need to be training daily.  My entire body has to be prepared for a life or death situation, hands, feet, knees.


 
Why? Do you live in a war zone? If you need to be prepared for a life and death situation, the answer (as mentioned earlier) is weaponry. But make sure you're not simply acting out of a misplaced fear or paranoia... because, honestly, you don't have to be that in shape or physically powerful, really. It's just not necessary for anything other than competitive systems (where things go for a number of rounds, and the skill set is matched).



tkizzle05 said:


> I might as well become a marine no?  This Budo place seems legit, the wife and I are going to take the NRA Course together but I will either go back to Kali or see what these other arts have to offer as far as weaponry.  In Zentai, we actually practiced knife fighting and gun defense, so its not old weaponry.



Not sure what the "Budo" place is... do you mean the Bujinkan group you found in Indiana? As far as Zentai teaching some modern approaches to weaponry, that's not too uncommon for the Bujinkan, really, so no surprise there. Hatsumi likes playing with guns....



tkizzle05 said:


> And this is where I am torn because I believe Kyokushin gives me the best conditioning out of them all, I've done BJJ/MMA for 2 years and it was fun, but most of the conditioning came fro MMA not rolling.  Again I am not interested in sports so MMA is out of the question.  I already have a great BJJ home should I go back to it.



You'll find the best conditioning is in sports arts, though. So, if you want conditioning, fitness etc, and to have that in your martial art, it's going to be a sports system 99% of the time. The reason is simply that there, it has a purpose... it just doesn't have anywhere near as much applicability in other systems.



MJS said:


> Well, I think you know what I'm talking about.   Sure, in the art you do, there're numerous sub-systems, for lack of better wording on my part, contained within the main art.  The difference though, is that in your case, and most likely in the case of the Jinenkan and Genbukan, where the standards are much higher, yeah, I could justify it.  But when you see someone who's in their late 30's-40's, and is claiming 6, 6th. 7th. or 8th degree BB's, well, sorry, but unless you're training 24-7, I'm going to raise the BS flag on that.



Ha, yeah, I know what you meant... of course, for the record, I was meaning all the stuff I do outside of my Ninjutsu classes... other forms of kenjutsu, Iaido, Kyudo.... again, no rank claimed or awarded (in some, I'm about as rank a beginner as you can get, ha!), but I still get around in terms of doing a fair bit.... 



Kung Fu Wang said:


> You seem like to use the term "self-defense" a lot. I have collected some opinions from another forum about this term. It may be interest to hear other people's opinion about "self-defense". I have no intention to change your mind. Just to point out that not everybody feel the same way as you do.



I used the term because you did, though. I was responding directly to your quote, where you asked how you could test self defence skill without sport or competition... it has nothing to do with my liking the term or not (I actually prefer others, but use self defence for a more consistent and immediately recognizable frame of reference, for ease of communication, really). I was asking you directly how you saw a correlation between them, when there isn't really much of one in the first place.

But let's look at your other opinions.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> - It is difficult for a passive person to beat an aggressive fighter. Self defense mentality is in conflict with martial training. Without proper mindset it becomes bad acting.




If the focus is on "beating" the other person, then you've already moved out of self defence (which is about having an aim of "get home safe", not "beat the other guy") and into the realm of fighting. I would be curious as to exactly what the person quoted here meant by "self defence mentality is in conflict with martial training" (I agree, from my perspective, but would be interested in if we mean the same thing), as the first half implies martial (fighting) training only. The last comment, especially if applied to proper self defence training (such as scenario training) is absolutely correct.




Kung Fu Wang said:


> - Training for self-defense is the catch phrase for people who don't train realistically, but want to convince themselves they are.




Yeah... I'd tell that person to google Richard Dmitri, Jim Wagner, Rory Miller, Geoff Thompson (especially his Animal Day work), et al and see if they really want to talk to us about who is and who is not training realistically.... if they were on MAP, I'd tell them to have a chat with JWT over there.... 

In other words, no.




Kung Fu Wang said:


> - When someone says they are training for self defense, usually they mean that they are learning to fight, but that they don't fight.




Can certainly be true. Doesn't really deal with what self defence is, only with perceptions of what is seen in martial arts classes as being self defence, really. And I'd agree there for the most part.




Kung Fu Wang said:


> - It seems if this is the goal, training track would be a better use of your time than training MA.




Possibly. But, again, that's only going to have limited applicability. The best skills to look to are awareness, and education.




Kung Fu Wang said:


> - It's best if we can admit that "self defense" is western marketing gimmick. You can't sell TMA to suburban kids by telling their soccer moms you want to brainwash them to create a hardened fighter.




Again, it certainly can be. I've railed against martial arts that have no self defence aspect being marketed as such for a long time now.




Kung Fu Wang said:


> - In all probability, referring to MA as 'self-defense' was far more tasteful to upper-class Victorian-era sensibilities than 'hard, bruising, sweat-wringing training'. For the most part, these were the ones who were first exposed to Asian MA in the West.




There's a few vagaries and assumptions in here... it's kinda like a cold-reading truism... not enough to argue with, so it gets accepted as truth. I don't think it's correct, though... mainly as it's only looking at a specific locational and social application of the term, without looking beyond.




Kung Fu Wang said:


> - _Self __defense__ is studied by those who do not have time or a want of committing to studying TMA._




Kind of a yes and no. It can also be studied in conjunction with a TMA (as I do), as a completely separate approach (such as an RBSD system, which is then integrated into the martial art school's approach), or it can be done instead of a TMA as it, well, suits the needs and desires better. And, if it does, in fact, suit the needs better than a TMA, it's not about time or want of committing, it's about recognizing what's the better approach. After all, do you say that someone who wants to eat cereal for breakfast does so as they lack the time or want to commit to becoming a chef?




Kung Fu Wang said:


> - It's a fact: 95% of people who say they study martial arts for "self-defense" are paranoid weirdos.



Ha, not sure that constitutes a "fact" there... nor is accurate, either... 



SENC-33 said:


> I have a good reason why sport fighting and controlled sparring should be limited when training "self defense". Sport fighting and sparring is a mutual agreement between 2 people to go back and forth on one another for a disclosed period of time or until one of you cries uncle or taps out.
> 
> A proper self defense mindset in my opinion is me strike you without you returning fire. Of course it doesn't always work out that way but win, lose or draw you aren't going to be fighting for 2 minutes or more in a realistic situation. Most conflicts last under 10 seconds and sparring or sport fighting don't really cover that reality.



I'd take it a lot further than that, as there are a huge number of differences. One that I went through a while back is the timeline differences between a sporting contest and a self defence situation (assuming the self defence situation became physical). Let's see if I can find it again... 



Chris Parker said:


> A match fight is very simple to understand. It is clear, defined, monitored, and (to a real degree) predictable. By that I mean that a competitor will have a fair degree of understanding of what they might expect to encounter in the ring, what attacks they might face, what weapons they might need to defend against (swords in Kendo, fists and feet in Tae Kwon Do, throws and chokes in Judo, chokes and armbars in BJJ, fists, feet, throws, arm-bars, chokes in MMA as examples), and the rough expected timelines and conditions (3 x 5 minute rounds, what the ground surface will be, when the ref will stop it etc). The other very important thing to realise is that a competition style system will focus on attacking, as that is how you gain points and win. We'll get back to this.
> 
> A self defence environment, on the other hand, has none of the above clarity. It could happen at any time, in any location, you could be facing any number, any weapons, any attacks, and no-one is going to step in and stop it (no ref). There is no preditable condition (are you on grass, or concrete? Is it just shouting, or are there going to be punches? Is it over in a few seconds [the most common are, by the way], or are you going to have to deal with an ongoing encounter?). These are just a few ways in which MMA and self defence are very different.
> 
> ...



Of course, that's just one example of differences, without even getting into tactical, psychological, social, and other aspects... 



tkizzle05 said:


> Wow, interesting perspectives gentleman...
> 
> I love all the feedback and welcome it.



Cool. 



tkizzle05 said:


> For me, my body must be conditioned, there won't always be a weapon around. Everything else follows, knives, sticks,  guns...



Again, why? It's just not realistically needed... it can be good, and I certainly advocate staying healthy and in shape, but the degree you're talking about is just not necessary... and smacks of a degree of fear, honestly. Did you know that the most popular form of self defence training, if we're going to look at it in it's broadest perspective, is body-building? Essentially, it's a way of advertising "I'm big and strong, so please don't attack me..." (of course, there are other reasons, but this is a fairly common one, especially on an unconscious level... the other primary one is a desire to be above, or beyond others... which is a rather unhealthy ego issue). 



tkizzle05 said:


> Also in most martial arts a kick is a kick a punch is a punch, execution and theory may differ, but in short your hitting with your body parts.



None of which is the important part. Nor is it what works, when you get down to it. In fact, it's pretty much irrelevant. 



tkizzle05 said:


> That said, no one can prepare for the unexpected, but once your in a brawl or life threatening situation, knowing how to best use your body/weapons to escape and subdue the attacker helps tremendously.



Sure... but that means understanding tactical application, which doesn't require what you're looking at.



tkizzle05 said:


> The Martial Arts is my vehicle to accomplishing this goal the best I can.



Okay. Hit the gym. Lots. Steroids can help with the look, too (not advocating, simply stating reality). Martial arts to accomplish it? Can happen... but really, only in competition systems.



Spinedoc said:


> Thank god there are civilized people in the world.....I can only hope my backwards nation can someday get over its gun obsession and do what you Aussies did in the 90's.
> 
> I've shot guns, many guns...grew up hunting, shot em in the military, and even after.....but I've seen too many people suffer the consequences...taken care of too many young patients....seen way too much both in the military and after. I will NEVER, ever carry or handle a gun again. I live without fear of any physical encounters but will always try to avoid them, and more importantly avoid the situations where they can occur....I train because I like it, because I love bushido, for inner growth....inner peace, and strength.
> 
> (This is also why I contribute thousands of dollars every year to enact much tougher gun laws)........YMMV...



Yeah, I've shot before as well.... and can honestly say, for an experience, it was fun (on the range). But I still have no love for them... and am again happy to be in a culture where they aren't considered an almost definite aspect of handling violence.


----------



## SENC-33 (Jan 5, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> Thank god there are civilized people in the world.....I can only hope my backwards nation can someday get over its gun obsession and do what you Aussies did in the 90's.
> 
> I've shot guns, many guns...grew up hunting, shot em in the military, and even after.....but I've seen too many people suffer the consequences...taken care of too many young patients....seen way too much both in the military and after. I will NEVER, ever carry or handle a gun again. I live without fear of any physical encounters but will always try to avoid them, and more importantly avoid the situations where they can occur....I train because I like it, because I love bushido, for inner growth....inner peace, and strength.
> 
> (This is also why I contribute thousands of dollars every year to enact much tougher gun laws)........YMMV...



Tougher gun laws = Harder for "law abiding" citizens to protect themselves from criminals. We don't have a gun problem in the United States we have a people don't give a @#$& about innocent life problem. How many people die every day at the hands of a drunk driver? Does the car get the blame? The alcohol? The drunk gets the blame. But let somebody shoot a group of people and the blame goes FIRST to the weapon.


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 5, 2014)

SENC-33 said:


> Tougher gun laws = Harder for "law abiding" citizens to protect themselves from criminals. We don't have a gun problem in the United States we have a people don't give a @#$& about innocent life problem. How many people die every day at the hands of a drunk driver? Does the car get the blame? The alcohol? The drunk gets the blame. But let somebody shoot a group of people and the blame goes FIRST to the weapon.




That's the party line of the NRA I realize, but when one considers that the overwhelming majority of guns used in illegal activities were purchased legally, then that begins to color that perception. 

Also, you are more likely to have family member shoot you, or have an accident, than you are to have some wide eyed psychopath attack you. But of course, that interferes with the great 'merican myth. I get to thankfully, lobby frequently on the Hill for healthcare issues (I was involved in the ACA, specifically, the ACO portion), and when asked about gun control, am happy to share my thoughts. 

But this is completely off topic. I was just agreeing with Chris. 

Mike


----------



## Kframe (Jan 5, 2014)

I don't understand why your are in favor of victim creation laws.  All that stuff your saying about getting killed by a family member is your Party line.  So you counter our party line with yours and expect that to prove your point? Im sorry but I have a god given right to defend my family and ill use what ever tools I can find to do so.  All your gun laws will have no effect on the criminals only law abiding citizens. The criminals will still get there guns, but this time the good guys wont have them. Honestly if you don't like the 2nd amendment, stop trying to circumvent it, and actually do something and Work to Repeal it. Untill that happens, the circle of BULL Crap with our two parties will continue. Your party comes to power, and enacts tough, rights shattering gun laws. Our party down the line comes to power, and either repeals your parties laws(not just the gun laws) or just sits there while the sunset clock ticks down..  Then your party gets back into power and sets forth reenacting all its former laws and handouts.  Then we get elected and start the cycle over. All the while Nothing is getting done anywere, because were to busy countering your parties attacks on our constitutional and god given rights.(and no that term is not up for debate with me either)


I love the smell of victim creation in the morning..


----------



## SENC-33 (Jan 5, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> That's the party line of the NRA I realize, but when one considers that the overwhelming majority of guns used in illegal activities were purchased legally, then that begins to color that perception.
> 
> Also, you are more likely to have family member shoot you, or have an accident, than you are to have some wide eyed psychopath attack you. But of course, that interferes with the great 'merican myth. I get to thankfully, lobby frequently on the Hill for healthcare issues (I was involved in the ACA, specifically, the ACO portion), and when asked about gun control, am happy to share my thoughts.
> 
> ...



True the majority of guns used in crimes are purchased legally. Harsh gun laws wont deter a criminal from obtaining one illegally and never will. If a family member kills another or an accident occurs why should the gun get the blame?


----------



## SENC-33 (Jan 5, 2014)

Kframe said:


> I don't understand why your are in favor of victim creation laws.  All that stuff your saying about getting killed by a family member is your Party line.  So you counter our party line with yours and expect that to prove your point? Im sorry but I have a god given right to defend my family and ill use what ever tools I can find to do so.  All your gun laws will have no effect on the criminals only law abiding citizens. The criminals will still get there guns, but this time the good guys wont have them. Honestly if you don't like the 2nd amendment, stop trying to circumvent it, and actually do something and Work to Repeal it. Untill that happens, the circle of BULL Crap with our two parties will continue. Your party comes to power, and enacts tough, rights shattering gun laws. Our party down the line comes to power, and either repeals your parties laws(not just the gun laws) or just sits there while the sunset clock ticks down..  Then your party gets back into power and sets forth reenacting all its former laws and handouts.  Then we get elected and start the cycle over. All the while Nothing is getting done anywere, because were to busy countering your parties attacks on our constitutional and god given rights.(and no that term is not up for debate with me either)
> 
> 
> I love the smell of victim creation in the morning..



I hope their is never a run on people killing with baseball bats. It would ruin another cherished American tradition......


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 5, 2014)

SENC-33 said:


> True the majority of guns used in crimes are purchased legally. Harsh gun laws wont deter a criminal from obtaining one illegally and never will. If a family member kills another or an accident occurs why should the gun get the blame?




We'll agree to disagree completely on this one. 

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2013/09/gun-control


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 5, 2014)

Again, thank you for your opinion, its welcomed. 

I've actually been in 3 street fights, fun but dangerous... Luckily there were no weapons involved usually in situations like that... Usually the case is the other guy retaliates with gun shots because of shame.
I've actually lost a couple of my guys from gang violence starting from a fight ending in gun fire.  

I was never a thug, but always in the wrong place in the wrong time.
In one particular fight though I wasnt expecting any of it, the dude tied to punk me out because I looked more harmless than anyone else...  I ignored him of course, but dude invaded my personal space... at that time my guy shouted "just whoop his *** Tim"  adrenaline began to pump through my body and I handed my dude my car keys (the guy is shouting at the side of my face the entire time) and as I began to take out my earrings... BOOM a punch, the dude snuck me.  I didn't fall or stagger or anything just wasnt expected... obviously...  SO then I turn towards him and he throws another punch but I grabbed him by the wrist and yanked him towards me and we ended up in a scuffle...  I had him in some kind of "street clinch" and I was just letting him have it, so he tries to escape but I grabbed him by his shirt and threw him towards the side of the car, I mercilessly gave him 2 haymakers (left,right) before he ducked and scrambled to this girls front lawn, I then tackled dude... and was in a street mount???  I was done at this point... tired... no cardio/stamina...  The dude reached out and scrached the side of my face then I threw a right punch that had to hurt, I threw another one and missed... because I was so tired.  His dude tried to jump in but man it was like 8 of us so they let him have it...

Now, thats just one example...  but I had 2 other fights the other in a college dormitory a bully type guy again... picked on me because I am the happy go lucky always smiling nice guy that takes a lot of crap. Long story short, he was making fun of me I tried to leave the room, he started shoving me then I snapped...  I was in fight mode and then all of the sudden he didn't want to fight, but its waaaay too late at this point.  He was 5'11 225 lbs mind you we were all college football players but at that time I was 5'9 185lbs but my strength was greater than his...  anyways...  I remember him pushing me back as I was stalking him, then he wrapped me up a bear hug type, but my arms were to my side... he then proceeded to slam me, but somehow IDK the dudes in the dorm didn't know how I escaped it and landed on him...  well at this point, im in street mount again... then the ground and pound began...  I was not stopping so his dude came and pushed me off... the bad part about it was after the fight he came back and hit me with a massive haymaker that floored me, my back was turned and i was in mid conversation with my guy Dante and all I remember is a quick flash and everything went in slow motion... I remember falling into Dante's stack of nike shoe boxes and then falling to the floor...  face flat...  but I got up instantly but I was dazed and couldn't remember what just happened...  I was pissed because he ran and locked himself in his room after he did that, but I was even more pissed off at my "boys" for not stepping in...  They claim they were all shocked and didnt expect it wither, but I was just angry at the time...

Now from those 2 experiences the only reason I had advantages was because of my athleticism and strength even though it wasn't planned, my body triggered its defense/survival mode...

I was good until I got knocked down which again no one can prepare you for...

So for me, I need to stay in physical shape, what if I wasn't strong physically in those situations... then what????
What if I wasn't athletic(God-Given)

I'm saying, I know what works for my body, been in it for 27yrs now and the better shape I am in the healthier I am in overall...
I will do weapons training, but again... there were no weapons available to me in those 2 situations so I had only to rely on my physical attributes...


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 5, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> Again, thank you for your opinion, its welcomed.
> 
> I've actually been in 3 street fights, fun but dangerous... Luckily there were no weapons involved usually in situations like that... Usually the case is the other guy retaliates with gun shots because of shame.
> I've actually lost a couple of my guys from gang violence starting from a fight ending in gun fire.
> ...



No, you had an endorphin surge. The fight or flight triggering you mentioned is very real, but unless you have trained, it has little to do with your athleticism, and much less to do with your strength.



> I was good until I got knocked down which again no one can prepare you for...



Not true at all. Some of use train specifically to throw people down, and how to get up from being down....others train exactly what to do when they are on the ground.....



> So for me, I need to stay in physical shape, what if I wasn't strong physically in those situations... then what????
> What if I wasn't athletic(God-Given)
> 
> I'm saying, I know what works for my body, been in it for 27yrs now and the better shape I am in the healthier I am in overall...
> I will do weapons training, but again... there were no weapons available to me in those 2 situations so I had only to rely on my physical attributes...



You'd be surprised at how much self defense has nothing to do with your strength or fitness.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 5, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> I used the term because you did, though. I was responding directly to your quote, where you asked how you could test self defence skill without sport or competition...


I used that term "self-defense" because OP did. I would never use that term myself.



tkizzle05 said:


> I'm not looking into sports or competition, but purely self-defense as a whole.





Kung Fu Wang said:


> Without the "sport" and "competition" environment, how can you "test" your self-defense skill?


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 5, 2014)

SENC-33 said:


> Tougher gun laws = Harder for "law abiding" citizens to protect themselves from criminals.



Not to pull this off topic, but... no. That is not supported by any case study or reality at all. In fact, quite the opposite... less tough gun laws make it easier for criminals to get guns, making it more likely that they would be used.



SENC-33 said:


> We don't have a gun problem in the United States we have a people don't give a @#$& about innocent life problem.



You have a gun culture problem. That then exacerbates the other issues. But yes, you have a gun problem... but it sometimes seems that only the US can't see that. Or, at least, certain factions in the US.



SENC-33 said:


> How many people die every day at the hands of a drunk driver? Does the car get the blame? The alcohol? The drunk gets the blame. But let somebody shoot a group of people and the blame goes FIRST to the weapon.



Which is a completely different situation (a car is not designed to kill, a gun is, so the simple purpose of the item changes things immediately)... but, of course, there are very strict rules in place about drink driving, as well as safety measures that are legally required for cars, and so on... in other words, irrelevant, and, well... no.



tkizzle05 said:


> Again, thank you for your opinion, its welcomed.



It seems you're responding to my comments, but there's no quote, so just in case, I'll respond to this as well. 



tkizzle05 said:


> I've actually been in 3 street fights, fun but dangerous... Luckily there were no weapons involved usually in situations like that... Usually the case is the other guy retaliates with gun shots because of shame.
> I've actually lost a couple of my guys from gang violence starting from a fight ending in gun fire.



"Fun"? Hmm. And the pattern starting to form isn't really a good one here....



tkizzle05 said:


> I was never a thug, but always in the wrong place in the wrong time.



Then you need to work on where you're going and your awareness. That's not just being aware of what's around you, it includes being aware of what's ahead of you, and whether or not you want to follow the path you're on...



tkizzle05 said:


> In one particular fight though I wasnt expecting any of it, the dude tied to punk me out because I looked more harmless than anyone else...  I ignored him of course, but dude invaded my personal space... at that time my guy shouted "just whoop his *** Tim"  adrenaline began to pump through my body and I handed my dude my car keys (the guy is shouting at the side of my face the entire time) and as I began to take out my earrings... BOOM a punch, the dude snuck me.  I didn't fall or stagger or anything just wasnt expected... obviously...  SO then I turn towards him and he throws another punch but I grabbed him by the wrist and yanked him towards me and we ended up in a scuffle...  I had him in some kind of "street clinch" and I was just letting him have it, so he tries to escape but I grabbed him by his shirt and threw him towards the side of the car, I mercilessly gave him 2 haymakers (left,right) before he ducked and scrambled to this girls front lawn, I then tackled dude... and was in a street mount???  I was done at this point... tired... no cardio/stamina...  The dude reached out and scrached the side of my face then I threw a right punch that had to hurt, I threw another one and missed... because I was so tired.  His dude tried to jump in but man it was like 8 of us so they let him have it...



None that impresses me. In fact, quite the opposite. Let's recap:

You were being challenged, and succumbed to pressure to fight, were preparing to fight, were getting ready to launch an attack, and then complain that the other guy got in first? You overwhelm the other guy, but don't disengage when he tries to get away, instead prolonging the fight, and when his friend tries to step in your eight guys "let him have it", and this reads as if you feel it was justified? But you're not a thug, right...

This is nothing but fail, and nothing you've been asking about (being physically strong etc) are really any advantage here.



tkizzle05 said:


> Now, thats just one example...  but I had 2 other fights the other in a college dormitory a bully type guy again... picked on me because I am the happy go lucky always smiling nice guy that takes a lot of crap. Long story short, he was making fun of me I tried to leave the room, he started shoving me then I snapped...  I was in fight mode and then all of the sudden he didn't want to fight, but its waaaay too late at this point.  He was 5'11 225 lbs mind you we were all college football players but at that time I was 5'9 185lbs but my strength was greater than his...  anyways...  I remember him pushing me back as I was stalking him, then he wrapped me up a bear hug type, but my arms were to my side... he then proceeded to slam me, but somehow IDK the dudes in the dorm didn't know how I escaped it and landed on him...  well at this point, im in street mount again... then the ground and pound began...  I was not stopping so his dude came and pushed me off... the bad part about it was after the fight he came back and hit me with a massive haymaker that floored me, my back was turned and i was in mid conversation with my guy Dante and all I remember is a quick flash and everything went in slow motion... I remember falling into Dante's stack of nike shoe boxes and then falling to the floor...  face flat...  but I got up instantly but I was dazed and couldn't remember what just happened...  I was pissed because he ran and locked himself in his room after he did that, but I was even more pissed off at my "boys" for not stepping in...  They claim they were all shocked and didnt expect it wither, but I was just angry at the time...



Yeah... this is just kids and ego. Frankly, you come to me with these stories, and I probably wouldn't train you. Unless you showed a lot more maturity and growth in the way you described things than you do here.

And, again, nothing in here would be noticeably helped with your requests.



tkizzle05 said:


> Now from those 2 experiences the only reason I had advantages was because of my athleticism and strength even though it wasn't planned, my body triggered its defense/survival mode...



Those weren't what got you through.



tkizzle05 said:


> I was good until I got knocked down which again no one can prepare you for...



Wrong.



tkizzle05 said:


> So for me, I need to stay in physical shape, what if I wasn't strong physically in those situations... then what????
> What if I wasn't athletic(God-Given)



There are a huge number of variables. What if you weren't so eager to fight? What if you weren't such a hothead? What if they had a weapon? What if you didn't have numbers on your side? What if you actually understood what social violence was, and what the monkey dance was all about?

In other words, what you think was the most important was actually a minor aspect.



tkizzle05 said:


> I'm saying, I know what works for my body, been in it for 27yrs now and the better shape I am in the healthier I am in overall...
> I will do weapons training, but again... there were no weapons available to me in those 2 situations so I had only to rely on my physical attributes...



No, you don't know what works for your body. You've made some assumptions that aren't actually backed up by your stories, and you aren't aware of what's really important.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> I used that term "self-defense" because OP did. I would never use that term myself.



I know where you took the term from, but you specifically made a statement (question) implying a connection between sports and competition, and self defence. I counter that there really isn't a connection (refuting your claim), to get caught up in whether or not you'd use the term is irrelevant, you did, and have not answered the question I posed to you.


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 5, 2014)

Interesting... Dont assume much my friend.  

This happened and from what I wrote there was no eagerness on my part whatsoever.  

I was at a friends house 1 scenario, I was at school 2nd scenario...  Ignorant people just decided to show up.
No fault on anyones par there.  

Also...  with strength comes everything... Define strength.

This was also prior to my MA journey, but being on both sides of the road I have an idea of what is what, at least from those 2 experiences.

I want to be as strong as I can be in whatever martial arts I choose to participate in.


THank you all for the advice and for the teachings much appreciated.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 5, 2014)

To be blunt, I don't have to assume anything. Nothing you wrote was new, unique, or anything that hasn't been seen many times before, by myself, and others. In order, choose better friends, and learn more about social violence (how to recognize, as well as avoid it).

The only definition of strength I've been going on has been yours:



tkizzle05 said:


> ...but my heart is only concerned with survival. I have to be *in shape and physically powerful*, for that I need to be training daily. My entire body has to be prepared for a life or death situation, hands, feet, knees.



Frankly, you don't have much of an idea of what's what, that much is obvious. That's fine, in fact, it's very much the norm. But I might recommend that, when you have a number of people telling you you're focusing on the wrong things, you might listen to them... they do know what's what.

To take it back to your OP, there is really only one answer.

Visit each school you can, see which one you like the most. Don't be that concerned about what you want it to be... see if you can get something from the teacher, and like the group. If you don't, then it doesn't matter how much the system matches what you think it should be (for you).


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 6, 2014)

SENC-33 said:


> How many people die every day at the hands of a drunk driver? Does the car get the blame? The alcohol? The drunk gets the blame. But let somebody shoot a group of people and the blame goes FIRST to the weapon.



Those are two entirely different situations, the intent is different. The drunk driver kills someone out of stupidity, recklessness and poor decision making, a loser that shoots up a group of people does it on purpose and there is plenty of blame to go around and most of it lies with the shooter. A drunk can't kill anyone with a car if he does not have easy access to one and you can't shoot up a group of people if you don't have a gun. More people die from shootings and drunk drivers than just drunk drivers but nobody complains when they make it harder to drive drunk.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 6, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> How is competition or sport testing "self defence"?





Chris Parker said:


> have not answered the question I posed to you.



First you have to know what "you want to test". You then design competition rules for that purpose.

For example,

If you want to test 

- head lock, whoever can get his opponent into a head lock,
- open hand against knife, whoever can use his plastic knife to cut his opponent's body, or the open hand guy can dis-arm his opponent's knife,  
- 1 person fight against 3 opponents, whether that 1 person can knock/take the other 3 guys down, or the other way around,
- ...

that round is over, the new round will start.

For different day, you may want to "test" different skill. You may just want to test a single skill (such as head lock), you may want to test a set of skills (such as open hand against knife), the competition rules will be changed.

When I trained longfist, my longfist brothers set up a "dodge rocks throwing" competition. 

- We drew a circle.
- 1 person stood inside the circle.
- Others threw tennis balls at him.
- If he could last for 30 seconds without being hit by those tennis balls, he won, otherwise he lose.

The nice thing about these kind of competition, you can keep a "record" and watch whether your record is getting better or getting worse. You then re-adjust your personal training accordingly.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 6, 2014)

Thanks for this.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> First you have to know what "you want to test". You then design competition rules for that purpose.



We want to test self defence skills. That's the premise of the comment you made.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> For example,
> 
> If you want to test
> 
> ...



Well, that sounds more like games than sports or competition training, but I can see how it can be used in a very limited fashion to test a small fighting skill set. Not seeing much self defence, though, with both sides having the same aim or giving the "bad guys" the option of "winning".



Kung Fu Wang said:


> For different day, you may want to "test" different skill. You may just want to test a single skill (such as head lock), you may want to test a set of skills (such as open hand against knife), the competition rules will be changed.



Cool. I'm not seeing anything that's testing self defence, nor that's sports or competition training though.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> When I trained longfist, my longfist brothers set up a "dodge rocks throwing" competition.
> 
> - We drew a circle.
> - 1 person stood inside the circle.
> ...



Again, a game, not much more than that. Neither self defence testing nor sports or competition.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> The nice thing about these kind of competition, you can keep a "record" and watch whether your record is getting better or getting worse. You then re-adjust your personal training accordingly.



But doesn't address the actual statement.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jan 6, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Without the "sport" and "competition" environment, how can you "test" your self-defense skill?



You cannot test self-defense skills in a sport/competition environment.  The training methodologies are diametrically opposite.  Rather, self-defense training needs to entail realistic scenarios that are likely to happen in a real-world altercation.  This never happens in a sport/competition environment because it is an artificially created environment.


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 6, 2014)

Am I not to take from my martial arts training what works for me? That is the goal... It has to be suitable for my needs.

What works for him may not work for me and vice versa...

I prefer to stay in shape... Its healthier and more pleasing to me.

This too translates over to unarmed combat, should the need arise... No ones talking bodybuilding, I'm talking over conditioning.

Throwing punches, throwing kicks, getting out of a choke hold, running away.... These all require strength and conditioning.

Every human needs this on some level, I'm wanting this included in the martial arts that I choose... For me.

If I get in a brawl, these will play a factor, I don't want to have to pull out a gun and shoot someone...

I could be at a baseball game with my son and an angry parent attacks me... If I'm out of shape, good luck Tim... But if I have been doing the proper training and conditioning, it should be easier... In theory.

That concept should be too easy to grasp, I'm simply seeking a martial art that offers training at a high level. 

Bruce Lee had the same mindset which is why he said you must train every part of your body...

Soldiers train
Spartans train
Samurai train

I care about my body... I'm not getting a new one, I will grow old and die in this one... Go look in the mirror... You earned that.

I choose to stay in prime shape for as long as God allows, again in seeking a martial arts home that is serious about training and survival... 

Thank you all.

Sent from my RM-860_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 6, 2014)

Sent from my RM-860_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 7, 2014)

Kong Soo Do said:


> You cannot test self-defense skills in a sport/competition environment.  The training methodologies are diametrically opposite.  Rather, self-defense training needs to entail realistic scenarios that are likely to happen in a real-world altercation.  This never happens in a sport/competition environment because it is an artificially created environment.



Pretty much exactly what I was getting at....



tkizzle05 said:


> Am I not to take from my martial arts training what works for me? That is the goal... It has to be suitable for my needs.
> 
> What works for him may not work for me and vice versa...



Sure... but the things you've been focusing on (what you think works for you, which isn't actually what does [it's more of a post-hoc ergo propter hoc thing...]) aren't the same thing as looking for what works for you in a martial art. You've gone in with assumptions about what your attributes actually are, mainly informed by youth, bluntly, and are looking for something that fits what you think you're good at. If you already know what you're good at, and what works for you... you don't need a school. All they're going to tell you is that there's a different reality for you to understand and explore.



tkizzle05 said:


> I prefer to stay in shape... Its healthier and more pleasing to me.



Cool, no problem with this at all. Agreed completely on this level.



tkizzle05 said:


> This too translates over to unarmed combat, should the need arise... No ones talking bodybuilding, I'm talking over conditioning.



Uh... less agreement here. It's far more important for competitive systems, match fighting etc. Which is really nothing at all to do with your stated interest in self defence as an aim.



tkizzle05 said:


> Throwing punches, throwing kicks, getting out of a choke hold, running away.... These all require strength and conditioning.



Not so much, no. Proper technique and training, yes. 



tkizzle05 said:


> Every human needs this on some level, I'm wanting this included in the martial arts that I choose... For me.



If you're after a system that focuses on conditioning (and strength, to a degree), look at competition styles... BJJ, MMA, Kyokushinkai, Judo... that's where you'll find it. Not in self defence systems.



tkizzle05 said:


> If I get in a brawl, these will play a factor, I don't want to have to pull out a gun and shoot someone...



Again, not so much as you're thinking. 



tkizzle05 said:


> I could be at a baseball game with my son and an angry parent attacks me... If I'm out of shape, good luck Tim... But if I have been doing the proper training and conditioning, it should be easier... In theory.



Nope.



tkizzle05 said:


> That concept should be too easy to grasp, I'm simply seeking a martial art that offers training at a high level.



Which is something completely different, and will mean something completely different to different arts. 



tkizzle05 said:


> Bruce Lee had the same mindset which is why he said you must train every part of your body...



And....? That isn't exactly what he was getting at, you realize... 



tkizzle05 said:


> Soldiers train
> Spartans train
> Samurai train



None of which are you... hell, there's no such thing as Spartans or samurai anymore.... and you've also missed entirely the point of the soldiers training the way they do.



tkizzle05 said:


> I care about my body... I'm not getting a new one, I will grow old and die in this one... Go look in the mirror... You earned that.
> 
> I choose to stay in prime shape for as long as God allows, again in seeking a martial arts home that is serious about training and survival...
> 
> Thank you all.



Choose what you want. If you want self defence, survival orientated training, it's not going to focus that much on conditioning the way you're talking about it. If you want something for conditioning, strength etc, then you need to look to sport systems. It's really that simple... and it's why you've been told from the beginning that your ideas are out of whack with reality, and contradictory to each other.

And, again, it looks like you were answering me... but it's hard to tell when you don't use the quote function. All you need to do is click on the "Reply With Quote" button next to the "Reply" one... it'll reduce confusion.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jan 7, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Pretty much exactly what I was getting at....



I just did it better with a much shorter post. :rofl:


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 7, 2014)

Ha, to be fair, I only used 8 words.... for that part, at least...


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 7, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Sure... but the things you've been focusing on (what you think works for you, which isn't actually what does [it's more of a post-hoc ergo propter hoc thing...]) aren't the same thing as looking for what works for you in a martial art. You've gone in with assumptions about what your attributes actually are, mainly informed by youth, bluntly, and are looking for something that fits what you think you're good at. If you already know what you're good at, and what works for you... you don't need a school. All they're going to tell you is that there's a different reality for you to understand and explore.
> 
> Uh... less agreement here. It's far more important for competitive systems, match fighting etc. Which is really nothing at all to do with your stated interest in self defence as an aim.
> 
> ...



Agreed 100% with this. To the OP, many martial arts are built around NOT using strength. Using technique and energy (not strength) to take on much bigger opponents. Which is why a small woman can take down a much bigger man with the right training and context. 

In the MMA world, in BJJ, strength and conditioning play a huge role. In order to defend yourself? Not at all in my opinion.

You aren't a samurai. You aren't a soldier from what you've told us. That conditioning is not for one on one fighting in a street encounter, but rather for sustained combat efforts over days against other trained soldiers. I was stationed with 2nd Marine Recon during the Gulf War (the first one), and that conditioning was essential when I was caring a medical kit plus my combat gear in 100+ degree heat marching for days. It was essential for samurai who could be in a battle that could last weeks with daily fighting. 

Neither of those has anything to do with defending yourself on the street. If you want to just stay fit to stay fit, well, good for you. Staying strong and fit is a good thing from a health perspective, but just remember, I don't care how fast or strong you are, or think you are......there is always, ALWAYS someone faster, bigger, and stronger than you (unless you're a freak and are 6'7", 295, and can run a 4.35 40-like the college kid I did a sports physical on a while back)

You need to listen to Chris. He's right on this. For example, I train in Aikido. Aikido, like many other arts, has nothing to do with your size, speed, or strength. It has everything to do with technique, blending, and manipulating energy. In fact, trying to muscle your way through won't work. It's counterintuitive, but the harder you try to fight and use your muscles, the less effective your technique becomes, the easier it is to resist it, and to counter it. If you relax, let go of using strength, and just focus on applying the technique properly, bam.....it works. 

Just some of my thoughts. 

Mike


----------



## KydeX (Jan 7, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> I choose to stay in prime shape for as long as God allows, again in seeking a martial arts home that is serious about training and survival...



You want to stay in shape and you want to learn self defense. I suggest you find whichever martial art or RBSD system you believe will give you the self defense system you are looking for. Then I suggest you go to the gym for staying in shape. This approach will give you the best chance of achieving both, in my opinion.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 7, 2014)

KydeX said:


> You want to stay in shape and you want to learn self defense. I suggest you find whichever martial art or RBSD system you believe will give you the self defense system you are looking for. Then I suggest you go to the gym for staying in shape. This approach will give you the best chance of achieving both, in my opinion.



and eventually you come to realize that it's a full-time job trying to maintain it all.  gradually you start to lose interest in it.  It's not worth it, trying to maintain it forever.  You just get burned out.

your training should serve you in life.  You should not become a slave to your training.  If all you do with your time is train, then you have no life.


----------



## Instructor (Jan 7, 2014)

Flying Crane said:


> and eventually you come to realize that it's a full-time job trying to maintain it all. gradually you start to lose interest in it. It's not worth it, trying to maintain it forever. You just get burned out.
> 
> your training should serve you in life. You should not become a slave to your training. If all you do with your time is train, then you have no life.



This...

Learning a martial art is a very long term pursuit, perhaps even lifetime pursuit. After 23 years I am still learning and I am still smiling while I do it. Pick something you love to do and something you enjoy doing and you'll be far more likely to stay with it.


----------



## lklawson (Jan 7, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - In all probability, referring to MA as 'self-defense' was far more tasteful to upper-class Victorian-era sensibilities than 'hard, bruising, sweat-wringing training'. For the most part, these were the ones who were first exposed to Asian MA in the West.


Ummm... what?

Could you give a little more detail about what you're saying here?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jan 7, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> the overwhelming majority of guns used in illegal activities were purchased legally


And you support that statement with???



> Also, you are more likely to have family member shoot you, or have an  accident, than you are to have some wide eyed psychopath attack you.


Sorry, but this is untrue and based upon a "study" which doesn't actually count as one.  It's more "cherry picking" and comes from a woefully small and geographically limited sample set which is decades out of date at this point.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 7, 2014)

lklawson said:


> Ummm... what?
> 
> Could you give a little more detail about what you're saying here?
> 
> ...


That was one of many opinions that I have collected from another forum about "self-defense". It was not my opinion. 

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?66958-Train-for-self-defense&highlight=defense

My opinion is as simple as "Whether you want to call it fighting, self-defense, or MA, it's just as simple as "fist meets face".


----------



## lklawson (Jan 7, 2014)

SENC-33 said:


> True the majority of guns used in crimes are purchased legally.


Just not by the person using them in said crime.


----------



## lklawson (Jan 7, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> Now from those 2 experiences the only reason I  had advantages was because of my athleticism and strength even though it  wasn't planned, my body triggered its defense/survival  mode...


Athleticism can't always replace skill.  In these  examples, in fact, I'd say that even a little skill would have trumped  your athleticism.  Haymakers?  A "street clinch?"  Bear-hugs?  Gah!  Your time in BJJ and Kali should have taught you how to get by those with very little athleticism.

From your discriptions, skill would definitely have trumped.  Fortunately for you, your opponents had absolutely no skills.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jan 7, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> That is not supported by any case study or reality at all. In fact, quite the opposite...


No.  I'm not sure why you think that there are no studies because that's not true at all.  I can point to no less than SEVEN separate studies which, do, in fact, show there are vastly more "defensive gun uses."  Perhaps it's just that no one has ever presented them to you.

No. of Defensive 
Gun Uses per Year         Source

2.1 million               Point Blank: Guns & Violence in America, Gary
Kleck

989,883                   "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A 
                          Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and
                          others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 
                          March 2000. 
http://www.springerlink.com/content/rngn3274255v6j67/

700,000                   Mauser study

650,000                   Hart study

498,000                   1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for 
                          Disease Control and Prevention

108,000                   1993 National Crime Victim Survey

83,000                    Rand, Michael J. (April 1994). "Guns and Crime: 
                          Handgun Victimization, Firearm Self Defense, and 
                          Firearm Theft". U.S. Department of Justice, 
                          Office of Justice Programs,Bureau of Justice 
                          Statistics. Retrieved 11 November 2012.
http://bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

76,000                    1996 National Crime Victim Survey

Significantly, even using the lowest estimate, 76,000 violent crimes are
prevented by armed citizens each year.  Thus, the number of violent crimes
thwarted by armed citizens is about four times the annual murder rate.​ 



> You have a gun culture problem. That then exacerbates the other issues. But yes, you have a gun problem... but it sometimes seems that only the US can't see that. Or, at least, certain factions in the US.


Not at all.  The U.S. has a shockingly low level of violent crime per capita, particularly when compared to our "more civilized" friends in Europe.

I could probably dig up some stats for you or you could believe that I'm not lying.  

What it boils down to is this, after all of the emotion and rhetoric, when looking at hard, cold numbers, the U.S. doesn't have a "gun problem" at all.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 7, 2014)

lklawson said:


> And you support that statement with???
> 
> Sorry, but this is untrue and based upon a "study" which doesn't actually count as one.  It's more "cherry picking" and comes from a woefully small and geographically limited sample set which is decades out of date at this point.




Straw purchases, gun shows, etc. Here's some articles:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/crime/14715658-418/chicago-gangs-dont-have-to-go-far-to-buy-guns.html

http://www.hartfordinfo.org/issues/documents/crime/htfd_courant_071606.asp

http://www.seattlepi.com/national/article/Guns-used-in-crime-sold-by-very-few-shops-1243557.php

etc.etc.etc.

As far as your second statement. Here's some more recent academic studies...

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196064403002567

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/9/1/48.short

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=187806

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795369900283X

Take your pick. Now it's true, that correlation does not equal causation. However, you cannot have causation without correlation. Note, none of these studies is based on anything "decades out of date".

YMMV.

Mike


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 7, 2014)

lklawson said:


> No.  I'm not sure why you think that there are no studies because that's not true at all.  I can point to no less than SEVEN separate studies which, do, in fact, show there are vastly more "defensive gun uses."  Perhaps it's just that no one has ever presented them to you.
> No. of Defensive
> Gun Uses per Year         Source
> 
> ...



Statistical cherrypick much?

Their violent crime might be higher, as we are at an almost all time low, however, murder rates, actual homicides, are much, MUCH higher in the US.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/...early-all-other-developed-countries-fbi-data/


----------



## lklawson (Jan 7, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> Am I not to take from my martial arts training what works for me? That is the goal... It has to be suitable for my needs.
> 
> What works for him may not work for me and vice versa...


The thing that's being said to you is that you might not know "what works best for you" and that you're making some assumptions about it. Further that you may be trying to shoe-horn what you think works best for you into a martial arts context which it might not fit well.



> I prefer to stay in shape... Its healthier and more pleasing to me.
> 
> This too translates over to unarmed combat, should the need arise... No ones talking bodybuilding, I'm talking over conditioning.


No one is telling you to not be in good physical condition, merely that top physical condition may not be as important to a "self defense" encounter as you seem to think, particularly when compared against actual skill.



> I could be at a baseball game with my son and an angry parent attacks me... If I'm out of shape, good luck Tim... But if I have been doing the proper training and conditioning, it should be easier... In theory.


Not necessarily.  Timing, leverage, position, technique can all overcome raw physical strength when properly applied.  Yes, if you have strength to add to skill, that can increase the odds.  But don't assume that strength always trumps skill.  Sometime it can.  Sometimes it can't.



> Bruce Lee had the same mindset which is why he said you must train every part of your body...


Bruce Lee is dead.



> Soldiers train


Not for "self defense" they don't.



> Spartans train


Gah!  Don't get me started on Spartans.  They're despicable.  The ONLY thing they gave to us worth keeping is Laconic Wit.  And then only sometimes.



> Samurai train


Which Samurai?  That covers centuries of evolution of the caste.



> I care about my body... I'm not getting a new one, I will grow old and die in this one... Go look in the mirror... You earned that.


While laudable, it has little to do with "self defense."

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jan 7, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> That was one of many opinions that I have collected from another forum about "self-defense". It was not my opinion.
> 
> http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?66958-Train-for-self-defense&highlight=defense
> 
> My opinion is as simple as "Whether you want to call it fighting, self-defense, or MA, it's just as simple as "fist meets face".


I can't see it.  So, please, answer the question about "Victorian" sensibilities.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jan 7, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> Straw purchases, gun shows, etc. Here's some articles:
> 
> http://www.suntimes.com/news/crime/14715658-418/chicago-gangs-dont-have-to-go-far-to-buy-guns.html
> 
> ...


Doesn't support your claim.




> correlation does not equal causation


Yea, verily.


> However, you cannot have causation without correlation. Note, none of these studies is based on anything "decades out of date".


First, none of them compare against (to quote you) "some wide eyed psychopath attack you."  Second, all disingenuously include suicides.  And, yes, conflating "have family member shoot you, or have an  accident" with suicide *IS* disingenuous.

You seem to assume that I've never looked at the information for myself.  I have.  The actual data.  And, sorry, but all of the studies which you reference have these same sort of (apparently deliberate) problems.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jan 7, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> Statistical cherrypick much?


Why yes.  If by "statistical cherry pick" you mean "referencing studies done by the CDC, FBI, and Bureau of Justice."

Thanks for playing.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 7, 2014)

lklawson said:


> I can't see it.  So, please, answer the question about "Victorian" sensibilities.


Can you see this? The 4th one down #19.

http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum...rain-for-self-defense/page2&highlight=defense

But at least you can see this. 



Kung Fu Wang said:


> It was not my opinion.


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 7, 2014)

lklawson said:


> Doesn't support your claim.
> 
> 
> Yea, verily.
> ...



Hmm, yeah, it would seem that many people who do not have the ability to purchase firearms legally, still manage to use guns purchased legally, which was all that I claimed above. I used the "wide eyed psychopath attack you" statement because it is the living embodiment of the fear in the American populace. Never mind that the chances of this actually occuring border on the non-existent. 

If you have other NON biased academic data, then kindly share them. Anything published by a journal or organization that supports gun rights is automatically disqualified. You'll note that I did not (intentionally) use data or publications from organizations that support gun control. Bias being bias after all. But, if you have studies published in peer reviewed scientific journals, I'd love to see it. I like examining both sides of an argument, not participating solely in confirmational bias. I just couldn't find anything supporting that. 

I've never made any such assumption about your knowledge. I don't know you, and therefore wouldn't do that. 

It would seem that we agree on Self Defense, training, and martial arts. Sadly, on this topic, we will disagree. Personally, I favor an absolute ban on assault weapons (I know, vague, and what constitutes an "assault" weapon is left open to interpretation) meaning assault/combat style rifles, as well as handguns. I would still allow shotguns and long rifles with much, much stricter regulations regarding purchasing, and then a tax to paid every year on every firearm in your home by the gun-owner. This money could be used to help buy back other weapons, enforce stricter regulations. Etc.

I've thought about this a LOT. Ever since the military. 

YMMV,

Mike


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 7, 2014)

lklawson said:


> Why yes.  If by "statistical cherry pick" you mean "referencing studies done by the CDC, FBI, and Bureau of Justice."
> 
> Thanks for playing.



No, I meant that those statistics are meaningless. 76,000 -2.1 million occurences depending on the source? I can already tell you that the p and R values are going to be worthless. 

Something that other authors also noted....

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1023077303928

And, one of my faves, our ASA journal...

http://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09332480.1997.10542033?journalCode=ucha20#.Usx_FfYqS6U

Positive bias indeed.....

Mike


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 8, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> That was one of many opinions that I have collected from another forum about "self-defense". It was not my opinion.
> 
> http://www.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?66958-Train-for-self-defense&highlight=defense
> 
> My opinion is as simple as "Whether you want to call it fighting, self-defense, or MA, it's just as simple as "fist meets face".



Except it's not that simple at all (well, except for possibly just fighting). "Fist meets face" can mean that you've failed terribly when looking at self defence, whether it's your fist or your face (contextually, of course... some self defence require it, obviously)... and it's a complete oversimplification of martial arts... so, well, no.

Oh, but with the link you provided, I'd like to address something you raised there (stemming from my question to you):



			
				Kung Fu Wang said:
			
		

> Someone asked "How is competition or sport testing "self defence"? Whoever like to use the term "self defence" always like to get knife fight involved. Their argument are since sport fight doesn't deal with knife fight, sport fight is no good for self defence.



Frankly, there's a fair number of words put into my mouth there, and I don't think they're warranted. What I was asking you was why you think training for one thing is the same as training for something different... there was no implication of knife defence at all. But, so you know, Tomiki Aikido is a sport form of Aikido that deals with knife defence (even in their competition format), and you could easily class a lot of what's done in the Dog Brothers group as being fairly similar to sports (a lot more than self defence, really)...

Honestly, the argument is simple. Training for sport is training for sport. It is geared towards the skills and tactics that generate success in sports competition. To think that it is doing anything else is to be thoroughly blind to the realities of what training does. The aims are different for sports as for self defence. The optimum tactics are different... in cases, completely opposite to each other. The criteria for success are also, in cases, directly opposed to each other. So why would training for a situation and application that is, in ways, opposite to what you'd actually want to achieve be a good thing?



lklawson said:


> No.  I'm not sure why you think that there are no studies because that's not true at all.  I can point to no less than SEVEN separate studies which, do, in fact, show there are vastly more "defensive gun uses."  Perhaps it's just that no one has ever presented them to you.
> No. of Defensive
> Gun Uses per Year         Source
> 
> ...


​
Hey Kirk, 

Er... who mentioned "defensive gun uses"? But, for the record:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/...un-deaths-than-any-other-country-study-finds/



> They concluded that more guns do not make people safer



http://www.theatlantic.com/national...key-questions-with-13-concise-answers/272727/



> *How often are guns used in self-defense?*There are no comprehensive records kept of incidents where guns are used in self-defense, so the only way to know is to ask people. Data from the National Crime Victimization Survey suggest that a gun is used in self-defense about 60,000 to 120,000 times each year. Several other surveys confirm this estimate. By comparison, each year about a million violent crimes involve guns. This means guns are used to commit a crime about 10 times as often as they are used for self-defense.
> A few surveys in the early 1990s suggested that there are millions gun self-defense incidents each year, but there are very good reasons to believe that these estimates were improperly calculated and these numbers are way off, more than 10 times too high. If the numbers really were this high, this would imply that pretty much every gunshot wound in America is the result of somebody protecting him or herself.
> Even among the more accurate surveys, according to a panel of criminal court judges who reviewed survey respondents' stories, about half the time the gun use was "probably illegal," even assuming the gun itself had been purchased legally.



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/18/gun-ownership-gun-deaths-study



lklawson said:


> Not at all.  The U.S. has a shockingly low level of violent crime per capita, particularly when compared to our "more civilized" friends in Europe.



Hmm.... let's look at that. Forgive the Wiki links, they were just the first ones thrown up when I googled for results.... more importantly, they're not the sole ones I look at.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

Number of guns... first in the world is the US, with 89 per 100 persons. The next closest is two thirds of that.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

Gun ownership and homicides... the only countries with more homicides than the US are drug-controlled and violence-ridden Central and South America, and places like South Africa. When compared with like-for-like countries (what are often termed "Developed Countries"), the US stands well and truly out in front.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

And the same is seen again. 

http://www.thenational.ae/news/worl...rts-but-other-countries-tell-a-different-tale

And really, the thing is, we're not discussing just violent crime, we're specifically dealing with the usage of firearms.



lklawson said:


> I could probably dig up some stats for you or you could believe that I'm not lying.



Nah, I don't think you're lying, Kirk. As said in one of the articles, the US simply has a very different way of looking at guns than other nations... which leads us to:



lklawson said:


> What it boils down to is this, after all of the emotion and rhetoric, when looking at hard, cold numbers, the U.S. doesn't have a "gun problem" at all.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



Yes, you do. Which is a direct result of your gun culture. But, rather than re-hash everything again here, this is a thread where I laid out my opinion on things already. It's only really page 2 and 3, and honestly I learnt a different take on things like the origins of the second amendment... but I'll let you go through it and see how much you disagree... ha!

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...Armed-Citizen-the-key-to-a-free-society/page2


----------



## lklawson (Jan 8, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> If you have other NON biased academic data, then kindly share them. Anything published by a journal or organization that supports gun rights is automatically disqualified.


CDC?  BoJ?  FBI?



> It would seem that we agree on Self Defense, training, and martial arts.


Yes, we agree on many things.



> Sadly, on this topic, we will disagree. Personally, I favor an absolute ban on assault weapons (I know, vague, and what constitutes an "assault" weapon is left open to interpretation) meaning assault/combat style rifles, as well as handguns. I would still allow shotguns and long rifles with much, much stricter regulations regarding purchasing, and then a tax to paid every year on every firearm in your home by the gun-owner. This money could be used to help buy back other weapons, enforce stricter regulations. Etc.


I had a lot that I was in the middle of composing revolving around various studies, and the inverse relation ship between the greater availability of firearms along with the ever laxer laws in relation to the ever declining violent crime rate.  However, I've decided that it's too far a departure within this thread.  IOW, it's stinking up the OP's thread.  I invite any interested parties over the the sites firearms sub-forum and we can continue there.



> I've thought about this a LOT. Ever since the military.


I've thought, read, and researched a lot myself also, ever since, well, honestly well before Columbine but with a renewed vigor after my good friend committed suicide.

Again, I'm happy to debate the subject in the proper forum.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Jan 8, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> No, I meant that those statistics are meaningless. 76,000 -2.1 million occurences depending on the source? I can already tell you that the p and R values are going to be worthless.
> 
> Something that other authors also noted....
> 
> ...


I do have answers for this objection.  But, as I wrote, not in this thread.  If you open a thread in the firearms forum, I'll present them.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## MJS (Jan 8, 2014)

SENC-33 said:


> Tougher gun laws = Harder for "law abiding" citizens to protect themselves from criminals. We don't have a gun problem in the United States we have a people don't give a @#$& about innocent life problem. How many people die every day at the hands of a drunk driver? Does the car get the blame? The alcohol? The drunk gets the blame. But let somebody shoot a group of people and the blame goes FIRST to the weapon.



Agreed!  Here in CT, we're dealing with a ton of gun issues, mainly due to the Newtown shooting.  Sorry, but there're shootings daily in the big cities here.  Instead of putting all the energy on the legit owners, I'd rather see more energy put towards mental health issues, as well as a mandatory min. sentence for ANYONE convicted of a gun crime.


----------



## MJS (Jan 8, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> That's the party line of the NRA I realize, but when one considers that the overwhelming majority of guns used in illegal activities were purchased legally, then that begins to color that perception.
> 
> Also, you are more likely to have family member shoot you, or have an accident, than you are to have some wide eyed psychopath attack you. But of course, that interferes with the great 'merican myth. I get to thankfully, lobby frequently on the Hill for healthcare issues (I was involved in the ACA, specifically, the ACO portion), and when asked about gun control, am happy to share my thoughts.
> 
> ...



So, the legal gun owner has to suffer because some **** bag steals the gun?


----------



## MJS (Jan 8, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> Agreed 100% with this. To the OP, many martial arts are built around NOT using strength. Using technique and energy (not strength) to take on much bigger opponents. Which is why a small woman can take down a much bigger man with the right training and context.
> 
> In the MMA world, in BJJ, strength and conditioning play a huge role. In order to defend yourself? Not at all in my opinion.
> 
> ...



I agree with this.  While size and strength do play a part, IMO, the vast majority comes down to proper technique.  Regarding the comment you made about BJJ.  Some may disagree with you on that, mainly due to the reason that people claim that in BJJ, the art was designed for the smaller man to win.


----------



## MJS (Jan 8, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Except it's not that simple at all (well, except for possibly just fighting). "Fist meets face" can mean that you've failed terribly when looking at self defence, whether it's your fist or your face (contextually, of course... some self defence require it, obviously)... and it's a complete oversimplification of martial arts... so, well, no.
> 
> Oh, but with the link you provided, I'd like to address something you raised there (stemming from my question to you):
> 
> ...



I know I've asked this before Chris, but I'll ask again.  If I'm understanding correctly, you're not a fan of sparring, so when you're 'testing' for lack of better words, your techniques, you're doing it in a fashion that isn't sparring, but the intensity is still there?  For example...when you're working a punch tech, I'm assuming the other guy is really trying to hit you, hard?  If this is the case, this is something that I did one time in class with some techs.  During the tech, the other guy was doing something other than just the intial attack, ie: if the tech was a defense against a lapel grab, he'd also do a punch, or something to throw off the defender, making it a bit more practical, yet at the same time, not allowing it to turn into sparring.

Am I on track with this so far?  

Now you mentioned the Dog Bros.  I assume that you're not fond of what they're doing, because its more sparring oriented?


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 8, 2014)

Let me ask this question?  What works for me?  Who can answer that but me alone...  Guidance is welcome which you guys are giving in abundance, I appreciate this much even at the age of 27 I'm very inexperienced in the martial arts and I'm always a student first.

Chris and everyone else, I'm trying to grasp what you guys are saying...
What I'm looking for is not self-defense? That is all I care about, but I want to maintain my physical capabilities as well, that is important to me.

Soldiers prepare for war/combat life or death situation, and that means training the entire body...preparation if you will.  I am simply seeking the same thing but on a smaller scale.

Training in times of peace that way I am prepared in times of war.

Self-Defense, Combat, Conditioning, and technique are all different aspects of martial arts.  I simply want them all.

Again, define strength....  I want to be strong at self-defense, I want to be strong in combat, I want to be strong in conditioning, I want to be strong in technique...  
I'm not talking about will vs. will, but skill and will.  

I come from a militant family so you cannot say I'm missing the point on why soldiers train...  That's too obvious.  
Father was a marine, aunts and uncles were in the army... 
I know the sacrifice my cousins are making right now in fighting for our country...  They are our homeland protectors... As I am with my family...  Which is why I am so concerned with my body and mental state.  I want to be the best I can be.  Regardless of the situation, now who can point me to the answer to this desire?

Am I wrong, am I misguided???  Am I seeking false hopes?  If I am, then what is the solution?  What is the reasoning behind the solution.

Thank You all.


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 8, 2014)

That, but how can BJJ help you in a situation where you have to fight off multiple opponents...  DO you say "hold on guys wait, let me submit this guy 1st then someone else can go next."?????

There is no perfect system, there is no correct system...  There are diversified systems that may help him or her in certain situations.


----------



## WaterGal (Jan 8, 2014)

Kframe said:


> Im sorry but I have a god given right to defend my family and ill use what ever tools I can find to do so.



I seem to recall the Bible saying that, if someone attacks you, you shouldn't even defend yourself - rather, you should turn the other cheek and let them strike you again.

I think that gun ownership should be legal - with reasonable restrictions - but it baffles me that so many Christians (pardon me if you practice another religion and I'm speaking out of turn) have the attitude that you mention, considering what the Bible actually says.


----------



## WaterGal (Jan 8, 2014)

Spinedoc said:


> Statistical cherrypick much?
> 
> Their violent crime might be higher, as we are at an almost all time low, however, murder rates, actual homicides, are much, MUCH higher in the US.
> 
> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/...early-all-other-developed-countries-fbi-data/



Right.  The reason that European violent crime rates are higher is because their violent crime statistics include a larger variety of offenses.  The FBI violent crime stats only cover homicide, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault; while their British counterparts include less serious offenses like unarmed assault, verbal harassment, and shoving.  It's not a good comparison.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 9, 2014)

MJS said:


> I know I've asked this before Chris, but I'll ask again.


 
Hey Mike,

Ha, go ahead....



MJS said:


> If I'm understanding correctly, you're not a fan of sparring, so when you're 'testing' for lack of better words, your techniques, you're doing it in a fashion that isn't sparring, but the intensity is still there?


 
Well... the intensity should be there anyway. The way things are tested is that they are first learned, then drilled, with all the weaker aspects that might be there (in the students performance) looked to and corrected, then they are drilled at a higher intensity. As the training progresses, the attacking side (which is typically the senior) looks for openings, will counter the technique if one appears, continue an attack, escape, or anything else. At earlier levels, that might just be pointed out... but at higher ones, it's physically demonstrated.

I'll see if I can give an example.

I've spoken a lot about Koryu, and have said that Embu (public demonstrations) aren't the same as what you see in training... they're often rather restrained, with the techniques being performed "precisely"... however the Araki Ryu (Ellis Amdur's line) is a bit different. In Ellis' own words, the only difference between Keiko (practice) and Embu (demonstration) is that people are watching. As a result, you can see in this Embu both Ellis and Mr Thanassis constantly looking for opportunities to attack or counter... there is a constant "tension" between them... and there's a couple of less-expected moments, such as when one of the weapons breaks, leaving an opening that is immediately capitalised on.








MJS said:


> For example...when you're working a punch tech, I'm assuming the other guy is really trying to hit you, hard?


 
Sure, but that's a given, even before any of the testing comes into it.



MJS said:


> If this is the case, this is something that I did one time in class with some techs.  During the tech, the other guy was doing something other than just the intial attack, ie: if the tech was a defense against a lapel grab, he'd also do a punch, or something to throw off the defender, making it a bit more practical, yet at the same time, not allowing it to turn into sparring.



How does changing the attack make it more practical, out of interest? To explain what I mean, each technique (in the Kempo system you're referring to here, and the same in my arts) is a tactical response to a particular stimulus... we could go back to Ras' take on Sword and Hammer, where he also thought adding a punch, or changing the attack made it more "realistic" or "practical", but what he actually did was miss completely the primary tactic of the technique, which was to apply a pre-emptive response before a punch could be thrown. Of course, telling him that for 40 pages didn't seem to sink in... 

I'm all for exploring the technique, but when you start moving away from what the technique teaches, you've missed the point of the exploration, to my mind.



MJS said:


> Am I on track with this so far?



Uh.... not quite, no.



MJS said:


> Now you mentioned the Dog Bros.  I assume that you're not fond of what they're doing, because its more sparring oriented?



Yeah, they're not something that appeals to me, as it comes across as more of a game of, shall we say, "extreme tag" than anything that related to actual application of tactical methods when encountering violence. The only form of violence it semi-resembles is a duel or match fight, and that's just not something I'm about to engage in.



tkizzle05 said:


> Let me ask this question?  What works for me?  Who can answer that but me alone...  Guidance is welcome which you guys are giving in abundance, I appreciate this much even at the age of 27 I'm very inexperienced in the martial arts and I'm always a student first.



Actually, no. In a way, you're too close to yourself to clearly see where your strengths (and, importantly, weaknesses) are. So who can tell you? A teacher with experience, knowledge, insight, and the ability to observe you.



tkizzle05 said:


> Chris and everyone else, I'm trying to grasp what you guys are saying...



I can see that. The struggle to grasp what you're being told, even though it's rather contradictory to what you believe at this point, is something I find extremely encouraging, it shows an openness to challenging yourself, and to personal growth. If you didn't show it, I probably wouldn't still be addressing you. So you are to be congratulated for your efforts.



tkizzle05 said:


> What I'm looking for is not self-defense? That is all I care about, but I want to maintain my physical capabilities as well, that is important to me.



No, that's not quite what we've said... we've said that what you're looking for as attributes of your martial "home" are not really that related to self defence, and are in ways contradictory to your stated desire of looking for a self defence approach. The question for you will be what is more important for you... actually understanding and gaining knowledge in the field of self defence (and the defence of others... not an easy thing to find anyone teaching anything really decent, but it's out there), which has a very different set of criteria than the ones you have mentioned, or your personal (inexperienced) beliefs about what's important.



tkizzle05 said:


> Soldiers prepare for war/combat life or death situation, and that means training the entire body...preparation if you will.  I am simply seeking the same thing but on a smaller scale.



That's not why there's an emphasis on fitness training in a soldiers life, though. It's more to do with the packs carried, the hiking/walking, and so on. The war/combat side of things is nowhere as prominent as the rest of a soldiers life.



tkizzle05 said:


> Training in times of peace that way I am prepared in times of war.



When you have some idea of the type of war you're preparing for, it's easier to know what you'd need to do.



tkizzle05 said:


> Self-Defense, Combat, Conditioning, and technique are all different aspects of martial arts.  I simply want them all.



Right. No. Self defence can be a part of a schools focus, I haven't seen any martial art that I'd class as actually being designed for modern self defence though. Combat is a very broad, vague term here... I train in systems that deal specifically with combat in a rather direct and brutal way... but don't really have the other aspects you're talking about. Conditioning will be specific to the system, and, one more time, it's the sporting systems that will have the most focus on that. Technique... well, that's kind of a given, really... unless you think some arts just throw people in to see what happens... 



tkizzle05 said:


> Again, define strength....  I want to be strong at self-defense, I want to be strong in combat, I want to be strong in conditioning, I want to be strong in technique...
> I'm not talking about will vs. will, but skill and will.



Yeah, that's all still very vague, and honestly doesn't say anything to me.



tkizzle05 said:


> I come from a militant family so you cannot say I'm missing the point on why soldiers train...  That's too obvious.
> Father was a marine, aunts and uncles were in the army...
> I know the sacrifice my cousins are making right now in fighting for our country...  They are our homeland protectors... As I am with my family...  Which is why I am so concerned with my body and mental state.  I want to be the best I can be.  Regardless of the situation, now who can point me to the answer to this desire?



("Military" family, not "militant".... ) Look, all respect to them, but frankly, so? Being the best you can be is great... but you're not listening when you're being guided that "best" isn't what you think it is.



tkizzle05 said:


> Am I wrong, am I misguided???  Am I seeking false hopes?  If I am, then what is the solution?  What is the reasoning behind the solution.
> 
> Thank You all.



Are you wrong? Yes. Are you misguided? Yes. Are you seeking false hopes? Maybe... or at least, chasing the wrong avenues to get to your hopes. What's the solution. Listen to what you've been told for 5 pages now.



tkizzle05 said:


> That, but how can BJJ help you in a situation where you have to fight off multiple opponents...  DO you say "hold on guys wait, let me submit this guy 1st then someone else can go next."?????
> 
> There is no perfect system, there is no correct system...  There are diversified systems that may help him or her in certain situations.



Who are you answering here? Quotes really, really, really help the conversation.....


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 9, 2014)

I know a friend of mine some times teaches in Fort Wayne but his dojo is in Columbia City.

http://www.yourlivingarts.net/martial.html

Dean is fantastic and really, really good!


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> Let me ask this question?  What works for me?  Who can answer that but me alone...  Guidance is welcome which you guys are giving in abundance, I appreciate this much even at the age of 27 I'm very inexperienced in the martial arts and I'm always a student first.
> 
> Chris and everyone else, I'm trying to grasp what you guys are saying...
> What I'm looking for is not self-defense? That is all I care about, but I want to maintain my physical capabilities as well, that is important to me.
> ...



Well, 6 pages and many posts in, let me ask you:  Have you figured out what you want to do?  You've received a ton of advice, and your head is no doubt, spinning.  It would seem to me, that you're looking for the "magic pill" so to speak, and I hate to break it to you, but there is no such thing.  There are no 'end all be all superior' arts out there, and anyone telling you otherwise is selling snake oil.  I mean really..if that was the case, that 1 school would put all others out of business.  Everyone would be training there.  

My suggestions are the same...you need to figure out your goals.  You need to figure out what's around you, how far you're willing to travel, how much money you're willing to spend.  Then you need to set aside the time and check out the schools in your area.  Figure out what meets your needs.  Start training.  It's really that simple.


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2014)

tkizzle05 said:


> That, but how can BJJ help you in a situation where you have to fight off multiple opponents...  DO you say "hold on guys wait, let me submit this guy 1st then someone else can go next."?????
> 
> There is no perfect system, there is no correct system...  There are diversified systems that may help him or her in certain situations.



It probably won't.  To be honest with you, dealing with that is hard, and isn't easy.  The majority of multi man training I have done, has been separate from regular class curriculum.  I have certain things that I would do, but again, nothing is a sure shot.  Getting the hell out of the situation ASAP, is the best suggestion.  Don't stand around any longer than necessary.  This isn't the movies.


----------



## WaterGal (Jan 9, 2014)

Said something earlier that got at me....



tkizzle05 said:


> I've actually been in 3 street fights, fun but dangerous...



Here's your good self-defense training: don't think of street fights as "fun".  Think of them as something to avoid unless an unprovoked attacker is trying to harm you and you can't get away.




> In one particular fight though I wasnt expecting any of it, the dude tied to punk me out because I looked more harmless than anyone else...  I ignored him of course, but dude invaded my personal space... at that time my guy shouted "just whoop his *** Tim"  adrenaline began to pump through my body and I handed my dude my car keys (the guy is shouting at the side of my face the entire time) and as I began to take out my earrings... BOOM a punch, the dude snuck me.  I didn't fall or stagger or anything just wasnt expected... obviously...  SO then I turn towards him and he throws another punch but I grabbed him by the wrist and yanked him towards me and we ended up in a scuffle...  I had him in some kind of "street clinch" and I was just letting him have it, so he tries to escape but I grabbed him by his shirt and threw him towards the side of the car, I mercilessly gave him 2 haymakers (left,right) before he ducked and scrambled to this girls front lawn, I then tackled dude... and was in a street mount???  I was done at this point... tired... no cardio/stamina...  The dude reached out and scrached the side of my face then I threw a right punch that had to hurt, I threw another one and missed... because I was so tired.  His dude tried to jump in but man it was like 8 of us so they let him have it...



Could you have walked away from this?  I mean physically - forget your street cred or ego or whatever.  Could you have ignored this guy and your friend, gotten up and left the area?  It sounds like you fought this guy because you got angry and gave into your emotions and hormones.  That's not self-defense, it's just fighting. 



> Now, thats just one example...  but I had 2 other fights the other in a college dormitory a bully type guy again... picked on me because I am the happy go lucky always smiling nice guy that takes a lot of crap. Long story short, he was making fun of me I tried to leave the room, he started shoving me then I snapped...  I was in fight mode and then all of the sudden he didn't want to fight, but its waaaay too late at this point.



It wasn't too late - that moment was exactly the time to stop.  When he stopped wanting to fight you, you had already neutralized the threat.  After that, the fight moved from self-defense to scrapping.

Based on this post, I'd say your problem isn't your strength or cardio, it's that you're letting your emotions rule you and get you into fights.  Cool it.  There's a corny-but-true martial arts saying:  "There are three kinds  of martial artist.  A bad martial artist gets into a fight and loses.  A  mediocre martial artist gets into a fight and wins.  A good martial  artist avoids getting into the fight at all."  Think about that.


----------



## MJS (Jan 9, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Hey Mike,
> 
> Ha, go ahead....



Ha, you know me...always full of questions.  But that's how you learn, plus I enjoy the interaction and how others train. 





> Well... the intensity should be there anyway. The way things are tested is that they are first learned, then drilled, with all the weaker aspects that might be there (in the students performance) looked to and corrected, then they are drilled at a higher intensity. As the training progresses, the attacking side (which is typically the senior) looks for openings, will counter the technique if one appears, continue an attack, escape, or anything else. At earlier levels, that might just be pointed out... but at higher ones, it's physically demonstrated.
> 
> I'll see if I can give an example.
> 
> I've spoken a lot about Koryu, and have said that Embu (public demonstrations) aren't the same as what you see in training... they're often rather restrained, with the techniques being performed "precisely"... however the Araki Ryu (Ellis Amdur's line) is a bit different. In Ellis' own words, the only difference between Keiko (practice) and Embu (demonstration) is that people are watching. As a result, you can see in this Embu both Ellis and Mr Thanassis constantly looking for opportunities to attack or counter... there is a constant "tension" between them... and there's a couple of less-expected moments, such as when one of the weapons breaks, leaving an opening that is immediately capitalised on.



Sounds right to me.  Start off slow, and gradually progress from there.   




> Sure, but that's a given, even before any of the testing comes into it.



I agree, although you'd be surprised at the number of people out there that do a half assed attack.  Sad, but true.  





> How does changing the attack make it more practical, out of interest? To explain what I mean, each technique (in the Kempo system you're referring to here, and the same in my arts) is a tactical response to a particular stimulus... we could go back to Ras' take on Sword and Hammer, where he also thought adding a punch, or changing the attack made it more "realistic" or "practical", but what he actually did was miss completely the primary tactic of the technique, which was to apply a pre-emptive response before a punch could be thrown. Of course, telling him that for 40 pages didn't seem to sink in...
> 
> I'm all for exploring the technique, but when you start moving away from what the technique teaches, you've missed the point of the exploration, to my mind.



IMO, Ras was doing something....well, sometimes I really wasn't sure what the hell he was doing, and frankly, I don't think others knew either! LOL!  You saw it, you know. No, he was taking a technique, and totally revamping it, making it something different.  Of course, he'll tell you he's doing ATACX Gym Kenpo, and the version was HIS gym's version.  I think we all know that the BS flag was raised A LOT! LOL! 

For me, I've got no problem with the base technique.  I've taught them for years.  Of course, I always wanted to take my training to the next level, and I figured I'd share my thoughts with those that I taught at the time.  IMO, there came a time when I felt that we should progress from the base move. I mean really...how often is someone just going to grab someone by the lapel and just stand there?  No movement, nothing other than a grab?  Rare, IMO.  So, when I say make things more practical, that is what I'm talking about.  Do the lapel grab, but also be capable of dealing with whatever may happen next, ie: shaking the person back and forth, moving them back to slam them into a wall, let go and perhaps begin to punch.  The list of things can go on forever, but I think you get my point. 





> Uh.... not quite, no.



LOL, I didn't think so. 





> Yeah, they're not something that appeals to me, as it comes across as more of a game of, shall we say, "extreme tag" than anything that related to actual application of tactical methods when encountering violence. The only form of violence it semi-resembles is a duel or match fight, and that's just not something I'm about to engage in.



IMO, I think that aspects from their training are very good, and should be implemented into FMA training.  Sure, it's sparring with weapons.  OTOH, I see it as valuable, in the sense that if you took out the sparring type format, if you weren't crazy about sparring, but adding in the contact, more movement, not standing like a statue, and allow the defender to pull off their tech.


----------



## TaiChiTJ (Jan 9, 2014)

I've always been interested in this Indianapolis school. Don't know much about it.


----------



## tkizzle05 (Jan 9, 2014)

I see.. Ok, above anything else, I want to focus on technique and true self defense... 

What types of training offers this?

I found this dojo... 
http://bujinkanindy.com/

Is this a good school?
I know a lot of that depends on the teacher though.

Also are there other similar systems?

Sent from my RM-860_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 10, 2014)

MJS said:


> Ha, you know me...always full of questions.  But that's how you learn, plus I enjoy the interaction and how others train.



Yeah... which is just really cool, to my mind.



MJS said:


> Sounds right to me.  Start off slow, and gradually progress from there.


 
Hmm.... well, yeah... but that's not entirely the point. I was training in Kenjutsu the other night, and after a particular technique (I was being the "attacker", uchidachi, so I "lost") I turned to my training partner and said "You know you died then, right?" To his credit, he had some idea, but didn't recognize where or why. I took him back through the technique... everything he did was "right"... but the way he did it left gaps, which could easily be exploited. As we're still in the early "learning" stage, but moving into the next "refinement" stage, he was just told... at other times, particularly with waza he knows better, he'd be shown. Definitively.



MJS said:


> I agree, although you'd be surprised at the number of people out there that do a half assed attack.  Sad, but true.



Yeah, I don't really allow such things... I want my guys to want to hit me... it's a celebration when they think they've got me... for a moment, at least (ha!). 



MJS said:


> IMO, Ras was doing something....well, sometimes I really wasn't sure what the hell he was doing, and frankly, I don't think others knew either! LOL!  You saw it, you know. No, he was taking a technique, and totally revamping it, making it something different.  Of course, he'll tell you he's doing ATACX Gym Kenpo, and the version was HIS gym's version.  I think we all know that the BS flag was raised A LOT! LOL!
> 
> For me, I've got no problem with the base technique.  I've taught them for years.  Of course, I always wanted to take my training to the next level, and I figured I'd share my thoughts with those that I taught at the time.  IMO, there came a time when I felt that we should progress from the base move. I mean really...how often is someone just going to grab someone by the lapel and just stand there?  No movement, nothing other than a grab?  Rare, IMO.  So, when I say make things more practical, that is what I'm talking about.  Do the lapel grab, but also be capable of dealing with whatever may happen next, ie: shaking the person back and forth, moving them back to slam them into a wall, let go and perhaps begin to punch.  The list of things can go on forever, but I think you get my point.



Yeah, I didn't really want to get back into a discussion of Ras' version of it, just using it as an example, really. The point was more that changing aspects of the technique (attack or defence) without taking into account  what the purpose of the technique itself is can lead to degradation rather than improvement. To use your question here (how often does someone just grab and stand there?), well, no, it doesn't happen... but you see it in techniques. So you need to ask why... and, really, the answer is found in the response. In pretty much all cases I've seen, the response is done in such a way to pre-empt the next movement from the attacker... so it's all about the timing of the response. To add in other attacking actions removes your ability to employ such timing, and therefore negates the very reason for that technique in the first place.



MJS said:


> LOL, I didn't think so.



Eh, happens to everyone. Well, not everyone... not me, for instance... ha!



MJS said:


> IMO, I think that aspects from their training are very good, and should be implemented into FMA training.  Sure, it's sparring with weapons.  OTOH, I see it as valuable, in the sense that if you took out the sparring type format, if you weren't crazy about sparring, but adding in the contact, more movement, not standing like a statue, and allow the defender to pull off their tech.



Just a point here, if you took out the sparring, and just left training with contact, more movement, not just standing there allowing the defender to do their technique, you'd have... traditional martial arts training, most specifically Japanese Koryu approaches (in the main).... just sayin'..... 



TaiChiTJ said:


> I've always been interested in this Indianapolis school. Don't know much about it.



Er... honestly, I'd leave them well alone. The Korean logo with a Chinese/Japanese character, the prevalence of kids programs, the mix of TKD and Chinese uniforms and methods, the Chinese weapons for the adults, the listing of the name of the school as "Karate" (and "Best Indianapolis Karate" for the name of the school at that....), while steadfastly refusing to state anywhere on the website what martial art they actually teach (even in the "What We Teach" page, there's no mention whatsoever), what the backgrounds of the teachers are, and so on, and it all just adds up to a whole lotta nothing to me.



tkizzle05 said:


> I see.. Ok, above anything else, I want to focus on technique and true self defense...
> 
> What types of training offers this?



True self defence? RBSD. Look for people like Geoff Thompson... Lee Morrison... Tony Blauer... Deane Lawler... Richard Dmitri...

Focus on techniques? Traditional martial arts schools.

They're not the same thing, and a focus on technique is not really a major part of true self defence training methodologies.



tkizzle05 said:


> I found this dojo...
> http://bujinkanindy.com/
> 
> Is this a good school?
> I know a lot of that depends on the teacher though.



Is that a good school? No idea. They're the same art as myself (well, after a fashion), but with the complete lack of standards in the Bujinkan, it could be good, great, mediocre, or terrible. I haven't come across the instructor much before, so have no real opinion... the gallery didn't add much (some still shots and videos of other schools and Hatsumi, doesn't really tell me anything...)



tkizzle05 said:


> Also are there other similar systems?



There's the Genbukan and Jinenkan (which are the same arts, but taught more traditionally in slightly different ways), Toshindo (Stephen Hayes' organization which features a more "modern" approach)... if you're looking for the "traditional Japanese art" side of it, then look to Koryu... but that's really not going to suit any of your needs or requests. Nor, I feel, will the Bujinkan necessarily (depending on the teacher, there might be a very good awareness of self defence and it's requirements, but then again, there might not... and none of the rest really gives you what you're after, aside from some weapons training)... but then again, you've already got some experience in that area (Zentai was a Bujinkan school). You could loosely describe Aikido and Hapkido as being similar (in ways) as well... or Krav Maga in other ways...


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 10, 2014)

TaiChiTJ said:


> I've always been interested in this Indianapolis school. Don't know much about it.



I have seen the guy who has the YouTube page teaching on Ehow, I didn't find him particularly impressive.


----------



## MJS (Jan 10, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Yeah... which is just really cool, to my mind.









> Hmm.... well, yeah... but that's not entirely the point. I was training in Kenjutsu the other night, and after a particular technique (I was being the "attacker", uchidachi, so I "lost") I turned to my training partner and said "You know you died then, right?" To his credit, he had some idea, but didn't recognize where or why. I took him back through the technique... everything he did was "right"... but the way he did it left gaps, which could easily be exploited. As we're still in the early "learning" stage, but moving into the next "refinement" stage, he was just told... at other times, particularly with waza he knows better, he'd be shown. Definitively.



Well...yeah, of course.  Part of my start slowly and progress from there, does cover many things.  Really when you think about it, the amount of time normally spent on something, in the average school, is really small, compared to what it could/should be.  I mean think about it...there are so many fine points that can and should be covered, things from stances, proper target, body alignment, what reactions you'll possibly get when you hit an area, etc.  I've been training for a while, and I can name a hand full of teachers that I've interacted with, that actually take the time to explain this.  





> Yeah, I don't really allow such things... I want my guys to want to hit me... it's a celebration when they think they've got me... for a moment, at least (ha!).



LOL, yeah, so do I!  Used to drive me nuts when I'd have someone throw a punch, and I wouldn't even have to move, because it would've never reached me in the first place. LOL.  Gee, if you're afraid to hit me, are you going to be afraid of hitting the bad guy??  Don't worry...if you hit me, I"LL take the blame.  





> Yeah, I didn't really want to get back into a discussion of Ras' version of it, just using it as an example, really. The point was more that changing aspects of the technique (attack or defence) without taking into account  what the purpose of the technique itself is can lead to degradation rather than improvement. To use your question here (how often does someone just grab and stand there?), well, no, it doesn't happen... but you see it in techniques. So you need to ask why... and, really, the answer is found in the response. In pretty much all cases I've seen, the response is done in such a way to pre-empt the next movement from the attacker... so it's all about the timing of the response. To add in other attacking actions removes your ability to employ such timing, and therefore negates the very reason for that technique in the first place.



LOL, I didn't figure you wanted to discuss him again.   But yes, we see that all the time.  I mean, when someone in a BJJ gym is learning a new mount escape, I doubt the guy on top is being totally uncooperative during that initial learning phase.  All the "What if's" are usually, or should I say, are supposed to be covered later on.  I view the techs as a base to build from.  According to the top Kenpo guys, such as Doc, aka Ron Chapel, who spent a very long time training with GM Parker, in his eyes, if you're doing the tech right to begin with, you shouldn't have to worry about the other stuff.  Hey, who knows...maybe he was taught some secret or special way of doing things, I don't know.  I'm sure he's privy to things that I'm not.  I'm simply saying that I don't want to assume that something will go as plan.  IMO, when plan A doesn't work, you better have plan Z.  IMO, saying that if you do this right, you won't need anything else, is akin to saying, "Well, my teacher learned this tech from his teacher, who learned it from his teacher, who learned it from his, and it worked for them, so it's gotta work for me!"  Sorry, I don't care about them, I care about me. 





> Eh, happens to everyone. Well, not everyone... not me, for instance... ha!



LOL!:bow:





> Just a point here, if you took out the sparring, and just left training with contact, more movement, not just standing there allowing the defender to do their technique, you'd have... traditional martial arts training, most specifically Japanese Koryu approaches (in the main).... just sayin'.....



Good point.  I can agree with that.  Sad part is, in many cases, what you described doesn't happen in many schools, like it should.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 12, 2014)

MJS said:


> Well...yeah, of course.  Part of my start slowly and progress from there, does cover many things.  Really when you think about it, the amount of time normally spent on something, in the average school, is really small, compared to what it could/should be.  I mean think about it...there are so many fine points that can and should be covered, things from stances, proper target, body alignment, what reactions you'll possibly get when you hit an area, etc.  I've been training for a while, and I can name a hand full of teachers that I've interacted with, that actually take the time to explain this.



  Yeah... overall, it's going to depend on the art, as much as anything else. Koryu are pretty well known for such an approach... you don't move on until you have gotten all those little details. Then there's arts like Seitei Iaido and Seitei Jodo... they have an entire syllabus of 12 techniques each (with Seitei Jodo having 12 formal kihon/basics)... no matter how long you train, there are only 12 techniques. Pretty much your entire career is spent refining and reviewing, going through all the fine points each session. An art such as Kenpo, which can have so many techniques, will, by necessity, have less time to spend on the details... in those instances, I've found (as it's pretty much the same with us) that the biggest development in skill is in personal reflection on the methods and home training... that's where you can get your repetition in. Ideally, you should then get correction from the instructor to ensure you're on the right track, but the bulk of it is home training.



MJS said:


> LOL, yeah, so do I!  Used to drive me nuts when I'd have someone throw a punch, and I wouldn't even have to move, because it would've never reached me in the first place. LOL.  Gee, if you're afraid to hit me, are you going to be afraid of hitting the bad guy??  Don't worry...if you hit me, I"LL take the blame.



 Yeah... it's more than that, of course. I personally don't think that the techniques even work properly without a real, proper attack. Additionally, it shows a lack of respect for your training partner.



MJS said:


> LOL, I didn't figure you wanted to discuss him again.   But yes, we see that all the time.  I mean, when someone in a BJJ gym is learning a new mount escape, I doubt the guy on top is being totally uncooperative during that initial learning phase.  All the "What if's" are usually, or should I say, are supposed to be covered later on.  I view the techs as a base to build from.  According to the top Kenpo guys, such as Doc, aka Ron Chapel, who spent a very long time training with GM Parker, in his eyes, if you're doing the tech right to begin with, you shouldn't have to worry about the other stuff.  Hey, who knows...maybe he was taught some secret or special way of doing things, I don't know.  I'm sure he's privy to things that I'm not.  I'm simply saying that I don't want to assume that something will go as plan.  IMO, when plan A doesn't work, you better have plan Z.  IMO, saying that if you do this right, you won't need anything else, is akin to saying, "Well, my teacher learned this tech from his teacher, who learned it from his teacher, who learned it from his, and it worked for them, so it's gotta work for me!"  Sorry, I don't care about them, I care about me.



Honestly, I'd agree with Doc there... the way the techniques are designed, the safeguards are already there. So, ideally, there shouldn't be a chance for something else to happen... that said, looking at potential situations is also a good idea. It might bring you back to the idea of "hey, that's why we do it this way... to prevent these attacks"... who knows...?



MJS said:


> Good point.  I can agree with that.  Sad part is, in many cases, what you described doesn't happen in many schools, like it should.



Koryu, my friend, Koryu....


----------



## Kframe (Jan 12, 2014)

WaterGal said:


> I seem to recall the Bible saying that, if someone attacks you, you shouldn't even defend yourself - rather, you should turn the other cheek and let them strike you again.
> 
> I think that gun ownership should be legal - with reasonable restrictions - but it baffles me that so many Christians (pardon me if you practice another religion and I'm speaking out of turn) have the attitude that you mention, considering what the Bible actually says.



Ya that's not what he was talking about, good try though.  Nothing you can say will sway me, I have a right to defend my self and my family. Until you and your party actually repeal the 2a, im going to use the best one.   Not sure why you would want to take away tools people can use to defend them selvs. Seriously whats this  BS about not defending your self? If you seriously believe that, why are you on this forum and why are you even in a martial art?


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 12, 2014)

WaterGal said:


> I seem to recall the Bible saying that, if someone attacks you, you shouldn't even defend yourself - rather, you should turn the other cheek and let them strike you again.



If you let someone attack you you will have no control on the level of violence, if you defend yourself successfully then you can chose when the violence stops and actually decrease the amount of violence in the world, surely that is morally preferable. If someone strikes me, the only way I would turn the other cheek is so they can kiss my ***.


----------



## Kframe (Jan 12, 2014)

Agree'd RBTKD, that's is not what "he" was talking about. I don't think he was talking about self defense. I think he was talking about normal everyday arguments. He says to turn the cheek if they hit you.  Which I interpret as accept what happened and move on, and end the anger between you.  This was not a self defense situation as in other parts of the bible it mentions them carrying swords and that gods messengers have swords for a reason.


----------



## WaterGal (Jan 12, 2014)

Kframe said:


> Ya that's not what he was talking about, good try though.  Nothing you can say will sway me, I have a right to defend my self and my family. Until you and your party actually repeal the 2a, im going to use the best one.   Not sure why you would want to take away tools people can use to defend them selvs. Seriously whats this  BS about not defending your self? If you seriously believe that, why are you on this forum and why are you even in a martial art?



As I *said* - you apparently didn't read my comment, so maybe I shouldn't bother replying - I do think gun ownership should be legal. I have no idea where you're getting this idea that I want to repeal the second amendment. I do believe in defending oneself.  However, I'm also not a Christian (anymore), so I don't believe in the Bible or what Jesus supposedly said.

What I said, simply, was that, according to the Bible, Jesus Christ preached that you should not defend yourself or use violence at all.  So, again as I said, it seems odd to me that so many of his supposed followers also are big fans of shooting people in self-defense - and even, like you, use their religion to justify it.

ETA: As far as what it meant, here's the verse in question, from Luke 6: "If  someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone  takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back."  That seems fairly straightforward to me.  That's not about not arguing with your friend, it's about someone robbing you.


----------



## Kframe (Jan 12, 2014)

Your still wrong. No where does it say to let your self get raped, or murdered.   You can keep misinterpreting the bible, and I truly don't give a rip. 

Edit to add. Im not going to bother finding the many versus, but you keep ignoring the versus that are in contradiction to that one. IF your not a Christian, stop trying to teach me something you don't believe in..


----------



## MJS (Jan 14, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Yeah... overall, it's going to depend on the art, as much as anything else. Koryu are pretty well known for such an approach... you don't move on until you have gotten all those little details. Then there's arts like Seitei Iaido and Seitei Jodo... they have an entire syllabus of 12 techniques each (with Seitei Jodo having 12 formal kihon/basics)... no matter how long you train, there are only 12 techniques. Pretty much your entire career is spent refining and reviewing, going through all the fine points each session. An art such as Kenpo, which can have so many techniques, will, by necessity, have less time to spend on the details... in those instances, I've found (as it's pretty much the same with us) that the biggest development in skill is in personal reflection on the methods and home training... that's where you can get your repetition in. Ideally, you should then get correction from the instructor to ensure you're on the right track, but the bulk of it is home training.



Just one reason why *I* think there's too many techs, but that's another thread.  IMO, it takes a special type of person to be happy with that type of training.  I mean really, in todays world, where it seems the majority think more is better, well, imagine if someone walked into a school today and learned that there was only 12 techs! LOL!  They'd be looking for the other 142! LOL!  Few actually want to spend time going over the fine points. Oh well....to each their own.  





> Yeah... it's more than that, of course. I personally don't think that the techniques even work properly without a real, proper attack. Additionally, it shows a lack of respect for your training partner.



Agreed.





> Honestly, I'd agree with Doc there... the way the techniques are designed, the safeguards are already there. So, ideally, there shouldn't be a chance for something else to happen... that said, looking at potential situations is also a good idea. It might bring you back to the idea of "hey, that's why we do it this way... to prevent these attacks"... who knows...?



Thing is...the Docs are rare.  Sure, they're out there, but they're the minority, IMO.  





> Koryu, my friend, Koryu....


----------

