Martial Arts Home.

[lklawson]

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

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]

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]

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

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

 

[MJS]

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

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]

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):



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?

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

Hey Mike,

Ha, go ahead....

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.

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.

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.

Am I on track with this so far?

Uh.... not quite, no.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.

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.

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.

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

Said something earlier that got at me....

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]

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]

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

 

[tkizzle05]

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]

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.

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.

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!).

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.

LOL, I didn't think so.

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

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'.....

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.

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.

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...)

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]

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]

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.