Waco said:
Perceptions change with experience. You have what - 6 months?
He has 6 months of what? From previous posts I got the impression that FTD had at least several years of training, especially given that he claims he should be referred to as a "master" of some sort... I'm still none too clear on that point.
I was one of the instructors on the panel for the test of which you speak. You may want to rethink expressing your personal opinions without having all of the facts.
This was only one of several dates for observing this testee over a 12 month period. This particular test was performed without sufficient sleep in an unairconditioned gym at the beginning of a Texas summer (end of June). Although we wanted to see a demonstration under total exhaustion, we did not want to go deep into the summer and risk heat stroke.
So, what precisely is the purpose of multiple tests? Additionally, what is the purpose of testing the individual "without sufficient sleep in an unairconditioned gym at the beginning of a Texas summer?" Did the individual(s) in question have physicals from their doctors allowing this? I'm sure you've done your homework and made sure your liability waivers keep you safe from prosecution in the unlikely event of an accidental death due to indifference on the part of the examiners...
I understand hardship, and I understand rigorous training, but insufficient sleep and potentially injurious climactic conditions sound more like overzealousness than dedication to training. Train smart, not hard...
Previous performances under favorable conditions were very well displayed. However, I will not discuss the conditions placed on this promotion which were mentioned at the conclusion of the test and which you did not post.
If FTD is getting the facts wrong, or is failing to adequately represent the situation, why do you refuse to discuss the testing/promotion conditions? I'd be curious to know what they were, especially given the fact that the individual(s) concerned had already been tested several times throughout the previous year...
I read your previous post where you criticized an 11 year old black belt and stated that he was age 7.
At either age, what business does a child have wearing a black belt with anything other than dress pants? Hell, I don't like 18 year olds running around with black belts, much less someone that hasn't even started puberty...
To be a better martial artist requires one to be more intraspective. Try and put more focus on yourself rather than others. This will benefit you greatly during your journey in the martial arts.
Being a martial artist has little to do with introspection. You are confusing fighter with scholar or philosopher. As for putting the focus on one's self, if you want to play ethical and moral games, or debate the philosophical ramifications of martial arts, it is the self that should be exterminated as well as any ties the self has to recognition or expression. The self is what expresses the ego, and time has shown that the ego does little to foster the "martial artist image" so many people hold as an example of proper behavior.
Some other questions -
What is "American Street" karate? I wasn't aware there was American karate, nor Street karate, much less American Street karate. I'm curious how your art, based on arts you found were less than suitable for self-defense, is somehow more suitable?
Why, if you are so dedicated to teaching self-defense, do you refuse to accept students from other schools? Why can't they benefit from your instruction in addition to that of their own teachers?
Lastly, can you explain this paragraph taken from your website:
This is a very aggressive street self-defense system. All males, age 16 and older, must provide a written character reference from their Pastor, Priest or Preacher before any information will be discussed concerning possible membership. This is required to prevent potentially violent persons from learning the skills taught in this system. We apologize for any inconvenience caused by such cautious pre-qualification of member candidates. The safety and lives of our neighbors and their families is too important to allow anyone to join this school just for the sake of earning a dollar.
Aren't you discriminating against non-Christians by requiring such character references? Isn't their word or the word of a family member sufficient evidence?
Thanks in advance for your replies.