Discussion in 'Tae-Kwon-Do' started by Acronym, Dec 24, 2020.
The fundamentals pretty much define "reasonable grip".
So, again, what are you trying to prove?
So, you did say "TMA", but meant "all TMA except Japanese Ju Jutsu"?
Define "wreslting", then? Because if I'd written that statement, it would be something like, "You can't apply them without controlling the opponent first by breaking down his structure and limiting his movement."
And the point of that post?
You're quite certain of that from your extensive visits to many HKD and TKD schools across the world?
You are the one saying it's the same everywhere.
You've never been to a US Karate school, have you?
Just resorted to insults to deflect.
Most anything leaves something open for something. That doesn't mean the technique doesn't work.
Sorry but I disagree. - it may mean what they train and it may not. Seen plenty of storefront schools list 12 things on their sign and maybe they do 3 of them.
So, this must mean your high kicks don't work statement was meant to me qualified in some sense. Or am I missing something?
Why does it always come back to semantics with martial arts? There is a limit to how much you can change something before its not it anymore. Like if you change all the major tenents in a ideology, can you really still call it the same name? I say no, you should change the name to reflect the fact you arent affliated at all with it besides a name. (its just dis honest at best fradulent at worse)
I have seen several place sclaim they do bartistu, they dont do it. They just do cane choregraphy, thats not bartitsu. that is blatantly dishonest or fradualent intending to get people in who want to learn bartitsu. That always annoys me, and i wish more people would militantly object to it and not fund the places that do it. (actually change my several to a couple, seen more bartitsu that does legitimately do it than not using the name)
I noticed a pattern on this forum that people who can't do technique X are the ones who reject it.
I guess that's what we call ego?
Yes I am certain of that since I am well read on the subject and I grew up with Hapkido. I don't need to visit schools in order to qualify that statement.
I can't speak for the emphasis however, but your claim that spin kicks are rare in the US is very questionable.
This is from a random student who trained under a 9th Dan:
"We didn't do much striking practice in HKD proper aside from High/Low wheel kicks"
So spin kicks do play a large part in Hapkido as I stated.
I'm not talking about those schools who lie about what they train. I'm talking about the schools who are honest about their training.
If the conversation shifts to schools who lie about what they train then I'll shift to there school. But right now we focusing on schools who that actually train Hapkido, because it's those schools who one would have to visit or train in, in order to know "what Hapkido schools do".
Going to a school that lies about training Hapkido won't help with understanding "How Hapkido Trains"
I don't remember ever saying that high kicks don't work. I think someone's responded to my comment in a way that made it seem like I was saying it. Here are the things I actually said in this thread about high kicks. Nothing about what I posted below is inaccurate.
"Kick too high and you'll expose your standing leg." post #61
"I don't train high kicks in my training, but it doesn't mean I won't kick someone in the head if the opportunity presents itself." Post# 23
"Kicks that are too high open you up for attacks to your standing leg, groin, or sweep." #28
"I don't train to do high kicks to the head, but I'm flexible enough to kick the head. If I see that I can kick the head then I'm going for it., because it's an opportunity and not "the plan." #76
The only pattern in this forum is that most of us are blunt. And that certain questions and behaviors tend to pop up from time to time, that remind of when someone has brought up the same assumption or reacted the same way in the past.
From time to time we see things like that repeat.
As far as people who can't do techniques X are the ones who reject it. I would definitely say that's not the case here. There is often a lot of discussion of things that most of us can't do, and it's not rejected. Kung Fu Wang is good for tossing things like that into the discussion and at the most people may not first understand, but then he'll post additional information that allows us to better understand what we are looking at. I don't see people just rejecting him all the time.
There are a few of us who want proof by video fighting a professional MMA fighters, but that's far and few in between. The other pattern that I've seen is that people are quick to jump on nonsense posts. Anything they think is nonsense they will respond to in a blunt manner, so I don't the responses that you are getting are due to someone not being able to do it., I think it's not as easy to get away with generalities on this site.
Can you explain to me how someone who isn't even capable of executing head kicks has any say on the validity of them?
Agree. My first NGA instructor had Aikido, Judo, Karate and something else on the door. He taught one of those (though he held rank in at least two of the others and taught some principles from them).123
Separate names with a comma.