Journey OF a new style...

[Kung Fu Wang]

Some may not agree that Taiji lacks hip throw.
example:

There is no hip throw in that video.

Hip throw has to follow 2 principles.

1. Use your hip to bounce your opponent's body off the ground.
2. Use your waist to lift your opponent's waist off the ground.

Both require knee bend -> knee straight. Neither principle is shown in that video.

 

[windwalker099]

There is no hip throw in that video.

Hip throw has to follow 2 principles.

1. Use your hip to bounce your opponent's body off the ground.
2. Use your waist to lift your opponent's waist off the ground.

Both require knee bend -> knee straight. Neither principle is shown in that video.

Now it's about principles, ok
Depends on how you define “hip throw.” In Taiji, the throw may not follow the Judo-style knee-bend, explode model, but the structure and timing still off-balance the opponent using the hips. It’s not about lifting,it’s about redirecting and turning their center.

Different method, same principle.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Different method, same principle.

You are talking about different throw and not hip throw here.

If you ask me, "Which move in long fist form can help you to develop hip throw?" My answer to you will be, "There is no move in Long fist form that can help me to develop hip throw." In all the long fist forms that I know, there exist no

- both knees bend -> both knees straight.
- bend head forward with head down and hip up.

Which move in Taiji form can help you to develop hip throw?

 

[windwalker099]

If you ask me, "Which move in long fist form can help you to develop hip throw?" My answer to you will be, "There is no move in Long fist form that can help me to develop hip throw." In all the long fist forms that I know, there exist no

- both knees bend -> both knees straight.
- bend head forward with head down and hip up.

Which move in Taiji form can help you to develop hip throw?

But I didn't ask , nor feel there is a need for any method/style to use or have what other styles, or methods have.
All are different with different focuses and strategies. One should find what suits them, and focus on it...

your teacher taught taiji, didn't he teach hip throws ?

 

[MadMartigan]

Whereas my curriculum would be more along the lines of: green belts learn head kicks. That gives instructors a lot of flexibility with how they create drills, combos, and sequences.

This is a bit off topic, but a small caution. If head kicks are a non-optional part of your curriculum, that's fine... but you will severely limit what type of students you attract.

I have several adult students who joined post 40. A couple of them will never be throwing head level side or round kicks... and that's OK. They aren't flexible, but they are great students who I would not want to drive away at green belt when their success moving forward now depends on their greatest weakness (hip flexibility).

I do like the principle based curriculum, and have a similar structure myself (each belt works on X kicking skills, but the drills to reach that goal vary from student to student or class to class). As long as there is a consistent grading syllabus, the specific drills aren't that important.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Just to be clear for the name of the throw. This video shows 3 different throws in 1, 2, 3 order.

1. 蹩(Bie) Leg break - Both feet on the ground in bow-arrow stance. He talks about this may break his opponent's knee.
2. 搵(Wen) Hip throw - Both feet on the ground in horse stance, knees bend -> knee straight.
3. 撩(Liao) Back kick - Use your leg to knock your opponent's leg off the ground.

Some may not agree that Taiji lacks hip throw.

Taiji has some throws. But taiji doesn't have "hip throw".

In this video, only "彈(Tan) Leg spring" is shown, The "搵(Wen) Hip throw" is not shown.

This is "彈(Tan) Leg spring" that you use leg to spring your opponent's leg that is closer to you. It is not "搵(Wen) Hip throw".

tie.gif

 

[Same Trick]

Do you need to train more than 1 MA system? If you train Taiji all your life, will you be able to do a "hip throw"? The answer is no. The reason is simple. The Taiji system just doesn't contain "hip throw". You may say, "I don't need to learn hip throw". If you say that, someone can also say, "I don't need to learn Taiji".

Which is more important? Taiji or hip throw? Why do we have to make that choice? Why not just train both at the same time?

But Taiji contain throws + striking, kicking and seizing, as do most CMA, not sure about shuai jiao ?

 

[HighKick]

I feared we would be seeing a post like this at some point.
Clearly the relationship with your instructor is tenuous. All the more reason to have had Everything Locked Down before you ever left home. Every T crossed and every I dotted. That ship has sailed so you are now in damage control. And you have to be willing to do whatever it takes. Money grab or not.
Yes, KKW documents can and have been faked but it is always found out in the end by a simple Dan number search. Plus there are ample resources through KKW to make certain your test would be legitimate.
For certain, I hear wrong doing on both sides throughout the one sided story I have read about your testing ventures. Which I hope you understand speculates things. Something to think about later when you have the time.
I cannot overstate strongly enough that you want to reconcile with your instructor. You have a HUGE investment there and, let’s be frank, he holds the keys to your 4th Dan KKW. At least the easiest keys for you. You are Way too close to the finish line to let something as petty as personalities get in the way. If you chose to go your separate ways you do that AFTER you get your rank, not threaten it beforehand.
***I originally put this in the wrong thread and realized it too late to delete so I pasted it to this thread. It is a duplicate. ***

I do not understand choosing Not to get your parents involved. They have history with your instructor, are going to be THERE with you, could be the best moderator for you to resolve the issues, and lock things down. Ask for their help. It means more than you think.
I hope it works out for you but it does not look good. Do what you have to do now to secure what you want for the future. Yes, that will mean playing his game for a while.

 

[ap Oweyn]

Alright skribs? What are you thinking at this point? (Assuming you want to share, of course.) How's it going?

 

[skribs]

I do not understand choosing Not to get your parents involved. They have history with your instructor, are going to be THERE with you, could be the best moderator for you to resolve the issues, and lock things down. Ask for their help. It means more than you think.

Avoiding a confrontation that could make the situation worse.

There is no way it would get better.

 

[skribs]

Alright skribs? What are you thinking at this point? (Assuming you want to share, of course.) How's it going?

I've actually got the start of a lot of good ideas, but it's going to take some time to work through them and flesh them out.

My plan right now is to create my own forms, and use them as the crux of my curriculum. One thing that's frustrated me and other instructors at other Taekwondo schools is the overwhelming scope of the curriculum. The memorization comes easy to me, but it doesn't to most students. It can be hard for instructors to keep track of who needs what, or what all of the different items are. If everything is based off of the forms, then it's much simpler.

For example, at my old school, knife-hand strikes were used in the white belt punch defenses, but weren't in the forms until green belt. The forms had nothing to do with the rest of the curriculum. In my new plans, I would like to use hammerfists for self-defense in the white & yellow belt class, so hammerfist will be in the white & yellow belt form.

This will allow me to concentrate my curriculum into the forms and make it easier for instructors to keep track of, it will also make it easier for students to prepare for testing, because everything they need to memorize for testing is in the form. It will make it easier for me to proctor the tests, because all of the striking technique that I want to check is in the forms. (There will be creative and reactive elements to the testing as well, such as sparring, but the curriculum to be tested can be kept simple).

The one issue is that while I concentrate the curriculum (which simplifies it in one way), I am also making the forms themselves more complex, which may be more difficult for beginners. I'm thinking about using stripes to break up the form, such as learning steps #1-8 of the form to get your first stripe, learning steps #9-16 to get your second stripe, and so on. And to make it easy for instructors to remember where the breakpoints are, I would simply place a kiyhap in the form anywhere I want to wait until the next stripe. It does mean more promotional overhead to manage a stripe system, but out of all of the stripe systems I have floated for myself, I believe this to be the simplest of them.

The curriculum would then include for each pair of belts the forms, a grappling concept (such as takedowns or pins), and then how we put those striking techniques from the form and grappling techniques together into sparring and self-defense. I figure my curriculum will be 70% Taekwondo, 20% BJJ, and 10% sprinkled in from everything else.

Tournaments are something I'll figure out later. I am still planning to call it Taekwondo, but go unaffilliated. I think I'll come up with a quorum system for high dan promotions.

I am going to wait a bit to open up. I have some other things I need to take care of first, things that I've put on hold during my push to 4th degree. I'll work on my forms and my business plan in the meantime. I'm hoping that later this year or some time next year, I will get my purple belt in BJJ. And by next year, I will have 20 years of experience in martial arts. I think that gives me quite a bit of credentials with which to open my school and feel confident in my resume bringing people in.

 

[Yokozuna514]

Not saying this is your case, but a bit about "hybrid" arts and those who say their art "combines" others. I put those words in quotes because just because you teach other arts in whatever proportion, DOESN'T mean you've invented a new hybrid system. I think to fit that description, some other elements must be present.

First and foremost, the multiple arts must work in conjunction and be intertwined with each other. For example, if I'm teaching X style karate and tell my students if they find themselves on the ground, here's some BJJ moves you can do, I am NOT teaching a hybrid system. I could do those BJJ moves without even knowing karate.

Now, if I teach my karate to set up a takedown, positioning me to apply a rear naked choke or arm bar (for the moment pretending my karate style doesn't already have such a move), I'm getting closer to a hybrid as the two arts are somewhat working together. There is a flow between the two.

A possible point of contention is that if I'm grappling BJJ style on the ground, it is difficult to employ my karate. I can flow A > B as described above, but not B > A. Does this detract from the "hybrid" label?

I like metaphors and food , so I'll use them in this example: I have a cafe that serves burgers and Japanese udon soup. I don't think you can say I serve Japanese American fusion cuisine. There's no fusion. But if I marinate the burger in the soup broth and serve it with shiitake mushrooms and daikon radish in the bun and call it an "udon burger," it's now approaching "fusion." (It may not approach "delicious" but that's beside the point.)

How about if I grill the mushrooms and daikon and throw a beef patty into to soup with a dash of ketchup? Now I've got "hamburger-udon soup." The fusion flows both Japanese > American and also American > Japanese. I'm serving fusion cuisine.

I'm just saying these points and others, IMHO, need to be considered when talking about combined/hybrid/mixed arts, or laying claim to a new "system."

Isshinryuronin, I believe I understand your point of view and would tend to agree. Simply combining two arts that do not work in unison is simply that, two separate arts that are not being used in unison. How much do the two or more arts have to work together to become a new hybrid art ? I am not sure if there is any true answer to that but as Supreme Court Justice Potter said, "I may not be able to define it but I know it when I see it.".

Capoeira is a an art that I would consider a hybrid system that has evolved so far from its roots as to be unrecognizable from the original. Is it a martial art ? Is it a dance ? It really looks like both to me and that is why I think of it as a hybrid system.

Skribs is working from a base of TKD and BJJ but he is in the beginning phases of thinking of how to incorporate them together. Perhaps he will have a new take on how to blend the two arts together. Time will tell but every great journey begins with the first step and you've given him something to consider as he embarks on his journey. Fair play.

 

[JimTheBoxer]

This thread might meander a bit. I'm stewing through a lot of thoughts and emotions right now.

Thread title is an obvious nod to the other thread that's been alive for several years now, the thread content is heavily based on the news I posted about in the TKD forum. To sum up: I am testing this week for my 4th degree black belt under my old TKD Master, and I just found out yesterday that I will not be getting that recognition by the organization. It will help to have a rubber-stamped 4th degree from someone higher rank in TKD, but I believe this may be the end of my TKD progression. It's definitely the end of my relationship with my former Master, and I'm not optimistic about establishing under another Master or under the organization myself based on the difficulties I have had over the past few years trying to find someone for this role.

I'm honestly at the point that I don't even want to call it Taekwondo anymore, and I feel I may be better served taking the Korean culture out of the designs completely. I'm not Korean, and I have very little connection to Korea or Korean culture. From everything I've seen and heard, Koreans don't have much respect for Americans (because we're lazy and undisciplined), and so I'm not so sure I should be putting them on a pedestal, when they wouldn't do the same for us. My approach is going to be much more American either way, and this would just solidify that.

I'm starting to run through some of the questions now about how I would want to run a new style. For those that don't know me, I have roughly 15 years of TKD training, 8 years of HKD, 3 years of BJJ, and a bit of wrestling, Muay Thai, and MMA. I've been around the block a bit. My initial thoughts are that I would want to take TKD, add the ground-fighting and remove the politics. But I'm starting to look at what else is there. So I'm taking things piece-by-piece. I know at the very least I want to have kicks (and sparring and tricking built around the kicks), and that I want to have ground fighting. But I'm not so sure on other things, such as: strikes (other than kicks), weapons, self-defense. Do I want to have a uniform or not? What do I want to name the art, and what effect would that have on my designs? Do I want to have forms?

Then there's the questions of what I do for my students. Do I have a belt system they can be promoted through or just teach technique? What do I do about tournaments for students who want to compete, when we're not really a part of any established style? Do I try to go more of the "Do" route and overtly teach things like confidence and discipline, or do I go more of the "Jitsu" route and focus on the martial art itself?

Then there's the questions of what I do for myself. I'm currently active in BJJ and I'm teaching cardio kickboxing, but I'm not active in a traditional martial art. What am I going to do to continue to learn and improve at the TKD side of things? If I do have a rank system, what am I going to do for my own personal rank progression, so that my students do not run into a ceiling where they cannot be promoted?

It's a scary proposition. Opening a school in an art that people know is risky enough. Opening a school in an unknown art is a bigger risk. I don't want folks to just bypass me because I look like another Master Ken, the guy who created his own art with "all of the strengths, none of the weaknesses; master of all, worst of none".

I don't know that this is the route I'm going to go down. I remember someone on here (I think it was Buka) suggested it a long time ago. But I am thinking it may be my best option if I want to open my own school.

You should name it Skrib kuando

This thread might meander a bit. I'm stewing through a lot of thoughts and emotions right now.

Thread title is an obvious nod to the other thread that's been alive for several years now, the thread content is heavily based on the news I posted about in the TKD forum. To sum up: I am testing this week for my 4th degree black belt under my old TKD Master, and I just found out yesterday that I will not be getting that recognition by the organization. It will help to have a rubber-stamped 4th degree from someone higher rank in TKD, but I believe this may be the end of my TKD progression. It's definitely the end of my relationship with my former Master, and I'm not optimistic about establishing under another Master or under the organization myself based on the difficulties I have had over the past few years trying to find someone for this role.

I'm honestly at the point that I don't even want to call it Taekwondo anymore, and I feel I may be better served taking the Korean culture out of the designs completely. I'm not Korean, and I have very little connection to Korea or Korean culture. From everything I've seen and heard, Koreans don't have much respect for Americans (because we're lazy and undisciplined), and so I'm not so sure I should be putting them on a pedestal, when they wouldn't do the same for us. My approach is going to be much more American either way, and this would just solidify that.

I'm starting to run through some of the questions now about how I would want to run a new style. For those that don't know me, I have roughly 15 years of TKD training, 8 years of HKD, 3 years of BJJ, and a bit of wrestling, Muay Thai, and MMA. I've been around the block a bit. My initial thoughts are that I would want to take TKD, add the ground-fighting and remove the politics. But I'm starting to look at what else is there. So I'm taking things piece-by-piece. I know at the very least I want to have kicks (and sparring and tricking built around the kicks), and that I want to have ground fighting. But I'm not so sure on other things, such as: strikes (other than kicks), weapons, self-defense. Do I want to have a uniform or not? What do I want to name the art, and what effect would that have on my designs? Do I want to have forms?

Then there's the questions of what I do for my students. Do I have a belt system they can be promoted through or just teach technique? What do I do about tournaments for students who want to compete, when we're not really a part of any established style? Do I try to go more of the "Do" route and overtly teach things like confidence and discipline, or do I go more of the "Jitsu" route and focus on the martial art itself?

Then there's the questions of what I do for myself. I'm currently active in BJJ and I'm teaching cardio kickboxing, but I'm not active in a traditional martial art. What am I going to do to continue to learn and improve at the TKD side of things? If I do have a rank system, what am I going to do for my own personal rank progression, so that my students do not run into a ceiling where they cannot be promoted?

It's a scary proposition. Opening a school in an art that people know is risky enough. Opening a school in an unknown art is a bigger risk. I don't want folks to just bypass me because I look like another Master Ken, the guy who created his own art with "all of the strengths, none of the weaknesses; master of all, worst of none".

I don't know that this is the route I'm going to go down. I remember someone on here (I think it was Buka) suggested it a long time ago. But I am thinking it may be my best option if I want to open my own school.

This thread might meander a bit. I'm stewing through a lot of thoughts and emotions right now.

Thread title is an obvious nod to the other thread that's been alive for several years now, the thread content is heavily based on the news I posted about in the TKD forum. To sum up: I am testing this week for my 4th degree black belt under my old TKD Master, and I just found out yesterday that I will not be getting that recognition by the organization. It will help to have a rubber-stamped 4th degree from someone higher rank in TKD, but I believe this may be the end of my TKD progression. It's definitely the end of my relationship with my former Master, and I'm not optimistic about establishing under another Master or under the organization myself based on the difficulties I have had over the past few years trying to find someone for this role.

I'm honestly at the point that I don't even want to call it Taekwondo anymore, and I feel I may be better served taking the Korean culture out of the designs completely. I'm not Korean, and I have very little connection to Korea or Korean culture. From everything I've seen and heard, Koreans don't have much respect for Americans (because we're lazy and undisciplined), and so I'm not so sure I should be putting them on a pedestal, when they wouldn't do the same for us. My approach is going to be much more American either way, and this would just solidify that.

I'm starting to run through some of the questions now about how I would want to run a new style. For those that don't know me, I have roughly 15 years of TKD training, 8 years of HKD, 3 years of BJJ, and a bit of wrestling, Muay Thai, and MMA. I've been around the block a bit. My initial thoughts are that I would want to take TKD, add the ground-fighting and remove the politics. But I'm starting to look at what else is there. So I'm taking things piece-by-piece. I know at the very least I want to have kicks (and sparring and tricking built around the kicks), and that I want to have ground fighting. But I'm not so sure on other things, such as: strikes (other than kicks), weapons, self-defense. Do I want to have a uniform or not? What do I want to name the art, and what effect would that have on my designs? Do I want to have forms?

Then there's the questions of what I do for my students. Do I have a belt system they can be promoted through or just teach technique? What do I do about tournaments for students who want to compete, when we're not really a part of any established style? Do I try to go more of the "Do" route and overtly teach things like confidence and discipline, or do I go more of the "Jitsu" route and focus on the martial art itself?

Then there's the questions of what I do for myself. I'm currently active in BJJ and I'm teaching cardio kickboxing, but I'm not active in a traditional martial art. What am I going to do to continue to learn and improve at the TKD side of things? If I do have a rank system, what am I going to do for my own personal rank progression, so that my students do not run into a ceiling where they cannot be promoted?

It's a scary proposition. Opening a school in an art that people know is risky enough. Opening a school in an unknown art is a bigger risk. I don't want folks to just bypass me because I look like another Master Ken, the guy who created his own art with "all of the strengths, none of the weaknesses; master of all, worst of none".

I don't know that this is the route I'm going to go down. I remember someone on here (I think it was Buka) suggested it a long time ago. But I am thinking it may be my best option if I want to open my own school.

Id like to state my opinion on the name you should give your style. While I know both styles you practice are not American but give it a more American name. I dont know just a thought from a guy who probably shouldn't be in here. Im only a boxer with very minimal training in Karate and served in the military

 

[windwalker099]

Skribs is working from a base of TKD and BJJ but he is in the beginning phases of thinking of how to incorporate them together.

Back in the late '70s, I trained with a light heavyweight contender Master Jimmy Brown who was preparing to fight Jeff Smith, the reigning champion at the time.

At the time, practicing Tibetan White Crane, and along with other martial artists, we helped him with light sparring to prepare for the match. He came from a background in Tang Soo Do (당수도) and Hapkido (합기도).

His method was to close the distance step by step — starting from kicking range, moving through punching range, and finishing with throws and joint locks on the ground using Hapkido.



A long time ago.
Is what Skribs is exploring really that different?

"Old Man Form
The person performing the form is the other founding member and original Chairman of the American Hapkido Alliance, Grand Master Jimmie Brown. This is a form he fondly named the "Old Man Form."

 

[skribs]

Is what Skribs is exploring really that different?

No, but I need to reinvent the wheel to revolve around my qualifications

 

[Yokozuna514]

Back in the late '70s, I trained with a light heavyweight contender who was preparing to fight Jeff Smith, the reigning champion at the time.

At the time, I was practicing Tibetan White Crane, and along with other martial artists, we helped him with light sparring to prepare for the match. He came from a background in Tang Soo Do (당수도) and Hapkido (합기도).

His method was to close the distance step by step — starting from kicking range, moving through punching range, and finishing with throws and joint locks on the ground using Hapkido.

A long time ago.
Is what Skribs is exploring really that different?

Who knows. I haven't seen it or even taken a class so I have no idea. To be fair, there are many, many examples of people that tried to create their own systems or martial arts and have gone by the wayside not because their martial art had no merits (to be fair, as I haven't experienced tons of those either, they may have had no merits either) but because they couldn't find their audience or following. They could have also found a following or audience but it may not have captured the imagination of more than a generation of students that would have kept the art going and growing. That is why it is amazing to me to see the people that did create something that has been carried on past their lifetime. They created something that captured peoples imagination enough to devote their lives into perpetuating the concepts of what was being taught. Was it because they were better at marketing ? Had better connections ? Created something so unique and interesting that it took on a life of it's own ? People have been punching, kicking, dragging, flipping, choking and smothering people for millennia but how many people are remembered for putting it together in such a way as to speak to a group of people that will carry on that legacy and teach it to others throughout the ages ?

Who knows. Who's to say Skibs won't be one of them ? Yes, it is pretty rare to meet an individual that can accomplish that but there are billions of people I have not met and it amazes me to think we have hit the height of everything the human race will ever know and accomplish as a species so why can't we know someone that will change or create a new MA ? If you are not open to the idea you will certainly never find it.

No dig, just saying that new things are also old things that have gotten a new spin but are just explained much better.

 

[isshinryuronin]

people that tried to create their own systems or martial arts and have gone by the wayside not because their martial art had no merits (to be fair, as I haven't experienced tons of those either, they may have had no merits either) but because they couldn't find their audience or following.

To "find their audience" infers one was looking. To what end? Profit, ego, to spread knowledge of a "better" way? If it's profit, the product must necessarily be fun, interesting, and other things designed to attract and retain students - elements that have little to do with quality. Assuming the most altruistic motives, why would anyone choose to follow this new way? New MA students don't know one way from another (unless great marketing can convince them of the new style's greatness). Experienced ones will look at two things: The reputation of the creator and then the effectiveness of the new style compared to existing ones.

it is amazing to me to see the people that did create something that has been carried on past their lifetime. They created something that captured peoples imagination enough to devote their lives into perpetuating the concepts of what was being taught.

In modern times, these people are few. Those that I know of are Ed Parker, the Gracies and marginally, Bruce Lee. It's hard to deny that publicity had a big part to play, but the fact remains they introduced concepts that affected MA. There seem to be many more whose names live on and whose art was perpetuated who lived a century or two ago.

Matsumura, Kyan, Itosu, Funakoshi, Miyagi, Arigake, Higashionna, etc. They had several things in common:
They were masters acknowledged by their peers and their art was effective. These men or their students created most of today's known karate styles. They did not look for an "audience or following" (they did not seek students - students sought them!) nor did they create their art thinking about ego, profit or its popularity. Yet, their legacies live on today. "Why?" is something to consider.

To be fair, today is not the past. I used the word "effective" but that is dependent on purpose, and purpose can change over time. New purposes have evolved such as sport, self-development and a different self-defense environment to deal with. I have no particular point to make in this post. It's just a commentary on the quotes, taking a broad view on some of the issues raised.

 

[skribs]

In modern times, these people are few. Those that I know of are Ed Parker, the Gracies and marginally, Bruce Lee. It's hard to deny that publicity had a big part to play, but the fact remains they introduced concepts that affected MA. There seem to be many more whose names live on and whose art was perpetuated who lived a century or two ago.

Matsumura, Kyan, Itosu, Funakoshi, Miyagi, Arigake, Higashionna, etc. They had several things in common:
They were masters acknowledged by their peers and their art was effective. These men or their students created most of today's known karate styles. They did not look for an "audience or following" (they did not seek students - students sought them!) nor did they create their art thinking about ego, profit or its popularity. Yet, their legacies live on today. "Why?" is something to consider.

I don't see what the difference is between these two groups of folks.

• Bruce Lee formalized JKD in 1967, after he had been teaching for several years and been involved in fights with other notable Chinese martial arts instructors.
• Carlos Gracie was already a black belt in Judo with a comprehensive competition record before he founded BJJ.
• Ed Parker was already a black belt in both Judo and Kenpo when he created American Kenpo.

(I would add Chuck Norris to that list of folks as well).

I'm not nearly as notable as any of these folks. While it would be nice to rise to the heights they have, I don't expect to. I expect my potential to be to oversee one very successful school and make a decent living there. I don't expect to have (m)any branches, I don't expect to expand to new regions, I don't expect to be a household name. But if I can make a positive impact in the lives of a few hundred kids, and make a living doing something I enjoy, I will consider that a success. Anything else is a bonus.