I started this thread cuz the Kuk-Sool Checkin thread was getting derailed. Hopefully this will help folks mind the MAP rules. I feel the sub-current started emerging about post #234. But I'm going to begin this thread with a recap of a later post (#245). The portion of Dragonkarma's post that I've highlighted in blue is very interesting considering the additional information he gives. First let me state that I could care less what he does in his dojang as that's HIS business. But I would like to point out just a couple of things that don't quite jibe IMO. According to the current KSW syllabus, only the fundamentals of sword and mid-staff (approx. 5 ~ 6 ft.) are to be taught at the DBN level, not the forms. The weapon forms are to be taught only after one has earned chodan. It doesn't matter what's taught during a seminar, because that's a special occasion not to be replicated in regular class. If a student remembers what was taught, s/he can train independently outside of class, but is not to receive additional instruction just because s/he attended the seminar. :bang: Unfortunately, the pattern to entice people with goodies like special allowances to train in weapons earlier than the syllabus dictates, has overrun the system. In fact, this is how the weapon fundamentals got added to the DBN level in the first place. During the early years of the seminar circuit in the USA, brown belts and DBN were allowed to do staff spinning along with the black belts (remember there were fewer BBs back in those days), and after awhile, the exception became the norm. Almost every DBN had learnt and knew the staff spinning drills, so the curriculum got changed. Same thing happened with juhl bong, especially after mass production of those foam rubber "saftey-chucks" made that particular item so inexpensive. What a great thing to distract the kids with, especially since they could care less to hear the GM's speech. As a result, now many schools teach this weapon to their color belt ranks. And let me restate this for my next comment: "All instructors should teach the weapons which are in the curriculum at their proper spot ... Being correct is the most important thing." In all the time I've been in KSW, I have NEVER seen escrima length sticks taught as a weapon, and certainly not as a PAIR the way it's taught in kali/arnis and similar MA. These weapons usually range from 2 ft. to one meter in length and aside from the longer mid-length staff I mentioned above, KSW short staff should max out about 12 ~ 14 inches. So while teaching this particular type of staff-work might prove interesting, it's definitely outside the KSW curriculum AFAIK. And for the record, dan bong basics are to be taught at chodan, in preparation for the the form taught at eedan, despite being included in the KSW staff handbook.
I suppose if you feel inadequate in your teaching you end up teaching lots of “fancy” things just to keep the students. Most of us when we first stared had trouble remembering everything we had to without adding a weapon to it; I thought a weapon was an extension of the person? How can a white belt that has trouble coordinating hand and feet going to work with a weapon, and if they do what do they have to look forward to when reaching d b n or j k n? As for using sticks, I hear the Suh’s were teaching short stick blocking a sword at seminars, which when shown to me was a load of c##p, in my humblest of opinion.J But a person I used to train with used to teach a rolled up newspaper as a defence to all under BB’s.
Also, in Iwama Ryu Aikio from 6th Kyu upwards, (i.e the equivalent of white belt in KSW) (also not sure of any other styles of Aikido but probably similar) one learns Jo and Bo Ken, as well as empty handed skills, since without learning bo ken, one cannot completely uinderstand the empty hand techniques, but without the empty hand techniques one cannot completely understand the sword (bo ken) or Jo techniques. However, that is not how KSW is taught. Therefore ig one is lerning KSW, I suppose one must learn things in the way and the order that KSN waned us to learn them in. C'est la Vie!
I think it's ALL not most Matt Good point Matt. Actually (as far as I know), ALL Filipino Martial Art systems teach weapon first and empty-hand second. If you think about it, it's a natural progression to teach weapon skills first on the basis that if there was a 'skirmish' with a neighbouring tribe, they'd hardly start fighting with empty hands, only to pick up a weapon when things started to go against them! They also usually start with double-stick training, in order to co-ordinate the left and right hand. Double stick is, therefore, usually seen as training for beginners, whereas single stick is seen as an advancement on that.
Where Oriental Martial Arts are concerned, I wouldn't be at all surprised if it wasn't something to do with building trust with one's student. Not giving them access to, and teaching them how to use, weapons, just in case they might use them against their Masters. A bit like when ordinary citizen's in Europe were forbidden to wear swords or, as in Britain in fairly recent years, even denying them the right to own and use handguns with a calibre above .22 - even for sporting purposes. (And I reckon that very fact should have ruled us out of the running when it came to us bidding to host the Olympics in 2012 as well!)
IMO this is a good reason not to teach students weapons early on in thier training. You need to be sure of a persons charactor before teaching weapons. As the student teacher relationship and trust builds you should know if the student can be trusted not to hurt themselves or others with the teachniques taught. The way I understand KSW rules regaurding weapons is that color belts are taught jul bong spins, brown belts thru Dan Bo Nims Staff spins, JKNs Staff and Sword and so on. If someone is teaching weapons too early they IMO are setting themselves up for dissaster if not from within then when HQ gets wind of it.
How long does it take you to get a sense of a person's character? A few weeks, a few months, a few years? I don't disagree, character is certainly important. And in my more cautious days I would watch for a year or more before really trusting someone. But I also think that trust is built out of experience. If you never give a person a chance, certainly you won't be disappointed, but neither will the relationship grow. As for this: I'm reasonably certain that HQ is aware of Clear Lake's weapons programs.
In truth, you can never hope to really 'know' anyone, no matter how long you have known them! I don't need to give you examples, I'm sure that you can all come up with plenty of your own if you think about it for a little while. As for teaching anything at all: Dan Inosanto once said, "If you are secure in your knowledge, then let it out." A sentiment to which I wholeheartedly agree. I despise the practice of drip-feeding material out to people over an unnecessarily extended period of time. As for "...setting themselves up for disaster...", what century are we living in? Are they going to go round with their henchmen and kneecap them or something?
As far As MA's go Kuk Sool has one of the most extensive sylabis you can find anywhere and if one takes the time to realy study and perfect it you don't need to learn it all at once. Teaching when a student is ready to learn more is up to thier instructor IMO. Do You watch the news reports?
So what rank are you, Obewan? Maybe you haven't experienced this MA phenomenon yet, but trust me, it exists in KSW as well. It's true that many MA have a tendency to teach 90% of their material simply to achieve chodan (1° BB) which forces them to then *drip-feed* any new material for the successive BB ranks, essentially relying on tenure as a means of preventing BBs from climbing the ladder "too fast." And KSW is definitely a different breed of MA in that there is PLENTY of additional stuff to learn after reaching 1st degree, but despite the KSW syllabus showing material for each BB (dan) rank, the amount of actual physical techniques diminishes greatly the higher up you go. Most of the upper level stuff is esoteric book knowledge, not stuff useful for SD. And forget about learning additional forms (as listed in the curriculum). All the higher ranked masters in KSW that I know have told me they have yet to be shown these forms (oon-bi hyung, mae-hwa choon hyung, or additional weapon forms for the moon-knife or trident). Not that they MUST learn new material in order to be promoted, but if so, then I wonder exactly what it was they LEARNED to be deserving of promotion (with no weight given to tenure). Remember that the minimum time (in years) spent at each level USED to be equal to the number associated with the next dan level (only recently was this criteria revamped so that it only takes 4 ~ 5 years for each level, which is much more sensible IMO). So I think the statement describing the condition of being forced to wait when there are fewer requirements needed to advance, as "drip-feeding" was merely stating the obvious and not trying to slight the KSW system. I do. And using outdated/traditional/ancient weapons to thwart a thug wielding a firearm is just plain insane. But I'm sure you've heard the old line about what a fool someone must be for bringing a knife to a gunfight, haven't you? It's sorta like that (BTW, have you ever been mugged?).
Sa Bum, so I agree I'm not at the point where I would experience that Phenomenom (please use smaller words I'm only a SBN). Come on now, Haven't you ever seen "Remo Williams".
The way in which weapons are taught at our dojang is thus: at blue belt, all 15 staff spins and the three walking staff spins are taught, at red belt, the five moving sword meditations and two unsheathings, and then Joong Bong Il Hyung is taught at brown belt, with Juhng Guhm Hyung not being taught until Ildan (Chodan) per the standard curriculum. In addition, anytime Jool Bong seminars are held (usually four times per year), everyone is welcome to attend and learn jool bong spins regardless of rank. This is how it has been since the dojang was founded and it's worked well ever since. I think this is a gread model!
for my class, i teach the 8 single and 3 double jool bong spinning sets at blue belt, a training routine for jool bong i made up, and short staff kneeling meditation and 18 movement form (just 1 direction) at red, expande on dahn dong and start middle staff at brown, inc spinning, moveing, retrival and control techs. i find all this helps prep students for staff and sword form as a lot of movements between weapons are similar or help develop the flexibility, co-ordination and strength required for weapons training.
:topic: OFF-TOPIC :topic: Actually, that's one of my favorite movies! (it was fairly accurate in keeping with the Destroyer series story-line, despite bombing at the box-office). Fred Ward, Wilford Brimley, and Joel Grey played their respective roles with aplomb, but Kate Mulgrew (Capt. Janeway) is a far cry from a *sexy* love interest, in my book anyway. Dodging a bullet really isn't that far-fetched, as long as you are quick enough to respond to the pre-flinch the gun wielder does in preparation for the recoil (obviously, you can't move faster than a speeding bullet - unless you're Superman ). However, since this particular skill doesn't require any WEAPONS to perform, it's of little use as a means to counter the point I was making earlier. Nice try, though.
Thanks, I did learn from somewhere that the police actually treat a threat with a knive as dangerous or maybe even more than a gun. I guess when some one rushes you with a knife it is difficult to retrieve your gun from the holster before the attacker get close enough to stab. And they seldom miss thier target with a knife. IMO if some one is using a gun in very close range then a person would have a chance to defend against it but at a range of more than a few feet it would be very difficult to defend against.
Knife versus handgun A man with intent, and surprise on his side, can reach you from around 18 feet away before you can react quickly enough to draw your handgun. This has been proven. From 21 feet away, a trained man should be able to draw his handgun and fire with some accuracy. Needless to say, if he's closer than 18 feet, you shouldn't even attempt to draw your handgun if he surprises you - trouble is, when you carry a gun, that's going to be your first instinctive reaction, and it could cost you your life! Knives don't run out of bullets either, and they can slash and thrust in a multitude of directions. If you manage to grasp the barrel of a handgun, although it can undoubtedly get hot if it has been used, it can't as easily be wrenched from your hand like the blade of a knife can either.
http://www.policeone.com/edged-weap...ense-Is-or-was-the-21-foot-rule-valid-Part-1/ or this: http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Tueller/How.Close.htm
Indeed! Those are some great articles. And it goes without saying that everyone should click the link at the end of the first one, and read Part 2 of that article. While not active in Law Enforcement, I have had many close friends who were, including not only run-of-the-mill police officers but those whose duty it is to train would-be cadets as well as supervise the on-going training for the officers in the field. In fact, I remember when that training video mentioned in the referenced article came out ("Surviving Edged Weapons"), and being told that 21 feet is a bare minimum by some trainers who conducted their own experiments with "safe" distances. The police academy where some of those friends of mine worked was equipped with a Hogan's Alley where they conducted all sorts of various scenarios to train the different local SWAT teams as well as other interested officers within their district. Many of the speed-cuffing drills used nowadays were developed around this same time (mid to late 80's), and if not mistaken, it's also about the time that ASP (Armament Systems & Procedures) introduced the expandable baton (T.J. Hooker had made the PR-24, or side-handle baton, quite popular - but IMO it's the most useless tool a peace officer could possibly carry). This is also when I became aware of the "escalation of force" model that is prescribed by most police departments. I also happened to learn a few tactical knife fighting moves, so I can affirm that everything mentioned by Pugil in post #18 is the unadulterated truth. I might also mention that due to this type of training, I now teach a slightly modified version of the rather simplistic evasive maneuvers evident in DAHN-DO MAHK-KI, and these modifications corresondingly represent a higher probability of survival, especially if facing someone who REALLY knows how to use a knife (it should be noted that I didn't tamper with the joint-locks, just the preemptive movements).
