If you are unable to sustain a civil conversation, I will have to exit the discussion without further ado.
If Earl Weiss is the gentleman I assume he is from his screen name, and you are contradicting him, I think that might be very wise. Add to that the experience of every TKDin or Karateka that I can think of being contradictory to your view, and I'm pretty sure what the verdict is. Seriously dude, I love TKD, it's my base style; I train in it, teach it, defend it and use it in all manner of contexts. Do San against an armoured aggressor engaging me with HAOV? Regularly. But you're just wrong on this. No shame in that, I'm the first to hold my hand up when I mess up. That's how we learn. But to learn you've got to acknowledge your mistakes and change. Mitch
So what you are in fact then saying is: Had the "superhuman" block breaker from the youtube clip only done the preparations "for years", no actual breaking ( not progressing level after level) and knew the exact technique, he could have performed the exact same sequence, without breaking his hand? Just want to be clear about that.
Spare me the wounded martyr crap - you are so wring on this its blown out the other side yet still think your opinion is right when quite literally every major style and brraker in the game states otherwise - that takes denial to a whole new level There is confidence, there is arrogance and then there is blatant stupidity
No, that's clearly not what I said. I can see that, as can others. But then, that's not the point we're discussing, which is your assertion that, "The purpose (of breaking) is to condition and streighten the bones." What I pointed out, along with many others, is that breaking is the demonstration of the conditioning, along with accuracy, technique etc, not the development of it. Mitch
My phrasing might be incorrect. I will admit to that. But that doesn't matter. This is a scientific question, not a martial arts one. If it's true that the actual breaking (that includes raising the level) leaves little to no effect as to the hardening of the bones - then the answer to my question would be Yes: he could have performed the same feat anyway, by simply knowing the technique and having prepared it for years.
Your abasement of the word "scientific" is an abomination The CONDITIONING allows the break to occur, not the break Seriously you CANNOT be this stupid...it is not possible
No, it really isn't a scientific question, and shifting the goalposts won't work with this. Your phrasing was wrong because you were wrong. Conditioning is only part of the requirements for a successful break, as I and others have indicated. As for "simply knowing the technique and having prepared for it," that would depend on the preparation. The point remains, the breaking is the demonstration of technique, conditioning etc, not the method by which the conditioning is achieved. Mitch
Do you still stand by your assertion that "The purpose (of breaking) is to condition and streighten the bones?" Mitch
No, I don't stand by "the purpose is", given how instructors disagree and would know better than me. This is different however from concluding that the process of application - "breaking" is of no use in terms of conditioning for future impacts. In that case, breaking is a 100% for show and of no utility, with the previous preparations all that matters.
Good. Thank you for admitting you were wrong. It would be helpful for friendly discussion if you could do so with good grace and a smile. Again, for me, this is not true. It denies the other areas of utility that those same instructors have outlined. Breaking is not just a test of conditioning. It is a mental test of resolve and confidence, it is a physical test of conditioning as we have already agreed, plus a physical test of technique, accuracy, and to some extent 'grace under pressure.' The point of a successful break is that it can be performed without significant injury (one may always get minor cuts from broken materials or minor bruising) because of the practitioner's conditioning and skill. What it does not do, is form a significant part of the conditioning regime. Mitch
Fair enough. But how is that applicable to expert level and master practitioners, who still do breaking as part of their training regime? The mental resolve and confidence is surely long since past for those experienced black belts in executing various breakings.
You take a point to the illogical extreme. Resolve and confidence are a couple of elements involvd in breaking. Testing your conditioning and the quality of your technique are other elements. AFAIAC to whatever extent safe and practical, instructors also need to lead by example. Further, as age takes it's toll, refining your breaks as to what techniques to use is part of the learning process that should never end "Be the eternal student..." ..."Never tire of learning..'
