The Book of Five Rings

I've just added an IRC chat room to my page, specifically for the purpose of discussing martial arts, regardless of style or experience. Try it out, and let me know what you think!

"A man cannot understand the perfection and imperfections of his chosen art if he cannot see the value in other arts"~Miyamoto Musashi

MARTIALWAY FORUM

I have studied martial arts of one form or another for about the last 17 years, off and on. Because of the fact that I moved around alot as a child, it was hard for me to train in one style, or to train consistently. Thus, I managed to work my way through several styles before settling into one. The styles I dabbled in were Shotokan, Aikido, and Isshin-ryu. For about the last four years, I have been studying Waga-michi Shorei Kempo under Sensei James Likens, a fellow police officer.

"If you sit by the river long enough, the body of your enemy will float by"~Unknown

Waga-Michi Shorei Kempo:

Shorei Kempo is an eclectic style, meaning that it is a blend of many styles, taking from each component style, whatever works. It blends techniques from Shorei-Goju ryu Karate (a form of Okinawan Karate), Shaolin Chu'an Fa (Chinese Kung Fu), and Arnis (Filipino stick-and knife fighting), as well as components of Judo, Chin Na (Chinese locking), and Aikido.
Stress is placed on conditioning the body to take blows, as no matter how proficient the fighter, you will get hit in a fight. Also stressed is power development, economy of motion, flow of movement, and realism in combat. The style is meant purely as a combat style, with hardly any tournament applications or forms being taught. Sparring is practiced in two ways- traditional point sparring, and full-contact sparring. Point sparring is done as a way of training for knife fighting, where getting in and out are important. Full-contact sparring is done using no pads, full-contact to the body and legs, light to medium contact to the head...throws, locks, sweeps, and grappling allowed. This type of sparring prepares the individual for actual combat.

The katas we practice are as follows:
1. Pinan Shodan
2. Pinan Nidan
3. Pinan Sandan
4. Pinan Yodan
5. Pinan Godan
6. Basidai
7. Sanchin
8. Suigi no Kune
9. Ruby no Kune.

The Weapons we study are:
1. knife
2. escrima sticks
3. bo
4. jo
5. nunchaku
6. sai
7. tonfa
8. short sword
9. long sword.

Belt rankings (in order) are:
1. white
2. gold
3. yellow
4. orange
5. green
6. blue
7. purple
8. 1st degree Brown
9. 2nd degree Brown
10 3rd degree Brown
11. Black.

"The more you sweat in training, the less you'll bleed in combat"~Sign at BUD/S Training

Thoughts on Martial Arts:

While the origins of "martial arts", in their most traditional (Oriental fighting arts) sense are open to debate, if the true and literal meaning of the phrase "martial arts" is taken into consideration, no intelligent debate is possible. Although many modern practitioners of the arts will disagree, "martial arts", strictly speaking, translates into "arts relating to war". Taking this into account, "martial arts", in one form or another, have existed ever since the first caveman brained his buddy with a club.
At the risk of infuriating the bulk of modern "martial artists", any statement that professes a martial artist's abhorrance of violence is modern, politically-correct drivel. While it is true that a true martial artist may not "pray" for violence, conflict, or war, the simple definition of the term "martial arts" is diametrically opposed to a "hatred" of these things. A person does not devote any amount of time to the study of something that they "hate". In order for man to study something, an interest in it must exist. Thus, to study the arts relating to war, a person must have an interest in war. Man is, by nature, a violent creature. However many millions of years of history have proven this, beyond any reasonable doubt. Violence has been a part of man's existence since the beginning of time.
To argue that a "true" martial artist does not study to wage war, but to bring peace is simply more PC rhetoric. If we look back in history, we can see that systematized martial arts were created purely with the intent to provide one warrior the ability to effectively kill another, and to come home in one piece, after having done so.
Do not get me wrong. In the modern world, we do not have to worry about being killed, everyday. I do not sit around my house, breathlessly awaiting the opportunity to kill, or hurt someone. I am a believer in honesty in thought, however. If there are those of you who are considering starting to study martial arts, it is important to realize, and be honest with yourself in that realization, what exactly the origins and purpose of martial arts are.
On a somewhat contradictory note, however, there are several styles of martial arts, that in their modern practice, are less combat oriented than others. Some examples of these styles would be Aikido, Tai Chi, and Tae Kwon Do. While there are some schools of each of these styles that do teach with an eye on realistic combat, as a whole, these styles tend to stress different goals than realism in combat.
Aikido and Tai Chi tend to be geared more along the lines of spiritual self-improvement, by way of a kind of meditation in movement. Tae Kwon Do tends to stress more of the competition/sport aspects of martial arts. While all of these styles have combat-effective techniques incorporated in them, the focus of the styles shies away from true martial training.
This being said, there is no one style of martial art that is better than another. Much of a styles effectiveness depends on the individual and the instructor. If the individual trains hard and realistically, the style will generally be effective. If the instructor trains with an eye on realism, and if he/she is familiar with what actually works in a "street" situation, the style will be effective.
Much of what people think about martial arts comes from their perceptions of what they have seen in the media. The media, however, is fickle. One day, a certain stylist or style may be more visible and marketable than another. For example: When Bruce Lee was alive and making movies, many people decided that Kung Fu was the ultimate style. Another example would be when Ninjutsu was the main focus of several popular martial arts films...many magazines and schools began to monopolize on the craze, and started stressing Ninjutsu as "The Ultimate Combat Style". Yet another example would be the Thai Boxing craze, which followed several Kickboxing and Muay Thai movies...once again, that style became billed as the "Ultimate Combat Style". A final example can be seen currently, with the appearance of "No Holds Barred" fighting. In these events, grapplers have held sway, giving rise to the perception that grappling styles are the be-all and end-all of effective styles. History does repeat itself, therefore, it is only a matter of time before another style becomes the darling of the martial arts world.
This leads to another thought. It is important for a fighter to be proficient in all ranges of combat. By this, I mean that an individual must be proficient with all of the following, before he/she can be considered a good fighter:
1.) Projectile weapons (guns, bows, knives,etc.)
2.) Hand-held weapons (Staffs, swords, knives, sai, etc.)
3.) Long range empty-hand techniques (kicks)
4.) Intermediate range empty-hand techniques (punches)
5.) Short range empty hand techniques (trapping and locking)
6.) Grappling
On this note, one should realize that the success of grapplers in "No Holds Barred" Events can be generally attributed to the fact that many of the promoters/backers of these events have a stake in the success of grapplers. Many of the grapplers who compete in these events are truely world class athletes, and fighters. However, very seldom is a truely outstanding striker ever present to compete. Do not get me wrong...I am not claiming to be one of these outstanding strikers. However, I have seen enough of these types of strikers in my life, to realize that the strikers present to compete are not of their caliber. What this basically results in, is the same as if you took Mike Tyson, and put him in a ring with an average high-school wrestler. I think very few people would argue the probable outcome of such a match. By claiming that "Grappling is the most effective style", because of what you see on one of the "No Holds Barred" events, would be the same as making the statement that "Boxing is better than wrestling", as a result of my hypothetical match-up.
It is up to each individual fighter to be proficient enough to not have to "play" according to the rules the opponent desires to "play" by. This means, that it is up to each individual to set the pace of the fight...the winner being the one who makes the opponent adhere to the rules he/she desires.
On a final note, one thing I have learned from my current sensei, is the importance of power development. Many people hit harder than average, but few people hit really hard. If you learn how to truely hit HARD, the psychological advantage it gives you will be enormous. What this means is this: Many people are capable of hurting an opponent with a punch or kick. While this has its place in combat, a hurt opponent can still hurt you back, or worse. Pain tends to goad people into seeking vengeance on the person who inflicted it. However, if you are capable of hitting someone hard enough to scare them, you've won the fight.

"A hurt man thinks of vengeance...a scared man thinks only of escape"~Sensei James Likens