kung jung mu sul

[Petter]

Pick the one that doesn't just do a bunch of compliant partner drills - you know:
"now punch me just like this" and then goes through a movement that only works because you aren't resisting.

Search the forums for "aliveness" which should get you a pretty good definition of what a good place is like.

you know nothing against you but i wish people didnt just copy and paste the same post every time a question comes up...
anyways i know most of what you are trying to say and i did look for that but regardless most schools in the area are gonna put you at basic level first of course where people will not be trained to be able to deal with on the fly things instead you get thrown into basic training which is where i was put.

Restricting training to basic technique does not prevent the training from having aliveness. Aliveness does not mean “anything goes”—as should be obvious: BJJ training is alive but excludes lots and lots of things, from striking to fish-hooking to grabbing the inside of the opponent’s sleeves.

You could perfectly well have a drill with some aliveness allow only a single technique: Imagine, for instance, sparring where only jabs are allowed—jabs at 30% power, say. This should not unduly confuse or frighten even a raw beginner, but it does force them to learn proper range and timing from the outset. The key here is not that technique is unrestricted, but rather that there is an element of unpredictability, and an unco-operative opponent.

Of course, teaching tends to start with demonstration, then compliant drilling, then some combination of resistant drilling and sparring—there’s a place for compliant drills to learn a technique. But a “basic training” class does not have to mean that you only drill compliant techniques. Nor, in my opinion, should it. Spend enough time teaching a technique that students can begin to practice it in a realistic fashion, and then ease them into doing so.

[brihno360]

Haha! sorry for restating the obvious. :)

I actually like the idea of the new Korean arts; it seems as though we are now seeing a resurgence of what was going on before the whole unification of the kwans happened under the KTA and Kukkiwon.

It seems like (this is pure speculation of course) the practice of martial arts in Korea was especially correlated with independence and therefore the creation of a national martial art at the time was more important than actually having a budding martial arts culture.

Nowadays, independence is not such a new idea since we are a few generations removed from the last time Korea was occupied by a foreign force. The martial arts diversity seems to be sort of reblooming; and I'm all for it- I just prefer honesty in where the thing came from. that's all.

Not saying anything about Kung Jung Mu Sul being bad or good here- just what I have been thinking about recently where this general area of KMA is concerned.

If I could I'd probably study Farang Mu Sul which seems similar in content in some ways to what I have seen in the stuff I found while Google searching on Kung Jung Mu Sul. (Just as an example of what that says about where I stand)

[brihno360]

@petter: yes that's a much better explanation of what I *meant* to say

[gral]

ah yeah as far as i know from what they said, this is fairly popular in korea not so much here though.

[brihno360]

so I take you are now studying at this school?
Well, how is it man?

[gral]

like any martial arts in my immediate area outside of judo and bjj it doesnt seem to be doing that much at my 6th time but meh.. from what i see it does quite a variaty but its still a bit low on the action imo. still better than my other choices atm

[brihno360]

well, you know as you get more experience, you may find that there is a 'core' group of people that really like to go at it.
But they may ignore you for a newb for the first several months...

[gral]

ah main thing that was a real big turn off is in all 6 classes i've been to they have hardly done any physical training at all. by physical i mean like push ups sit ups the works... most i've done was 20 pushups the other day and that crap is child

[Featherstone]

I have a buddy of mine that practices this up in Port Richey. He's done it for several years now and enjoys it. Tim Wright is the main instructor and he appears very competent in his abilities. They have a pretty good school, cant remember the jui jitsu instructor or boxing, but they have a good mix and take there training pretty seriously.

[Miguksaram]

I was just saying that I wish these guys would just say that they made the art up instead of trying to claim BS history about it.

it seems to have started with the whole tkd is 2000 years old thing; then it was like every art had to be 2000 years old to have any legitimacy.

Obviously, it's fine to call an art whatever you want; but I'd rather see something like:
"we developed this art in the spirit of Korean royal court martial arts and that's why we called it that "

Than:
"this is the real stuff that they used to bodyguard kings 2000 years ago"

Thanks for clearing that up. Yes, I agree with you on this. I have no problem with someone telling me, "I learned Korean hapkido and Chinese Mantis along with weapon work. I combined the two and came up with Kuk Sool Won." Cool...let's learn some.

I'm a KMA history buff. However, I try not to use history as a base for an effective martial art. For some reason people think romantic history = awesome martial art. The Gumdo people who get pissed off about their art's history being debunked need to just realize that it is what it is. If they took their art because of what they believed to be an ancient historical military art, then they are idiots and should have done more research before starting. If they take it because they enjoy it regardless of who put it together then great, why worry about its history.

Just because you are being spoon fed, doesn't mean you have to enjoy the taste.