f13.net

Not looking for board breaking tournaments here, just the basics to teach respect for the concept. My 7 year old daughter is getting to that age where I want to set her on the path, and daddy can only teach her so much.

Anyone gone through this have any thoughts?

Can't remember if this is more of a GenDis topic or a Serious Business one.

My son who's also 7 started Win Chun (which I used to do) but he didn't enjoy it much. Perhaps because it was in kind of a hardcore chinese kung fu gym. This year he's doing Akido and he seems to really like it a lot. Two very different martial arts but both are effective and instill some discipline and core tenets.

I did Tae Kwon Do for 5 years or so, my sister was 8ish when we started.  It was good, a good instructor who understands kids doing this for fitness\activity is important as opposed to a hardcore disciplinarian is probably what you want and should look for.

I took some Hapkido when I was younger along with a little Aikido.  Both are pretty good.  I'm not a huge fan of Tae Kwon Do though, probably because when I was growing up it was all the rage and there were soo many crappy schools.

I would recommend Akido too. Besides, it'll get your kid in less trouble if she actually uses it. Ever been sent to the office for a wrist lock? Don't think so.  :grin:

I took Aikido and Karate. I'd recommend the former.

Let me know what class she takes and I will sign up and dominate!

(http://www.ikigaiway.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/kramer-karate.jpg)

Style is irrelevant you want to go and speak to individual teachers and make your choice based on that. In any martial art or physical activity in general how its taught is just as important as what.

I was lucky enough to be taught by some G.I.'s who were doing at the base gym, and taught different styles. And not only that, they did it for free (and still do). If you can find something like that, it's almost a sure thing kids will be taught well. I forget how cheapened the "martial school landscape" can be. Probably lots of John Kreeses and Rex Kung Fu's out there. :grin:

[edit] Actually, John Kreese wouldn't be so bad.

I actually have a hard time finding martial arts that isn't "too" authentic. Doing various, ah, activities, to increase the scar tissue on your knuckles is not really what I have in mind. I also have a hard time understanding the accents of some of the teachers, which can also make it more difficult than need be, but that's my own failing.

My 13 year old is a black belt in Take Kwon Do, working on his second dan (sp?). We started him in martial arts when he was 7 at an Okinawan studio. After a year of that, we restarted him at a different studio because we had moved. It was a TKD studio, but one of those "USA Martial Arts!" places. Great teachers, don't get me wrong, but it wasn't accredited TKD with the Olympics (there is a difference).

When we moved to San Diego for my current job, we restarted him again, at a place that professed to be a TKD joint, but was actually more of a MMA studio with a basis around TKD in the loosest of senses.

19 months ago we moved (yes again, I bought a house a few cities away) and we enrolled him in his current studio, which is Olympics approved TKD (it has ties back to Korea, very official, etc.).

The one constant across all four studios was that the instructors were there to teach and were great people. We scouted all studios in the area each time, and turned down more than one place that was focused on the wrong things in order to find the right things. With the right instructors, the work he had done at other studios wasn't discredited and ignored, it was used to find where he fit into their belt system. I give him a lot of points for sticking with it and getting his yellow belt three times in three styles, and finally advancing to his black belt; but he wouldn't have been able to do any of it if we hadn't found studios where the focus is on learning the skills and how to use them instead of doing stunts and winning a tournament.

Oddly enough though, he can break a mean board and take a punch in the face. We do let him spar and he's taken his fair share of bruises, etc. but he's never done ass stupid things like be told to stand there and kick or punch something hard to condition his body to ignore the pain.

Helpful? I can answer more questions if you have them. Kids and martial arts are a great thing when you match a genuinely good instructor with your kid.

I'm looking at kid-oriented karate place far away with schoolmates versus a local brazillian joint next to a rowdy bar.  I really don't like where I live, as a community.  I'm not even worried about style, I just require good instructors.  Nice to have some confirmation on my instincts; same instincts that got him into his current school, which is great.

I really want to find something like this for my kid, too. I could not *stand* the local guy we went to--his market with kids is obviously "my boy is a huge discipline problem, can you slap him into shape while giving him something to hit"? All this pseudo-military assholery and bragging about his method is same thing that Shin Bet uses, etc.

I've gotten a BB in Taekwondo and Shorinji Kempo, and I really wouldn't suggest TKD for girls. I think the movements in something like Aikido would be much more enjoyable. If you're Cali or in NY I'd say have a look at Shorinji Kempo too.

Thanks folks. I was leaning Aikido going into this and the replies seem to bear that out. I never advanced very far in the few different systems I tried, more like a perpetual dabbler. But I liked the concepts of Aikido the most, from a self-discipline and self-defense pov.

The actual instructor is far more important than the specific martial art, and any decent school will let your kid try one class for free.  Try a few, watch the class yourself and see what she likes and if it's not stupid or insane. 

Yea, absolutely. I still remember my first instructor, him being the reason it took me a few years to try again. I don't like the ones that describe their interest in a style based on how effective it makes them at bouncing at bars.

Aikido also has social advantages: very little striking and kicking, no stunts with boards and bricks, and a strong cooperative spirit. In the beginning it alternates teaching methods for effective, unpredictable defense (as uke, performing conventional aikido techniques) with reinforcment of how to be a cautious, yielding attacker (as tori... the dummy punching, holding, and lunging towards fellow students). Later it combines the two into brutal reversals, but early on it insists that the best option is always to watch and react. Karate's focus on discipline is to keep kids from getting hurt or hurting themselves, but Aikido is all discipline and most American schools focus heavily on its founder's late-life conversion to an almost entirely non-violent philosophy:

Aikido joke: Who would win in a fight, Bruce Lee or Osensei (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morihei_Ueshiba)? There would be two winners, as each would have made a new friend and ally.

I know it was a joke, but I can't think of two guys who are more different actually! Both wanted to end fights super quickly.. But that's about the only similarity. Heh. Ueshiba's story starts with him hitting some thief, I think.. then feeling bad for almost killing him, then disappeared, contemplated, and formed a softer way of handling people. When Bruce overcame a tough opponent, he was disappointed in himself for "being a little winded" afterwards, and went to his research on how he could beat them fast and harder. He wanted to handle all martial artists in the same way Ueshiba handled a common thief. This lead him to being a far more violent man than Ueshiba. I wonder if they'd actually be friends.

Less different than you might think.  Both attempted to create effective martial arts pursuant to a goal.

DURRRRRRR DURRRRRRRRR  :uhrr:

Of course! As philosophies though, JKD's and Aikido's goals are wholly incompatible. One is a striking art and doesn't object to violence - Jeet Kune Do - "the way of the intercepting fist". It states no style of it's own, and already assumes violence. It's merely telling you to deal with violence with... even better violence (i.e. intercepting fists). The other OTOH is an immobilizing art and shuns violence - Aikido - "the way of harmony". Aikido will redirect the energy of a fight into no fight at all.

edit:

I have nothing but good opinions about both though, so I hope I'm not being misunderstood. One of my teachers was aikido based, and I would wholly recommend it for kids. Kids don't really need to be incorporating some of the things Bruce Lee would suggest. :P

As you said its not a "style" it is a philosophy, but you then say its a "striking art" which is wrong. Now Jun Fan Jeet Kune Do (Bruce lees specific style) which you are conflating for the philosophy itself most certainly involves avoiding confrontation as the first technique. Jeet Kune Do is the perspective of adopting any techniques based on practical application instead of dogma. That is it.

They are not mutually exclusive in the least bit.

Yes, that was a mistake on my part. It is not a striking art, per se. I was over-simplifying to contrast Bruce specifically with Aikido. He was in favor of many forms of striking (per the guideline that you use what works for you), but the philosophy itself is not about striking per se. It's about what a fighter deems practical, as you said. Which could be many things. And yes and no to "they not mutually exclusive." The "hypothetical camaraderie" between these two (and I don't know why I started this.. I must be really bored heh) is a one way street. From Bruce's point of view, it's all good. He wrote about Aikido a bit as well, especially the footwork. Not sure how much he actually incorporated it, but that's beside the point. He had nothing against it. From Ueshiba's point of view though, it's not all good. He created Aikido as part of a philosophy of non-violence he came to believe later in life. Apparently he was well versed in many other forms, but he put them aside for a softer approach. Therefore he would probably find Bruce Lee disagreeable, who didn't have the same outlook. Bruce Lee was open to anything. [edit] Err, I won't carry on.

Those of you fuckheads who want to discuss which style is better than the rest take it to another thread.

Sorry about that.

In my defense, I already made fun of myself and didn't know why I started it. Saturday nights aren't what they used to be, I guess.

Wouldn't that be the Ju Jitsu philosophy then?  :grin:

I don't understand.. wouldn't what be ju jitsu philosophy? Uneventful Saturday nights? Starting tangents about two dead dudes?  :grin:

Next fuckhead that posts something offtopic gets banned.

The only reason I'd recommend a school / teacher where kids are going to do a little sparring (i.e. has some punching or kicking, not pure grappling / holds) is that it provides some training in how to deal with someone punching you.

I can't speak for all schools, but some Aikido / grappling schools can be very flowery in that they avoid punching, even in practice. Your child shouldn't be used as a punching bag, of course, but not being afraid of getting hit is important. It's one of those reasons why trained black belts can lose fights - they get hit, spend their next bit of mental time processing the hit and in the meanwhile are getting pummelled.

But as always, it depends what is around you. I'd personally not choose TKD as it is less applicable off the mats, but it might work for you.

I agree with UnSub about sparring. It should never be a beat down, but it's good for the kid to have the contact. I've watched my son progress from being surprised and shocked when someone gets  a hit in to being more focused and determined in his defense. It's not about being tough and learning not to cry, it's about understanding what the point of the defense lessons are: to stop those hits from landing.

That, and your nerves are shot when something actually bad happens and you're not used to contact. It's a bit like sex (bad analogy for a kid's thread! but you get the point). I had a friend, for one example, who was well above my skill, but he (or at least at one time) didn't know how to handle himself in the "real world". Too scared and clumsy to draw from anything he actually knew.

What I want to know is, how do you know that your friend is better than you at sex?

Sorry Trippy, I'll add a topic relevant bit to avoid your awe-inspiring powers of bannitude:

How do you convince your significant other, a female, that self defense is a worthwhile pursuit and not just an excuse for a seven year-old to go hit other people, or get hit in return?  I'd really like to send my oldest son to...something...but my wife is dead set against it.

Tell her that it makes your son happy.  If that isn't enough, then all the philosophy and discipline benefits will be pointless to discuss.

Most of our best memories as kids are doing things our parents didn't want us to do.  You have the opportunity to give your son a happy memory of something positive, supervised, and beneficial.

Hope that helps. 

That's a tough one Cyrrex.. In addition to what Nebu said though, it might help to point out that a kid doing any organized, adult supervised after school activity is a good thing. "Keeps him off the streets!" haha

[edit] Then again, that just might convince her to sign up for some pansy activity instead. Jazz Flute classes or something.

Did both Tang Soo Do (similar to Taekwondo) and Jujutsu when younger, and would heartily recommend them both as kid friendly, if you can find a good school. Great confidence builders, fun and disciplined without being overly authoritarian. The former being probably better for fitness, and the latter more of a thinking game.

Not framing the issue as "self defense" would be the first fucking step. Your  7 year old kid is not learning how to defend themselves from others. Unless you want to teach your little kid about violence and the methodology of distrust(self defense begins with identifying threats) and fucking up other people in the most efficient manner possible probably should not bring it up.

For practical application AND the whole structure and discipline aspect you really are not going to find something better than boxing or wrestling. Both based around "sport" both based around "sparring" and both immediately applicable in real life. You can also wrestle through school so that is an added bonus. Dont take your kids into a TKD or Akido class expecting them to learn how to defend themselves.

On general principles, I'd recommend an inherently defensive art (such as Aikido) for kids.  Not only is it philosophically preferable, but it's more immediately *useful*, small children lack the mass for a "hard" style to have enough effect on the target to let offense be their defense.  I learned a variant of Karate that was pure power-strike oriented (people with broken jaws don't talk back, people with shattered knees don't run), but always had the most trouble when sparring/fighting against someone using Aikido or a related "soft" style oriented on redirection and joint locks.  If your reflexes are all tuned towards maximum impact on the target with total physical commitment, getting your strike redirected leaves you a little...out of position.

Krav Maga is a good blend of offense and defense, but it's hard to find a good instructor for it outside the really big cities.  However, it's purely physical, no mental "eye that cannot see itself" mental aspects (which can be a plus or minus, depending on your own opinion on Zen and Tao philosophy).

--Dave

Did Judo go out of fashion?  I always felt that it was an incredibly useful form in terms of philosophy and body awareness.   

For adults I think Jujutsu is probably more popular now here in the US, thanks to the rise of MMA competitions. Dunno which form would be better for a child, though.

As someone who has 6 years Win Chun i would agree with this 100%. Akido and such are much better for childrens ability if you don't intend to make them killing machines,*and* the styles are more effective for the average human.

Yep, I'm the third-generation of my family to practise judo, and I'd hugely recommend it.  It has let me fix situations without having to really hurt people on more occasions than I could count (often, but not always, on the rugby pitch).  Great for self-control, spatial and balance awareness, and doesn't necessarily look all that aggressive if you are trying to placate the partner as you describe.  All the same, it can get you out of some pretty hopeless situations if you really need to use that side of it (again, I speak from experience).

Also less risk of broken fingers (especially the pinkies) and little-toes than some of the impact-centric arts.  Those kicks and strikes do exist in formal kata but you'll never find kids actually using them and they're not used in practise or in bouts.

Edit: also, the rigid formalism of judo is kinda cool when you're a kid, or at least I found it to be so.  It's a huge contrast from just about anything else you experience around you in the west.

Tell her it's exceedingly hard for your leg to accidentally be bent two ways at once when there's only two people on the field and a burly guy who could kick the shit out of a bull is watching.

My parents put me in martial arts when I was 4. I got a black belt in Karate when I was 12, and a second degree when I was 16. It was more or less my life when I was younger as I never did any formal sports.

More important than finding a good instructor is not letting your kid quit, which she will most likely want to do more than once. The American martial arts scene is largely inspired by the European adaptations of Asian fighting styles, which means it is largely an adaptation of an adaptation. It has gotten better over the years, but if you were looking for practical self defense techniques to teach your daughter, then Tae Kwon Do, Karate, and Judo are in essence a lot of bullshit. Yet the most important factor in teaching your kid discipline through martial arts is ignoring their requests to quit. Make them stick it out until they get their black belt, a good instructor comes secondary to that.

As far as actually choosing a fighting style, unless you are concerned with practicality, then let her check out various martial arts movies and pick which one looks the coolest.

I would like to politely and respectfully voice my dissent to this opinion. A black belt from a poor instructor is not worth having. I've seen more than one studio that gives them out to kids like candy. This may make them feel good, but they don't earn it, learn anything about themselves in the process, and rarely learn anything useful.

It's like getting a black belt at McDonald's with your kids Happy Meal at that point. Sure, the kids love the food and the toy, but the food isn't good for them and the toy either breaks or gets lost within a few days.

Agreed. But in my opinion a good instructor isn't there to be liked, but to be respected. It is great if the child likes the instructor, but that shouldn't get in their way of being taught discipline and perseverance, as stoic as that sounds. This means a lot of kids dislike their instructor because they are reprimanded for goofing off in class, and then they complain to mom and dad about how mean the instructor is. Therefore if the parents let the child quit just because they are mad at their instructor, they never learn the valuable life lessons that martial arts is there for. It's not that the instructor isn't important, but the parents need to push their kid to continue forward despite the difficulty, which in my mind is already required before anyone enrolls a child into martial arts.

But yeah, I totally agree about the black belt thing. The entire belt system (white, gold, orange, green, etc) is a western idea so that students have some notion of progress. It is a business tool which keeps people interested and moving forward vs a white and black system for life long adherents. A lot of black belt tests are a joke these days.

Yup. We had different words for the same thing.

An instructor can be hated, and still be good. :)