HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Subject: What happens when you cross styles? 
Distribution: world
Organization: IE Technical Services Holland
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 12:00:47 +0000


In article <1992Sep10.021729.21037@edsi.plexus.COM> rybskip@edsi.plexus.COM writes:

>
>I've studied TaeKwonDo Moo Duk Kwan (somebody please correct me on the
>spelling if I'm wrong) for two years now.  Unfortunately, moving off to
>college has put a dampener on the availability of that style.  Lawrence
>University offers TKD style Song Mu Kwan, but I don't particularily care
>for the teacher.  I've looked around at other places, but with my
>limited budget, I just cannot afford them.
>
>One of the professors teaches Aikido at a YMCA nearby.  The class is
>pretty good and I have been thinking about joining for the time that
>I'm here (about 3 years).  My question is, would dropping my studies in
>TKD all of a sudden (something that I feel bad about doing) and taking up a
>radically different art affect my overall performance in a combat
>situation?  --front kick, no, wait, I want to grab his arm and fli--
>BAM!
>and that's all there was to little old me!   :-)
>
Depends a lot on what grade you are.  I taught Martial Arts for nearly
twenty years, mostly Aikido, Atemi-Jutsu and Aiki Ju Jitsu, but also
had a background in Karate, Kung Fu and a number of weapon arts.  My
own experience of crossing styles was that it was helpful.  I have had
a number of students coming to Aikido who had, and in some cases still
were, studying Karate.

Now those who had studied to a high grade generally had less problems
crossing styles.

In the association I was in there was a requriement to study more than
one Martial Art.  To get your diploma you had to have Dan grades in three
Martial Arts.  What I found and a number of students reported the same to
me was that it was easier to move between different arts than those
closely related to each other.  I had no trouble moving between Aikido,
Tao Chi Kung Fu, and Bo Jutsu.  I had major problems with moving between
Aikido and Aiki Ju Jitsu, and between Judo and Ju Jitsu.

A move from TKD to Aikido should not present too many problems.  You should
in fact be able to practice both if you want to.

Nigel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Nigel Backhurst ( nigel@ietech.demon.co.uk )
c/o 88 Ashburton Road, Hugglescote, Coalville, LE6 2LX, U.K.
p/a IE Technical Services Holland, Deventerstr 150, 7321 CE Apeldoorn
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
From: mhirsch@dynastar.princeton.edu (Michael Hirsch)
Subject: Chinese yoga?
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University Department of Computer Science
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 16:23:07 GMT

The local YMCA here offers "Chinese Yoga."  I've never about it
before.  Do any of you know anything about it?  Does anyone do it?
The blurb said the instructor has 16 years experience in Chinese
martial arts.  I wonder if it could be chi gung with another name.

Any info much appreciated.
--


Michael D. Hirsch		mhirsch@cs.princeton.edu    
Computer Science Department	Voice: (609) 258-1751       
Princeton NJ, 08544		FAX:   (609) 258-1771
From: robinson@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Michael Robinson)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: Re: groundfighting
Date: 11 Sep 92 22:15:08 GMT
Organization: Institute of Cognitive Studies, U.C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: cogsci.berkeley.edu

In article <3647@unisql.UUCP> wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:
>Why wouldn't her ideal position be standing but her attacker on the ground? 

Well, yes.  But really, is this much different than saying "her ideal position
would be shihan aikidoka"?

In real life, a woman does not really have the option of dumping an attacker
who is twice as strong and heavy on the ground.

>Why isn't her best strategy to stay mobile and disengage as soon as
>possible instead of getting tangled up in a wrestling match?

Well, this is her best strategy.  The question, though, was about strongest
position, which sort of implies immobility, doesn't it?


-- 
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Michael Robinson                          UUCP:   ucbvax!cogsci!robinson
                                        INTERNET: robinson@cogsci.berkeley.edu
From: poore@ds9.scri.fsu.edu (David Poore)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: Re: What happens when you cross styles?
Date: 14 Sep 92 19:24:20 GMT
Reply-To: poore@ds9.scri.fsu.edu (David Poore)
Organization: Florida State University

In article <716252945snx@ietech.demon.co.uk> nigel@ietech.demon.co.uk ("Nigel G. Backhurst") writes:
>In article <10692@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> poore@ds9.scri.fsu.edu writes:
>>I've heard of an obscure Southern Chinese system called Tao Chi Chuan
>Tao Chi Chuan, this was taught by Dr Richard Chan in 1936-40 to
>a number of Europeans, one of whom was my father.  I was suprised
>to read you describe it as an obscure Southern Chinese system, as
>the impression I got from my Taffy Jones (who also learnt it from
>Dr Chan) and my father was that Dr Chan had developed the system.

Didn't mean to imply any disrespect by the use of the term 'obscure'! It
seems that way from my perspective, because I've never met anyone else
who'd ever heard of it. I have a small manual from this style that
details the 18 fists they use and the particular applications for them.

>Essentially the system is strongly based on Chin Na techniques,
>combined with Atemi moves which require a high degree of anatomical
>knowledge.

Sounds interesting! More, more, we want to hear more!

David Poore
poore@ds9.scri.fsu.edu

Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
From: drury@helix.nih.gov (Richard Drury)
Subject: Re: Sigh... boxing
Organization: National Institutes of Health
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 04:17:07 GMT

In article psc@sei.cmu.edu (Peter Capell) writes:
>>09-Sep-92 drury@helix.nih.gov (Richard Drury)Re: Boxing...(once again...)
>>Well, I know you didn't mean that Cai Hong Xiang, wearing 16 oz.
>>gloves, unable to kick, choke, lock, throw, or even hit below
>>the belt, would wipe up the ring with, say, Hollyfield. 
>>So, maybe you meant that your fighter wouldn't have to follow
>>boxing rules, but the boxer would?  And the likelyhood of your
>>guy prevailing over the boxer in this situation is the point 
>>you were trying to make?  That's it?
>
>Get a grip Dru.  I was saying that the boxer would be boxing with boxing rules
>only, and Xiang would be using kicks and boxing.  That was my point.  We are
>talking about BOXING vs. BOXING w/ KICKS essentially.  If we open the floor to
>both kicking, eye gouging, joint locks and so on, Cai Hong Xiang would
>definitely kill Evander Hollyfield, no question there at all.

Sorry, I was just trying to "get a grip" on what it is you were
actually trying to say.  Thanks for clearing this up for me.  You
are saying that a fighter who is permitted to punch and kick
will generally cream a fighter who is only allowed to punch.  We
are in violent agreement on this point.  In fact, I don't think
anyone who contributed to the boxing thread disagreed.  Come to
think of it, I don't think I've ever seen anyone in this forum
argue otherwise.
--
Richard A. Drury
drury@helix.nih.gov
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
From: cherry@access.digex.com (Cherry Poptart)
Subject: Re: Boxing and Kicks
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:12:22 GMT

With all of this discussion of boxing vs. MA
I am unclear on a couple of things;

1. In watching some kickboxer types recently,
and pro boxing on TV, it seems like there is 
not much need for these guys to block "kicks
to the head" because they stay covered up most
of the time.  In fact, while they seem open to
kicks to the lower legs and maybe up to mid
thigh, their upper bodies seem to be very well 
covered by the closed stance that they hold
(looks real different from the MA stances that
I see in the movies ;-)

2. If you did kick up high at a boxer, what
would happen if he or she decided to box your 
foot?  They seem to put a lot o power into some
of their shots, and the foot is actually pretty 
slow (to be technical, on a straight kick it 
pretty much has to come to a halt to reverse 
direction, maybe not so for a roundhouse though).
Since I know someone who is hobbling around right
now with a severe (blackened) bruse on one foot
(someone blocked their kick with an elbow, and I
guess in this case the foot lost) I would have to 
think that sticking your foot in a boxers face 
would be like saying "here, hit this". 

3. If you took american boxing and added kicks
to it, wouldnt it just, eventually, evolve into
something like Thai kickboxing?   Or not?


Cherry!


Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
From: psc@sei.cmu.edu (Peter Capell)
Subject: Sigh... boxing
Organization: Software Engineering Institute
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 11:50:27 GMT


>09-Sep-92 drury@helix.nih.gov (Richard Drury)Re: Boxing...(once again...)

>Well, I know you didn't mean that Cai Hong Xiang, wearing 16 oz.
>gloves, unable to kick, choke, lock, throw, or even hit below
>the belt, would wipe up the ring with, say, Hollyfield. 
>So, maybe you meant that your fighter wouldn't have to follow
>boxing rules, but the boxer would?  And the likelyhood of your
>guy prevailing over the boxer in this situation is the point 
>you were trying to make?  That's it?

Get a grip Dru.  I was saying that the boxer would be boxing with boxing rules
only, and Xiang would be using kicks and boxing.  That was my point.  We are
talking about BOXING vs. BOXING w/ KICKS essentially.  If we open the floor to
both kicking, eye gouging, joint locks and so on, Cai Hong Xiang would
definitely kill Evander Hollyfield, no question there at all.
From: garth@dojo.West.Sun.COM (Garth)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: Re: Too Silent, Too Vocal
Date: 11 Sep 1992 21:51:40 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: world
Reply-To: garth@dojo.West.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: dojo.west.sun.com

In article 13543@pogo.wv.tek.com, roberts@pogo.wv.tek.com (Robert Stroud) writes:
>In article <lavukkINNk4n@west.west.sun.com> garth@dojo.West.Sun.COM writes:   
>
>  I think one problem people are having with this kia discussion has to do
>  with silent kia versus voiced kia.  All actions have kia (ie proper breathing)
>  when done corrently.  If you choose to make noise or not is the difference.
>  For instance when I make a men strike (hit to the head) I exhale the same
>  when I make noise and when I don't.  The air control is important.  But if
>  kia is audible it can do more psychological work on your opponent.  

Interesting, yet another type...
When we kiai, it is a very violent expulsion of breath, leaving almost
non in the lungs, when you inhale after kiai, it is also almost violent
because the lungs have no air...
When we breath for combat, it is very diffent..inhale is quick, exhale
a bit longer...all very relaxed.
Attacks or defense can be donr inhaling or exhaling, but most power is
generated when exhaling, and therefore preferred.  For Max power..Kiai,
all followup blows are done with little to no air in lungs.

	-Garth





			= = = = = = =
  | Garth R. Doverspike		Sun Microsystems, S.E. Seattle |
  | garth.doverspike@west.sun.com			       |
From: mdamico@anselm.uucp (Michael D'Amico)
Newsgroups: rec.misc
Subject: Channel 48 (Phila.) now on air
Keywords: WGTW, ch. 48, Philadelphia,PA
Date: 13 Sep 92 18:38:32 GMT
Organization: Saint Anselm College, Manchester, NH


   For anyone that lives in the Delaware Valley, the former WKBS-TV,
channel 48 in Burlington,NJ/Philadelphia,PA which left the airwaves
in 1983, returned to the air on August 15,1992. The station is now
known as WGTW-TV. Programming is mainly old reruns/movies and most of
it is satellite fed from the American Entertainment Network, a satellite
feed which caters to low power TV stations, and small independent
full power stations. The new channel 48 has a fair/medium signal in 
the far northeastern Philadelphia suburbs of Monmouth County, NJ.
Would anyone with information about this station, please contact me
via e-mail?

-Thanks
           Michael D'Amico
           St. Anselm College
           Manchester,NH 03102

!anselm!mdamico
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: exuses@exu.ericsson.se (Stacy Scott,exu-xt-df,5959)
Subject: Shotgun
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems
Date: 8 Sep 92 07:44:07 CDT
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu
Keywords: Forsale

Winchester Model Ranger         

12 gauge Autoloader with Winchoke tubes (Full, Modified, Improved Cylinder)
28" barrel with bead front sight and ventilated rib also
22" Slug barrel with rifle adjustable sights and tapped for scope.
 
Makes a great all-around hunting gun.
           
Price: $300

If you are not in Texas you will need to find an FFL.

Contact:  Stacy Scott                       Ericsson Network Systems
          Home: (214) 494-1007              Work: (214) 907-5959
          exuses@exu.ericsson.se



Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: crs@beta.lanl.gov (Charlie Sorsby)
Subject: Re: Hunting Deer with .223?
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Date: 14 Sep 92 07:53:17 CDT
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu


= >think most netters will advise against using this caliber to hunt
= >deer with as it is marginal in knockdown power.
= 
= I would say that a 223 is marginal at best, but it's not
= because of the weapon it is fired from.

I don't think the post at the second level of quotation implied
that it had anything to do with the firearm used.  It did make a
few comments about military-looking firearms that I took to be
tongue in cheek but I think the comment above does and was meant to
stand on its own.

= > Some may even say
= >it was designed more to just injure rather than kill quickly
= >since it is a military caliber. 
= 
= 	I see. So I guess 308 or 30-06 will just injure rather
= 	than kill since they both are military calibers?

Was the heavy sarcasm really necessary?  Granted the comment about
military calibres could have been more clear but I knew what he
meant.  Can it be that views about what the purpose of military
cartridges are for have changed between adoption of the .308 and
that of the .223?  I have frequently read comments both here and in
rec.guns that one of the reasons for the choice of the .223 as a
military cartridge was that "if an enemy is killed it removes one
enemy from the battle but it he is only wounded it removes two or
more--the one wounded and the one or more to take care of him."
Whether a major reason or even a real one I don't know--but I can
certainly see the source of the phrase "since it is a military
caliber."

Lest the point be lost amid all this bickering, the post gave good
advice.  In the hands of any but the most experienced,
knowledgable, and skillful hunters, the .223 is not suitable for
most US deer and is of doubtful suitability for any US deer.

The cartridge was never designed as a deer cartridge and .22 cal
bullets are too light.  Deer can be killed with them but it
requires that the hunter be able to tell when a shot must be passed
up and have the self restraint to do so.  That is true for any
cartridge, of course, but the light .22 calibre bullet magnifies
the importance of those constraints.

I don't think either of you disagree about that.  One of you simply
took offense at some tongue-in-cheek comments made by the other.
Let's just don't lose sight of the original request for advice
grumbling at each other.


-- 
Best,

Charlie "Older than dirt" Sorsby				"I'm the NRA!"
	  crs@lanl.gov


Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: sglanger@vela.acs.oakland.edu (LANGER STEVEN C)
Subject: Re: Hunting Deer with .223?
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: 14 Sep 92 07:53:28 CDT
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu
Keywords: knock down power

Actually, the .223 was developed intentionally to *maim* not kill.
It's spec was developed during/after the Korean War when military
strategists learned that if you kill a guy, you only disable one
person. If you wound him, you take out him plus two guys to carry the
stretcher. The Viet Cong learned this lesson well. Their mines carried
only enough C4 to take off a guys foot. [You can get additional info
on this from sci.military .]

  Anyway, I sure wouldn't use that caliber on anything much bigger than
a woodchuck.
From: ut-emx!shawn@emx.cc.utexas.edu (Shawn Boyd)
Subject: Re: Bear Deterrent Spray Contents & Address
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin; Austin, Texas
Date: 8 Sep 92 07:42:19 CDT
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

In article <1992Sep2.065503.28222@doug.cae.wisc.edu> ketchum@fubar.cs.montana.edu (Steve White) writes:
>The contents of a canister labeled "Backcountry Escort" self defense spray is
>10% oleoresin capsicum. Whatever that stuff is. Anyone care to answer?

The definition of the term "oleoresin" indicates to me that this
ingredient is designed to cause the irritant (see below) to stick to
the target, and perhaps penetrate tissue on the surface layer as well.
As the delivery mechanism for the acting ingredient, it is most likely
intended to hold the mixture together while it is being sprayed as
well as to cause it to stick tenaciously to the target once it
arrives.

Capsicum is the genus name for a set of plants we commonly refer to as
"chiles" which contain a substance known as capsaicin, chemically
referred to as phenolic amide -- the stuff that makes chiles "hot"
(more correctly said in Spanish, "picante," meaning "peppery" to
distinguish the notion from "caliente" meaning "hot" since capsaicin
doesn't burn, it STINGS).

It doesn't sound like this would be as strong a deterrent as some
other chemical, say "tear gas."  But it is.  If you don't believe me,
try rubbing your eyes after you eat a pickled habanero, which contains
very little capsaicin in comparison to the 10% mixture you refer to.
The amount varies from chile to chile, but it is well under an order
of magnitude relative to the 10% ratio you refer to.

>It is distributed by Steele's Marketing Group, P.O. Box 7152 Bozeman, MT 59771.
>I recall seeing a can somewhere with cayenne pepper in it that I believe was
>made in Missoula. If I come across it I'll post something about it.

Thanks.  I am interested in this stuff as a hunting aid.  I hunt
exclusively with a bow, and have an invitation to go to New Mexico for
a black bear hunt this season or next.  I will be carrying a back up
gun, but a bowhunter cannot realistically carry a shotgun around.
I'll only be taking a .44 Smith wheel gun.  Blackies reputedly aren't
all that aggressive, but I intend to hunt from the ground, and my
guide may or may not be around when I shoot.  I think I'll order a can
of this stuff.  Thanks for the address.

I also hunt large feral hogs, again from the ground.  I'm pretty
sneaky (bowhunters have to be) but I have to get close to be
effective.  Real close.  I won't take a shot over 40 yards, and I
prefer 10 yards or under.  I have never taken a charge, but I might
some day.  That Smith is just too damn heavy.

>
>According to the caution label this is some bad stuff.

I hear the stuff really works good, but I've also gotten E-mail
advising me not to give up a firearm backup.  I'll be taking that
advice, but I'm getting kind of tired of chasing pigs through the
cactus with a six gun strapped to the small of my back.  My bow gives
me more trouble than I care to deal with as it is.

>  Steve White								     |

Shawn Boyd


Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: mrein3@cfsmo.honeywell.com (Matt Rein #3)
Subject: value of model 1100
Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center
Date: 14 Sep 92 07:52:44 CDT
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu


> 
> How much is a used Remington Model 1100 semiautomatic 12 guage in fair
> to good condition worth?  No rust and the stock finish looks ok.  The
> action works fine except occasionally the safety fails to reset on
> reload (Might this be expensive to repair?).
> 
> I don't know when it was made.  Is there an easy was to tell?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jeff
> 
I saw a 3" Mag. 12 ga. 1100 with 3 tubes on the used shelf at the local
sporting goods store yesterday for $329.99.  If I didn't already own
one I would have wrote the guy a check on the spot.  I do have two
questions for you:

What do you mean, "the safety fails to reset on reload?"  You either
push the safety on or off manually.  There is nothing automatic about
the safety.

Why would you ever want to sell an 1100?  In my opinion, it is by far
and away the best working and best looking auto-loader on the market.

Sounds like I opened up a can of worms with that last fact.

--
- Matt Rein
- mrein3@CFSMO.Honeywell.COM
From: toby@milton.u.washington.edu (Toby Bradshaw)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: Re: Hunting Deer with .223?
Keywords: knock down power
Date: 15 Sep 92 15:13:42 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

In article <1992Sep14.075328.27680@doug.cae.wisc.edu> sglanger@vela.acs.oakland.edu (LANGER STEVEN C) writes:
>Actually, the .223 was developed intentionally to *maim* not kill.

Note that this is with an FMJ bullet.  I haven't heard anyone recommend
FMJs for deer.

>  Anyway, I sure wouldn't use that caliber on anything much bigger than
>a woodchuck.

Your choice.  Coyotes everywhere are hoping that nobody ever uses
a .223 on them because they are unsuitable for anything bigger than
a woodchuck :)

Toby Bradshaw
Department of Biochemistry and College of Forest Resources
University of Washington, Seattle
toby@u.washington.edu

"A well-educated electorate being necessary to the prosperity of
a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall
not be infringed."  Do you conclude from this that only voters
may own books?
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: lawsonj@morse.cns.vt.edu (John Lawson)
Subject: Re: Where's the birds?
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA
Date: 9 Sep 92 08:01:56 CDT
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu


I just got back from a very enjoyable hunt in South Carolina. There
seemed to be plenty of birds and several of us did ok. This was my first
dove hunt so I didn't know what to expect but had a great time. We were
pass shooting birds as they were entering/leaving a wheat field on my
friends neighbors' property. Action was good early until around 9 am
then picked up again around 3 pm. Hope to go back again next year for
the opener!!!



Newsgroups: rec.hunting
From: cescript@mtu.edu (Charles Scripter)
Subject: Re: Me again
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: 8 Sep 92 07:43:50 CDT
Originator: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

In article <1992Aug31.094514.12208@doug.cae.wisc.edu>,
halvorsen_ralph@mac-mailserver.atc.ll.mit.edu ("Halvorsen Ralph") writes:

> 2. My vote for the new gun for Matt Harrington would be for something on the
> order of a 270 bolt action(your choice of manufacturers). It will give you the
> versatility you need from prairie dogs to deer. 

Don't overlook the .308 either (I wouldn't recommend it for 1000 yard
shooting, but I wouldn't recommend trying to shoot deer at 1000 yards,
either ;-).  The .270 is a nice cartridge, but bolt action .308s are
easy to find (some of the old military rifles are nice; Get them checked
by a gunsmith, though).  I think you can find some of these down into the
range of 100 bucks (maybe someone can give you pointers for a source;
The Shotgun News is the first one that comes to mind).

-- 
Charles Scripter   *   cescript@phy.mtu.edu
Dept of Physics, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931
-------------------------------------------------------------------
With your one remaining eye, please do NOT look back into the laser