Mr Abernethy's Latest Offering

Ok,

I know this has been doing the rounds on some other forums, but I thought I'd offer up this bone here also - if only to get the "Old Dog" (MAP that is) re-booted into action.

Seishan/Hangetsu Bunkai clip:

http://blog.iainabernethy.com/

As many of you know, I'm not exactly going to trample down my door to go and train with the fella, but I do like watching what he does and sometimes I can see mutual points of agreement.

This last one though really has me scratching my head.

I just don't get it.

Anyone? Anyone?

Gary

 

Gary, what exactly is it that you're not sure of? I actually quite enjoyed that. I think it's a much more realistic interpretation of what's going on. Ok, the stance may not come in to play in the same way as in other interpretations, but the upper body movement is, to my mind, the most important there.

 

I'm with Llama on this one, it was OK. I'm not convinced by the kick to the front of the knee to force the leg back - it seems an awkward movement and one that might rely on Mr Abernethy's burly build to get the force behind. The downward push seemed like a good interpretation though.

 

FWIW I've always interpreted the kick as a sweep (I don't hoik it up in the air like in the vid - the follow through for me is lateral) so a sweep followed by a push seems reasonable to me

 

Yeah, I'd interpret it as a sweep too, but a standard "ashi barai" from the side rather than the thrust into the knee that Mr A shows. I'm not saying his interpretation couldn't work, but I think I'd struggle personally.

 

Yep, and considering the chain of moves the sweep doesn't have to be particularly convincing - sweep to unbalance followed by a sharp push will have someone on their back

 

Moosey, Llama,

What do you instructors teach you to do?

Gary

 

We do very little bunkai, which is fine by me as I don't especially value it as a training method.

I don't think I've ever looked at bunkai for hangetsu and the bunkai we learn generally isn't anything special.

 

Can I ask why?

Gary

 

I think that most useful things can be completely divorced from kata and learned as partner drills without needing to be bound by the kata.

I suspect that it comes from a lot of people not really knowing the bunkai to our kata so all of the useful stuff we learn comes from partner drills rather than from using kata as an encyclopedia.

 

It seemed to me that when he's actually doing the kick against a real target he's not doing a crescent kick at all. He's doing what I'd call a front stamp kick, with the foot rotated so that the toes point outwards a little (see about 1:33 to 1:43 in the video clip).

That said, I don't have a big problem with that as:
a) I think the stamp kick works just fine in the way he's using it, and
b) my version doesn't have a crescent kick anyway so its a moot point for me.

Moosey, a big strong lad like you shouldn't have a problem with that kick. Its all a matter of making sure you've already destroyed his posture and set yourself up at the right distance and angle, just before you kick. Its an easy kick to perform but can be debilitating to your partner's knee joint, so care needs to be taken in practice. Ideally you want to kick slightly from the inside rather than head on.

Mr A. does seem to achieve the necessary unbalancing & positioning by virtue of the opposite hand pushing on the opponent's shoulder, but like I said, he's not really doing a crescent kick. I think it would be rather harder to cause the same damage with a crescent kick, unless you have plenty of momentum.

I'm not really convinced by the following punch. What's the target for a standard fist (seiken)? I don't think I'd want to punch the upper thoracic vertebra with seiken. The vertebrae are quite strong there and the spinous processes are quite knobbly - you could break your own fist if you punch really hard. But other than the spine there's not a particularly good choice of targets in the area (at that angle) for seiken.

And the push down? All seems a bit wishy washy, not a very definitive technique but OK I suppose if you don't want to hurt the opponent but just want to push him over so you can escape. If that were the case though I wouldn't have already stamped through his knee, irrecoverably damaging his knee ligaments.

All that said, its still a million miles better than the bunkai that many people come up with. So fair play to Mr A.

Mike

 

Haven't looked at the bunkai yet but we're usually given free reign to experiment and then our sensei may or may not show us the 'conventional' application depending on what we've come up with

 

I agree with MIke's analysis. As I watched it I wondered why he spoke of a crescent kick and then did a thrusting/stamp kick.

The kick (as we practice it - Taihojutsu) is inside and slightly above the knee. Its a thrust and stepping through. While it can be debilitating to the knee it doesn't have to be. It doesn't take much pressure at that point to rotate the leg out and open up the hips stealing the opponent's balance.

I also agree on the uncertain effectiveness of a closed fist punch to the lower cervical/upper thoracic vertebrae. It would seem from that vantage that a knee to the forehead or an open palm/hammerfist to the back of the head would give more bang for the buck as a means of stunning to permit escape.

 

You know years ago (in my shotokan club) we had to perform 3 crescent kicks in heian sandan, then later it was changed to 3 stomps. (probably back to 3 stomps)
So i guess its all the same lol.. Not to me its not, and it pee's me off to discover little changes like this occur from time to time.

This freedom to come up with whatever ya want in Bunkai pee's me off too, why?.. Becouse things like this occur to take us further away from the origional intention.

Its just this simple: Within each Kata there is a few "tricks" i like to call them personally, and they work for particular situations, thats it.. No never ending puzzle to discover for every conceivable attack on earth.
I really dont like re-inventors of the wheel, thats all im seeing with this type of footage..

Give me the origional Bunkai, or better yet the origional intention of the movement. Even if it means going back to goju for it (in reference to shotokan). This anything goes stuff is moving us further away from what we set out to discover... rant over, on with normal programing

 

For egsample some movements are there simply to show how to generate power with the body, not quadruple super blocks for multiple situations as in the typical interpretation of tekki shodan etc

Just my view mind you, dont expect anyone to agree at all

edit, Like why would you stand, holding your ground and have to deflect 3-4 punches away and finish with what, a backfist... see, not viable. its obviously a generation of power technique. Sure you can fight inside with it, but its not the whole package to win the fight, its just a lesson in power generation.

 

I thought Mr Abernethy explained that in his view the original intent of the kata was a low unbalancing kick that had gradually evolved into a high and more flamboyant crescent kick (as probably happened with many jumps and kicks in other kata)?
As such he's not utilising the kick as per how it appears in the kata today but more in line with his impression of how it was intended to be used back in the day.
And pulling your leg back when you've floored someone in front of you is a sound tactic. Anyoen that's doen any grappling will know that people grab hold of your legs all the time (when they are allowed as part of the training).

 

Hey Griffin,

I think what you say has merit, but I also think interpretation is a good thing. As long as you're not being WKF stupid. For me, it's not necessarily looking about what was intended with the kata. It's more about taking a technique and seeing what you can do with it in isolation or in a string of moves. Sure we can all practise some kind of set in stone conventional bunkai, but that doesn't encourage you to really analyse what you're doing, and to what effect. It would just end up as another box to tick on the syllabus sheet.

 

I look at it like this, The men that developed Karate, or even back to Okinawa te or whatever the correct historical terms are, refined what they apparently took from China. We can see the development of certain techs.
They work for particular situations, historically proven. The Chinese werent shy to apply techs all those years ago, then they were apparently developed to be better and so on.
At what point should the development cease? i would say when the origional intention of the movements are lost.
Some movements teach generation of power, not meant for a mirriad of tactical options.
just my 2 cents as im only 3rd kyu brown shotokan

 

Some movements do teach power, which is good and very useful. But on the point of stopping when the original intention is lost, that's probably already happened if you look back far enough. And as a counter question, do you think it's wholly productive to accept the bunkai of the jump in heian godan for example to be jumping out of the way of a long stick? People don't really use weapons like that anymore. Pool cue maybe, but they're unlikely to be going for your ankles...