regarding knee position: after what sensei yonamine said at the seminar last week, i've been experimenting a bit, and i've found that the vertical shin, although feeling a bit more natural, appears to stifle the power a bit, whereas the knee over the toes (but not beyond them), which sensei insisted on, allows you to keep transferring weight during the whole technique. i'd liken it to the very last bit of extension and twist in the punch, and the straightening of the back leg on impact; they're the "follow-through" of the technique, and should only happen after contact has been made, while a lot of people stop after hitting, leaving the technique half finished, and others do the whole technique, but hit after the technique has finished.
I have heard of some moving past the "vertical" shin at the apex of the punch and then relaxing back to vertical shin after. Like a small rocking motion. Gary
For what it's worth, we're told that ideally you should just be able to see the edge of your big toe, with the rest obviously excluded by your knee. Also, on the issue of rocking, when I do a technique that involves alot of hip twist (so a reverse anything), I tend to lengthen my stance and push my front knee forward a bit, dropping my centre of gravity. I find it helps control the ol' Elvis knee wobble
As I understand it, the issue of stance "registration" is pretty much a western thing. I was advised by a Japanese Karate-ka that if you asked a Japanese student to describe (verbally or in writing) how long/wide a stance was - they would probably look at you blankly. If you asked them to show you - no problem Gary
I suspect this chaps "handbook" comes from www.bukonshotokan.com.. They have an advertisement in Blitz mag aust. with an instructor posing in zenkutsu dachi, his groin is lower than his front knee !. I think this would explain the "collapsing" of the stance as apparently prescribed here. Lets just say it is "less than mobile".. Hey magpie, why you post this same thing all over Oz forums too? Are you suspicious of it?.. Or are you trying to re-invent the wheel
Re: extending the shin past vertical. I think I'd agree pretty much with the points made by Fish, Gary & Lama. Just a quick check - when I hold the posture my shin is more or less vertical, but when I punch the knee moves forward for a moment, thus moving my centre forwards into the strike. Mike
Yes, not in dispute. Main area of fault was- front knee collapsed "in" signifying loss of mobility, also backfoot was dead straight?? who here can get that low in forward stance and keep back foot 12 o clock like that? We all do 1 oclock right..... (magpie did not say "this is how we do it" he said "this is textbook shotokan") This is the point i am making considering its a questionable photo that does not match the diagram illustrated below it.. Also, no one found the boxing vid a little odd?..
No - 12 and 12 for me. 1 O clock is lazy and shows that either you need to work your flexibility, or you are lower than you should be. However - I haven't gone that low for years. But I recognised early on that for maximum mobility having the foot that's about to move pointing in the direction you intend to go is a must. That said I think there are some books floating around with pictures of me having my foot in the half past twelve position... cough. which in all honesty was a result of me not stretching enough and having difficulty getting back into shape after a major abdominal operation, and I chose to do proper Shotokan stances for those rather than low stances (and while I spotted the error before publication - the difficulty in re-shooting the pics and the overall lack of importance of those pics compared to the actual paired pics meant that I decided to leave them in - after all I've seen senior grades with far worse stances). When I did train Shotokan regularly (going back a while now) it was 12/12 for zenkutsu.
Just want a comparison not only from oz but around the world. All i can say is there aren't many schools around that teach karate the old way. BTW i study JKA shotokan karate.
If by OLD WAY you mean really deep stances then you are not talking about the old way at all. You're talking about something that was pretty unique to western countries due to the failure of the first wave of JKA Japanese Instructors to recognise the difference between body types. It was a mistake, it took about 20 years to rectify. It's not how JKA Karate is now done in the UK. A few associations that split from the JKA earlier made the change back to normal earlier, one or two are still doing it the incorrect way.
Hi jwt I look at it this way the throws of judo are no different today than they were 50 or 60 years ago, the wrist locks and arm bars of jujitsu or aikido are also the samethe principles and mechanics involved have never changed drastically in any of these arts, why then is karate any different? The principles and the mechanics of JKA shotokan karate haven't changed all that much over the last 50 or 60 years, and i dont see any need to unless some sort of scientific reason can be produced that states otherwise. Traditional martial arts, whether striking or grappling provide efficiency, mechanical advantage, optimum power, leverage, balance, mental focus etc. so whether they are in fad or not these principles & fundamentals will always be present in all traditional martial arts. Do they need evolving well it depends what sort of evolving your talking about, if they provide one of the best ways to strike or throw in accordance with human anatomy what more can be done in this area? of course there is always room for improvemnt they aren't perfect but they dont need an overhaul either. If on the other hand you are suggesting that karate be mixed with brazilian jujitsu, or that judoka incorporate boxing strikes into their randori, or that muay thai matches also use western wrestling in the ring, then i don’t see this as a progression of the traditional martial art in question but rather a dilution of sorts. So after studying karate and looking around at most other arts that are in the western world i really think the japanesse got karate right, juts like judo, aikido and jujitsu, i haven't seen anything that would prove me wrong and i have searched for a fair while, so its not just a case of blind worship. Like i said in the head post these stances are held for less than a second in combat just to deliver the pay load and usually they aren't in the perfect format that we see in those photos but thats what we're striving for. If its good enough for the japanesse to parctice kihon from deep stances why not the western world, instead of going to the gym and doing leg squats you are getting it while doing karate, well not exactly but hell it conditions your legs. If you look at the sparring they aren't in such deep stances and the body weight is 50 50. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkGP0AM14F0"]YouTube- KARATE SHOTOKAN JKA Kumite[/ame]
In the interests of openness, my stance is about 12, then maybe 12:05, 12:10? Doesn't seem to cause me any problems so I usually let it slide... But isn't discussing the different body composition and buildof westerners and Japanese a scientific physiological reason? And its definitely an issue, hence Japanese cut and European cut gis... Also, in that video they are more upright because it's showing kumite, not kihon.
I think you're making a considerable error here - you're falling into the trap of thinking that 'old style Shotokan' (choose whatever 20th century decade you wish) is the original authentic way to do karate. Actually Shotokan, in any of its forms, would be more accurately considered a new art, a dramatic break with the traditions of the past. Try picking up Funakoshi's first book (line drawings in the 1922 edition, photos of Funakoshi in the 1925 edition). You won't see a single Shotokan stance anywhere. Does that mean that Shotokan is without value? No. Does it mean that Shotokan (of any flavour) is the only way to do karate? Most certainly not! Mike
Hi magpie, I'm not sure whether you are being deliberately obtuse, but you seem to be missing my point. 1. The stance you illustrated is not the OLD WAY of doing Karate. Nor is it the MODERN WAY. It is a manner that has been ditched by most Shotokan associations, including most European JKA groups. One or two instructors still do it, because it was the way they were trained by Japanese instructors who did not know how to adapt to western physiology, but it has now been discontinued by and large. My NEW point is in reference to the quotation above. Expand your karate library, particularly your Shotokan library. I suggest Funakoshi's Karate Jutsu, Karate Do Kyohan (1935), Karate Do Kyohan (1955) and Dynamic Karate (Nakayama). That will show you just how much the principles and mechanics of JKA karate have changed. Not only that but the ethos has changed considerably as well. Shotokan has ditched a huge amount of its heritage.
Hi Llamageddon You have a point but everyone has their tool to gauge their stance, a standard tool that fits all sizes and that is the angle of vision as described before, this sets you in the right place whether you are a girrafe or a midget. Again like i mentioned in the thread at the begining those stances are held for less than a second to deliver the payload, most of the other time you are positioning to get into one. Hi jwt JKA shotokan karate is in most countries stilled practiced according to Nakayamas best karate series and dynamic karate, if you look in there you will find that the stance in the photo and the stances in those books are identical. I also have Karate Do Kyohan Gichin Funakoshi. I know alot of shotokan schools have dicthed their heritage and the techniques , principles and mechanics that come with shotokan, its evident here in Australia, thats what i meant about shotokan not been taught like in the old days. Some schools over here call them selves shotokan because they practice the heian katas and so they put themselves under the shotokan banner, believe me they are doing everything and anything but it isn't shotokan training as i know it, to the untrained eye it may have similarities but if you have got some sort of experience and know what to look for you can tell they are missing the finer points. Hi Mike Fisrt of all let me say that when i say karate i do indeed mean shotokan karate, most shotokan practitioners just call it karate so ok i should be more specific and say its about shotokan karate, so i apologise there. I'm not comparing it to all karate just shotokan. I see your a shorin ryu practitioner, hey dont you guys practice nearly the same kata as shotokan, aren't both these art very closely related and they do both have the same roots?, i think shorin ryu came from shurie and tomarie te, and so did shotokan. I cant comment on shorin ryu since i dont know enough about it, whether you guys have long or short stances i wouldn't know, like i said i'm not trying to compare it to all traditional karate styles like goju, wado ****o etc etc.
The pics I have attached are the original Karate Do Kyohan pic, the 1950s pic, and Nakayama in dynamic karate. I disagree.
Noted. It probably is worth specifying if you're just talking about Shotokan. It saves me getting my knickers in a twist I'd say that Shorin ryu is Shuri-te, just different names for the same thing. So generally speaking modern Shorin ryu is closer to historical Shorin/Shuri than Shotokan. So we have a lot of kata in common, although their execution is often quite different. Generally Shorin ryu stances are much smaller than the modern mainstream styles. You will see some modern Shorin ryu that has large stances, but IMO this is not Shorin ryu, its usually Shotokan rebranded. Funakoshi's 1925 book isn't a bad reference to get an idea of the size of stances in Shorin ryu, although obviously there are differences from sub-style to sub-style. Mike Mike
Hi jwt I can't really comment on the Karate Do Kyohan (Gichin Funakoshi) the only thing i can say about that is i do know Funakoshi's stances were higher than the standrad JKA stances, but after closer inspection of the Karate Do Kyohan photo number 20 his knee is directly over the ball of the foot in zenkustu dachi which falls in line with what i'm saying and looks very similar to the photo i posted. Now about Nakayama's photo i hope i dont get assasinated for this but as you can clearly see in the Nakayama's photo there is a diagram in the right hand corner which clearly shows the plum line from the knee dropping to just outside the foot print on the big toe knuckle joining to the ball. To get your knee to be directly over the ball of the foot like that you clearly have to have a smaller angle that pushes your knee over the foot. If we exam Nakayama's photo, Nakayama is not in this position, that is drop a plum line from his knee down to the ground in Nakayama's photo and it will probably land somewhere around the heel of the foot, his lower leg (knee to foot) seems to be perpendicular to the ground, must have had a hard day shooting all those photos. I suppose he can be forgiven since he must have been somewhere between about 50 or 60 years of age in that photo, and it just goes to show that even the head sensei can be slack. Also his back foot isn't at one oclock but this could also be because of age imo. The guy in my photo is much younger and more flexible. Karate exercises do get harder as we age, and age effects everone differently.
