Did someone say elbows? [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABV2IjnuUUc"]YouTube - David "THE CROW" Loiseau 2008[/ame]
He tenderised that first guy he'll elbow anything. To be honest, ive never seen a round elbow walked through like that (just the one later) Erm, i think i need to visit a different video store lol, Im still a chuck fan lol, I'll definately check out this Machida shotokan stylist next visit. thx for update dudes
I don't know if you're just being snarky or trying to be helpful, but I'll assume the latter. The simple answer to your question is that I'm in a small city and there's no reputable MMA, Muay Thai, Kyokushin, Enshin, or kickboxing school in my area. There's a good chance that in a couple years I'll be moving to Madison, Wisconsin, though, and that should open up a bunch of other opportunities that simply aren't available where I'm living right now (i.e., Twisted Fitness Muay Thai, BJJ, and yoga). In the meantime, I don't think that there's anything fundamentally wrong about questioning certain Shotokan teaching methods. I'm not a Shotokan hater. I like the style's body mechanics. I like the style's focus on simple linear strikes. I just don't like the teaching methods I've encountered for kyu ranks, which almost seem to be deliberately designed to lengthen the learning curve longer than it needs to be, and seem to cater primarily to people who want to learn a striking-based martial arts style without ever hitting other people or getting hit. I realize that some of these criticisms don't hold true for Shotokan in the UK, in Australia, even in other parts of the United States...good for you guys. But it DOES hold true for Oregon. And it's not just one dojo, it's the entire JKA in Oregon.
I second that Mitlov, for Karate do in Oz (Shotokan especially) has become like this. And i too live in a small town with only 3/4 outlets for MA practise. My choice is a freestyle suited to the young, a Shotokan lost in Basics to the same degree as you say youve experienced before, and a TKD which only runs when the instructor feels like it lol... And ofcourse a watered down version of tai chi at the local community centre LOL... Thats after living in a big city and enjoying many styles and different instructors. In the end thats what it comes down to. Our Instructors grip on reality In fact thats why i havent posted my brown belt grading, 3 hours of basics about 45 min of sparring and then kata about 10 times each up to tekki shodan. No bunkai whatsoever!!!! or even self defense exhibition at all?.. lol.. We actualy continued on through tekki's to Bassai dai. Thats my gripe with my local karate, no bunkai at all
Fix-ed for ya! :hat: I've got a theory that the basic kyu grade training schtick in shotokan is entirely designed for getting people used to being able to attack at full speed and power but pull the technique if you choose so that, as a higher grade, you can do free sparring or unarranged basic sparring without clocking each other all the time. Yes, it can make for a boring couple of years as a 10th-3rd kyu but I'm not entirely convinced that karate should make concessions to the impatience of the general public. As for the blocks - I took a lesson in Krav Maga a couple of MAP Meets ago and the defences against a downward clubbing motion and a forward stabbing motion were, to all intents and purposes, age uke and chudan barai, respectively. Not a shortened, barely recognisable technique, but a full, basic, age uke and chudan barai with a gyaku tsuki. Perhaps the basic techniques are the real self-defence techniques that get overlooked in the current obsession with duelling and cages.
What did you expect? Krav Maga is a form of Ju Jitsu. It has a self propagated reputation as a self defence system because it (in another form generally to that taught to the general public) has been taught to Israeli forces. But that is not necessarily a guarantee of its effectiveness as a martial art.
I had no expectations - I just know it's generally held up as an example of "reality based self defence" on this forum. Sure, but it does have a "reputation" as a popular RBSD art. That's all I can say really. There are very few ways of guaranteeing the effectiveness of a martial art - as evidenced by the endless debate on this site.
Hey Guys All i can say is that the basics of karate are magnificent movements that with slight adjustments can fit any puzzle the human body can come up with. A while back i went to a non traditional seminar, it had 5 different instructors from BJJ to kickboxing to jujitsu etc etc. When we were doing striking drills i was paired up with this guy (he was a great person good to get along with) who has delved in many types of arts ranging from kickboxing to FMA etc so he was a jack of all trades. At the FMA station we had to do defenses against striking drills (punches) i had to defend first, ofcourse i went straight into age uke slightly modified of course this was not a karate class, so there was no initial movements or withdrawal of the non striking hand, my ake uge just went straight up to meet his punch which was a cross between a traight punch and a round punch somewhere in the middle. The punches were thrown fast but i hope in his case with control, anyway i had managed to block them all since we knew the sequence they would be coming at, after that initial exchange he claimed his hands were aching from clashing with my forearms, i also used a right hand sweep against jabs, that is like your shewing away a fly my right hand would sweep his left jab over to my left shoulder, but it was the age uke that done the damage. When it was his turn to defend i was waiting to see what type of defensive blocks or sweeps he would come up with in the hope that i might pick up something new, well he did exactly what i had been doing, he blocked my round punches wtih the same type of age uke i used and sweep away my jab just like i did to him. Now from the arts that he had done, i dont think there is such a thing as an age uke although they may have the sweep of the jab, so that facinated me that he found age uke so effective and painful that he also used it, mind you i also found it painful when he used it on me. Nakayama says in the dynamic karate, that no other art has the blocks of karate and how they can be turned into attcks i agree with him. Also if you look at how the basic blocks are done with the intial movement there is also a reason fro this it gives you cover from a king hit to the jaw, whether we look at 1.age uke, crossing the hands protects the chin, good against really fast punching guys 2.soto uke, the withdrawal of the blcking hand to the side of the head could be a block against a round punch, while the other hand has been stretched out in front of you this also protects the other side. 3.sh!to uke, the point of the elbow now becomes your new extended chin with the forearm and bicep/tricept forming your new jaw line 4.uchi uke, extension of the hand will intercept incoming bombs from that side, but other side unprotected. My point and where i'm going with all this is that all you have to do is use your flinch to get to the initial stage of the block and in some way you would have nullified the hay maker to some extent, so they can also be used as a cover, along side the blocking and aslo attacking. Belive me after you have thrown afew punches that have been intercepted by karate blocks you dont really want to throw too many more, as i'm sure you all know. In the end it would be a real shame for any karateka who thinks that for example a sote uke can only be used for a straght punch to chudan level full stop, and a great waste.
I can't agree with that statement, as heretical as it is to say that Nakayama had it wrong. There's nothing really new under the sun, and martial arts are no exception. In taijiquan, our "fair lady works shuttle" was the same fundamental action as age uke. Our "brush knee" was the same fundamental action as gedan barai. I'm sure if I wanted to do extensive research, I'd find functionally equivalent movements in various kung fu styles and a half-dozen other arts that didn't originate from karate. Why, then, do we not see them used more to intercept punches in competitive kumite (either light-contact Shotokan kumite or knockdown kumite), MMA, or any other sort of venue? There's always one anecdotal story here, one anecdotal story there, but you essentially never see those uke techniques actually used successfully in free sparring the way we train them in gohon kumite and the like. I agree. It is a great waste. And part of that great waste is that, in three years of Shotokan training, that's the only use that I've been taught in class. If it weren't for the internet, I wouldn't know that the technique has other uses. And that's what I mean when I talk about karate curriculums being structured in a way that artificially lengthens the learning curve. Why not teach the most practical, easiest-to-apply uses of uke techniques from day one, instead of starting with the rarely-feasible use (intercepting a straight punch just above the wrist) as the "main" use, doing drills every single class that reinforce that rarely-feasible use (gohon kumite), and only years later revealing the far more practical uses?
I would second Mitlov on this. I seem to recall Funakoshi makes a rather similar statement sometimes. What we should remember is that their knowledge of other martial arts was far more limited than ours because the opportunities to ravel and cross train with non karateka, or read their books, or watch their videos, or talk with them via the internet and look at photos etc did not exist..
Mitlov wrote: I can't agree with that statement, as heretical as it is to say that Nakayama had it wrong. There's nothing really new under the sun, and martial arts are no exception. In taijiquan, our "fair lady works shuttle" was the same fundamental action as age uke. Our "brush knee" was the same fundamental action as gedan barai. I'm sure if I wanted to do extensive research, I'd find functionally equivalent movements in various kung fu styles and a half-dozen other arts that didn't originate from karate. Hi Mitlov I can't agree with you there i might not have trained in all the arts but i know enough to say that no other martial art can manipulate its blocks the way karate can so they maybe used as attacks, covers or just a shortned version of the block for actual blocking etc. Then again if you think that ake uke is only or can only be used as a defense against an over hand right or round punch then all i can say is your not exploring your art enough. Mitlov wrote: Why, then, do we not see them used more to intercept punches in competitive kumite (either light-contact Shotokan kumite or knockdown kumite), MMA, or any other sort of venue? There's always one anecdotal story here, one anecdotal story there, but you essentially never see those uke techniques actually used successfully in free sparring the way we train them in gohon kumite and the like. I think the question is do you actually prcatice to do this in kumite, would shortened blocks be a long range type of technique would you go for cover instead of blocking/parrying when your in clinching range, i still haven't seen anyone block or parry hooks and upper cuts. As for mma Machida is a JKA shotokan karateka he uses shortened blocks in the cage, but he much prefers to use his legs instead leaving his hands free to do the damage. I think its how people percieve and undertsand what their doing for instance do you think shotokan blocks require wind up and withdrawal of the non striking hand to the hip just like in basics in a real fight to be effective? is that how you think they are to be used? is that how you would use them? should they work in jiye kumite as they work in gohon kumite, do your seniors do it differently? How can you make them work in a real scrappy encounter? or against another karateka? I dont know about the club you train at but generally when a senior and a kyu grade do the same technqiue it just always looks abit different the way the senior is doing it. I agree. It is a great waste. And part of that great waste is that, in three years of Shotokan training, that's the only use that I've been taught in class. If it weren't for the internet, I wouldn't know that the technique has other uses. All i can say here is if you have no faith in your art that means you have no faith in yourself which means that what ever you do in a fight will probably fail without the ability to commit yourself, i think you would have to ask yourself does this work for me or am i wasting my time and money here. And that's what I mean when I talk about karate curriculums being structured in a way that artificially lengthens the learning curve. Why not teach the most practical, easiest-to-apply uses of uke techniques from day one, instead of starting with the rarely-feasible use (intercepting a straight punch just above the wrist) as the "main" use, doing drills every single class that reinforce that rarely-feasible use (gohon kumite), and only years later revealing the far more practical uses? Again there is a reason maybe one day you will come to know it, but you have to be possitive and not negative about it, ask how many uses can you make of this very over glorifies technique then ask yourself can i make it work the way i want it to. In my experince karate is a template you learn the template, once you learn the template you have to personilise it to progress, if you dont personilse it what are you trying to become a carbon copy of your instructor? you maybe tall and slim he (your instructor maybe short and fat) what works for him will not work for you. I think once you get to shodan (1st dan) even though you may feel that you have progressed in reality you have become a white belt again and going to black belt classes will definetly imo change your mind on many things, in the end i think that you will be thankful you learnt to power walk before you could do normal walking. A quote from Japanese scholar Izawa Nagahide “You should detach from arts when you have mastered them. If you do not detach from arts, you are not an artist.”
Hi JWT Not sure i can agree with you here, i think most of the old master were indeed mma guys, and they looked into everything and anything that was around at the time, whether it be wrestling judo or fist fighting, they may have not had things at the tips of their fingers but that didn't stop them using their legs to get to another town or dowm to the wharf to check out the paasanger coming of the ship. I think thats why you'll find that the mnemonics of kata dont only contain striking but also crude grappling and throws, but this could be a topic for another thread.
If you mean the karateka on Okinawa, I would disagree with that. Not only did they have all the different approaches to karate but also a big Chinese and Japanese influence. Many of the notable karateka of the time did a lot of traveling and cross-training in other countries. I think the biggest thing that hurt karate itself was WWII. Approximately 42,000 to 150,000 civilians were killed during the Battle of Okinawa and 90% of the buildings destroyed. When you have guys that only want to teach a kata to one person (i.e. like Funakoshi and his son) get waxed, you lose that knowledge. Same if they wrote down anything; what they did was probably burned up due to the bombings and artillery fire.
When the arts came out of Japan in the fifties early sixties it was common for students to crosstrain. In my opinion NOTHING teaches you more about progressing in your chosen art better than getting out of your environment and crosstraining. "Karate" blocks. below tegatana (handblade)aikido or call it ude uke karate used as a "slapping" block/deflection. The right hand shall strike upwards (Ridge hand karate) leading to kessa gatame (judo standing strangle) ALL of these techniques were taught in shotokan AND aikido. Cross training was used to better understand the principles of your own art rather than to learn "new" techniques.
Hi Kuma, Magpie, I don't dispute the fact that it was traditional of Karateka of Funakoshi's (and earlier) generation to cross train, I've written articles on the subject. I am also aware that this was, as Koyo mentions, also common again for a while in the 50s and 60s. My point is that the range and variety of arts and information that they had available to them was tiny compared to what I can easily access today. I do not regard that as debatable. I can easily travel and train with any number of different karate, Aikido, Kendo, Kenjutsu, Iado, Jodo, Kung Fu, boxing, MMA, Ju Jitsu, Judo, capoeira, filipino, ninjutsu, systema, savate, RBSD instructors and stylists. I can watch huge numbers of competitive fights (and real fights) on video with ease. I can watch footage of both past and present teachers instructing. The range of written and video material available to me would have been inconceivable to them. The ability to chat with distinguished instructors on the other side of the world and bounce ideas around? To see the fallacy in the statement that only Karate has such versitility with its techniques, you just need to look towards its likely base arts. There are so many shared movements between Karate and various styles of Kung Fu, and between arts that 'technically' aren't related such as Ju Jitsu and Aikido, that to say Karate has only that versitility suggests either blind ignorance (unlikely) or marketing (far more likely). A study of Shotokan in its early years reveals the creation of a marketing brand. You can see the same with Judo. You can even see how the two worked in harmony with each other to avoid competition with regard to the techniques they began to emphasise less. The Nakayama years saw the realisation and solidification of this into a Japanese corporate entity.
Marketing brand...aaaaargh!!!! Specialisation.....aaaargh!!!!! All to bloody true. All ways of stagnating the growth of the martial artist. The basic principles of all of the arts are near identical.Why can't we see that? And learn from each other.
QFT , i had a similar conversation this morning after i'd shown some bunkai for empi , and was told "but that looks more like Aikido ":bang:
What's your basis for saying that other arts (including but not limited to taiji) don't have an equal breadth of application for the exact same action? Like in Shotokan, taiji recognizes that there is more than one "right" application for each technique, and it's not uncommon for a single technique to be interpreted alternatively as a strike, a block, or a throw/joint lock. I NEVER SAID THAT. What I said is that this is the only application which I've ever been taught in class. Those are two completely different statements. Woah woah woah woah woah. Questioning the efficiency of a particular training method within the Shotokan curriculum, or questioning the structure of kyu-level Shotokan instruction, is the same as saying that I have no faith in myself? That makes no sense. And it reeks of the "don't question, just do" attitude that can make a martial art stagnate. So how many years of mindlessly doing something without questioning do you recommend? I someone allowed to say "I'm not sure if we're doing X in a very useful way" after five years? Ten? Fifteen? Honestly, I'm not some guy who just started karate a week ago. I have over a decade of martial arts experience, and three years experience in Shotokan. I think I'm allowed at this point to start asking questions if something doesn't make sense to me. Honestly, I think that good things rarely come from a "don't question, just do" attitude. Toward ANYTHING. And yet nobody has been able to post a video from a JKA, Kyokushin, or MMA competition where an age uke was used in the way we're taught to do it day-in-day-out in gohon kumite. Not a video with a tall thin person, not a video with a short and fat person, not any video. First, there aren't separate "black belt classes" where I train. Second, even where there are such classes, doesn't this kind of prove my point about artificially lengthening the learning curve? I understand having basic classes for people still trying to learn footwork and how to keep their elbows in. But don't you think that excluding people who have been training for three, four, five, or even six years from these classes is detrimental to their learning? To go back to the age uke example, why is it beneficial to have someone learn the least-useful application for half-a-frickin' decade before having them experiment with more realistic and more easily-used applications in a "black belt class"?
