If you don't want to defend your assertion, then you shouldn't make the assertion. If you have something to say, you should lay it all out there so everyone can make up their mind as to it's validity. If you don't have anything to say, then don't say anything. If you didn't want to uselessly argue about the validity of your sources, why did you even bring it up to begin with?
Sorry, everyone's entitled to their opinion in here as long as they don't resort to personal attacks *nudge* Keep it cool. |Cain|
Of course everyones entitled to their opinion. I'm not even saying he's wrong in what he's saying, I honestly don't know. But what he did was pop in and shoot a dig at shotokan and then refuse to back it up. Unless calling him on his faulty logic is a personal attack,then I didn't deliver a personal attack to him.
Reading through the posts it seems to me that there has been a misunderstanding as to the relationship between Gichin Funakoshi and Shotokan. The Shotokan style, as it is practiced by the majority of Shotokan Associations around today, is not the style of karate that Funakoshi taught. If you want to see that style of karate (of which more later) you need to look at the Shotokai karate of Harada (graded 5th Dan by Funakoshi) and Wado Ryu and ****o Ryu. The most readily available resource for a thorough study of Shotokan History and politics is "Shotokan Karate: A Precise History" by Harry Cook, unless you have many back issues of the Shotokan Magazine or Terry O Neill's FAI to flick through. There are many reasons for the discrepancy between Funakoshi's karate and the modern Shotokan style. These are (in no particular order): 1. The loss of most of Funakoshi's earliest students in WWII 2. Funakoshi's ideal to use karate as a Martial Way rather than a fighting system. 3. The adoption of Karate en masse by Japanese Universities and the effect on its training methods of teaching large numbers of young fit men. 4. The desire of Nakayama to put Karate into the Olympics. 5. The declining influence of Funakoshi in his later years 6. The influece of Yoshitaka Funakoshi on Shotokan development. If you want to see Funakoshi's karate I suggest you read his Karate Jutsu and Karate Do Kyohan. The style shown there is quite different from the more modern style which can be seen demonstrated predominantly by Nakayama and Kanazawa in the former's Dynamic Karate. Funakoshi's karate was softer, more relaxed than the modern Shotokan style with higher stances and a slightly different form of kime. This does not necessarily mean it was weaker. :bang: The relationship between Shotokan and Wado... Funakoshi was one of the students of Anko Itosu (who probably developed the Heian/Pinan Kata that are the delight of my middle years). I have my reservations about the depth of study that Funakoshi was given by Itosu, given the difference between his kata and those of other Itosu students. These could be attributed to: 1. How Itosu changed his teaching over the years. 2. How he changed his teaching to suit the different temperament of his students (Funakoshi was pro Japanese and a 'man of peace/philosophy' rather than a fighter - this may have affected the depth of inofrmation Itosu gave him). 3. Itosu's other students may have also made smalll changes of their own to the forms they were taught. Back to the point.. The founder of Wado, Ohtsuka, was already an experienced martial artist when he met Funakoshi. He studied breifly with Funakoshi and then went to Okinawa, where he studied with Mabuni (another student of Itosu and the founder of ****o Ryu). These experiences led him to create his own style of Karate, Wado Ryu. Although it costs a bomb, I'd recommend Harry Cook's book on Shotokan. I'd recommend Mark Bishop's 'Okinawan Karate'. Patrick McCarthy's stuff is very good. Hope this helps. JT
when it comes to kumite, I haven't really seen a lot of differences. In our federations which are: KBN, EKF, WKF and IOC is all the kumite quite the same (semi). but when it comes to kata, there's a huge difference, yes shotokan is one of the most popular style. It also got allot of members and shotokan is very succesfull in kata. The katas r just much more powerfull and better to look at. It has got a good reputation. Wado hasn't really got that reputation in kata. The katas of wado are more basic, simple and not always that pretty to look at. Tho I think both are effective. In their own way. But hey, I do got kata experience on toplevel but... I dunno everything about the styles. What I'm saying only relates to tourneys and competitions and stuff. Good Luck finding out. XxxxXxxxX
Wasn't sure if I should add my 2 cents to this (or if its even still wanted). Anyways, Both Shotokan and Wado are decent styles and would call neither "better" then the other. Both, at first glance are incredibly similar, to the point that the first 5 forms or Kata are nearly identical. The primary reason for this is simplicity in itself. Hironori Ohtsuka, the founder of Wado, was a student of Gichin Funakoshi. Many years Ohtsuka trained with him to the point were he was a "Senior student". Regretfully, GF and HO disagreed strongly on one aspect - sparring. GF wanted little to do with it (this is glazed over a little due to my lack of detailed knowledge) and HO believed it to be a good learning tool. In the end, this caused the two to go their separate ways. Essentially, HO used a lot of basic stances / punches / blocks taught to him and added his own "flair" to create Wado Ryu. This flair involved aspects of Jujitsu and what was then called - Yakusoko Kumite. These developments of HO can be linked to the beginnings of modern day sparring. To this day this is a source of great debate as to whether it was a benefit or not (as demonstrated even by this form). Basically HO incorporated more sparring into his classes and slightly less Kata. While it was of course still practiced, HO trimmed the usual amount of Kata from an average of 13 to his accepted syballus of 9. So does this make one "better" then the other? Frankly, having studied both all I can say is - Whatever is best for you.
itosu Hi all, Master Itosu created a form of Karate to be practised by the okinanwan schoolchildren He taught this suprisingly enough to the school teacher funakoshi, not a street fighter not a bouncer not a gangster a school teacher. Itosu did not teach Funakoshi the applications to the kata as they were for kids so they/had have not practiacal fighting value This what eventually came to be called shotokan and then had an off shoot wado ryu The Japs who kept invading Okinawa forced the Ok's to teach 'em their deadly art which the japs ahd heard good things about Now the ok's not liking the invading japs gave then their school childrens version, you guessed it, shotokan. This was appropriated by the middle class japs in universities like Nakayama and later Kanazawa, Kase, Enoeda, etc. not fighters not ruffiens, academics. Being midle class students they did not want to engage in rough past times so karate was watered down further into No contact competition Karate, the deady JKA. 'No contact competiton Karate'. Not full contact not semi contact, NO contact. Deadly eh? Now most of these academica were studying Commerce or such courses and as such were good business men. This explains why they took this empty hollow shallow form round the world and made millions of pounds by conning gullible non fighting westerners into believing they would become lethal fighters if they practiced the forms with out meaning did endless repetitions of competiton techniques and paid them lots of money. This may upset some people but it is the historical truth. Dont believe me or your Grand master look it up research your 'art'. Take care 'always seek the truth' MF
