Wa-No-Michi

I think one or two minor errors (ie not executing one kick out of say 10 very well) may be overlooked. Botching a Kata, ie getting two moves into and forgetting it, is an instant fail in my group. Even if you restart it 30 seconds later and do it 100% you will still fail. Pair Work is slightly differently - if for example you do these in the wrong sequence, you will not be penalised (unless you do it repeatedly which again shows lack of preparation), but you must demonstrate the correct tenets / principles of engagement that come with Kumite. Kata is vitally important to most traditional budo and failure to execute it correctly is failure in your training at the end of the day. But as you say its horses for courses I guess.

Nicely put Seija and welcome to the forums. Always good to have another Wado-ka on board. A comment on another thread has made me go hmm!! and I think this is a good place to discuss it. In my group, if you make a mistake or forget a kata due to nerves for example, its an instant fail. You don't get another chance on the day, in fact you have to wait at least 6 months before you are allowd to re-take. This is because Dan gradings are as much about strength of character (as Seija says) as they are technique. If you dont know your material well enough, and or can not manage the nerves, you are not ready to grade imo. You don't get another chance in a fight after all. What do you guys think?

And as far as where karate and Jujutsu became joined at the hip, well (apart from Wado-Ryu) they didn't really imo, and don't need to be. Okinawan Karate has an equally rich heritage to that of Japanese Jujtsu. Its indigenous Todi/wrestling attests to this. Arguably they are two tributaries feeding into the same river that is modern karate, but in truth they are very different I think.

Blimey , in the most part the tough love seems to be coming from the girlies here. Mind you, although I spent best part of twenty years squaring up to some of the meanest looking blokes (in my comp years), they pailed into insignificance when it came to a telling off from my little Irish mum. Jees she'd put the fear of god into any man.

As John mentions, you have to first understand that Jujutsu today takes many forms (as well as spellings... Jiu-jutsu, Ju-jitsu etc) but ultimately it originated in Japan, was a battlefield art in its early days and was modified according to times. This is a great essay that goes along way to explain the history behind the art. You will also get part answer to your question, in that it details that among the first references to these arts were the "Nihon Shoki" (Japan Chronicles), and "Kojiki" (Ancient Records). https://www.shinyokai.com/Essays_Whatisjujutsu.htm If it's the real deal you are after (IE Koryu), this site is the most respected in terms of its accuracy. And they have a great book store as well. https://www.koryu.com/index.html If its the modern stuff you are after, I guess amazon is your friend?

Have you had to experience this yourself granitemiller?

Ahh,but isn't this the point, how do you qualify this. You may have misunderstood me, Michi. The rest of the paragraph reads: One of the two points I was making in my posting is that we keep presenting, as I see it, that the individual has to have knowledge of the martial art from, say, kata/hyungs to techniques to its history to whatever. Let's use it as a given, rather than keep repeating it. The second of the points was that what we need to consider is the ability to instruct, to teach others what s/he knows. That's why I compared the MA instructor with the college professors. They don't have dan memberships, but they do have doctorates. An individual can be brilliant, but can that individual teach/instruct others? Sorry Joe matey, I did not mean to misquote you, but it's all about knowing the material isn't it? My point is perhaps, that it should be, but in fact it isn't in most cases and it would be wrong to assume that it was a given? Correction, in order to avoid the risk of being "hoist upon my own batard" I should have rightly said that "in my experience" it would be wrong to assume that it was a given. Sorry

You Kyokushin guys love your "Osu"ing that's for sure.

Ahh,but isn't this the point, how do you qualify this. You may have misunderstood me, Michi. The rest of the paragraph reads: One of the two points I was making in my posting is that we keep presenting, as I see it, that the individual has to have knowledge of the martial art from, say, kata/hyungs to techniques to its history to whatever. Let's use it as a given, rather than keep repeating it. The second of the points was that what we need to consider is the ability to instruct, to teach others what s/he knows. That's why I compared the MA instructor with the college professors. They don't have dan memberships, but they do have doctorates. An individual can be brilliant, but can that individual teach/instruct others? Sorry Joe matey, I did not mean to misquote you, but it's all about knowing the material isn't it? My point is perhaps, that it should be, but in fact it isn't in most cases and it would be wrong to assume that it was a given?

Hhmm, you have your own style, this makes things a little clearer! Also; not taking money for your teaching may absolve you from certain "legal" obligations, but I would argue that it would be wrong to hide behind this, if only from a point of view of teaching things the best way. You have duty of care toward your students to teach them the best way possible and I would question whether 13 years (even at three hours a day) qualifies you to do this?

Ahh,but isn't this the point, how do you qualify this. Yes, there are good teachers and bad out there, and to extent I buy into the "you can teach or you can't" way of thinking, but I don't think it stops there. Good teaching is down to good communication and classroom management, thats a given. True in depth technical knowledge is something else. imo. This is perhaps why we have a lot of very enthusiastic ma clubs around the uk who are taught by "effervescent" teachers who nurture very keen students, but at the end of the day "technically" they are rubbish. Understanding of technique/purpose is king. The rest is down to how you get it across.

Agreed, but what is there to stop someone who is a "naturally" good teacher from teaching things the wrong way (or teaching the wrong things (seemingly) very well)? Teaching ability has to be combined with correct technical knowledge and the latter perhaps is where the licensing/certification thing comes in. Agreed though, when it comes to teaching, a dan grade is a belt like any other and does not necessarily bear any relevance to teaching ability.

In traditional Japanese Koryu Jujutsu, as most know, they did no have belts (kyu or dan), but when students were considered to have reached the correct technical standard (and more importantly were of the right caliber), they were awarded a license to transmit (teach) or "Menkyo". This actually took the form of a hand written certificate with ryu-ha's Soke's official stamp (for the purpose of authenticity). These were not just given away, they were very rare and it was considered to be an important part of the ongoing propagation of the art. So even "way back when", it seems certification of teachers was seen as an important factor to control / ensure quality transmition of information.

I suppose if you are referring to the term "Qualified" in its professional context (IE teacher), it means that a person wishing to promote themselves as such, should have the appropriate instructors license / recognition by way of certification by a recognised governing body. However, this is easier said than done and given the diverse number styles, clubs and groups etc that practice their own ma it is very hard to say for sure what is a recognised governing body. In the UK for Karate alone, there are at least three groups that claim to be the governing body of Karate, when in fact none of them have been recognised by "Sport Britain" the official office of the British government covering the development of sport here in the UK. Coaching qualifications are one thing, but they are often no substitute for experience, knowledge, technical and natural teaching ability. If these can be balanced with a recognised form of sport coaching qualification, then this is the best of both worlds IMO.

Hi Traymond, I feel sure this approach worked for you, but I tend to agree with Joe in that this approach is wholly unacceptable in todays society. I can't claim to be an expert in British law let alone American, but striking a child (or adult) with a paddle constitutes assault in my mind and further more contravenes all of the "Child Protection" processes that we have here in the UK. These exist to protect children from exactly this type of thing. As far as it only being an assault if the recipient chooses to press charges, well here in the UK this is certainly no longer the case. There was a law passed within the last decade, (which arose as a result of domestic violence cases) that allows the authorities to press charges - even if they do not have the victim's consent. This law was brought about because often, victims do not want to press charged for any number of reasons; be that fear or just misguided loyalty etc Back on topic though, In my experience behavior management is / should be built the schools system as part of its pedagogy. Also if a teacher has good class room management skills along with a good knowledge of the art they are teaching this will automatically promote conformity and good behavior

Don't worry Tori, we are all good friends at the end of the day. We're enjoying a good discussion. Picking up on you latter comments thought (even if slightly tongue in cheek), there is no correlation between technical standard / ability and how strict / disciplined your school is. If a club chooses to let people come in from other styles and wear their BB thats their look out. Not my cup of tea, but each to their own. Sampling is fine John, but doesn't provide quantifiable proof that in fact the "Majority" of martial arts clubs have changed. The ones you have experienced may have, but I would say changed from what anyway, a model that was in the most part developed in the early parts of the twentieth century which differed to how it was years before? So I guess change is eternal.

Agreed, but therefore it doesn't necessarily apply to the "majority of schools". Unless of course you have trained with over half of the martial arts schools around the entire world.

What!! No Koshinage? I thought that was the Judo-ka's bread and butter.

I tend to be in agreement with this statement. It doesn't pertain to all schools. But certainly the majority. With respect ps1, I don't think you can make that statement if you haven't trained in, or had experience with "the majority of schools". Your statement (like JohnC's) is therefore anecdotal, based on your own experiences.

Then of course there are Judges and referees that quite simply, don't know their stuff as they should. Biasness aside, I have lost count of the number of kumite refs who just don't seem able to see what everyone else in the entire stadium sees. Just substandard really and an insult to the competitors. Then of course there is the dilemma of how to judge different styles of Kata up against each other. A virtually impossible task if you ask me, because in order to do this, the judges would have to be "expert" in every single style.

We may possibly practice some "Idori-no-Kata" or some other "exotic" techniques that can be found within the Wado spectrum. But I think its more about the comaraderie thing tbh.

OK, Thanks for sharing that.

You got that right.

Well, it's fast approaching that time of year again, and I just wondered how you guys (if you guys) note this in any way. We have an annual award ceremony for best karate-ka of the year (Jr and Snr) where engraved shields are presented. We will usually have a fun session with the kids involving fighting the seniors from the club. They love it (kids and adults that is). This is usually followed by a meal for the seniors and a few drinks where we will look back on the years training with its ups and downs etc, and look forward to the new year of training. Kanpai!

Spot on tg - this is the way I tend to look at it as well. Appropriate technical ability and knowledge (both practical and theoretical) is what should be the deciding factor as to whether someone passes or fails a dan grade examination. [Edit] of course correct protocol should be used as well.