Wa-No-Michi

I agree, Whilst I am a traditionalist, and observe rule sets like not wearing shoes in the dojo (part of the dojo-kun as it were), I believe that you must be able to perform equally well if you are wearing shoes -no point otherwise. But sometimes it is important to look beyond what might appear to be cultural differences in order to fully appreciate a martial art form for what it is and how it works. In my group for example we practice kata that amongst other things allow us to experience the importance of the feet being perfectly flat on the floor (on all four corners). Important because it engenders correct ankle-knee-thigh-hip girdle alignment. Not saying that this cant be achieved wearing shoes but maybe it is a bit more difficult. WNM

What surprises me about my style? 1. Just how little it is understood - mostly by people that practice it!!! 2. Why people will insist on comparing it to Shotokan - in a somewhat watered down way! 3. How many people feel that Wado can be used as an excuse to form their own group / wado-based style - due to the fact that Ohtsuka integrated karate techniques into his jujutsu vision. WNM

Hi Dobbersky, I think that there as a big difference between learning a variety of fairly obvious techniques from other styles as opposed to understanding how to subsume the core principles behind them - often as a result of the way they are taught. As AJ eludes to, the practice of drills in the form of Kihon is Kata. Pair work like Wado's Kihon Kumite is Kata. Chances are you group practices ippon / sanbon kumite in order to act as a way to bridge movements found in solo kata/kihon with an active partner (thus introducing additional aspects like ma-ai (distance) and sen (timing) etc. These also are a type of kata because they are drills. They are the building blocks toward understanding and managing engagement, but not in them selves designed as self protection techniques (although done well they are very effective). As far as the punches, back kicks and round kicks that you refer to again, don't confuse basics/kata with application. Yes Wado does junzuki with a straight punch (as kata), but we also practice uppercuts, hooks and cross punches they are all there believe me. No one said that Wado mawashi are "only" done with the shin/instep. That is just one way. Also most good Karate-ka will have a variety of different kicks/penetration depth ranging from Jab to full on MT style follow through. In a nutshell, Wado with its Kata based pedagogy probably differs greatly in terms of how techniques and principles are subsumed. I agree with what has been mentioned on other forums, in that you have a job on your hands trying to reconcile the two styles. But I am sure you are the man for the job. WNM

Hehe...Great minds and all that Hope you are well fella. WNM

Hi Dobbersky, Nagashizuki and the principles contained therein, are very important in the study of Wado-ryu karate. On the surface a simple looking technique; it combines the avoiding of an attackers technique by twisting the body along with the simultaneous acceleration of your counter (within the same twisting motion). Typically, it is done as an "Irimi" or entering technique designed to be performed either preemptively or simultaneously as you oponent attacks. The latter has the additional benefit of combining the attackers incoming momentum with that of your own. Important to remember that you also practice Tobikomizuki prior to learning Nagashizuki. I always bang home to my students the importance of the lean when it comes to do a good Nagashi. As far as the drill you describe, it is your typical bog standard way to do it in Wado Kihon and therefore learn it, but actually the way you describe is nothing more than an exercise as you can do Nagashizuki in a number of stances/situations. In its "basics" form its probably going to be no more effective than your kihon jun/oi-zuki in application - its the principle behind it that makes it work. But... your instructor is right imo, as you should NOT step out to the side (as much as your previous training makes you want to). Stepping to the side is good Taisabaki (and not to be ignored) but Nagashi is more twisting to avoid, as opposed to stepping to avoid. I have been told it comes from Wado's Kenjutsu origins in that I suppose it is quicker to twist to avoid a technique than it it is to step out of its way. Hope that helps. WNM

Also, in my experience many senior Karate-ka within a lot of groups, seek to offset the natural "depreciation" in terms of their physical ability (within grade) with positions of bureaucratic office. I suppose this is human nature really but again, not really within the Karate ethos of things IMO. WNM

Why do you feel that titles have to be idntified any more than dan grades? Granted they may be rarer to obtain, but isn't the honour of being awarded one enough? WNM

Its good just to read sometimes. My old boss used to fall back on the old salesman's mantra of "you have two ears and one mouth and you should use them in that order". I was going to say that as far as Forums go you have two eyes and ten fingers but that doesn't work. No matter how much you think you know, there are others that know more - and thats what great about forums like this, as students (and we are all students) we have the benefit of a global education / perspective. WNM

Good post sensei8, The group I train with is affiliated to the Wado-kai of the Japan Karate Federation (JKF) - (the JKF being national governing body for all Karate in Japan). To my knowledge, there is no "Rank Identifiers" within dan grade in the JKF Wado-kai (and never has been). I have trained on several occasions with 7th, 8th and 9th dan instructors from Japan and always they wear just plain simple black belts. Also, "Shogo" (or honorary) titles like Renshi, kyoshi and Hanshi etc., don't typically tend to feature in the JKF - as all instructors are simply addressed as sensei. Some might be referred to as Shihan or Hanshi etc., (by a third party) but the title by which they are addressed is still sensei. As I understand it these titles were "developed" by the Dai Nippon Butoku kai - who of course were the first national governing body for ma in Japan covering arts from Aikido to Okinawan Kobudo. Each to their own of course but to me, titles like Renshi and Kyoshi don't sit into the karate ethos of things, they are just an extension onto the rank identifiers. If you are not going to differentiate between Shodans and Godans, why bother with Renshi Kyoshi and Hanshi? Surely when people get to that rank they are known by the students of the group (and their peers) as a result of their previous teaching ability, this doesn't need to be waved like a flag. With regard to newbies being able to go to instructors rather than other bb's that are not ordained as instructors, well in my group at least, I would like to think that everyone with a black belt would offer good advice, and if they didn't know the answers they would know where to get it from. WNM

Most Samurai were schooled in multiple arts. Schools or "Ryuha" varied in terms of the diversity of the skills they taught and to an extent how each of these complimented each other. The complete martial schools were referred to as a "Sogo Bujutsu" Ryuha, in which the Samurai would be exposed to multiple arts to allow core types of training including weaponry, stand up, grappling and any other martial requirements of the day. The key was how these ryuha integrated the varying skills into their schools. Some had their own "home grown" Jutsu, whilst others borrowed from other arts (heiden bujutsu). Most important though was the fact that the core principles remained constant between your weapon work, stand up and grappling. I think this is still true today. We have a feast of MA on offer to us and it is very tempting to take a bite out of everything, but my advice would be to train in an art to a level at which you can appreciate the other ma around you and how they can effectively work in concert rather than conflict with your ma training. If it were me, I would not try to learn two Karate styles (Goju and Shoto) in tandem.... to conflicting IMO WNM

Strictly speaking there are three dantien or "tanden" (in Japanese) the mind, the heart and the stomach (hara). It is the later (hara and tanden (more strictly speaking "seikatanden") - often used in the same context), that most martial artist refer to as their centre. It is my understanding that whilst the Hara/Tanden is a good way to "generalise" about the centre of mass, it should more accurately be referred to as the centre of movement, as all movement should at first emanate from the tanden. Sounds obvious, but in fact most of us don't do it, and in fact the guys that do it the best are toddlers that are just learning to walk - watch how they are constantly trying to catch up with their centre of mass. One of my old Daito-ryu instructors used to have us practice walking in a same arm to leg ratio - called "hitoemi" - really weird feeling at first but without a doubt, taking out the twisting motion of the body does produce better results when trying to learn how to move from the tanden. That's why understanding the principles of Junzuki/Oizuki is so important in order to understand how Karate ticks. There are some that get it at many that don't. WNM

Of course, your ma training skills are tempered in the the furnace of the dojo - for as many hours as necessary, but the cynic in me says that setting overly excessive amount of training hours between belts (just for the sake of it), is often just an excuse to generate revenue for many clubs / schools. Whilst I do not advocate "racing through belts" I think natural skill levels and aptitude have to come into it. In my group, the "regulation" time between belts (8th kyu - 3rd kyu (incl.) is 3 months and min 24 hours training. 2nd kyu to 1st kyu - 1st dan is 6 months between. This means that "technically" you are eligible to grade for Shodan after 2.5 years of training, but no one ever does because the technical requirements are too high and the content of the syllabus too extensive. Also, something else to think about when we talk about grades (more pertaining to dan grade maybe) is the fact that when many of the first wave of Japanese instructors came over to Europe / US, their grades were often "enhanced" by the association / master whose teachings they were attempting to propagate. I have heard on a number of occasions about instructors who left the shores of Japan as 1st/2nd dans only to arrive in the UK as 4th dans! But thats marketing I suppose. WNM

Necessarily qualified to teach! WNM

Interesting thread. I read an essay recently about body size and how it effects your Karate. Basically the premise was this: In Okinawa/Japan where karate (or arts from which derive from Karate) was borne, most techniques were developed to prevail against home grown enemies - of a very similar size and shape. In the west (take for example medieval Europe) enemies came in very different sizes to you and still do! Food for thought maybe? - particularly for the traditionalist! With regard to size/weight and affective karate my brain thinks like this - as well as the bloke(s) standing in front of you, you have another enemy in gravity, and its all about beating that one - so you can get on with the task in hand. Therefore, I tend to work on drills that allow me to beat gravity as best I can and get lighter on my feet. WNM

Hi Van Lenten Scribe, Can I ask, are you a student of Mr Van Lenten? WNM

I think this is the guy:- WNM

Hi SaxonPig, As far as I understand it the low dynamic stances of Shotokan were introduced by Funakoshi's sons - in the most part Gigo. Prior to this, the stances were more upright and fluid. So arguably the low dynamic stances that we know and love Shotokan for, have become a traditional part of the art, but perhaps weren't there in the first place. WNM

Do you know, years and years ago I actually stayed in Bakersfield for a few days. I was travelling the states at the time - Very industrial as I remember. People nice though (as most Americans are TBF). WNM

Hi and welcome to the forums. Where abouts in LA an with what group? WNM

At the Joden level of "Shu-ha-ri" is the traditional Japanese notion as to when a Sensei has taught the student all he can. Effectively student becomes master when the art is ingrained into their being as an instinctive part of what they do. White turns to black and then eventually back to white again. I don't think you can put a time span on this process - especially in this day and age when ultimately, most of us are "hobbyists" when it comes to our ma compared to the training regime that was undertaken in many Koryu dojo. Also people are different, learn at different paces and have varying physical capabilities. In the modern idiom I think that most of us need at least an overseeing eye to keep us on the straight and narrow. In my group for example I would say that when someone gets to 3rd dan they probably have enough skills to keep them going for a fair while, with say a monthly trip to their sensei - to make sure things weren't going too far astray. WNM PS not ignoring your PM wouldbemaster- I am doing some enquiries for you.

Hi nanook660, Good to see another Wadoka on board. Checked out your web site a saw a familar face there - Mr Shiomitsu. If you haven't already trained with him, do so!! He is quite a legend. Very nice man as well. Onegaishimasu! WNM

I think that the term master is looked upon to mean perfection, or close to it. I don't agree with this assessment. I do think that it means that one has attained a high level of skill, in their style, along with the ability to transmit that knowledge to others. In my secondary school, all (male) teachers were referred to as "Master" - Master Smith, Master Regan etc.... you get the picture. They were just teachers at the end of the day, but that was the term many grammar schools in the UK (in the 70's) used back then to describe a male teacher. Interestingly (in this case at least), the word "Master" is derived from "Mister" - which is in turn is derived from the French/Latin "Messieurs". It was used to refer to a person of some standing in society, but who did not hold a title of "knighthood" (or above) - typically it referred to the likes of priests, scholars and artisans. From where the expression arose - in Medieval Europe - it is quite a lowly title it would seem... almost common. This is perhaps why, here in the UK the correct "title" for a male under the age of 13 is still "master"!!! But agreed, somehow the word "Master" in ma seems to have been elevated massively to refer to someone who can not be surpassed. So maybe, next time you train with a guy with the title of "Master" think 13 years old?? WNM

Hi Sensei8, I wasn't being facetious, just trying to point out why it related specifically to kata. The op asked why katas vary from school to school and the existence of "Shu-ha-ri" has to be one of the main reasons. Putting aside individual traits that will naturally make one instructor perform the Kata differently to another (like size and shape) - if one instructor is further into the journey of "Shu-ha-ri" than another, he will see certain things from a different perspective. This will undoubtedly have an effect on how they teach the kata. So katas not only vary between schools they will vary over time with the same instructor at the same school. I for one am teaching katas differently than I did say 10 years ago. That's all, didn't mean to offend WNM

Simply stated, it means "hold, break, leave" which are the levels of learning of a person. Shu, the practitioner tries to obey the rules. Ha, the practitioner tries to break free from the old rules. Ri, the practitioner tries to leave/depart from the rules. That's as basic as I can put it. Strictly speaking, the term is used to describe the developmental progression and understanding of a (specific) art form - through the use of kata. The word "Kata" should not be singularly viewed along the lines of the solo performance style "Karate" kata (ie Kanku-dai etc) but rather, as a set or form used as teaching tool to impart the core principles of the art. Most Kenjutsu schools for example have both solo and paired kata, as do Jujutsu schools. Even outside MA, the tea ceremony is a Kata. Kata with a capital "K" is core to the pedagogy of many tradition Japanese art forms, and very hard for us here in the west to understand (beyond the obvious performance / shape and form) as to how it really works. "Shu-ha-ri" describes the stages of this "Kata" and so therefore the art form in itself. Literally, "shu-ha-ri" means to embrace the Kata, to diverge from the Kata, and to discard the kata. In "Shu" students will follow diligently the footsteps of their instructor and fully embrace the Kata/art form faithfully as it is represented to him by his instructor - without question. "Ha" –is only achieved after many years in "Shu" when student will enter into the "ha" or divergence stage. This is where individual creative expression will start to develop but, the core principles of the art and correct form remain sacrosanct. "Ri" to discard – To arrive at “Ri” a student must have fully internalised the “shu” and “ha” stages of kata training. Ultimately this means that one has trained in the art to the extent that the Kata itself ceases to exist (in its external form). The core principles found/practiced within, become instinctive, to the point where an exponent can use his skills spontaneously and automatically in free thinking way as opposed to “set” into a form. WNM

Not sure I would? Personally, I spend my time training ways to keep conflict to a minimum. IE quick fast over and done with and "get the heck outa there". 100/200/300 + man kumite is a conditioning tool for the kokushin based guys. Nothing wrong with it, but its not conducent to the style of Karate I study. I have an understanding in terms of what my style of Karate is designed to "deliver" (I hope) - and it ain't about fighting for 3 days constant - even if I could!!! But yes, I guess it's a feat... but then again so is climbing Everest - or walking backward from Land's End to John o' Groats for that matter. WNM