shadowspawn

Whenever someone throws some funky technique I don't know how to defend against, I like to use it myself in friendly kumite so that, in addition to myself trying to discover counters, I can observe my partner and his/her reaction to that specific technique. After all two heads are better than one

Oyata Sensei used to have my instructor run Naihanchi with turns back when he did Ryukyu Kempo--every time he did a step over his own foot he pivoted all the way around--which I think works great for working techniques against attacks/grabs from the rear. I tend to agree with you that turns all the way around can be for defending against attackers that come up behind you, but sometimes they can also be throws or joint locks--there's just all kinds of fun stuff in kata! Like all aspects of kata, they are techniques of body movement put in there to give your body muscle memory of fighting techniques that work in given situations. Try this out, do a body turn while you are holding an uke from the front. Kata is not designed to illustrate fighting against multiple opponents. To think multiple opponents in bunkai, is Mickey Mouse bunkai stuff in my opinion. I would disagree to some extent here. Admittedly, you won't be fighting 10 guys at once or anything, but the idea of two or even, perhaps, three assailants coming at you doesn't seem entirely far fetched. Else how would you explain the opening movements of ju roku? Surely you wouldn't step off to the side and pull both your arms backwards before striking would you? My bunkai is a bear hug attempt from the rear. Before they can lock it in, you step off to the side to pull them off balance, and both arms come back with the intent of one of them making contact. What's more is that while Japanese martial arts (or at least sword martial arts) tend to focus on a singular opponent, Chinese martial arts (or at least their sword martial arts) have a tendency to branch out and sometimes include multiple opponents. As Karate was more influenced by Chinese martial arts than Japanese martial arts, it would make sense that it would include at least some instances of multiple attackers. Just my take on that.

I was always under the impression that the turning was merely a simulation for an attack from the rear. ie. You turn and do techniques A and B: That is one scenario where opponent approaches from left. You do a 180 and do techniques A, C, and B: That is another scenario where opponent approaches from rear. You turn and do Technique A and technique D 3 times: That is 2 scenarios with the first being an attack from the left and another an attack from the front. There are some kata that do string together though so I'm not saying that every time you turn it's a different scenario. Just that I feel any one kata was meant more to prepare you for as many different scenarios as possible by meshing together a web of ippon kumite-like drills into one continuous flow of movement. In a sense, all you would need is one kata mastered and you should be able to defend yourself.

In our style we simply refer to it as shuto uke. In practice, it is referred to as a "parry". In reality, if you do the technique right (the inside sidestepping movement), you don't even need to block. The block (or in this case parry) is simply there to continue their momentum and lengthen the amount of time it would take for them to fire with their other side.As per a full force mawashi geri, we're taught to simply get in as close as you can so the focus point of their power ends up passing harmlessly behind you. From there, you can hook their leg and take them down or whatever you want to do. Moving at an angle is the best option for this though as moving straight ahead cuts the amount of time you have to move down by a few milliseconds which can make all the difference in whether you take the brunt of the impact or not. It's often referred to as a very "banzai" move since you're closing as much distance as you can with your opponent and risk running straight into a follow up strike if you don't keep your guard up. As per getting out of the way of the oncoming force can still be attributed to "not being there in the first place". I mean if there's that huge truck coming at 90 mph on the freeway, the best thing is not to be standing in the middle of the freeway in the first place. But if you do, for some reason, end up having to stand in the freeway, you can still "not be there" by willingly moving out of the way. That's the secret to pretty much every problem though isn't it? Just don't put yourself in a position that the problem would present itself.

We do have a tatetsuki vertical punch. It's generally regarded as a mid range punch where you have some airspace between you and your opponent but not enough to throw a full extent punch. Due to the range, the strike's angle is slightly off straight ahead and intends to "pull their sternum apart" by way of that slightly offset angle rather than "crushing" it by striking straight ahead. I have also seen people use a strike which is angled between the orthodox and vertical style with the line created by the first two knuckles being angled at about a 45 degree angle to the floor (where orthodox is 0 degrees and tatetsuki is 90 degrees) with the idea being that it's a very natural knuckle position that mitigates unnecessary tension within your arm.

No way I can speak for your style or sensei. I can say that the katas in Matsubayashi Ryu have been exactly the same and in the same order since the system was founded. Incidentally, in Matsubayashi Ryu, not only does the order of kata closely resembles that found in Shito Ryu, the katas we share with Shito Ryu also closely resemble one another. The only commonality to the Matsubayashi and Shito Ryu lineages is Anko Itosu. Not sure how that relates. I was merely further emphasizing the degree of variation depending on the beliefs of the ones in charge. Of course some styles are going to have more conservative masters than others. It doesn't exactly equate to a universal order for all kata originating in Okinawa.

Light gis are more comfortable and breathe more easily (which is great here where it's always hot and humid). Heavy gis feel more like my everyday attire and allow for more snap during kata. I guess it really depends on the situation, but generally speaking, I prefer lighter gis. They really make you work for that snap.

@sojobo and Ueshiro: In our school, we actually have the so-called "brown belt kata" as Kusanku, Jyuroku, and Naihanchi. A few years ago, Jyuroku was actually dropped so now we are left with only Kusanku and Naihanchi. My sensei attributed it to learning the "easiest and the hardest of black belt kata" so that it allows everything else in between to fall into place. @cayuga: I completely agree. IIRC, karate as we know it today is actually more of a "blend" of pre-existing Okinawan martial arts. Attempting to put them in a single unified order would be like telling an aspiring MMA fighter that he has to train in boxing before he takes up any other martial art.

That is a very interesting claim. You might want to consider making a new thread for it altogether. For those of you who CBA to read this TL;DR theory: The karate taught to Okinawans by Chinese officials may have actually been a short-spear martial art designed to fight pirates on the high seas. It was hidden by removing the spear and masking the spear striking techniques as empty hand strikes to train in plain view without anyone finding out. I'm actually really interested in seeing this especially considering that your first project would be Kusanku (my favorite 'black belt' kata). If this is true, it would actually really help to explain why there was no real sparring in karate prior to Funakoshi's death. Most other martial arts have some form of sparring (including Chinese martial arts) so it did seem very strange that kumite would only come after Shotokan had been established.

I've never heard of this rationale. One was that as one hand strikes forward (tsuki), the other strikes backwards (empi) effectively training two techniques in one motion. The other is to exaggerate the rotation of the torso in addition to the rotation you get from the hip. Kind of like how if you were to try to spin a coin (without flicking), you'd get better results by applying a force to both sides and spinning them in the same circular direction as opposed to spin it by only applying a force to one side. As per the thread, we've had two locations in our school: fist at level of sternum and fist at level of last rib. The reasons for this have already been mentioned but I do feel I should add that you will meet more resistance punching from last rib since you have to raise your fist slightly as you strike. Still the amount of energy exerted by raising your hand a couple inches doesn't compare to the amount you'd waste by holding your fist tense at sternum level.@tayl: I think it just feels that way because your arm is tense the whole way through. I've practiced both methods. The hand at sternum feels more powerful than hand at last rib, but having your hand at your last rib allows your bicep and forearm to relax and thus feels faster. Both methods seem to work well for the people who use them so I'd say that both methods are probably very effective in their own ways.

I disagree. There are more PC exclusives than there are console exclusives mostly due to the RTS genre. If we are excluding PC though, I think I would be split between Wii and PS3 myself. I mean Wii games are fun (and I mean fun fun not 'it's only fun when I win' fun) and PS3 has some of my favorite game series such as God of War, Resistance, and Yakuza. X360 only had Ace Combat 6 for me, but prior to that, the Ace Combat series was a PS exclusive IIRC. The one game series I wish they'd continue on PS3 is the Naval Ops series. Warship Gunner 2 was by far my favorite. Absolutely loved that game.

You don't teach varying levels of force depending on the situation? Someone tries to take your lunch money, so you crush his treachea?! I'm all for having a lethal or maiming option for the rare occasion when it would be needed, but to have no other response pattern is irresponsible. The closest thing are forms of restraint that we borrowed from aikido. That requires an initial attack to execute though and is not really suited for self-defense as it is a pretty basic idea. It's more suited for restraining someone you do not want to hurt but is presenting somewhat of a threat to yourself or others. A good example is a member of your family coming home drunk and acting erratic/violent and you want to restrain them until they come to their senses. Regarding the bully scenario, we try to avoid teaching anyone under the age of 16 because of that idea. It's similar to putting a gun in a kid's hand. You can give the kid all the gun safety training in the world (teaching them how to avoid confrontations altogether, etc.) but it would still be pretty ridiculous to give a 7 year old a gun (unless you're like some kind of terrorist rebel who trains kids to fight governments). We also do have some methods of disabling them (due to one of our students being a cop) such as striking pressure points that send muscles into spasms or knocking them out with a hook or something, but it is far from our primary concern. Our philosophy could be considered something like "If you want to fight, go to the gym and learn to box" since the whole idea of us teaching karate is for them not to use it. Kind of like when people go to the shooting range to fire a 9mm. Sure you teach them how to aim and shoot in a life/death situation but you don't give them rubber bullets and start telling them to shoot anyone who wants to fight you. While I do agree that crushing their throat isn't the solution to everything, I do not believe that people should be fighting at all if they have a choice. But there will always be those people who do choose to fight. To those people, I can only be glad they didn't kill the person. But I'm not gonna teach someone to fight someone without killing them to encourage that kind of behavior. To me it seems like you're giving them the green light to fight someone whenever they're provoked since they have non-lethal ways of "subduing" an opponent. I suppose we do have one "non-lethal" way of dealing with bullies though (not that many of our students would have to put up with them due to the age restriction). Kick 'em in the nads and run like hell. Mainly taught to women due to the increased risk of sexual predators these days.

That sounds somewhat hard to believe considering the amount of accidental deaths I've heard of where people have fallen and hit the back of their head/neck on a corner surface ie. a curb. Unless their elbow didn't have much weight behind it or it didn't really catch them in the specified area, it doesn't seem likely that no one would be seriously injured after multiple incidents of the foul. I mean the elbow is a very pointed part of the body. Combine that with a 200 pound fighter and a brain stem that doesn't take too much to damage and you'd expect someone to have some kind of spinal injury. Admittedly I don't watch much MMA competitions, but this sounds as unbelievable as someone catching a punch and hitting right behind the elbow without breaking the guy's arm.

It's a very gutsy move though. Very effective once you get inside, but you can get punished pretty bad if you don't keep your guard up. I personally do it a LOT. I've also been on the receiving end of a misplaced headshot because of my movements ie. they put their arm up expecting you to go for the head and you catch an elbow to the eye or getting inside a mawashi geri and taking a headbutt because they leaned forward after kicking. Most of the time I get hit while moving inside it's accidental on their part, but if that were to happen on the street, that could spell out disaster since a lot of times undisciplined fighters will just randomly throw everything they got at you with no real direction. I personally think the best thing to do in an actual confrontation is to just make sure you hit your opponent first. Typically speaking, when a guy is trying to beat you down, they're not gonna lead with a short move like a jab unless they have some kind of experience with boxing or something. It really depends on the situation I suppose. Typically speaking (at least for someone my size) it's best to move inside as quickly as possible but there are times that it's something you do not want to do (especially against people who excel in close quarters like clinchers or grapplers).

I agree that from one tournament to another it's a matter of what the judge sees, but I don't agree that doing lower stances, slow techniques or excessive kai's makes any difference. As a judge I look for speed, power, control, accuracy and just plain good, solid technique. Do a back flip or split and I will drop your score down at least a full point. Kai every technique and that will drop you more. Weak kicks/punches or blocks and down it will go further. Weak stances will also drop my scoring, but just because you make a wider, lower stance will not raise the score with me. Say for example you do Pinan Yondan. Maybe it doesn't look the same as MY Pinan Yondan, and that's ok. I won't mark you down for it one bit because I know systems vary. A kata doesn't have to be done the same as I do it to be great, it just needs to be done well Yondan was actually one of my favorite tournament katas as a colored belt. Really allowed me to show off my low stances and was just an all around fun kata to do. I'd actually disagree on the kiai every move part. Yes if the kiai is half-assed, it would drop their score with me. But if each movement was strong, crisp, and each kiai was done with conviction, it would probably raise their score in my books. Still that would be a lot of energy wasted and to do so with any kata longer than jyuroku would be impossible IMO.@bushido: I'd say I'm the same way. Still, a practical kokutsu just doesn't look as awesome as an exaggerated, extra-low kokutsu. I mean I guess it could be practical if you're trying not to get shoulder-thrown, but you just can't move in a stance that low. As per a phone, I do not. I do have a 3DS that I might be able to use though but then I'd also have to find somewhere with enough space for the camera and for me to do the kata. I could probably use my backyard. I'll see what I can get this weekend. As per asking judges for advice, normally I would but it's an off-island tournament and seeing as my dojo is the only one on the island, I wouldn't want to do anything that makes us seem intrusive/etc. My sensei actually said that if he caught any of us doing anything that would embarrass him or the dojo, he would take us out back and personally beat the hell out of us LOL. Next class I'll ask about what he regards as proper etiquette though. @russell: That is true. My sensei emphasizes the benefits of kata competition as simulating the same kind of nervousness that one would experience in a life or death situation. It's supposed to help you keep your head and think even under all that pressure and execute each technique with crispness and rhythm even with all that adrenaline rushing through your body. As per changing things to suit competition, unless what I need to change would drastically affect my ability to perform (like adding a 360 degree jump to a kata because a certain school practices the kata that way), I'm usually able to adapt. I've done a number of variations to the same kata that drawing the links between them and adjusting where necessary isn't too difficult a feat for me so long as the kata are not vastly different. If I were to do kata my way though, it would probably tick everyone off LOL I'm pretty sure my bunkai for some techniques is very different than what the judges' bunkai are. @DWx: I do use mirrors to check my stances. I like to compare all the different ways I take stances to find their strengths, weaknesses, and which look best in terms of wowing the audience. I mean I personally have about 5 different ways of taking kokutsu depending on what the purpose of taking the stance is. IMO, having many bunkai for a single technique is very much a benefit since you will be able to use very similar movements to do many different things. Even something as simple as a gedan barai has many interpretations for me. For critique I primarily turn to my sensei for advice. I will see what I can do about getting a vid though. As per looking, we're always thought to look first then move with the idea that you can't start punching at something until you know it's there. I'd probably never change that since it just wouldn't make sense for me to move before/while I look just like I'd probably never change my habit of looking in the direction of your last attacker before going to yame. As per kumite, even that is kind of subjective but I'll stay on subject here. @Montana: Our school is generally in the middle with the high vs. low stance debate. Our naihanchi stance is roughly two shoulder widths wide as opposed to other schools who may have their stances almost as high as sanchin and others low to the point where the arc created by their legs looks almost like the top 1/3 of a circle. There is a dojo within our school that deals almost exclusively in low stances though. Needless to say, they're mostly kata focused. I agree on the high kicks as well. I'd go so far as to say I wouldn't condone low stances at all either. Unless you are a practitioner of a throwing martial art such as jujitsu, the potential benefits of lowering you stance to get a lower center of gravity just don't outweigh the potential losses of lowered mobility and a chance of getting kicked in the face. BTW that's the only time our sensei condones kicking them in the face: if their head is at or below the height of chudan.

I practice kicking with slippers Here, everyone wears them. Can't really kick with the ball of the foot while wearing slippers though so learning to kick with the instep, heel, and shin are pretty necessary. Of course developing ways to get those off quickly when you have the opportunity help improve the versatility of your kicks is pretty helpful (I've tried practicing ways to kick the slipper off in the direction of the opponent's face in the hopes of distracting them as well as getting the slipper off). As per tradition, you could try kicking a makiwara. That's what we do, although it is an "indoor makiwara" which is supported not by the ground, but by a steel brace that tries to keep the board from moving.

I don't agree with the definition mostly because I don't agree with the title. IMO, you aren't "either an expert or not" depending on certain criteria. If members (high-ranking or not) consider you an expert, you are an expert to them. This same idea does not carry over to every person you meet. This reminds me of a little quote by Margaret Thatcher that I like to throw at people who make a big deal over titles: "Being powerful is a lot like being a woman: If you have to tell someone that you are, invariably, you are not." As per training etc. that really depends on what you consider to be most important. Some people put an emphasis on the ability to commit to fast and powerful techniques. Others put an emphasis on kumite. Some put an emphasis on kata. And others still put an emphasis on teaching ability and leadership. They each have their merits and outside training can help with a few of these (speed/power and, invariably, kumite) but depending on what you value most, it may mean practically nothing. As per importance, a good amount went into karate. It was definitely on my priority list but it was not "the" thing. It just kind of fell into the same category as my piano playing. It's not something I dedicate every moment of my life to, but it is definitely something that has kind of blended into my lifestyle.

Sounds fun LOL Do you guys train with any of the listed weapons or is it just for fun?

1: Yes very much so. Our style, for example, is based mostly on Shorin-Ryu. However, we have taken many influences from other arts such as kajukenbo (of course), aikido, and even boxing to a certain degree. We typically avoid groundwork and takedowns are a bit of a rarity (despite the aikido influence) so the attitude does very much follow the "traditional" karate philosophy of never hitting the ground. 2: I personally wouldn't be able to answer that. I do know, however, that styles can vary not only from style to style, but even from dojo to dojo. I've seen a good amount of people of various ranks from different dojos under our style with each having their own distinctive approach. Our dojo in particular has two types of mawahi geri while the rest of our school only has one (being the full taekwondo-esque one). I have trained, however, in Shito-Ryu (or at least a variant of it) in the past though. Once thing I notice is its de-emphasis on raw power and more on precision striking for vulnerable areas such as pressure points or soft tissue whereas the "modified Shorin-Ryu" I'm studying now has more an emphasis on power in addition to striking vitals. The style of Shito-Ryu I had studied also had significantly more takedowns and, to a certain degree, groundwork when compared to the Shorin-Ryu variant I'm training in now. Not sure if that helps. If any more distinguishing features come to mind, I'll be sure to update.

We actually had someone like that come in to our dojo. He was 2nd kyu at another school when he walked in. First time in over 30 years that he was getting back into it. It really shows too. It's kind of like riding a bike. Once you learn, you never really lose it. We have 2 classes every week with the rest of the days up to the student to practice on their own. What he had most difficulty coping with was out slightly different basics and kata which, I'm sure with training, should be easy to adjust to.

Hmmm well video taping hasn't really been something I've been able to do very often. There are many times I've wanted to video tape it, but I could not for lack of equipment. As per the people who got first and second, there were a few things I noticed. The first thing I noticed was an exaggerated "breath". I assume they were trying to imitate a so-called "breath kiai" in which rather than shouting, they simply exhale hard very similar to how boxers breathe when they strike. To me it sounded more like they were just blowing air through their teeth though. A second thing I noticed is that they never looked before they turned. What I found strange though is that these people did the exact same kata as most of the people that ranked below me in the comp. and it looked very similar, if not identical to the others I had seen: High stances, no look before turning, that "breath", etc. A classmate of mine had speculated that it could have been that the person who came in first just so happened to be the daughter of the head sensei of the dojo the tournament was hosted at. IDK if I want to get into any accusations though.@evergrey: The part about the mistakes is true. Once I completely screwed up in kata and got two kata mixed up. I started with one and ended with another LOL but it seemed that no one outside my dojo at the time noticed. I still got relatively high marks. @wastelander: The only two things working against me I feel are my short stature and lack of flexibility in my legs. Like seriously I cannot kick any higher than chudan which would probably be gedan for the average person LOL. I don't pay it heed though because I wouldn't kick any higher than my own chudan in an actual confrontation. Still high kicks are one "decorative" point that I'll probably never achieve in kata competition. In any case, it's very rare that I'll find someone within my rank division that has as (relatively) long and low stance as I do. I tend to drop really low for competition's sake to the point that it would not be practical at all on the street. For example my kokutsu is so low and long that I cannot move once I lock the stance in. I literally have to do a semi-hop to change stances (I pull my legs up ever so slightly but rapidly to take enough weight off my feet to bring my front leg back and change directions). I like to do kata that feature many "neutral" stances to further demonstrate the contrast of height. It has been a while since I've seriously practiced kata for competition. I'll be working on getting my stances low and, hopefully, my kicks high in anticipation for the tournament.

So an interesting topic here. This regards kata competition. Normally when I do kata, I use a somewhat upright, practical stance to practice form that I could use in an actual confrontation. However, for competition's sake, I tend to get my stances exceptionally low and use various "techniques" to emphasize movements and add "drama" to the kata. I'm considered one of the stronger kata people in my branch but, despite this, I've never placed any higher than third in any kata competition I can recall off the top of my head. Of course none of the tournaments were hosted by my dojo, but I'm actually beginning to wonder whether there may be some other reason behind the judgment. Perhaps variations in our kata don't match with theirs? In any case, another competition is coming up in about a month or so. Anyone have any ideas as to what the judges like to see other than low stances, dramatic movements, and "fancy" techniques?

I'm assuming we're talking about modern day karate here. The beauty of it is that you don't need much to train. If you can take 2 steps in any direction, you have enough room to train on your own. You don't need a partner or even an instructor to train. All you need is the basics and the knowledge of at least one kata.

I've watched a few. Martial arts as a sport has never really been my thing, but here where I live, it's something that I'd estimate 70% of the population is into with maybe 20% participating in at least amateur bouts. From what I'd heard, Pride was superior to UFC during its time. Still IIRC, when Pride was rounded, UFC had already "reformed" to suit the politicians protesting it.Watching any sport has never been my thing. I find it boring as heck for the most part. However, I do like to turn on UFC sometimes to analyze what they are doing. Does it have application in the real world? Is that technique in a kata, etc. I often ask myself, if biting was allowed, would BJJ be nearly as big as it is? There are a lot of things in many sports that have applications in the real world. Not just MMA. Still, yes it is interesting to analyze different martial arts and find the similarities between them and other styles. Usually the things that are common throughout the arts (ie. hip rotation) are the things that really work. And I agree with pain here. If biting were allowed, highly competitive matches would probably involve a lot of it. I mean imagine if elbows to the back of the head/neck were allowed. I'm sure a ton of those ground fighters who like to go for double legs would end up paralyzed or dead. MMA is by no means a simulation for a street fight. It never has been (well maybe in exception to some forms of vale tudo but even that doesn't account for outside variables such as weapons, rugged terrain, dirt in the eyes, etc.) and never will be. Really the best non-street fight simulation for a street fight would probably be war. I mean that is where the "martial" part of "martial art" comes from.

I usually will when I'm faced up against someone who is much bulkier and heavier than me. Like my sensei. I'll keep defenses up, attack, pull back and put my defenses up again. It's one of my only advantages over this huge black belt grizzly bear: I have longer arms and legs since I'm tall and I can sometimes outspeed him (but that's infrequent) Moving straight back when someone is coming right at you relies heavily on your agility and the idea that you're faster than your opponent though. If it's rare that you are faster than your opponent, I would definitely suggest moving out of the way. You can use an outside movement to create distance while sidestepping by stepping out at a 45 degree angle to the rear but to step straight back against someone who is bigger AND faster than you is one way to get destroyed LOL If you don't believe me, you can try getting in the ring with a brawler (sometimes called "power puncher") and move backwards during his onslaught. As per techniques to keep those kinds of people off of you, I find one of the most effective things, when used properly, is a jab. And not one of those "light" jabs that you often see in the ring with almost no power behind it, but a jab with enough weight behind it to flick the guy's head back. It might not be as fast as a "normal" jab, but it's basically like your own martial arts stiff arm to keep the guy off of you just long enough to create some more distance and fight him on the outside. Just be careful of inside fighters. They're usually quick on their feet and can close gaps in the blink of an eye. For them, all I can recommend is you step on their foot and blast them while they can't take a step LOL