CredoTe

Absolutely...

You just dropped some knowledge sir!!! Jedi Knight level!!! Much wisdom he has, yes? Hmmm?

Very intriguing; I've always wondered the significance of the Shindokan shield/patch. Thank you for explaining...

...I'm going through a similar experience with my current CI, so I'm right there with you... Thanks!!! Ok, you've piqued my interest! This venue may be too public, but if not, I'm dying to hear more !!! Well, all I can say right now is that my CI and I are at odds regarding the future of our dojo, as well as the future of our MA journeys. The path I believe I should follow seems to be in a different direction than the one my CI wants to go down. I've been with my CI for 15+ years, so this decision is a tough one. But, I have to go with what's in my heart and mind; I have to stick to my values in order to remain honest with myself. If I don't, I will end up breaking and deceiving myself, as well as deceiving others in the future. After all, if I cannot be honest with myself, how can I be honest with others? If I did that, how could I properly seek the truth in anything?

...If we have to question why a change was made when the one who modified it is no longer around, then don't we have to question the founders choices at the outset of the art as well? For me, this is easy. Of course we do! But some artist have real trouble acknowledging this. Not saying that you do, just saying that a lot of people are quick to dismiss change on the grounds you stated, but balk at the idea of questioning a founder that was born two centuries ago. This is key. For instance, I am a Matsubayashi-Ryu karateka, so Osensei to me is Shoshin Nagamine. That said... The further I go on my journey, each time I train to gain in-depth understanding, I always have these questions in my mind: "What was Osensei's thinking? Why did he do it this way?" These questions lead me to better understanding of his background and technique, but equally important, to better understanding of my own technique and how my body is able to use them. I don't practice Matsubayashi-Ryu to exactly mimic Osensei; I practice Matsubayashi-Ryu because I believe the kata, techniques, methods, and philosophy of Osensei's version of Shorin-Ryu best suits my personal development and understanding of MA. The questions above inevitably lead to researching Osensei's historical/biographical background and training history; who did he train under? (Ankichi Arakaki, Chotoku Kyan, Motobu Choki, Chosin Chibana) What did they do, why did they do it? Who did they train under? And on and on it goes... Being able to honestly question any instructor, even founders, are crucial to understanding your own personal karate and how effectively you are able to use it to save your own life (or that of your loved one). Additionally, it gains you better insight into the history, culture, and foundation of your chosen art.

The employment of an elevated pedantic pedagogy indeed may lend towards an array of baffling befuddlement that affects a confound cacophony of caterwauling flowing forthwith from aforementioned pupils. Yes?

I must FIRST learn what goes where and when and how and why and so on and so forth; solo training, the core of the kata because that's how it's presented to most students...the 'A' before the 'B' or the '1' before the '2'. Then, the supplemental training begins when I've a partner to execute live training so I can NOW see the where and when and how and why and so on and so forth. Learn the steps first! Then, supplement that knowledge with someone who can throw the monkey wrench into the entire kata. Both posts here are solid and are actually discussing two different cars that are a part of the same train. At its primary level, kata serves simply as a catalog of techniques and as a method of personal improvement/perfection. As a catalog of techniques, any time individual kata practice is performed, whether the student is first learning a kata or doing it for the 1000th time, it is a training method to remind both the body (muscle memory) and mind (movement concepts) how individual techniques are performed. As part of personal improvement, we do kata over and over and over again, each time attempting to concentrate on some minutiae here and there the work on and hone. Bob's post regards a car that's a bit sooner in the train, near the front. When learning a kata, whether a student is taught movements first and then bunkai or vice versa, the student must understand the basic movements of each waza in the kata (from a physical, muscle memory standpoint, not necessarily intellectual understanding of bunkai) before being able to partner up. DaveB's post regards a car that's only a bit later in the train, perhaps only a car or two after Bob's. Once the basic movements of each waza in a kata are understood from a physical standpoint, partner work is essential to understanding what we're actually doing with the moves in a kata. This is a great point and I think goes well with the two posts quoted above. Originally, when Tii was first developed, there were no kata. Training included the study, learning, and development of movements and techniques using "shadow boxing", targets, or training partners (what we would call kihon), as well as fighting scenarios and live opponents where they would apply the techniques within the context of "matches" (what we would call kumite). There was a lot more to Tii than just the "kihon" and "kumite" aspects, but they provide insight into how the pre-founders of karate trained and developed their art. The first vestiges of "kata" appeared within Okinawan folk dances, which the Tii players would learn during their training as both a cultural preservation and a method to "hide" the techniques as weapons and fighting methods became outlawed. These Tii waza didn't develop into full blown kata until after the infusion of Chinese martial arts with the Okinawans' indigenous Tii (becoming Tode).

Absolutely. You've shown that you understand your art well enough to begin making it your own and making your own decisions for your MA journey. I'm going through a similar experience with my current CI, so I'm right there with you...

Now there's a bit of scientific explanation of martial arts! Great article! As an engineer, I like being able to put any technique I'm shown to the test against physics/scientific fact. If a technique doesn't make common sense (fighting sense) or physics/scientific sense, how can it possibly be used to defend oneself? Because some "sensei" says it's based upon some "ancient mystical energy or technique"? Puh-leeeeze... Karate/Tode is based upon Tii; Tii was invented by educated people who had the best grasp of physics and the human physique/anatomy in the Okinawan culture for their time. While there was some spirituality put into their art (meditation, etc), the actual Tii techniques were based purely on their best understanding of physics/scientific fact (and how the human physique relates to it) at the time. In fact, Tii had no kata, and thus no "mysterious techniques" or ambiguities, until after the need to preserve the art secretly. Even then, the only "kata" that existed in Tii were in Okinawan folk dances that contained the movements and techniques of their art (which needed a skilled, trusting instructor to decipher for the student).

OH! Almost missed it.... Congrats on your 8-year tenure here at KF!!!

Yes, good insight. We pretty much do the ten things listed, just from a slightly different angle. Particularly, points 1, 2, and 3 are followed almost verbatim to what you described; point 4, while we don't specifically write out goals on a dry-erase board or anything, we always have a per-class lesson plan that addresses what goals we want each rank/level group (novice, intermediate, advanced) to achieve for the day; points 5 - 10 stem from respect and duty - the instructor's respect for the students and the duty that comes from that to adequately, professionally, and respectfully serve the students. What I really like about your ATA points is that they spell things out in no uncertain terms how to achieve both a successful school and a respectable atmosphere between instructors and students in or out of the school.

I absolutely love this stuff; this bare-boned, razor truth approach to MA and to life. Man oh man, I wish I could get all of my students to see things this way and treat the training floor as a sort of "Occam's razor" (or Ockham's razor, i.e. lex parsimoniae) for their personal MA journey. We get a number of students and/or parents that like to make up any amount of excuses to not do an exercise, drill, etc (I'm not referring to the folks with legitimate medical reasons). These same folks then wonder why they or their children aren't progressing at the same rate as others around them (rank or otherwise)...

I'll let you know once I've picked it up and read some. It's on my list and will be a part of my personal library in the near future.

Yes... provides great insight...

Congrats! Well earned!

Quite the pickle isn't it? You bring up a good point... But, perhaps that's more evidence why Bruce Lee was such an anathema to "traditional" schools? Good point...actually...great point!! Any thoughts on my question, though? If a student is part of what we think as a "traditional" school, then yes, they must meet the expectations of instructors and any governing bodies. If they're treading their MA journey alone, then I'm not so sure. IMHO, Bruce Lee's quote is more geared on a personal level to a practitioner that has figured out that his/her MA journey is his/her own, and that said practitioner has achieved a level of skill and understanding to begin making his/her chosen art his/her own. Once a student understands an art well enough to figure out his/her own decisions on the MA journey, then Bruce's quote is more applicable.

Yes! Woo hoo! Congrats!

This is a great starting point (I know I'm a little late to the discussion, but hey...). A great analogy I was taught that happens to coincide with the article shared by Kusotare is: if body mechanics, power generation, etc were wrapped up together as a "bomb", you want this proverbial "bomb" to explode inside (and/or through) your opponent. Kime is what is used to ensure that the "bomb" explodes inside your opponent; it is NOT the "bomb" itself, rather, the setting of the "bomb" inside your opponent. So true sometimes...

Agreed. As a fellow Matsubayashi-Ryu practitioner of 25 years, you're better off training on your own using the Nagamine videos as reference. I also own a copy of that DVD series, and they're great for reference. If you choose Shotokan, IMHO, the differences in how they move and perform techniques and the concepts behind them are different enough that it will most likely disrupt your established skill in Matsubayashi-Ryu. "Taijutsu" is just an umbrella term that basically means "body technique/body skill/combat skill". IMHO, sounds to me like the Taijutsu school might be some sort of free style school that teaches bits from an array of arts. Mt. Lebanon PA looks like it's close to the Ohio border; Matsubayashi-Ryu is fairly prevalent in Ohio, so I would imagine that there's a school somewhere within driving distance of Mt. Lebanon. You might have to do some searching, but you should be able to find one.

Quite the pickle isn't it? You bring up a good point... But, perhaps that's more evidence why Bruce Lee was such an anathema to "traditional" schools?

What Wastelander says here is the key to sparring of any kind (not cage fights like you mentioned). Understanding the value/purpose of sparring will change your disposition towards it at least a little bit and hopefully enhance your sparring experience, as well, so that you get the most out of it. The primary concepts taught through sparring are distancing and feeling what it's like to have a moving target in front of you that strikes back. One thing you may want to do if you haven't learned already is ask your instructor what the purpose of sparring is in your dojo.

Very cool video. I agree that there are some similarities in concepts with karate. For instance, one of the concepts/bunkai we teach for shuto uke (chudan or gedan) is to perform it with tenshin while moving just a hair off center line to redirect an opponent's attack/momentum.

Lawrence Kane and Kris Wilder have wrote a nice book titled The Little Black Book of Violence. I highly recommend it. They cover a lot on not only the psychology of combat, and how attackers choose victims and what not, as well as dealing with the aftermath of having to defend yourself. Its a very good read. Thanks! I will look into that book and let you know once I've read some of it.

Yes, it's an exciting time for you, and well earned! So, not wanting to put it off any longer than it must is nothing to sweat over. Why? You'll sweat soon enough during your test... Sorry, I couldn't resist, it was a hanging curve ball, so to speak... In all seriousness, you've more than proven you're worthy of the test, your Sensei knows that, too. Being overly nervous is a natural reaction for someone who understands the gravity and meaning of what s/he is about to do (in this case, for you, a Shodan test). Your Sensei expects that you will make a few silly mistakes that can be attributed to nerves and not lack of skill. Focus... It'll be awesome... All of us here at KF know you'll perform awesomely and leave everything you have on the floor...

Wouldn't ukemi be more like landing, instead of flying...?? ...And sort of crash landing at that...? Just learning how to "crash land" with minimal damage done as possible...?