Wado Heretic

Lose any attitudes you have. Keep in mind sparring is for learning; not winning or losing. Find out which Black-Belts (or equivalent) will help you, and those that will just use you as a punching bag or grappling dummy. Avoid the latter whenever you can. Find out how not to lose, but don’t neglect learning how to win. It’s all very well throwing yourself at the wall of people you can’t beat to get better at defence, but if you never learn how to win you never will. Take time out to just your techniques out on people your own level, or even people not as good as you. Just remember give and take. Take any criticism or advice at face value. Even if you felt what was being criticised worked, it could still give insights to improvements. Have a lesson plan; what are you working on now, and how can sparring give you useful feedback. If you have been working on your leg kick set ups; focus on using leg kick set ups, even if it gets you punished by your sparring partner. Sparring is about learning how to make things work; it’s trial and error. Precision over speed, and technique over power. The point being; don’t rush yourself, and don’t use power to compensate for mistakes. Overall; I'd argue "sparring" tips beyond the above are very much contextual. I do not think I could come up with 100 tips without being on the floor, and knowing what type of sparring I am giving tips about.

Shinko Matayoshi, the individual who introduced Kingai-Ryu to his family arts, primarily studied Fuchow Quan Fa under Roshi Kingai. Due to his connection to Koki Go and Kenki Go, and the unique kata practised in Kingai-Ryu (Such as Tora Tsuru: Tiger-Crane) the system is believed to be a branch of Fujian Tiger-Crane. Similarly; the Matayoshi lineage also contains significant White Crane forms and influences from Kenki Go, whom was Shinko Matayoshi's other significant teacher. As most people believe Kingai-Ryu to be "the" unarmed discipline of the Matayoshi family; the recognition that Kingai-Ryu is but one system of techniques preserved by the Matayoshi family is often lost in translation. Indeed, Kingai-Ryu contains techniques for the Hooked Pole-Arm, a combination of sword and shield found little elsewhere, the use of the Surujin (Weighted cord), and even Shuriken Jutsu. This is not a unsubstantial Kobudo syllabus by any means. Much confusion arises from the fact many believe Matayoshi-Ryu is only a form of Kobudo; simply because of the popularity of Matayoshi Kobudo. However, there was a form of Matayoshi-Ryu Kenpo; which Shinko Matayoshi augmented with the Tsuru Kenpo of Kenki Go, and the unarmed forms of Kingai-Ryu. Kingai-Ryu is very much a form of Fujian Tiger-Crane; but Matayoshi Kenpo is very much influenced by White Crane, and the Kenpo readily demonstrated to the public is very much of the Crane Style. As such, that is where much of the assertion that Kingai-Ryu is essentially White Crane comes from, but Matayoshi Kenpo is largely White Crane; Kingai-Ryu itself is Tiger-Crane. This is, by the way, from an outside observer and I have only encountered Matayoshi-Ryu a handful of time. I have just had the benefit of talking to practitioners more than willing to explain the distinguishing qualities of Kingai-Ryu, and the rest of the Matayoshi system. I was once also under the impression it was solely White-Crane, until I was informed otherwise. To be fair; I think it's more like Hung Gar in its form the more I look at it.

In terms of dynamics there are a lot of similarities between Shotokan, Goju-Ryu, and Tang Soo Do. How the hip is used to generate power is actually quite consistent across the three styles, and all favour a full rotation of the fist. With the above said; the main differences are primarily the kata, and the scale of power generation. Many of the kata of Tang Soo Do and Shotokan are functionally the same, and thus you will essentially retread old ground. Goju Ryu on the other hand will have a wealth of new kata, and fighting techniques to study. On to the meaning of the scale of power generation. The primary difference is that Shotokan perform the movements on a larger scale, and make more use of body movements and momentum to generate power. After all, large stances limit hip rotation, and flexibility. In comparison Goju-Ryu uses the hips to generate most of their power with the smaller stances. There are a multitude of other differences, but those are the big ones.

I too would consider fraud a strong word for some examples. Some times it is not the fault of the player, but rather the organiser and how they determine competition levels. I saw it on a semi-regular basis back when I was kick-boxing: two rookies who were both 0-0 but for one it was their first competition bout, but the other had a Knock-Down Karate or Boxing back-ground and had competed before. On paper, both were of the same experience level as kick-boxers, but one had experience that was a practicable factor in kick-boxing. It was not the fault of the more experienced competitors though; the organiser just saw two 0-0 kick-boxing records and matched them up for a debut. Sand-Bagging on the other hand, though, is a deliberate act comparatively speaking. It is a failure to declare one's actual ability to compete in an easier division. It is more often seen in open-grappling competitions I find. Someone with four years of free-style wrestling experience, or a Nidan Grade in Judo, only admits to the Blue-Belt they have in Jujutsu and thus ends up in that division. In that case it is the fault of the player; they have with-held information that is important for the organiser to be able to place them in a fair bracket. With regards to how I deal with such individuals on the dojo floor; I use a red-belt system. Basically; if new-comer declares to me they have prior experience and provide proof of it, I give them a red-belt to wear for the first 3/4 months, instead of making them wear a white belt. On the belt I place three Velcro bands. One representing the level of striking, another Wrestling, and the third grappling. What I mean by this is the level of intensity I am permitting them to do relative to the belt standards I use, for each of those three skill sets. For example; there is no point in me preventing a Tae Kwon Do player or a Boxer doing Bogu Kumite (without leg kicks) because they have the prior experience to do that. Similarly, there is no point in me making a BJJ Purple Belt drill sweeps and the Punching-Phases with white belts, when they can be rolling with my Brown/Black belts. After those 3/4 months; I then let them challenge for an actual belt in my grading system. Some times they succeed and can do away with the Velcro; sometimes the velcro bands have to stay for a little longer, even with the new belt. In terms of people who lie to my face, and come just to beat up on my students? I just tell them to leave, and never come back, and tell the other people in the area about them. Have got a few people black-listed from* Clubs and Gyms around here.

Context gives these matters meaning. On the Dojo floor the belt should reflect an awarded rank. To go back to the totality of what I stated; it is whether those belts scale to the rank, and if that rank scales effectively to the implied skill. Outside that context, the belt has no inherent meaning, nor the ranks attached to the belt. If you ask a context specific question, then you have to use context specific logic.

Sincerity; are the training habits of the individual consistent with their actual goals. It is one of those relative things. For example; I have had someone say they wanted to be come a professional kick-boxer, and I offered to put them in touch with some contacts who could help make it happen, but it would mean taking a leap of faith and moving countries. They have turned around and decided against it. However, they were at every training session I put on, and always had solid progress suggesting they worked hard outside of sessions. They were serious on one scale, but talk of being serious on another scale put them off. The root of Amateur, is to do something for the love of it. The only difference between an Amateur and a Professional is one gets paid for it. I would argue everyone is serious; you do not put time and money into something like martial arts without some degree of seriousness. The main problem I would argue is honesty and self-awareness. Some people are far better at recognising the reach of their abilities, and recognising what they need to do to improve. Others are content to get a little better every day, while others need to see that leap of progress regularly. Some are deluded about what makes fighting ability, and others are very aware of the work needed to be effective at fighting. All are serious, but are they realistic is the question.

I would argue it depends on the robustness of the individual ranking/belt system. I have found the Judo Belt system to be consistent. After all, to challenge for Shodan you must earn sufficient points through competition play and pass a technical grading where you demonstrate sufficient knowledge of Judo. Similarly, challenging for senior grades requires facing a line-up, and/or a technical grading panel. Yudansha in Judo have had to contend to get that belt; might not demonstrate they are an elite player, but it demonstrates they have fought, and have technical knowledge. Similarly; it was once a tradition in Kyokushinkai and its circle of influence that one fight a line up of the grade you were aiming for. If one made it past the Kyu Grades; they had fought for it. The belts in said systems are largely consistent with the skill development curve. Now, what I would say is that many systems award grades based on activities that do not directly correlate to fighting ability. Many Karate, Tae Kwon Do, Quán Fǎ, Kenpō, and Gendai Budo Jujutsu schools grade based on the rote memorisation of new Kata/Tàolù/Hyeong, and demonstrations of techniques on compliant partners. Forms, after the initial hurdle or developing the ability to learn them, do not necessarily reflect progress, barring Forms which introduce more athletically demanding movements. Even then, that only reflects a development of athletic ability. Similarly, the demonstration of techniques on a compliant partner merely reflects knowledge of the final part of the technique; not the ability to apply it under duress, or create opportunities to apply said technique against a resisting attacker. The above is of course not true of all the dojo/dojang/kwoon and sub-systems of the broad approaches mentioned. Since the 90s, there has been increasing trend towards more alive training approaches in martial arts over all. However, it cannot be said yet that the above issue has at all disappeared. There remains the issue of many rank systems not in fact relating to actual fighting ability. That is what I feel is the actual essence of this discussion. If someone has a Purple belt and it means Yonkyu in a system; the belt and the rank are one in the same. Now, let us say that purple represented Yonkyu in two different schools, of the same umbrella discipline. In this example, let us say karate. If we took two purple belts, of the same size and relative strength, and had them fight and it was not a competitive bout we would have to question what Yonkyu/Purple means. The rank should indicate a similar level of skill, according to the standards of the school, and if they were of the same size and weight class we can eliminate a simple difference in strength as the determining factor. What has gone wrong in this scenario? Over saturation of the belt-system, and a rank system which awards abilities not related to fighting skill. Thus, what occurs, is that individual differences determine differences in skill; not the actual standards of the school. If you have too many ranks, awarded too often, then the belts are not reflecting the actual time it takes to improve as a combatant. Similarly; if the belts are being awarded based on factors not relating to fighting ability, then of course the belts do not reflect an individuals growth as a martial artist. Belt and Rank are one in the same. The issue is what they mean in the context they are seen. Now, do the belts meet the expectations placed on the rank they represent is the real question.

Of relevant records, very little direct training indeed. The only confirmed training was for brief periods of a few months at the Ritsumeikan in 1935 and 36. Yamaguchi Gogen probably received the majority of his early training from Yogi Jitsuei, who himself at most may have studied under Miyagi Chojun for at most five years. Yamaguchi, according to Higoanna Morio, did later under go more training under Meitoku Yagi, but this training could have also happened in the thirties. The matter is a little confused by contradictions produced by differing accounts. It is largely accepted that Goju-Kai is the invention of Yamaguchi, and his associates So Neichu and Yogi Jitsuei, but that it has strong roots in Goju-Ryu. Personally, I consider it one of the Japanese Branches of Goju-Ryu, but not "The" Japanese Goju-Ryu that some do. Authentic Japanese Goju-Ryu largely starts at Yoyogi Dojo and Higoanna Morio's efforts in Tokyo.

In the United Kingdom you are permitted the use of reasonable force to protect yourself. Reasonable force being governed by the danger you "believed" yourself to be in at the time, not the actual danger, but that interpretation is then determined in the courts. As long as the force you used was demonstrably consistent with the level of danger you believed you were in then you will generally walk free. Let us take two examples of deaths and house invasion: Recently a home owner had his house invaded by two men, and his life was threatened with a screwdriver. When the home owner and one of the men were isolated in the kitchen, a fight ensued, and one of the house invaders died from a stab wound inflicted by the aforementioned screwdriver. The Homeowner was taken into custody but faces no charges, as despite the death, it was successfully argued he used force consistent with the danger he both believed he was in and was probably in. In contrast, a number of years ago, a farmer shot a house invader dead with a shotgun. He shot a 16 year old in the back, at a distance where the house invader was no threat to him. It also emerged that the farmer suffered paranoid delusions, and made a habit of staying up late at night holding said shotgun fully loaded. The farmer was sent to jail for murder. The argument being that he killed someone that he would have had no reason to believe was a danger to him (The forensic evidence was the house invader was at a distance, and actively fleeing.) Context is hugely important to any discussion regarding self-defence. Above I have discussed reasonable force in the context of self-defence during a house invasion. I largely agree with Spartacus Maximus if we are discussing the context, of say a violent mugging, and he has outlined the ideal and the simplest course. Effective Self-Defence is about effective avoidance of potential situations, deescalation of situations, and removal of self from danger. However, there are cases where escape is not feasible, or indeed possible, without doing some harm to the aggressor. Similarly, there may be cases where restraining the aggressor is the sensible course of action, for cases of citizen's arrest and the like. I cannot speak for other places in the world, but so long as you used force consistent with the danger you believe you are in, then you are usually okay in the United Kingdom.

I would try and ask if someone will let you borrow a lighter glove before committing. However, I'd be fairly confident a 10oz would be too small, so if you had to get a size, I'd go no smaller than 12oz for a bag glove, and 14oz for a sparring glove.

It can do, and it really depends on your goals with the technique. If you intend to be a power fighter, than you will want to develop using the shoulder. As I said, I cannot remark too much because I cannot see your feet, but judging by the movement I do not think you are putting the in-step in enough. I would say try thinking with your feet more, rather than the arms, if you are after power. Getting your weight moving properly is the first step.

Sadly, not at the time, but as mentioned by P.A.L we have finally seen progress on the matter with the JKF doing away with the Shitei-Gata. Now, I fear it is a mixed bag because I honestly, looking at the rules, just feel as though the concept of the Shitei-Gata has just mutated into a more encompassing version. After all, article five of the kata rules list establishes the "Official" kata and individuals are still beholden to performing kata from their Ryu-Ha. It is a comprehensive list, but still has omissions, and still largely favours the four "official" styles recognised by the WKO. It is a move forward, but how good it is will be something only time will tell.

As mentioned prior, Goku-Kai can readily be considered the Japanese Branch of Okinawan Goju-Ryu. There are not many fundamental differences, but there are a handful of key differences. Goju-Kai has a series of Kihon-Gata named Taikyoku. Inspired by, and influenced by, the kata series of the same name by Funakoshi Gichin, but those used in Goju-Kai are the invention of Yamaguchi Gōgen. As in Shotokan, they are beginner kata and they are usually taught prior to the Gekisai Kata. In comparison to Goju-Ryu, where the Gekisai Kata are either the foundational Kata, or omitted from the syllabus entirely; depending on when the founder of the branch graduated from training with Miyagi Chojun. To continue from this; Sanchin, Tensho, and Saifa, alongside Gekisai, are considered the foundational kata of Goju-Ryu, and one can expect to start studying Sanchin from day one. In contrast, in Goju-Kai and Japanese Goju-Ryu in general, one will not begin serious study of Sanchin until after the Taikyoku-Gata and Gekisai or around Rokyu or Gokyu. Similarly, Saifa is often considered the first “Adavanced” kata in contrast to it being foundational in Okinawan Goju-Ryu. Beside differences in kata practice, Goju-Kai generally places more emphasis on Yakusoku Kumite and Jiyu Kumite, and although there is also practice of bunkai it is not the primary focus. In contrast, in Okinawan Goju-Ryu, almost all Kumite is related to the process of Bunkai. Another contrast is that Goju-Kai competition is more likely to be inline with WKO style competition, but Okinawan Goju-Ryu is largely involved in Full-Contact or Knock-Down rules. Also, Goju-Kai is perhaps, alongside Kyokushin, the most focused on Hojo Undo it is still very limited in contrast to Okinawan Goju-Ryu. This is where the primary difference, in what I have observed, differs between the two. Much is made of Hojo Undo and conditioning the body on Okinawa, but Goju-Kai seems to have an approach more balanced between the three Ks; Kihon, Kumite, and Kata. Lastly; Goju-Kai today seems to omit Kobudo/Kobujutsu practice, where as on Okinawa the practices are still intimately entwined. I will add that this is very much a case of an outsider looking in. I have witnessed, and trained alongside both Goju-Kai and Okinawan Goju-Ryu practitioners so I felt I could make a relatively fair comparison but I would take my words with a grain of salt. Also, all Dojo/Clubs/Gyms differ in the way all instructors differ. I would happily gamble that there is a Goju-Kai instructor out there that could intimidate a Goju-Ryu practitioner with his passion for physical conditioning.

First thing first: a 1 second clip of 1 combination is not really going to be useful to judge from. Similarly, without a view of the hips and feet, and a side angle, there is not much I can tell you. Realistically; need to see you performing it at least 20 times, from different angles, and ideally against something such as pads or a bag. # What I can say from the clip is that over all it looks okay. I have seen far worse. However, a couple of things: 1. Your elbows are too loose; they are doing nothing for your defence splayed out like that. 2. You flicked the jab rather than thrust it. I would not usually cite this as an issue, as there have been very successful boxers who have used the flicker jab. However, you are doing it from a peek-a-boo-stance, so you should be thrusting the jab out. This in part comes from the elbows; try tucking the lead arms elbow in tighter to the chest. 3. You are starting the 2 before the 1 is complete. It's a common mistake as it feels faster, but it throws the hips off. Make sure to fix the jab in before throwing the cross. 4. You bring the front hand back to neutral after the jab. Remember to bring it back to the chin, or above the shoulder, but never just back to neutral. However, as I mentioned, I have seen far worse and over all it is okay. Furthermore; what I just pointed out could just be mistakes made in this one clip, during this one particular combination. I really cannot say anything with certainty without seeing a lot more footage, and against something offering resistance such as a bag.

The lighter weights are smaller than the heavier weight gloves. There is usually an inch worth of difference between the sizes. Going down a weight should result in a better fit. What weight class are you, and your hand circumference without wraps? That can tell you the glove size you should have.

I enjoyed it as something different, but at the same time I can see it not being for everyone. Also, there is a very obvious lack of depth to all of the divisions that exist thus far. Very few that I have seen have readily adapted their Non-Contact talents and abilities to this new format. I generally use two litmus tests for any new sport. The Heavyweight division, and the division with the most obvious talent. The heavyweight division can be both bloated, and shallow, at the same time due to weight control not being an issue. Of the heavyweight division thus far; it is not good. It comes across as two ironclads swatting at each other with under-powered guns. Some promising wrestling, and interesting power moves, considering they are Karate Players but the striking exchanges have been sub-par thus far. I would argue a relatively middle of the road Nak Muay, or a decent Dutch Kick-boxer would have taken apart what I have seen with relative ease. This hurts to type, because the heavyweight competitors are not names to sneeze at in the world of competitive karate. Rafeal Aghayev is the only Welterweight I watched who has adapted well, and even he made some odd choices tactics wise. However, his Non-Contact approach has always been reliant on Head-Movement, Sweeps and Throws from the Clinch, and punishing his opponents flamboyant moves with his aggressive approach. He is the lone competitor who I felt looked like he knew what he was doing. However, His age is catching up with him, and in the last couple of years his dominance at the top of the pile has been challenged. I fear it a little too late for him to truly prosper in full-contact now. Yet, it is the likes of Aghayev that makes me think the Welterweight division is promising. It has the broadest range of talent so far, and if they can turn Aghayev into a vehicle for promoting the division it could be exciting viewing. A definite need to open up the talent pool though, but I am optimistic that this could become something if managed properly.

Judo is the foundation of my approach to grappling, and it has served me relatively well. I would add the caveat that I have not studied it in a formal manner significantly. In my late teens/early adulthood, I worked out practically every day with a couple of friends. One is an Amateur Wrestler (and a coach now), and the other a Judoka. We exchanged skills and sparred and so forth, with my contribution being my kick-boxing and striking skills. Now, I did spend around a year at a University club where I trained 3-4 times a week, and it was a competitive club and the training quite intense, but again for only a year. I still do some Randori, and roll, with my students at least once a week, and I try to get to a nearby Judo/Wrestling club at least every other week, but I would not call myself a Judoka. Now, I would like to argue that Judo is probably most well-rounded grappling base you can find beside SOMBO. This is for a few reasons: 1. It has a takedown game and is built around throwing. It will provide you the fundamentals of putting your opponent on the floor and will teach you a lot about how to avoid being put on the floor. As so much is done from the clinch as well as the standard grip, you will learn many counters to throws, sweeps, and arm drags which can frustrate Nak Muay, Greco-Roman Wrestlers, and Karateka whom often build their take down game around such tactics. Similarly, this knowledge is readily applied against the controlling methods used by violent criminals as detailed in models such as the HAPV and so on. 2. It has a submission game, and despite popular thought, a lot of techniques which are easily applied without Keikogi. It’s ground game also features the use of the guard, and leg wrestling, despite leg locks being an illegal manoeuvre. Similarly, with the focus on pinning and submissions, it can teach you a lot about avoiding being held down and the fundamentals of positional work. As such, it covers all the fundamental bases. 3. The use of the Keikogi, and the necessity of grip fighting, translates relatively well to defence in general. If you can prevent your opponent gripping you, then you can usually adapt that skill to avoid being hit too. I have found that the basic defence of Judoka is generally better than No-Gi Players, although on average No-Gi players have much better positional control and wrestling ability. With all the above said, I would say Judo has several holes that you will need to fill to make it effective as a self-defence base: 1. The lack of the technical stand-up. This is rarely taught in Judo circles these days and for simple reasons. There is a 30 second limit on the ground phase if there is no active attempt at fighting, as such to avoid fighting on the ground one can simply turtle and prevent the fight continuing. There is no impetus to get off the ground to stop the ground fight. 2. A limited guard game; there is a guard game, but you rarely fight from anything except closed guard. This is because once one Player is on the ground the fight is generally stopped, and the ground phase only begins if both players go to the ground. In a Judo match, if both players go down, they are usually entangled in such a way that they have given their back away, or they land in half-guard or closed-guard. Similarly, pulling guard is the quickest way to lose a Judo match. 3. A caveat to point 1 in reasons for Judo being well-rounded. Rules on grips mean that deviating from the standard grip must immediately be followed by an attempt to throw. As such, you will rarely wrestle with your opponent holding a back-grip for example. Similarly; the nature of the rules, where hitting the floor with your back and shoulders is testament to a loss means you will rarely encounter techniques such as suplex from a back-hold. This means the throwing aspect is very skewed in comparison to other forms of wrestling, and grappling. You will encounter different holds, but they are not about control, but facilitating a technique. 4. Restrictions on techniques. On the ground there is a complete restriction on cranks and legs locks, and while all the legal submissions of Judo are Arm-Locks there are rules determining what is a legal arm-lock and what is an illegal arm-lock. There is also no “shooting” aspect. Unlike other forms of wrestling you are not permitted to grip the leg to secure a take down, thus eliminating completely techniques such as the single or double leg takedown. Now, what I would add is that the Ashi-garami, though forbidden in competition, is a recognised technique of Judo and thus a technical Judoka would be able to show you it and teach you it. Similarly, the Morote-gari (double-leg take down) is still an official Judo technique, if not allowed in Olympic style competition. The short version of all the above, and what I want you to take away from it though, is that Judo is a good base, but you need to consider your self-defence focus. Frankly, for what you are detailing I would much rather recommend Gracie Combatives. I have loved my Judo experience, and as I said, as a base it has served me well. However, I had to round it out for my self defence purposes by looking at the punching-phases and guard theory of Gracie Combatives, and the holes in technique I have filled by training in Amateur Wrestling and Catch Wrestling. With that said, you could still pursue Judo. What I would say is that it will depend on the club; if age is a concern, and the associated wear and tear, I would recommend finding a technical or traditional club. I would not recommend a University Club, or a group that meets at an MMA Gym, because they are likely to compete, and have quite intense training. They would also be more likely to throw you in the deep end and thus increase the chance of injury. Not because I think such places are reckless, but just because of the nature and attitude of the competitive side of martial arts. For self-defence purposes as well, you should probably also consider a group that participates in Free-Style or “Kosen” rules, because they are more likely to better fit your needs. That is, your concerns about dealing with an aggressive attacker who has gained top position. They are more likely to incorporate more general wrestling, more sophisticated guard work, and techniques such as the technical stand up. The only barrier really, is impatience and diving into the wrong environment. If the place you know about will let you move at your own pace, then as long as you play it safe, and give yourself a recovery orientated schedule it should be fine. End of the day; it is not a race to the finish.

Royce has stated in some interviews that he has "dabbled" in Boxing and Kick-Boxing, but this is the first time I have heard of a claim he has committed enough time into another art to earn a black-belt; never-mind one in Karate. I would be surprised because Royce is one the last Jiu Jitsu purists, in that he continues to argue that Jiu Jitsu is enough of a weapon to be successful in Vale Tudo. He does balance this by at least acknowledging some knowledge of your foes weapons is useful, hence his dabbling, but he seems largely convinced in the "completeness" of his family's discipline. Edit: Unless it is honorary. After all, Bas Rutten holds an honorary Godan in Kyokushin from Jon Bluming. Though, Rutten did earn a Nidan rank the old fashioned way too. I would not be surprised if Royce was given an honorary rank from some one.

Chitō-ryū, the style established by Chitose Tsuyoshi. Not Shito-Ryu as established by Mabuni Kenwa. Chitose's primary teacher was one Aragaki Seisho, but he continued his studies under Higaonna Kanryō, Kyan Chōtoku, and Motobu Choyo, as well as Hanashiro Chōmo whom I already mentioned. The book I own by Chitose, Kempō Karate Dō, is where I found his statement that he learnt Shihōhai from Hanashiro. Hanashiro's only known teacher was Itosu Ankō, and Shihōhai does not appear in the teachings of other Itosu students. Also, Shihōhai does not appear in the teachings of Ryūkyū Hon Kempō (Okinawa Kempō Karate), or Shōrin-ryū Seibukan, or any branch of Kobayashi Shōrin-ryū I am aware of. All systems that Hanashiro had a direct influence on at some point. Now, there are three conclusions I can reach: 1. Shihōhai was created, and later abandoned, by Hanashiro and passed on only to Chitose Tsuyoshi. 2. Itosu Ankō taught Hanashiro the kata, and it potentially has older Chinese origins. After all, if one traces back from Itosu back to his instructors; the origins of his kata all feature an expert in Chinese Chu'an Fa. The reason it is only practised in Chitō-ryū being that the kata was only passed to one student each generation. 3. Chitose was wrong in his recollection, and Shihōhai comes from one of the Heterodox schools he studied, and hence it's absence from Orthodox Shuri Te. I suspect it being called the Chinese kata is due to an erroneous understanding of the name. It literally means four-direction salute. However, it is often translated as "worship in four directions" which as a ceremony has allusions towards the concepts of In-Yo, or Yin and Yang to use Chinese terminology. Also, Chitose significantly changed all the kata he taught from what he original studied, and that can be seen in all the kata of Chitō-ryū. Here is a link to a compilation of the system's kata as performed by Chitose Yasuhiro: Aside from Shihōhai, the only other possibility that comes to mind is the kata series from Shukokai Shito-Ryu often called Shihō-zuki or Shihō-uke. Hope some of this has been of help, but I fear the truth may have long been lost to the ether.

Sadly, it is old hat. Pro Fight Karate, a French promotion, tried a similar format starting in 2009/10 which lasted until 2012. To be fair, in comparison, Pro Fight did allow some limited clinching and grappling, thus a little different from what is being presented by Karate Combat. Also, this league does seem to have some promising factors: 1. A streaming service, and video archive, which will help people access it. Also, Bas Rutten on commentary is not a bad thing for an inaugural event. 2. A unique arena suited to the combat. It gives the viewing experience a unique look, and helps differentiate from kick-boxing and MMA. It also seems to contribute to the quality of the combat, judging from what I have seen thus far. 3. Over 100 fighters already signed from around the world, and including luminaries such as Rafeal Aghayev. It has a significant appeal to people who already follow Sport Karate, but also has the potential to draw in Kick-Boxing enthusiasts. Now, what I will add is that is has some very stiff competition. There is already Glory (Kick-Boxing) which has deals with UFC Fightpass and ESPN, and for those who are not fans or Free-Fighting or Boxing it is comfortably filling a niche. In terms of striking sports that allow throws, it must also actively compete with Shoot-Boxing, Muay Thai, and Sanshou. Now, one advantage it does have is that it is very difficult to access Shoot-Boxing outside of Japan, professional Sanshou outside of the Chinese mainland, and regular Muay thai events outside of Thailand. Also, the violence of Muay Thai can be off putting for some fight fans, and this Karate Combat League could offer them a less bloody alternative. Similarly, the clinch fighting of Shoot-Boxing and Sanshou can lead to turtling and some very boring competition. After all, Glory has made it's mark through rules which keep the fighting active. The trend of what I like to call Budo Shin-Kakutogi continues to go strong as well. In Japan you have Ganryujima, which is still going strong this year. Again, difficult to get good access outside of Japan, but it is very easy to find fights on Youtube if one looks. In the U.K, there are the ongoing efforts of Lee Hasdell, and though Combudo seems to have run it's course, I suspect more events of a similar ilk will be on their way. Also, at an amateur level, it has to be asked if this is providing anything that Daido Juko Kudo and Kenka Karate do not already provide. With the above said though, I see promise in this venture, and the timing is impeccable. With the Olympics only two years away, and Karate making it's debut as an Olympic sport in Tokyo; having a professional league established, and ready to absorb Olympic competitors, could be a very good thing. The main danger lies in the effort losing traction before that potential pay off in 2020. The main threat to that traction is a lack of support because of the stiff competition that exists in the fighting world.

WTF Style or WT-TKD is a well known colloquialism for the Tae Kwon Do as propagated by the Kukkikwon, and by extension is the style seen in WT sanctioned competitions, and is taught in WT affiliated schools. Any discussion about there being a WTF Style or not is thus an argument of semantics, and essentially pedantry. The main point is that WT and the WKF are very dissimilar organisations because the WKF has no relationship to any style specific body which dictates the "style". I shall put it this way. If you go to a World Tae Kwon Do School, then you are going to be taught according to the syllabus established by the Kukkikwon. The Kukkikwon which is well known as the World Tae Kwon Do Academy for that very reason. Your sparring will be the same as seen in the Olympic Sport, and your forms will be practised according to what is also expected in WT forms competition. In contrast, if you go to a World Karate Federation affiliated school you could be training in Gōjū-ryū, Shōtōkan-ryū, Shito-ryū, or Wadō-ryū, or any number of related schools. The kumite will be practised according to the traditions of the school, and the goal of the instructor. Not all WKF affiliated schools practice sundome kumite according to WKF regulations. All schools practice different kata, and different core kata, and a number of which would have been illegal in WKF kata competition until very recently. Not all schools adjust, and practice their kata, with success in WKF kata competition in mind. As such, the WKF succeeding in getting Competitive Kumite into the Olympics will not dramatically change WKF affiliated schools; the level of autonomy is significantly greater. Will the inclusion in the Olympics lead to more grass roots participation?As mentioned prior, I suspect that yes, it inevitably will. Will it fundamentally change karate? It will hopefully improve the quality of competition. However, all karateka react to the trends that are prevalent to them. People fighting for points is outside the radar of those who practice for realistic self-defence, or participate in full contact. That remains true even for those schools affiliated with the WKF. What I will say of Kata, is that it is like all training. You fight how you train, so make sure your kata training is goal orientated. If you have no goal for your kata training except "I have been told I need to do it for X rank" then it is not goal orientated. If you want it to be mnemonic device for the practice of self-defence, then have a thorough grounding in alive training methods, and make sure the kata movements are adapted to self-defence situations. If you want to win Kata competition; follow the methods of the competition winners, and practice the Kata that do well in competition. If you find kata a useful training device, but your goals are in the world of competitive fighting, look to the Kata of Ashihara or Enshin Karate, or perhaps Nippon or Shorinji Kempō. However, this is straying off topic.

As a kata it is found only in Chitō-ryū, and it's descendent schools. So far as I know Chitose claimed to have been taught the kata by Hanashiro, a student of Itosu, but it appears in no other descendent school of Itosu. As such, I consider such a claim a hint suspect. However, Itosu did teach according to the traditional Okinawan ethos of instructing a student in accordance with the character and needs of the student. Also, it should be remembered that Chitose altered many of the kata he had studied and all Chitō-ryū kata are distinguishable from their heterodox analogues. The above comes from me presuming Shi-oh-hai to be a a mutation of Shihōhai. If they are not one in the same then I must join the club of the mystified.

Probably not, as a comparison of the World Tae kwon do to the World Karate Federation is a poor one. World Tae Kwon Do is as much a style, as it is an organisation, and thus when that direction was taken it could adjust its syllabus and concept of Tae Kwon Do to meet the thrust of the organisation; Olympic Level Competition. In contrast the World Karate Federation is not in any way a style, there is no such thing as a WKF school. There are many schools which are associated with the WKF but there is no WKF style per se. The WKF is a huge alliance of national associations, and style organisations, and has three very specific goals based upon it’s primary role as a regulating body: 1. The training of referees and officials. 2. The hosting and commissioning of tournaments. 3. Facilitating coaching and training opportunities. Now, beside these three, there are tertiary aspects they do also oversee. For example, one can earn grades through the WKF, however, such a service depends on the local federation. Also, it serves more often to recognise grades than to award them and serves as a quality control mechanism. Furthermore, as a competition regulating body it does significant work in ensuring that competition records are maintained, and the top athletes properly recognised. It also focuses on promotion of the sports associated with karate. A great strength of the WKF, and its affiliate federations, is the lack of a “style” or indeed a syllabus. Although the sport aspects are promoted, it is not the essence of the organisation. One is relatively free to do as one wishes while enjoying the benefits of WKF membership, so long as one does not tread outside some of the golden rules. In short, no I do not think it will influence WKF Karate because there is no such thing as WKF karate. Now, do I think the inclusion of the sport promoted by the WKF in the Tokyo Olympics will change matters at the grass roots? Frankly, probably not. Those schools and clubs that wish to succeed in competition are already geared towards it and take advantage of the opportunities for coaching the WKF facilitates. All that will change is that with Karate as an Olympic sport that hopefully more funding will come their way if they are University or School based. I suspect it will have an impact on the popularity of the Sport, and there may be a spike in the number of Karateka who participate or at least finally give it a go, but beyond that I do not see it making a great impact. At the elite level, many kumite players I have met have been quite candid about not practicing kata since reaching the international level, or only participating in it inconsistently. At that level, they train with a linear goal orientated manner. The kata movements deal with do or die situations, not the Combat Sport Mat situations after all. I also wonder what this Japanese Karate is? Cannot say I have heard of it. I know of many styles of karate that originate from Japan, but I do not know of this Japanese Karate. Joking aside, that is a huge generalisation, and though it is just your observation it is incredibly skewed. Shotokan places significant emphasis on Yakusoku Kumite, as much as it does on Kata. Shito-ryu, as to be expected of its origins, has a long-established application-based approach to kata. Wado-ryu is structured around paired kata and Jiyu kumite. Goju-Kai also places significant importance on Jiyu Kumite. In fact, the practice of Jiyu Kumite, and modern kumite, as we would recognise it is quintessentially Japanese. Also, Kyokushinkaikan and its descendent arts pioneered Jissen Kumite (Knock-Down Karate) and at one-point Kyokushin was the most popular style in the world at 12 Million practitioners. I have rarely been a karate class where there has not been kumite, and almost every style of karate has kumite as an essential part of its syllabus. With that said, if you do not do kata then you are not doing karate. The Kata are essential part of what karate is. The key is to practice kata correctly. Many practice kata with maladapted movements, without exploring the intent of the movements. Also, I would also state that kata practice is useless without a strong base in Hojo Undo (Conditioning) and Kumite. It is kumite and hojo undo that develop the qualities that kata hone into a weapon. Kata are about study of self-preservation, and if you have no idea what it is like to go up against a resisting aggressor, you will have no understanding of kata. Any martial arts training that focuses on only one thing will fail; after all, combat is but a series of opportunities. Only well-rounded training will give you the tools to make use of the opportunities presented. Are there schools with an unfortunate similarity to dance classes? Yes, but is that the general trend. I would have to argue no. Since the start of full-contact karate in the 70s, many schools have incorporated the approach on some level. Since the late 80s and early 90s, there has been an increase of adherents of the bunkai model. Do they all get it right. No, they do not, but I would say most modern karateka practice kata with knowledge of bunkai. Similarly, the explosion of MMA competition in the modern era has been a huge wake up call for many karateka. Now, some reactionists have opted to remain one dimensional and not evolve, but the greater majority have taken the message that violent conflicts are not easily settled with the picture-perfect o-zuki.

There are not many ways to avoid seiza in the practice of any traditional martial art, never mind Iaidō. The version of Iaidō propagated by the Zen Nippon Iaidō Renmei is strongly influenced by Musō Jikiden Eishin-ryū. The majority of the Waza, or techniques, of said school are initiated from Seiza or Tatehiza. Similarly, all of the Koryū from which the Tōhō kata are drawn, and from which the Seitei-Gata were developed, come from schools where techniques are performed from Seiza. The most popular form of Iaido outside of Zenkenren Iaido, so far as I know, is Musō Shinden-ryū, which is a descendent school of Musō Jikiden Eishin-ryū and thus is similarly built around Waza from Seiza and Tatehiza. Koryū which have an Iaijutsu or Battojutsu curriculum generally practice drawing techniques from Iai-Goshi (kneeling position) or Tachi-Ai (standing), but getting involved in the world of Koryū is another kettle of fish. Toyama-ryū is a modern school of Battojutsu which I know to be fairly popular. It performs its techniques exclusively from Tachi-Ai, however, I am not sure how popular it is outside of California in the U.S.A. Otherwise, there are the various Iai-Gata found within the Kenjutsu of the Takamatsu Den. However, to find those requires entering the shadowy world of Ninpō Bugei and the X-Kans, and I would not advise that in good conscious to any one. On balance, and as mentioned by Spodo Komodo, it might be best to seek out a teacher willing to instruct specifically in the standing versions of the Seitei-Gata.

I would also say it depends on why you intend to leave. It sounds as though you have been very committed to your training, with both regular classes and a weekly private session. Is it a time commitment issue? Why do you "have" to leave? Why can you not attend both? Now, if you were just a regular student, I would advise just to leave. However, as you have very regular private lessons you probably do need to notify your instructor that you are leaving. Frankly, you do not need to explain your reasons, as at the end of the day you are a customer simply choosing another provider for your martial arts training.