Spartacus Maximus

If one really wants to do so, there isn’t much stopping a martial artist to re-do or re-train any part of what was done before. It’s a great way to go back and perhaps take a new look from a different perspective

A lot of people have a chasing rank phase at one time or another, especially teenagers and younger adults. In that respect my case was an exception. I tested/graded because my instructor insisted and I didn’t/don’t doubt his evaluation. Otherwise I’m perfectly confident and content to keep training rank or no rank

All teachers, whatever they may teach must consider the level of mental development and varying attention spans and ability to stay focused or concentrate. Each age group has different levels and individual abilities also vary. Basic knowledge and understanding of these are essential for knowing how to teach, how much and for how long. 2hrs might be good for older teenagers and adults, but it is way to long for the average youth and younger children will be bored to tears after a half hour maximum.

Depending on their age, it’s always more productive to talk to their parents/guardians or whoever paid to enroll them. In my experience, no sensible person will refuse a refund and that is usually all it takes to get rid of incompatible students Absolutely nothing can force anyone to teach anyone, especially a martial arts instructor who has none of the constraints that say, a schoolteacher might have to abide by. Choosing with whom to share skills and knowledge is one of the advantages of the occupation.

What helped was that the instructor had trained with and was well acquainted with most of the other Kobayashi Shorin ryu instructors on Okinawa(the island is small), and mainland Japan. Also, the previous instructor and himself were taught by the same teacher(successor of Chibana). In addition to that, most of the other students had significant experience and background in all kinds of martial arts. He was very well accustomed to teaching these types of people and for some reason, those with no prior knowledge of any martial art were a minority.

One way or another it is always possible to get rid of someone who is disruptive. Give them a refund if they’re paying and simply tell the adults in charge that their child/youth’s attitude to being taught and/or behaviour is not acceptable.

The nagging thought of having key concepts and important fine-points from kata, techniques or bunkai missing; is why starting over made sense. It felt like going back to school and repeating each grade, but it became clear that the instructor is always more important than the martial art, even within the same ryuha/style.

It is possible that Jion is also done in at least some dojo affiliated with/under direct students of the late Miyahara Katsuya.

Amateur okinawan karate historian here. There is much similarity among those styles as they share most of their kata. The Naihanchi and Pinan series as well as very similar renderings of the kata Passai, Chinto and Kusanku. All can trace their origin to Matsumura Sokon(taught Shotokan founder) as well as the most influential Okinawans to introduce karate to mainland Japan such as Funakoshi(disciple of Matsumura), Motubu and a few others, all from the shuri-te, which is what it. was called before evolving into all the shorin stlyes.

The original post’s question is not exclusive to martial arts. The same can be said about any teaching situation. There is no worse student than one who isn’t interested, unwilling and thrust upon the teacher by another’s will or wallet. Fortunately for martial arts teachers, unlike regular school, the solution is simple: give them minimum teaching attention(they’ll eventually quit) or just stop wasting energy/time teaching them. A good suggestion for an instructor would be to approach this explicitly with all students old enough to understand(Even parents/guardians). Tell them: Don’t come/don’t bring your kids if for any reason you/they don’t want to be there or aren’t interested in learning.

This is something I had to do and it is still difficult. A few years ago a change in lineage and instructor meant re-doing and re-living each and every level of training from nothing to 3rd dan. Basically earned all levels in two different lineages/associations of kobayashi shorin ryu (Chibana Chosin’s karate). Looking back on the experience, it was the best thing to do. Learned more in 1 year with the second than nearly 10 with the first. All native Okinawan teachers on Okinawa and mainland Japan. There is something particularly difficult about re-learning the same thing a different way compared to starting a completely different unknown style where there is nothing to unlearn first.

without going in depth, it is now quite obvious that the answer is that it is a question of focus and emphasis. Both « methods » effectively train and develop powerful kicks, but the Shotokan/japanese way seems to target a different part of the technique than the way kicking is approached with the Okinawan method of teaching/learning the same techniques. For personal practice, both are good and useful, however it can easily be too much for teaching/training others. When teaching it would be recommended to introduce one way(Okinawan, in my case) and later get them to practise their kicking the other way to give them a different perspective to emphasize different points in kicks such as using stabilizing muscles etc…

When comparing the kicking technique of high level Okinawan stylists with high level Japanese Shotokan, both have very solid, fast and fierce basic kicks. Their method of teaching and training kicks clearly produces a similar result technically speaking. So then besides stylistics and esthetics, there must be a different point of emphasis versus the “Okinawan style” kicking drills. As for the Okinawan method described in previous posts, the explanation is that learning/practising basic kicks from a natural stance closed hands in a guard is that it is meant to emphasize all muscles involved in kicking. Most importantly the essential role of the core in the action. The other reason is that if one is attacked, one will most likely be in a natural standing or walking position, therefore it makes sense to train to execute techniques effectively from the position people are usually in when casually walking or standing.

A question to Shotokan karate students/instructors: After watching kihon waza drills of Shotokan groups in person and in media, many if not most drills for basic kicks start in the forward stance/zenkutsu. What exactly is the reasoning behind using that specific starting point? Is there some advantage to training/teaching basics that way? It is one of the first things noticeable when comparing how Okinawan schools train versus what is the norm in Japanese schools. The Okinawan schools have mostly the exact same drills used in Shotokan, except the most common starting stance is either natural standing(shizentai) or something that looks like a natural waking stance with a natural guard instead of closed fist with arms extended to sides like seen in the “Shotokan version” of drills. Anyone have insights?

In the original post the question was about the style taught by Chibana and his students who eventually started their own schools. My teacher’s teacher(Miyahira) was one of these and so was the late master Nakazato(founded Shorinkan). It is now almost certain that Seisan taught in my school didn’t come from Chibana, otherwise everyone trained by him would include it.