MatsuShinshii

Spartacus Maximus, You are correct that most Okinawan's have full time jobs. Most teach in a make shift Dojo in there homes or as an outbuilding on their property. Others have small Dojo's that they rent and finally you have those that own their own space and teach full time. The later is not common. My Shinshii adopted this methodology and worked full time, taught at night out of his pole barn. Monthly dues were cheap and we never paid for testings. I have carried this on myself. However as I said before there is nothing wrong with keeping the doors open and making a fair living. Of course this is subjective to each person as far as what fair means.

I love that you are making your own weapons. I have been making mine for years and love the fact that you can customize them to your specific specifications. I have made Tuifa and Rokushaku from Osage with good results after I learned how to turn it without ripping the wood. Osage is very fibrous and will tend to rip down from the area you are working especially if it contains too much moisture. It took me many tries to get this right and only after allowing the wood to cure and dry over the course of a year did I get decent results. However once sanded and sealed its a very dense material that will take a huge amount of punishment and is great for Kumite. I have also made Eku, Tuifa, Rokushaku and Kama from White and Red Oak. On the none turning side I have made Tecchu out of Ipe with a band saw, hole saw on a drill press. Rounded corners with Router table and finished sanded and sealed. Turned out OK. I also have made my own blades by means of forging, heat treat and tempering. Depending on the tools you have I may be able to give you some pointers on how you can use basic tools to accomplish the job. Send me a PM if you want to talk about techniques.

Wow, I thought there would be more comments. Sensei8 - Solid point. Bushido_man96 - Solid points. I have never really noticed the natural progression within myself until watching others and then analyzing myself. Other than both of your points I think it has a lot to do with efficiency. As you perfect a technique it becomes easier to execute and becomes natural. When looking at this it looks almost lackadaisical but it's not. After watching instructors in their early years and then later in their older years you can tell their is a commonality and natural progression. It's not lazy or slow it's efficient. I know this because I have went toe to toe with these instructors and there is no loss of speed nor power. However they have a greater ease in attacking and defending. I have noticed this myself. When I was younger it was a task to go toe to toe with my students and I used more brute strength and forced speed. As the years went on I find that I do not need to use as much strength or force speed. It comes naturally and I also find that the techniques and combinations of techniques come naturally instead of being forced. I am more relaxed in my approach and I expend far less energy. Never realizing this, I have to say after watching and then analyzing myself I think this is a natural progression rather that a slowing down with age. Having said that the older I get the slower I feel.

To the underlined. So you're saying that no technique/application works all the time on any attacker? Yes. Every time? Against any opponent? If that's the case, then all martial arts would be pointless except for one very simple one with just a handful of techniques. I'd pay good money to be trained such techniques. If given the opportunity to use it. Obviously targets are moving in a real fight and not stationary as in practice. But yes, when I have the opportunity and have executed the technique it has always worked for me. However I'm not trying to give the wrong impression that it's the end all do all either. As with any technique is concerned you must have opportunity, timing, distance, and proper execution. I guess I should have clarified that but based on your post I read that no technique would work 100% of the time. That is not true however I must preface that with you have to have the opportunity to use it. If this was the way you meant it I will fall back on yes it works every time I am given the opportunity to use it. Just like any fight not all techniques are able to be used. Your favorite might be the right cross but if the opponent doesn't give you the opportunity to use it then it's worthless. Hope this makes a bit more sense. To the bold. I'm not sure how many fights you've been in but often this is the case. You only use a handful of techniques. Obviously those techniques change depending on the opponent and the conditions. I can honestly say that I don't think I've ever used more than a handful of techniques in any fight. it's great to have 100's or 1000's of techniques to draw from but when it gets serious it typically falls down to just a few.

Hohan Soken O'Shinshii's lineage comes by way of Matsumura Sokon to Matsumura Nabe to him. Having said this, and even though I am a practitioner, I must state that Hohan Soken O'Shinshii studied under others as well. It pains me to say this as a practitioner of the art due to the constant controversy on the web and those that seek to tear down the art and Hohan Soken's credibility, but being honest and based on my own personal research and that of others (that provide documentation rather than speculation); Hohan Soken O'Shinshii taught Kata that Matsumura did not pass down. Conversely there are Kata that historically we know Matsumura knew/passed down that are not taught by Hohan Soken O'Shinshii. Based on the Kata that he taught that Matsumura did not teach my best guess is he studied under Itosu or one of Itosu's students. I do not say this to light addition fires for the skeptics out there on the web but merely to be honest in what I have found. But again I have no real facts to support this PERSONAL theory. The controversy that is most common by so called experts out there lurking on the web proclaim themselves as experts and claiming to have knowledge of this and that without being able to provide any substantial proof one way or the other is that of the Hakutsuru Kata. I'm a practitioner and can honestly say that the largest controversy that I have come accross more times than not concerns the Hakutsuru Kata. I will admit that I have issues with the fact that the Kata is named with the Japanese pronunciation rather than the Uchinaguchi (Hogan) or Chinese pronunciation. However since I was not alive nor was I born in Okinawa nor was I born with the name Matsumura, I can not comment with facts, just like the rest of the so called experts out there. Is it possible that the name was changed later by Nabe or Soken? Absolutely. However some seem to think that the only possible explanation is that Hohan Soken learned it from Gogenki. Well if this is true where is the documentation to prove it? Where are the so called facts to support this claim? We know that Matsumura studied under Bai He Quan masters so why is it not probable that he learned Hsing from them and created this Kata from those Hsing? The experts point to the fact that he did not teach it to Itosu or any of his other students. Is this a good fact to base history on? Well if you look into the common practice back then of keeping the families secrets for the family and teaching others a washed down version then yes it makes perfect sense. For some reason the so called experts dismiss this convenient fact and tend to push this to the foreground while pushing the Gogenki theory. The whole Gogenki theory is based on the fact that Hakutsuru resembles or has similarities with the other Kata taught by Gogenki. If you bother to look at these other Kata they all have some similarities. Does that mean they are all come from the same person? Or could it be possible that because there are similar techniques within the art of Bai He Quan that it's coincidence that the Kata are somewhat similar? Furthermore could it be remotely possible that the same or similar Hsing was taught to Matsumura and then later to Gogenki? Prove it. Any of it. Without documentation it's impossible. Again back to speculation, theories and personal opinion. To me there is no controversy. There are facts and there are personal opinions and theories. I choose to believe the history that is passed down until I find facts to support a different history. What seems so wrong to me is the domino effect. One person reads something on the web and takes it as fact and then passes it along as such. Another reads both and takes it as fact because two people are saying the same thing and so on and so on. Just because someone with a," pedigree, title, rank", says something on the web does not make it fact. I really wish more people would do their own research rather than blindly following so called experts just because they have a recognizable name and have whatever title/rank. Let me end with this; I find it funny that so many other instructors of the art have studied under other teachers and have incorporated the Kata from those arts into theirs but nothing is controversial about them or their arts. If fact many of the so called experts study these arts that are basically hybrids. The you have Hohan Soken O'Shinshii. I agree and am of the opinion that he did not just study under Matsumura Nabe. Whether he actually studied under others of picked up Kata really doesn't matter. In the end I feel he did what most did. Incorporate what they liked into their art. This practice goes back to the beginning. First there was Ti and Tegumi, then they incorporated Muay Boran, Then Quan Fa and the elements of Jiao Li, Chin Na, Dim Mak, Dishu and Gao Quan, and so on. The Okinawan people are martial arts sponges that soak up anything useful. So why is it a controversy for one particular man and one particular art? Maybe these so called experts should look long and hard in the mirror before throwing stones. They might just find out their own lineage is less than pure. Do I think that the art it 100% pure as Matsumura passed it down? In methodology, yes. Has Kata been added to the art? IMHO yes. Have Kata been taken out of the art? Again IMHO yes. Do we practice the same Kata in our branch of the art? No. We choose to not teach the Itosu type Kata and instead teach what we feel was the Kata that Matsumura knew and/or passed down. Does it matter one way or the other. IMHO NO! There's my 2 cents.

That's fantastic news. Glad to hear she is on the road to recovery.

To the underlined. So you're saying that no technique/application works all the time on any attacker? I guess I'm one of those rare teachers that dares to say this technique works. There are techniques/applications that work based on medical science and size, shape, etc. do not enter into the equation because we are medically made up the same anatomical way. Yes this person may be more muscular or fatter or skinnier or taller or shorter, but we all have the same anatomy. So if I can execute a technique (at least in my experience) 100% of the time with the same results, based on your comment, I am still a liar because no technique works on everyone?? To the bold - I agree 100%.

Cool. Thanks. How come it's bassai dai? It's years since I trained in a karate that admitted to being Japanese. My current style is (claims to be) Korean so my Japanese terminology is weak. Is 'dai' simply another way of saying 'second'? In Korean there are at least 2 different sets of the same numbers. Or is 'dai' something else entirely? No. Dai means greater. Sho means lesser. Bassai is the Japanese pronunciation. Passai is the Okinawan pronunciation. Pasai or Baoshi is the Chinese pronunciation. Passai Dai or just Passai was passed down from Matsumura Sokon. Passai Sho was invented by Itosu. He labelled the first Dai and his Sho. Having said this there are many variations of the Kata. If your verion comes from Funakoshi it can either be from Shuri-te (Suidi) [Matsumura] lineage or Tomari-te (Tumaidi) [Oyadomari] lineage. Hope that helps.

Yes it is. In today's world, knowing ones capabilities and being honest about them is a rarity. Humility is not a common commodity today.

If you're full time job is teaching then I absolutely understand testing fees (to an extent). I have never paid for a grading test in my organization over the past 40 years. Why? Because my Shinshii looks at teaching as a passion rather than a job. He holds down a full time job and what he charges is to pay rent, utilities, and misc. supplies like belts and certificates, etc. When I started he was charging $10 a month. Prior to retiring he was charging $54 a month. I do not charge a testing fee for gradings. But I have a full time job that pays my bills and then some so I do not have to. When I was renting space I charged enough to keep the doors open and the lights on (easy calculation - rent,utilitie and misc. expenses / number of students = each students monthly due). I personally would not feel right to charge for something that has already been paid for. I feel that the student, through the monthly fee's, has paid for my teaching. They earn the belt. I do not sell belts nor rank. Because of this I would never charge a student to test nor to receive what they have already earned. But that is my personal feelings. Having said this and being in business for my self in an unrelated business and understanding expense, and profit, I understand the need to charge an amount that not only pays the rent, utilities and supplies but also puts a pay check in your pocket to pay bills. And again I have no issue with this. Making a living to support your family is the right thing to do and if you are teaching as your sole means of doing so then I understand the practice of charging for testing along with monthly dues and find nothing wrong with it. In fact I support it in this circumstance. My biggest issues are those schools that rip off their students/instructors and their sole purpose is making money. It's a business not a Dojo. The ones that I am talking about are those that have their instructors/ assistant instructors volunteering (perk they get to teach and use the Dojo for free, yeah!) their time but in yet the owner is charging large monthly fee's, testing fee's, forcing their students to buy books and video's from them to get to the next grade and to top it off forcing students to buy their uniforms, belts, and equipment form them as well at a hefty mark up. Oh and I forgot, twice the number of belts and tests to obtain what you could have with half that in another school within the same art. In other words a McDojo. I have never forced a student to buy uniforms or belts from me either. It is their choice to have me get their Obi/Gi or buy them from another source. The only exception is the Yudansha grades. I send notice to the Hombu that a student has passed their grading for a Yudansha grade and they send me an embroidered Obi with their name, grade and art on it. All Mudansha belts are their choice to get or to get them through me/organization. I have also never forced a student to buy or spend money on anything to receive a grade. I think it is ridiculous to force a student to pay for this or that or not be able to test. This IS a scam and a pure money making scheme. This is a McDojo period. Maybe others feel differently but for me personally I don't teach to make money but to pass on what was passed down to me. To me it's a responsibility that I have to both my instructors who taught me and to the art itself. Having said that if I were teaching to support my family I would not have an issue charging higher monthly fee's but still would not charge for tests. Just the way I was brought up in the arts I guess. There is a magic number of students needed to pay the rent/utilities and supplies. There is also a magic number of students to pay for the instructor should it be their full time job to live on. There is a certain dollar amount that each student would need to pay in order to make this happen. It's simple math. If you need to charge for tests along with monthly dues in order to reach that magic number, I see nothing wrong with doing so. However it's those that reach that number and go far beyond it and then start to increase their dues and start to charge for everything under the sun that I do not see eye to eye with.

I figured as much.

Cangrats to both of you!

Have you ever noticed that as students progress through the grades their approach changes? What I mean is their stances, the way the strike, kick, or perform Kata alters over time to the point that is it less rigid and looks (at times) almost lackadaisical. My Shinshii sent me an email with a video attached showing him performing Kata with an older Okinawan gentleman (have no idea who he was) and I noticed that the older gentleman performed the Kata in a proficient and fluid manner but it almost looked like he was in need of a good nap. After watching this I also noticed that my Shinshii's performance had changed a bit since the last time I trained with him. Interestingly enough you really don't notice the change while training with someone. It's only after you haven't seen them for a period of time that it becomes obvious. The weird thing is I realized that I too had changed over the many years. I have my theories of the why's but thought I'd pose this to you to find out what your opinions are and if you have noticed this in your instructors or even yourself.

You need to show up and talk to the instructor. Find out when class starts and show up 15 to 20 minutes early. Talk to the CI and address your concerns. Most likely you will be asked to stay and watch a class or even participate and if they don't, ask them if you can. Messaging, texts, emails and the like are impersonal and show no desire or motivation. Show up and if the teacher is worth their salt they will be open to your questions and concerns and address them accordingly. Just don't expect them to alter the class for your endurance/fitness level. Do what you can and as another said you will progress to that level over time. And don't be self conscience. Every one starts out some where and we all progress at our own rates. The key is to start. Make sure you ask questions and watch a few classes before committing. I think you'll find out that their is great diversity in the students and this may help to bolster your confidence. Having said that you have to take the first step and walk through the door. After that you're on your way. Good luck and welcome to KF.

Sensei8, I am surprised that you would be having difficulties. The answer is in you many, many posts. The proof is on the floor. What they think they know and what they actually know comes out on the floor. Humility is often learned when attempting to be something of know something and then being allowed to prove it. It is the best teacher of humility. Or an expression that my mother used often, give them enough rope... Ask them to prove that they know more. Have them show you. It will definitely work itself out when they realize that their ego is bigger then their common sense. Problem solved.

I agree with this pretty much completely. However, I guess there’s a time and place for everything. I see someone being stripped of a title and the responsibilities that come with it. It would be an odd situation where someone isn’t fulfilling their duties but hasn’t done something outright wrong enough to warrant dismissal. Perhaps someone in a traditional and official Senpai role who’s supposed to be a leader and/or role model, yet he/she isn’t effective in that role or is no longer fulfilling the obligations. Or a senior instructor who’s genuinely continually struggling to teach effectively. Or a “board member” who’s vision is clearly off line with the organization’s. Those don’t constitute dismissal IMO, but if they’re not up to the standards, they shouldn’t have that title and role. A demotion, but not a rank demotion. Agree 100%. Titles are political in most cases and entail administrative roles. As in a job role if you are not performing your duties you could be demoted in position within the company vs. being fired. So yes I'll go along with this line of reasoning 100%. It makes perfect sense. But again I do not agree with demotion of grade as it has, in my mind, already been earned and as such can not be taken away. That is IF it was earned. If the school is a belt factory and one is demoted I'm not sure that constitutes as a punishment due to the fact that they did not earn the grade to begin with. On the other hand if said student walks into another school wearing an undeserved grade then I would support demotion 100% and under this specific circumstance I wouldn't hesitate to demote a student of their grade. Having said that if you join my class you start as a Hachikyu regardless of your previous grade so it's not really an issue. So I'm back to not agreeing with demotions.

Like you I am a natural born skeptic when it comes to Chi/Ki/Qi and all things that are not easily explained. I offer an example that was offered to me years ago that attempts to explain the un-explainable. A teacher asked me if a had a child. I said yes. He then asked me if I had ever tried to pick them up when they did not want to be picked up. I said yes again. Then he asked me if they felt heavier and conversely, if they wanted to be picked up, did they feel lighter. To this I had to say yes. He explained that they felt heavier because they were projecting their energy down and they felt lighter because they were projecting their energy up. He said that this was the easiest way that he could explain Chi/Ki/Qi. Hope that helps. If not hope you had a good laugh.

A martial art is any systematic method of teaching combative skills. I must correct you on your statement. The art of Ti (Ti'gwa) and Tegumi (Muto) that eventually became known as Tudi (Tode) after the okinawans incorporated Quan Fa, that eventually became known as Karate after being introduced to Japan was a purely combative art to begin with. The issue was the Japanese wanted it for the physical aspects and did not want any of the Chines aspects of the art so they discarded many elements of the art that made it a combative method. After noticing the physiques of the Okinawans the Japanese wanted to adopt this training method to strengthen their soldiers. They reduced the art from a complete combat system to a striking only system, removing the other elements and created a training method to achieve the goal of physical fitness over the old methods of combat training. And you are correct that Funakoshi altered the art to suite the needs of his students. However if you look at his earlier books you will notice elements of the original art he was taught (Tudi) before the eventual complete take over and alteration of the art to become Karate. This is a tough one for me to tackle. If I think in terms of what arts are now called Karate the answer would be yes and no. Yes as far as the arts that altered their original training methods and joined the Dai Nippon Butokukai thus altering their arts to fit a systematic training curriculum based on physical fitness. If we are talking about those arts that did not join the DNB and maintained the methods of training and the passing down of the original methods then I'd say no. And before anyone states that they have changed over the last 150 + years, I would say that what I mean is staying strict to the ideals that the art is meant to defend and fight rather than the ideals that it's a sport or a way to stay in shape. That is not to say that each progressive instructor did not put their own stamp on the art thus slightly altering it. Ok here is where we really differ. You couldn't be further from the truth. The fighting styles that "Karate" was derived from where never sports. Here goes the novel and the history lesson... The Okinawan's had an indigenous striking art called Ti (Ti'gwa, Di) that was more or less a what most would call dirty boxing. Along came the Siamese Empire that started to trade goods with the Okinawan's (I can provide documentation in another post if you wish) and one of the things that was introduced was an art called Muay Boran. This was not a sport but a tested in combat martial art. This incorporated the other weapons of the body and a new methodology of utilizing then. The Okinawan's incorporated this into their strike art. Along with the empty hand arts the Siamese also introduced them to their weapons arts from which many of the so called farm implements were incorporated into their art (that's right, incorporated, not taught separately as it is in most arts today). Along with Ti the Okinawan's also had another art form that was included into their method of striking. This art is called Tegumi (we call it Muto) for which I assume you are referring to as a sport. Yes this art form LATER became Okinawan Sumo but it did not start out as a sport but rather as a combat method of throwing an opponent to the ground, thus putting them in a vulnerable position on the battle field. Later the Chinese started trading with the Okinawan's and introduced their fighting systems (empty hand and weapons systems). These arts (Five Ancestors, Five Animals, Lohan Quan, Gou Quan, Bai He Quan, Tiger Boxing, Lion Boxing, Dragon Boxing, Dishu Quan, Chin Na, Jiao Li, etc., etc. were not invented for sport but as a combat method. All (and more, possible influence from Vietnam to name one) of these arts were created for one reason... combat. The guards and warriors of Okinawa, not the peasants, created the original arts of Ti and Tegumi and infused the other arts into one art that came to be known as Tudi (Tode) and later was categorized based on where it came from (Shuri, Tomari or Naha). The fact of the matter... the Okinawan's were sponges and absorbed the combat fighting methods of others to create a very effective and polished combat art. Not a sport. Your history is a bit too far along. Dig deeper and further back beyond Itosu and Funakoshi. There in lies the truth and the history of the art. The art was degraded primarily because Itosu wanted it to be taught to everyone (prior to Itosu the art was only taught to the warrior class and the royal class). His student Gichin Funakoshi later degraded it more to make it fit the Japanese ideals. The original combat system of Ti, Tegumi, Muay Boran and Quan Fa was stripped down to the basic elements of strike, punch, kick, block. And in case you were wondering, this is were the concept of "block" came to be. I'll save the details for another post. Having said this, it was not a sport and never was developed as a sport. This came later with the creation of Karate under the Japanese direction. However even though the majority of the arts under the name Karate are more sport based than combat based, it doesn't change the fact that it's a striking art and the main intention is to defend and if needed to maim or even kill the opponent. If thats not Martial I'm not sure what is. Agreed however acrobatic displays are a modern thing and not representative of what was taught pre-modernization of the art. Here is the thing, if you train in an art that teaches combative methods that can be used to defend, harm, maim or kill then you are practicing a martial art. I agree that the way most arts are taught today are for reasons of sports, fitness and stress management. However if a priest goes to the rifle range and shoots a rifle does that mean that the rifle is no longer a weapon of war? No. It just means that it's practitioner has changed the intent via the reasons for participating in the weapon/art. Just because 80% of modern day schools put a heavy emphasis on sports and fitness does not mean that the art doesn't still contain the original concepts and intents of it's founder. It really depends on your intent as a student of the art. If you are practicing the art to get fit then yes you could call it a fitness art. However if you practice the art with the intent on learning the methods that the founders passed down then you are studying a martial art. Semantics really, and it can be viewed as to the way it is perceived and practiced by the individual practitioner. Just my 2 cents. For whatever that's worth. Oh and I chose not to comment on the bow as a martial art because I had already put forth my thoughts in that post.

Although you have a point in the teaching of proper mechanics this is not the intent of this technique at it's core. It is a receiving mechanism where by the practitioner is able to deflect/redirect while at the same time seize the attacking weapon and by which is able to control the opponents balance to his/her advantage. That's one. It is also a means to facilitate a throw/takedown. By which the same mechanics are utilized to take an opponent down to the ground and thus giving you the advantage. I could go on but I'm trying not to write novels this year. Call it better time management. I would be happy to give specifics if required. The point is can this be used as a tool to teach proper mechanics/alignment? Yes. However if you study the Kata and it's applications, this is not the core intent of this movement. And yes it is not a block. However it can be a strike if you understand depth, timing and proper targeting. There's my 2 cents.

Solid post!! And I wrote it without a long novel. Who knew I had it in me? Again, we, you and I, share many of the same traits...novel writing is just one of the many!! Well I feel it's because you can not convey your thoughts as clearly on a post without details. It's far different when speaking in person. Body language, facial expressions, physical demonstrations and examples are all tools when in person. When on the forums you can not use these tools so you have to go further in your details to get your point across.

Because it's not formalised as one. It's quite literally close combat. There is no lineage of former masters that dictated what it means. It's literally just the Israeli army close combat. Every army has its way of training for the eventuality that a soldier mat fund himself unable to fire a gun to neutralise an enemy. They all call that part of training various things like unarmed combat, combatives, hand to hand combat etc. The Israelis call there's krav maga, which just means something like close combat in their language. So based on your definition Karate before the Japanese took it and made it what it is today is not a style but rather just close combat. So close combat makes it what? Too many view fighting as a long distance engagement when this couldn't be further from fact. All fights end up in close quarters and turns into close range strikes, clinches, grappling, submissive/controlling techniques or throws. Just because Krav Maga has these elements it's not a style? What then is Judo, Jujitsu, or a 100 more styles/arts. If it teaches one to fight effectively then it's an martial art and thus is constituted as a style. I have never taken Krav Maga (so I'm no expert) but I have watched it in a few seminars and I just looked it up on google and to be honest I'm not sure why you are saying it's not a style. Like Sensei8 points out it basically has the makings of every style I've ever taken. Whether its an all around effective art or not, well... I'll leave that to those that study it. But style or no style? I think it's a style.

I don't personally agree with demotions. If they have done something heinous enough to warrant a demotion, IMHO then they deserve to be shown the door. For one a demotion of rank is perception alone. The student still has the skills and knowledge so the only thing this accomplishes is taking away one belt and replacing it with another. Furthermore the student remains in class (if they do not quit) and at some point I am sure that the instructor will elevate them back up. Thus this is not really a punishment.

To the bold - I agree 100% that grade should not be just given. Question; what do you expect to see at the Kodansha grade tests? Do you expect to see a display of abilities above the previous grade? If so by how much? Are you considering the amassed injuries incurred over a 40+ year period and the normal aging issues that start to rear their ugly heads? I agree that their should be a test of skills and knowledge past Rokudan in my art. However what does that test consist of? Should it be a day or two day long experience? Should they fight every grade two below and two above their own as the previous grades do? Should they demonstrate every Kata and its applications, and demonstrate all knowledge up to that point? How extreme should it be? At that age and grade what more should they prove? The reason I ask is by the time you reach Rokudan/Nanadan you have been tested and maybe even punished and tormented a bit to earn your grade. If additional testing is required what should that testing consist of. What if anything should you be required to prove that you haven't already? Food for thought; does not your students (their knowledge and skills) reflect your abilities as a teacher? Does your instructor not know your abilities and knowledge? If you still train with your instructor that is. Do you not take part in the testing those of your grade, a grade below and two grades below during their gradings? Have you not then already been tested and have you not then already proven that you are capable? Considering that every Yudansha and Kodansha is required to participate during testings of others and that your students and your students students are tested and thus are a reflection of your teachings and thus a testament of your abilities and knowledge, what more must you test for? I already know that a student is worthy of a grade before they test. The test is to test their endurance, resolve and determination and to put them under duress and pressure to see if they are capable of getting through it. The test is less about their skills and knowledge than it is to see if they have the heart and resolve to get through it without quitting. So I have to ask (keeping in mind that I agree that one should earn their grades) what should the test be for higher/senior grades? What should it look like and what should be tested? Personally the ability to teach and pass on the art at these grades would be the area I would be looking at more so than any other area. Obviously their knowledge of the art would take center stage.

I wouldn't place the number that high but it is a high percentage. If you think in terms of resolve and intention it plays a large factor. If you are not resolved to fight to the end you have already lost the fight. If you do not have the intention to do whatever it takes and yet your opponent does, they will win more times than not. Yes there is always the lucky shot factor but mentality plays a huge role in the outcome of a fight. When you take into account the countless hours of training where the responses become second nature, again this is the mind. The mind recognizes a pattern and reacts without taking the time to analyze and choose the proper response. The Japanese call this Mushin but it is really your subconsciousness recognizing a pattern and responding with minimal or no thought. Again the mind playing a huge role. I have no idea what the percentage is nor will I attempt a guess. However the mind plays a huge role in not only the aforementioned but also in knowledge of the applications and techniques, calculating how to use and what to use, and developing a strategy and execution. Obviously you must have the physical abilities but the mind is what puts those abilities into action.

Monday, Wednesday, Saturday.