OneKickWonder

It is my understanding, and I may have got this wrong, but I believe shorin is just the Japanese pronunciation of shaolin. And as we all know that ryu just means school, that means that shorin ryu is the school of the Japanese interpretation of shaolin kung fu. And we can ditch the kung fu because that just means skill. So shorin ryu just means school of a style we learn from the guys at shaolin. Undoubtedly the Japanese would put their own mark on it. But if you watch the shaolin dudes train, compared to the more flowy tai chi style kung fu, you'll see very clear common ground between shaolin kung fu and karate. i listed more than one style that calls itself shorin ryu. this can be confusing so at times it has been known to use the shaolin in conjunction or the Chuba or othodox. ect. so the person knows what school is being discussed. but yeah its a bit redundant. as the kung- fu VS karate comment...your take on it is a bit simplified and when you do this it can get confusing. i would want to be more detailed. i would first want to understand that there is a big difference between main land Japan and Okinawa in terms of karate. they are separate and should not be lumped together. second thing i would want to understand is that there is old and new kung-fu. i would add that anything that is called shaolin today is pretty much a new art and would not resemble the arts karate was derived from. there may be a link to the southern shaolin temple but its mostly folklore and as distant as we humans are to neanderthal. karate or early Te in Okinawa came in a few waves, the really old stuff came with Chinese immigrants to Okinawa the other influx was from native Okinawans traveling to China in the late 1800's early 1900"s. these fighting arts are from Fuchou area and even these arts are rare in China today due to Governmental policy. however if you want to see the roots of naha-te karate the fukian/ fuchou area still has arts that are not only similar but share the same kata albeit we have to account for changes on both sides over the last 200 years. To the bold, yes I know. I had to simplify for two reasons. 1. I didn't have the time to write an entire volume of books to discuss how trade links and conflict and piracy (the original kind) and pilgrimages and contests and displays moved various skills all around the region influencing each other over centuries, all while politics led to pockets of isolation and skills being refined at a local level and sometimes in secret, and sometimes only for the aristocracy etc, all leading to the styles we recognise today. Others have already written such books. 2. I was trying to illustrate a point in an environment where most contributors would already have a good understanding of the history, and this wanted to keep it brief enough for folks to read in their spare time.

It is my understanding, and I may have got this wrong, but I believe shorin is just the Japanese pronunciation of shaolin. And as we all know that ryu just means school, that means that shorin ryu is the school of the Japanese interpretation of shaolin kung fu. And we can ditch the kung fu because that just means skill. So shorin ryu just means school of a style we learn from the guys at shaolin. Undoubtedly the Japanese would put their own mark on it. But if you watch the shaolin dudes train, compared to the more flowy tai chi style kung fu, you'll see very clear common ground between shaolin kung fu and karate.

I don’t have anything to cite nor saying this as fact, but I believe there would have to be SOME local ti, toudi, etc. indigenous Okinawan art influence on Goju Ryu and/or Uechi Ryu. Lots of arts influenced each other. But politics are rife in martial arts. Founders or advocates of many styles liked to claim theirs is unique. Funakoshi does exactly that in his book karate do kyohan. It's full of contradiction. In one chapter he discusses the Chinese influence on karate, and in another chapter it suddenly becomes uniquely Japanese. When we think about it, if a style is pushed as unique and not influenced by any other style, then it would be a terrible waste of time to study it. If somebody said to me, this style is mine and uniquely mine, would you like to learn it? My first question back to them would be, how can you know how effective it is? Unless someone style is so magically powerful that you can use it to defeat anyone without even having to adapt as you go, then you're going to want to pinch ideas from others that do well.

I sometimes get to teach, although I'm not formally an instructor. I love it when someone I'm teaching a technique to either neutralises my demonstration of the technique, or gets a good one on me. Why? Because then I get to ask them to do it again, we study it, we experiment with it, they learn something, and I learn something.

I think you'll find many masters tell of hard times and brutal teachers. I think it's just that life gets easier with each generation, and martial arts teachers used to be tough. I could write a book about growing up in the 1970s and 80s. Having to do a paper round before and after school because my parents couldn't afford to pay for everything I wanted. Training at martial arts in an environment where the teacher could still knock you to the floor and bust lips were common in sparring. No point me writing it yet though. There's still far too many people around for whom all that is normal. Maybe in 30 years when the current batch of weaklings have grown up and many of the old boys have passed. The 'flavour of the month' thing is absolutely nothing new. Most, if not all styles of martial arts around today are MMA. They just aren't called that. Funakoshi's shotokan is just the formalisation of several styles he practiced, and he chose which bits, in his opinion, we're the best bits to keep. Aikido was founded by a man well versed in many styles, as well as less rigid more practical military combatives. There's another man that chose which bits he thought were right. Some of Funakoshi's students decided that there were elements of shotokan that were not good. So of course they changed things. I may be mistaken, but I believe that wado came about following a disagreement with Funakoshi. There always has been flavour of the month and always will be. And it's right that that's the case. Otherwise martial arts would become useless. If you had a style that never evolved, and it's practitioners never pursued 'flavour of the month',then it wouldn't be long before their adversaries knew exactly how to defeat them every time, because they'd be too predictable, and their weaknesses would become common knowledge.

Not stretching specific, but kind of fits in with what you say about your military friends. Watch out though, it's somewhat profanity heavy, Exactly. Good find. Makes a lot of sense.

Thanks all. To clarify a couple of points though, TSD is my current main style but it's not my only style or first style. I also have experience of Chinese kung fu, as well as wado and aikido. I'm not necessarily looking to replace TSD with a carbon copy. TSD has taught me a lot. I'll be keeping what I learned, and bagging it up with all the stuff I've learned in other styles. But what I want now is more knowledge. Either more refinement of what I have, or more new stuff, which in my experience amounts to the same thing if you keep an open mind, it's just that different styles places the emphasis on different principles, but I think they're all in there.

Sounds like a mashup. Double ridge hand, front kick and back fist are present in our pyung ahn sah dan. As is the choke but not in the order you describe. Here it is done a little bit badly. The side kicks by the way are supposed to be front kicks in the original form I believe. Does it look familiar?

Pinnan, or pyung ahn, can be thought of as one form. It was split into 5 parts to make it easier to learn. The second part of the name just refers to the number in the sequence. The order in which the 5 parts are taught has sometimes been swapped about. So Pinnan nidan to one teacher might be different to Pinnan nidan to another, but overall, one would expect people to that the set as a whole will broadly contain common material, it all the elements of Pinnan. Except it gets a bit more fiddly. Pinnan is a fairly broad self defence set. It contains strikes and blocks but also more subtle things like footwork and sweeps and some grappling. Different schools place emphasis on different aspects of combat. Some like grappling and take downs. Some prefer forceful linear strikes. Some like to get in close. Some like to create space. Wherever a school places the emphasis in general, will influence their interpretation of the forms. As a total aside, seeing as Pinnan was quoted as an example , some useless trivia follows. Pinnan or pyung ahn has no direct translation to English, but is often translated as peace and tranquillity or stillness of mind. Apparently that's rubbish. Apparently the Chinese use the term routinely as a greeting that means something like simply, stay safe. When viewed in this context I think it makes much more sense. As far as combat goes, Pinnan contains very simple but effective moves at all ranges. Almost like a mini style in itself.

Hi all. Some of you may know from my other posts that I'm looking to move on from my current style of tang soo do. I'm considering a number of options. One is shotokan, which basically is what tang soo do tries to plagiarise so going to shotokan should give me some hint of the truth behind TSD. Another option is goju ryu. I initially turned my nose up at goju ryu, on the basis that apparently that's Mr Miyagi's style, and I was annoyed when I found out, something like 30 years after The Karate Kid, that Mr Miyagi actually had no Karate. But shattered illusions aside, people tell me goju ryu is a very credible style. What can folks tell me about it? What are some of its unique characteristics? What sets it apart from TSD or shotokan?

Inspired by the thread about real life styles that are more popular in fiction, I thought I'd start the opposite and see what comes out. I'll start. Ninjutsu. It seems to be an actual thing now. But it (probably) wasn't always. From what I can gather, the term Ninjutsu is relatively new. Somewhat older is the term shinobi, which apparently doesn't describe a style at all but alludes to a long struggle or to endure. The term Ninjutsu started out meaning the art of invisibility, implying the art of camouflage, concealment or disguise, further implying covert operations. Nothing directly to do with fighting (although such people, if employed as some kind of special agent, would not doubt have some combat skill). Even as recently as the 1980s when Hollywood fell in love with the idea of the ninja for a while, there were no (or few) schools that claimed to teach it. When Ninjutsu schools did start popping up, they were often mocked. In fact some still are. It doesn't help when you get guys like Ashida Kim writing ridiculous books and performing silly displays on YouTube. The guys from history that we might now call ninja, no doubt had several styles of Japanese martial arts to their name. Perhaps kendo for weaponry and perhaps various of karate's predecessor arts for unarmed combat. In that respect I can see how a credible style could be developed. But it is exactly that. A style that has been developed, recently, rather than a genuine historical style.

Here we go. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_scythe The 'war scythe' or 'military scythe' is a purpose built weapon, loosely based on the agricultural scythe it seems. The agricultural scythe has the blade at a very different angle. The agricultural scythe was primarily used for harvesting grain crops ( and secondarily hay and stray) before mechanisation. It's blade is at a right angle to the pole, so as to be horizontal and close to the ground when held and swung in a sort of sweeping motion. The 'war scythes' depicted in Wikipedia look to me much closer to the bill hook, which was a popular weapon of choice, but also primarily a farming tool. As an aside, anyone that's ever had the privilege of having a go on a genuine vintage scythe will know that if it was used in combat, you'd better not miss. They are perfectly balanced when the blade is at the bottom and you swing it in a sort of pendulum motion. But they are so heavy that if you tried to swing one blade up, it's going to take a lot of energy to bring it to bear again if you miss first time. Your enemy would have time to catch his breath, select his weapon, maybe have a cup of tea, then kill you any way he felt like before you'd brought it back round. That's all assuming you don't accidentally lop your own head off with it.

That is true and a fair point. In my martial arts fiction phase I got obsessed with scythe. In reality people did fight with scythe but there was never a school or a style that catered to scythe techniques. It was more of an improvised effort by eastern European peasants looking to defend their land and freedom. Although the world of anime has glorified scythe wielders to a great degree. The scythe would make a rubbish weapon. They are heavy and unbalanced and unless you're attacking the enemy's ankles while he stands still, they'd be very awkward to use offensively. I know this because I've used an old fashioned scythe many times. No doubt better than nothing as a weapon, but there were many peasant farming tools that make vastly better improvised weapons. One of the main weapons of choice in medieval England was the bill. It's basically a massive heavy blade with a hook on one side, mounted to the end of a long stick. It's agricultural use is for managing hedges and for cutting fruit from trees, but it is also naturally very offensive, being a big stick with a heavy blade. It was used in combat both as a staff and as a spear. The hook also proved useful for dragging soldiers from their horses. It was so popular as a weapon that for a while, it was a legal requirement for all boys over the age of 13 to attend their village green or square every Sunday to practice 'bill drill', which I guess could be approximated to the Japanese concept of kata. The scythe is rubbish due to its crooked handle but the main advantage was the fact that it caused terror . I am not being comical either, the scythe really messes people up psychologically speaking. That being said the ultimate scythe is a halberd that has a scythe handle. I think if anyone ever actually used a scythe in battle, it would have been because it was the only thing handy when they were caught off guard. It would be better than nothing. But there were very very many better choices. I'd be interested to read of any historical record of the scythe being used as a weapon of choice, either for its offensive use or its psychological impact. With regard to the psychological factor of causing terror, I can't help but wonder if this is myth in the same way as the vikings with their horned helmets that they didn't actually have. Ie, a great thing for theatrical effect but absolutely no place in historical warfare. Since you asked... http://wiktenauer.com/wiki/Paulus_Hector_Mair The scythe... does have it's use, however it would not be my first choice of weapons. I must be missing something obvious, but I can't see where it mentions the use of the scythe in battle.

That is true and a fair point. In my martial arts fiction phase I got obsessed with scythe. In reality people did fight with scythe but there was never a school or a style that catered to scythe techniques. It was more of an improvised effort by eastern European peasants looking to defend their land and freedom. Although the world of anime has glorified scythe wielders to a great degree. The scythe would make a rubbish weapon. They are heavy and unbalanced and unless you're attacking the enemy's ankles while he stands still, they'd be very awkward to use offensively. I know this because I've used an old fashioned scythe many times. No doubt better than nothing as a weapon, but there were many peasant farming tools that make vastly better improvised weapons. One of the main weapons of choice in medieval England was the bill. It's basically a massive heavy blade with a hook on one side, mounted to the end of a long stick. It's agricultural use is for managing hedges and for cutting fruit from trees, but it is also naturally very offensive, being a big stick with a heavy blade. It was used in combat both as a staff and as a spear. The hook also proved useful for dragging soldiers from their horses. It was so popular as a weapon that for a while, it was a legal requirement for all boys over the age of 13 to attend their village green or square every Sunday to practice 'bill drill', which I guess could be approximated to the Japanese concept of kata. The scythe is rubbish due to its crooked handle but the main advantage was the fact that it caused terror . I am not being comical either, the scythe really messes people up psychologically speaking. That being said the ultimate scythe is a halberd that has a scythe handle. I think if anyone ever actually used a scythe in battle, it would have been because it was the only thing handy when they were caught off guard. It would be better than nothing. But there were very very many better choices. I'd be interested to read of any historical record of the scythe being used as a weapon of choice, either for its offensive use or its psychological impact. With regard to the psychological factor of causing terror, I can't help but wonder if this is myth in the same way as the vikings with their horned helmets that they didn't actually have. Ie, a great thing for theatrical effect but absolutely no place in historical warfare.

That is true and a fair point. In my martial arts fiction phase I got obsessed with scythe. In reality people did fight with scythe but there was never a school or a style that catered to scythe techniques. It was more of an improvised effort by eastern European peasants looking to defend their land and freedom. Although the world of anime has glorified scythe wielders to a great degree. The scythe would make a rubbish weapon. They are heavy and unbalanced and unless you're attacking the enemy's ankles while he stands still, they'd be very awkward to use offensively. I know this because I've used an old fashioned scythe many times. No doubt better than nothing as a weapon, but there were many peasant farming tools that make vastly better improvised weapons. One of the main weapons of choice in medieval England was the bill. It's basically a massive heavy blade with a hook on one side, mounted to the end of a long stick. It's agricultural use is for managing hedges and for cutting fruit from trees, but it is also naturally very offensive, being a big stick with a heavy blade. It was used in combat both as a staff and as a spear. The hook also proved useful for dragging soldiers from their horses. It was so popular as a weapon that for a while, it was a legal requirement for all boys over the age of 13 to attend their village green or square every Sunday to practice 'bill drill', which I guess could be approximated to the Japanese concept of kata.

Sadly there is a huge dollop of erm, egotism within the martial arts. It seems every instructor believes their way is the best and most revered. The truth is grade counts for nothing outside of your association. In ours, it's even in the wording of the formal declarations and oath when you reach black belt that it only applies to our association. Don't be downhearted though. You've achieved a lot to reach one grade short of black belt. Any decent instructor will recognise that and take it into account when assessing you. And there are only so many ways the human body can move, so your current skill will count. Even if you choose a style that places emphasis on something other than your current style emphasises, you'll surely know by now that techniques are just the application of core principles, and those core principles are common to all styles, because they are core to human movement. Any decent instructor will see the same. Anyone that fails to recognise this is in my opinion not worth giving time and money to.

What typically happens is this. You explain from the outset that you have this level of experience and this grade in this style, but you are there to learn their style which you acknowledge is new to you, but you hope that if they agree, they will fast track you based on their observations of your ability within their style. Then you start off right at the beginning as a white belt. But if the club is fair, you will be invited to grade after a few weeks. They may not bump you straight up to 1st ku. They might give you a green belt or something, then watch you again, so how quickly you assimilate any new material, and grade you again and so on. So if the club you join is a very similar style, you might be set back by a year or thereabouts. Of course if it's substantially different, then chances are you'll just go through their normal grading cycle with no 'honorary' promotions. But perhaps most important, grade means very little in the right club. Some clubs will hold back knowledge until certain grades, regardless of your ability. In those clubs your belt colour is your passport to new material. But decent ones will train you at the level you are ready for, regardless of what colour belt is holding your jacket shut.

I only found out fairly recently, after numerous failed attempts to train myself to have greater control of my toes, that it is anatomically impossible to get the same range of functions that our fingers offer But silly mistakes aside, I'm wondering how much control each of us has over our toes. It sounds trivial no? Well, we know that certain kicks call for different toe positions, so the question may not be as daft as it first seems. I found out by chance recently that several people I know didn't even realise it is possible to flex the foremost joint of the big toe. When it came up in one of those random conversations, the group was immediately divided into those that think it's bizarre to even consider that it flexes, and those that think it's bizarre that some can't do it. In my case, I can't raise my pinky toes. I can push them down or across, but not up. I used to be able to. And I don't think I've lost the ability through illness or injury. As far as I'm aware they are still fully intact. I just seem to have lost the neurological association required to lift them. I can lift all my other toes, including the ones that have been broken. Some of them badly. Why does this matter? Take the basic front snap kick. It calls for pulling all the toes up and back to keep them clear of the strike.

You have to be careful when considering such things. It's very easy to find martial arts in virtually every kind of movement. You could look at an old man using a rake in the garden and quickly conclude he's a master of whatever style you're familiar with because he's in a perfect fighting stance for example.

I think in response to comments that you can never be better than a teacher that is still learning, I think you can. Consider a teacher that is still learning the teachings of his teacher. His teacher may have long since retired or died, but may have left a legacy of books and other students that serve as reference. The student that aims to be better than the teacher that is still learning, might look not only to his teacher, but also to teachers of others styles. A student may find something in tai chi perhaps that casts new light on a particular principle that their main teacher taught. This is not to say that the student actually is better than his teacher. But such a student, in seeking knowledge that his teacher can't provide, is demonstrating a drive to become better beyond what his teacher teaches. The student that only takes knowledge from one teacher will never be as good as his teacher, because he is bound to miss something. Such a student is then going to let down his own students when he becomes a teacher, because he's ignored opportunities to further refine his own understanding.

While larking about with my kids and their friends, the Nerf guns came out. Or one of them did. A few of us had a go. Then I left the room and return with one of the bigger semi automatic Nerf guns. Pretending to be a psycho and much to the kids amusement, I started shooting said Nerf gun. Having run out of ammo, I left the room to reload. This time when I came back, all the kids, laughing, did a reasonably good job of running for cover. All this was harmless play. But afterwards a thought occurred to me. There have been far too many tragic incidents where the shooter was not someone entertaining the kids in Nerf combat, but a real psycho with a real gun. This got me to thinking. Can kids be educated to give themselves the best possible chance in the event of a real attack, simply by playing mock attacks with harmless Nerf guns or similar? Would it be possible to instill the sense of calm urgency needed to do the right thing in a genuinely terrify situation without getting all serious and grown up about it during a Saturday after play session? Would it even make any difference? After all, there is a massive difference between a dad firing very low velocity foam bullets and a genuine psycho with a genuine weapon. Any thoughts? As an aside, a friend of mine used to use a toy pellet gun to train mugging defences and disarms at his karate school.

You get extra resistance in the water. Your arms and legs have to push the water out of the way vs the air. They’re quite useful in the rehab setting. Take someone with ACL reconstruction; they’ll be able to run on an underwater treadmill before they’ll be able to run normally because the bouyancy in water counters the pull of gravity, thereby significantly reducing the impact on the knee. Same for a lot of injuries. For general working out without an injury that benefits from it, I have no idea why. Edit: I guess it would be cooler than running outside in the summer. I get all that. But what I'm wondering is, if you're in a pool, where you are close to weightless and have all the low impact resistance, why not just walk in the pool? Or perform slow motion footwork drills in the pool. Or balance exercises. Or slow kicks. Or just about any exercise that's appropriate for the goal? I don't understand the advantages of confining one's self to a treadmill where the range of movement options is very limited, in the zero impact almost weightless environment of the pool. A number of factors go into the need/desire for various exercise tools. Treadmills exist despite us having plenty of sidewalks and trails outside. It takes up a lot less space to have a tank with a treadmill in a PT facility. Have you ever been to a public pool? It's frequently hard to use without someone else being in your way. Ah I see. I get it now. I was thinking you had the luxury of having access to a regular swimming pool for private use, as some gyms do. I totally hadn't thought of a tank with a treadmill in it. That makes much more sense.

You get extra resistance in the water. Your arms and legs have to push the water out of the way vs the air. They’re quite useful in the rehab setting. Take someone with ACL reconstruction; they’ll be able to run on an underwater treadmill before they’ll be able to run normally because the bouyancy in water counters the pull of gravity, thereby significantly reducing the impact on the knee. Same for a lot of injuries. For general working out without an injury that benefits from it, I have no idea why. Edit: I guess it would be cooler than running outside in the summer. I get all that. But what I'm wondering is, if you're in a pool, where you are close to weightless and have all the low impact resistance, why not just walk in the pool? Or perform slow motion footwork drills in the pool. Or balance exercises. Or slow kicks. Or just about any exercise that's appropriate for the goal? I don't understand the advantages of confining one's self to a treadmill where the range of movement options is very limited, in the zero impact almost weightless environment of the pool.

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the point of an underwater treadmill? I can see the point of a conventional one. Although I'm not a fan. I can see that they can isolate the mechanics of walking and running from all other external factors. But in a pool? The human body is already close to weightless in water. And the water will exclude most external factors while allowing a greater range of movement options than a treadmill. In fact our local gym, like very many, runs all sorts of classes in the pool. Often aimed at those with mobility issues, they do aqua aerobics and all sorts in an environment where joint stress is kept to a minimum.

Thanks for all the input. I have decided that I am going to ask the shotokan folks if they'll take me in. I will of course be honest with them about my experience and goals. And of course I'll be happy to wear a white belt and stand at the back. I can't start yet. It's looking like a few more weeks yet. But I am looking forward to it, in anticipation that they'll take me of course. If not, there are other options. As an aside, the chief instructor at the club I'm hoping to go to is 6th Dan in shotokan, but also has 2nd Dan in both judo and aikido. I'm hoping they'll include some of that in classes. If not I'm thinking I might also look at the local judo club.