Shorin Ryuu

Hmm...I ordered those fans from AWMA last week and I'll have to see if they are interesting. I just ordered some because I heard Sokon Matsumura (Old Okinawan karate great from back in the day) used them sometimes when he was the bodyguard to the Okinawan king. Plus, they look neat. I'll probably focus more on my more practical stuff (like bo) before I really get in to it, but eventually...

I think it is a good punch to certain targets, certainly soft tissue, but the bones for the pinky finger are very weak and in fact are not fully connected to the hand in the same manner the other fingers are. I'm trying to remember his name (which eludes me at the moment) but there was a great master of the martial arts who broke his hand in two places using this to strike a hard surface area. Arguably, conditioning will overcome body weakness, but I personally think it is better suited to rising attacks (due to its upwards energy transfer) to soft tissue areas.

I would have to say that there are hard chinese styles and soft chinese styles, just as there are hard and soft okinawan and japanese styles, so i don't think thats really the point. As far as copying goes, the Okinawans borrowed a lot from China and Japanese karate today is nothing more than what Okinawans taught in Japan in the early 1900s (For my thoughts on this, just view some of my other posts in the karate section). One theory i've heard is that there was a 700+ step Tai Chi Ch'uan (not sure about the style, I think that is what was said) kata made about 750 years ago that was in effect a reference manual to differing strikes and attacks (much like kata today) and that many of the kata were just different parts of this. While there are certainly "stiffer" styles, some of this impression comes from the fact that many people do not know how to perform kata (especially in America, i'm afraid) and they just go about thinking this is a block, thats a block, punch, kick, ooh, another block, etc. The division between kata and self-defense I believe is one of the main factors behind this. I know when I first started taking Shorin Ryu I thought it was hard and stiff, but the more advanced I became and as I learned all the forms, it is easy to see how soft it is with some hard points here and there. Whether you believe it all or not about its specific origins, most of the older kata is simply people preserving their own techniques in a way they can memorize them. One story is of how Okinawan kata got Chinto, which is very Chinese, is when Sokon Matsumura (The Royal Bodyguard of Okinawa) was sent to track down and fight a rather notorious chicken thief (sounds funny nowadays), who was a shipwrecked sailor from China, he got thrashed, which was saying a lot because he was rather good. He tracked this guy down again and begged him to teach him his style, which is what is transmitted as the kata Chinto today.

I've only used ankle weights to walk around in. I used to put 5 pound weights on each ankle. I wouldn't run because I think it messes up your knees, but I would just walk around with them all day. I really builds up your ankles and tones your leg. I have a friend that kicks around in them every once in a while, but I just choose not to.

Punches, because most people aren't going to start a fight with a kick. Then again, countering close-in grabs and chokes are fun as well because they don't expect it as much from "just a karate guy."

Most karate systems incorporate traditionial weaponry. The name karate wasn't officially adopted till 1936 anyway and its first use in published literature was in 1906. Before then, it was known as Toute or simply Te, meaning Chinese hand or hand. It was also known as OkinawaTe as well. Kobayashi Shorin Ryu uses Yamane-Ryu for weaponry. I agree with jmy77. Weapons training is useful for using "weapons of opportunity" that resemble the weapons you have trained with. Plus it is easier to defend against a weapon empty-handed if you know how to use it.

Savate-This is a French martial art that I believe involves lots of kicking. Sources vary on its origins, and range from the 1600s to the 1800s I think. I really don't know much about it, I was just amused that the French had their own martial arts. Anyone know much else about it? My knowledge of martial arts beyond superficial facts is pretty much limited to Eastern styles.

I'd probably jam his bicep with a vertical shuto (knife hand strike). It is extremely painful when hitting along the muscle separation or even just the general area and is usually not expected. At this point, you can continue to close in and work combos or start grappling, or you can circle out, slip out, or push him away and then walk away, depending on what you want to do or what the situation warrants.

I used to have a problem with being real skinny because I was born three months premature. Now I'm still pretty thin and probably won't ever get huge, but I have pretty decent lean muscle buildup. To help with the ribbiness, I did a lot of pushups (I suppose bench press would help as well, maybe) which is just good for general upper body musculature and lower back as well. When putting on muscle, just make sure you keep stretching and work w/o weights as well (with calisthetics like pushups or just plain things like punching) so you don't over-bulk up and tighten up. Plus there is a machine in most gyms where you sit and rotate your torso while holding onto the machine, which rotates with you and provides resistance w/weights. That might help as well.

No. My school doesn't like them.

As I always rather vocally profess, my main purpose for studying the martial arts is for its combative purposes. I study it for the practical application and for the ability to defend myself and protect loved ones should the need arise. All the other benefits, such as discipline, humility, confidence, etc., are appreciated and come with the training, but are not my primary motivation. What makes a good martial artist is of course technique. However, if they are only skilled in technique and do not possess traits of self-restraint, discipline, and humility then they are simply good fighters and not martial artists. I think this is something we all agree on. I think there is also something to be said for an innate grasp of the mechanics of fighting as well, although this can also be trained. Do I possess these traits? I think I do, to some extent. I try to be as open-minded and humble as possible, but occasionally my self-confidence crosses over into too much pride, but I am usually able to keep it in check. As far as technique goes, I consider myself fairly adept, and welcome any opportunity to practice my skills or learn new ones (in a controlled environment, I mean, not going out and picking fights). Of course, I still have a long ways to go till I can consider myself a master, but I think that is true for everyone, no matter how skilled.

Yes, Funakoshi did say "Karate ni sente nashi" or "In Karate, there is no first strike"...However, I disagree with much of the interpretation of this and his shift in emphasis of the martial arts. I do not deny the benefits of humility and other spiritual and mental benefits. These are all very good traits. However, you have to remember that Funakoshi's karate was more for the improvement of the self rather than self-defense. As I have said in numerous other posts, this emphasis was really introduced into karate only in the early 1900s. If that is your primary motivation for karate, I do not have a problem with that at all. Its just not me. As I said before, I practice bujutsu, which was created for group solidarity and for self-protection amongst warriors rather than budo, for the purpose of improving the self. That is my take on it. I do enjoy the other benefits than pure self-defense, they just are not my primary focus. With this in mind, I do not go around picking fights or purposely place myself in vulnerable positions, I'm just saying I would use my skills when put in a position. Also, due to the benefits of training, I think that I will not be too excited to think things calmly. I must admit that I have never had a gun pulled on me, only a knife once and a baseball bat on another occasion. The knife I was able to talk my way out of while the baseball bat I was not able to. I might add that my self-defense training did allow me to get out of the situation unscathed. I do agree with you that there is something beyond the simple techniques, otherwise a person would not be a martial artist and would merely be a good fighter. I think we have a mutual understanding on this so I won't belabor the point. As you said, it is a matter of emphasis and the purpose for which we both study martial arts. Thank you for your discussion.

Most karate styles I know of practice only traditional weaponry like the sai, bo, tonfa, nunchaku, etc. and not the katana. I randomly went out and bought an iaito, which is a practice sword for iaido. I don't have a teacher or anything and all I do with it is practice some basics I read in a few books and can do just knowing basics of weaponry every once in a while. I plan to do iaido eventually, I just can't really find a teacher right now. You don't necessarily have to quit karate, just find more time to add in to your schedule if you want to do both. I for one still intend to do karate while I study the sword later on.

I'm getting a few videos by Tadashi Yamashita in a week or two. I'll let you know how they are. He's the person that taught Bruce Lee nunchaku, if you want some background, but he's also been in the Guiness book of world records and is pretty decent. Its a shame that due to politics at the time, he was sort of expelled from Shorin Ryu Prior to that point, he was the "adopted son" of the head of my style of Shorin Ryu. All that aside, it also helps just to have someone show you the basics at least, because its hard to ask a video when you have questions.

Welcome! Final Fantasy VIII...I remember getting to the 4th disc and my game jamming every single time I went up this elevator...3 years later I finally borrowed someone else's and beat it...hahaha

I'm not sure if the above comment was addressed to me, but I was just trying to defuse the anti-karate people's argument using their own logic against them. And I do agree with you that it is probably a rare case in most places, although quite frequent in others. I would like to add that if he was within reasonable distance I would try to disarm him...why else am I studying martial arts then to defend myself? For me, at any rate, that is the primary reason. And with SaiFightMS I also agree. "Unfortunately, no one can be told what karate is...You have to see it for yourself." That is why I like the term "karateka". In Japan, a "fill in the blank"-ka means someone that doesn't partake in an activity but watches or studies it closely. a "fill in the blank"-sha is someone who does it. Thus a person who watches baseball is a yakyuuka (although nowadays they'd just call them athletic supporters in engrish) while a person who plays it is a yakyuusha. Yet due to the distinct nature of karate, a karateka refers to someone who practices it and studies it, not just an observer. I like that subtle difference...You might be able to gain an appreciation for it or maybe some respect, but its not the same unless you do it yourself.

I agree, I think the fight scenes were much better this time around...maybe he had more practice?

Sorry, I'm not a big fan of shotokan. Before I continue, let me just say that I mean no offense to any practicioners and I think Shotokan is very good for spiritual and mental development. However, in its founder's own words (Gichin Funakoshi), he greatly set about simplifying its style and made it focus more upon spiritual rather than pure self-defense. One good indicator of a school is its punch...If it insists on a full-twist punch where the fist ends up parallel to the ground...don't choose it. A style that emphasizes a 3/4 turn is the best, although a vertical fist is pretty good, but not quite there. I'm not sure, but I think Shotokan does a full twist punch...I've posted all my thoughts on the punch in the strategies and tactics forum. Anyways, regardless of style, the main driving force is the instructor. You can't really judge a style by its name, but you can judge the instructor by what you see, observe, and ask. I say try for it and see how it is (even though I dislike Shotokan) and it might be good.

Hello everyone, I keep wanting to bring up the topic of the advantages of a 3/4 turn punch over a full twist (and a vertical tate for that matter) on many different posts, so I just thought I should just post it here and refer to it later on... All right, here goes...I am very critical of the full twist/corkscrew punch and although the vertical tate punch is really good, in my opinion, it is not quite as good as the 3/4 punch. I just wanna hear what everyone else has to say. Here is my justification: The body is designed to withstand attacks straight on. Thus attacking at an angle (3/4) will do the trick. A full twist punch hit to the ribs will hit 3 or 4 at a time while a 3/4 punch will only hit one at a time (breaking it). A full twist punch will not fit within the solar plexus gap between the ribs, but a 3/4 punch will. A punch to face can be easily accomplished by a 3/4 punch, while it requires some manipulation of the wrist for a full twist punch. Also, on a full twist punch, the bones in the forearm cross, making it weaker and the muscles twist and dissipate your force (sort of like wringing out a wet rag, the water goes out everywhere). Conversely, with a 3/4 punch, the bones of the forearm and its muscles are perfectly aligned with each other maximizing its force and safety to the practicioner as well. Another point...there is a pressure point that is concealed beneath one of the upper forearm muscles when you do a 3/4 punch. When you twist your arm fully, the muscle shifts over and this is exposed. These are just some of the advantages. Most of these explanations are simply anatomical in nature, but you can see how they apply to martial arts. My main gripe with the vertical tate (and not that much, really) is that it is only slightly off of the 3/4 punch and in some situations may be more useful. Can anyone give me as many reasons why the full twist punch would be better than the 3/4 punch? What brought this on was something that I noticed many traditional styles teach the full twist punch. Usually those that do are unfortunately watered down styles originally created for school children or for purely budo rather than bujutsu, however some of these styles seem to be decent but they just insist on the full twist punch. Some people say its mainly tradition while others really can't explain why they do it. I'm actually curious myself. Any thoughts? Looking forward to a good discussion.

They DO have to realize that unless their guns are already drawn and ready to fire, then if they are facing off with you and they pull a gun, then it will take them longer to shoot it than for you to apply a self defense technique. Pulling a gun out and shooting isn't quite as fast as everyone seems to think... If they say "Hey, what if they are 20 feet away and they have a gun pointed at you?" In that case, then even if you had a gun too, you wouldn't be able to pull it out before they shot you... In fact, policemen often have specially designed holsters to reduce the main drawback of guns: You have to take it from your hip or chest and aim it which takes time. To reduce the aim takes training. To reduce the draw-time takes design (that and quicker hands I guess). I remember reading in American Hangunner (I will really try to find the statistic) that they did a study on how quick it takes to draw a gun and in many situations, an attacker with a knife would be able to close in quicker...When I find that number and source I'll put it in here...until then, I can't back it up with solid evidence...

I'm not denying the existence of reverse-bladed swords or knives, I'm just saying that a reverse-bladed katana would be very weak due to design. I'm not sure, but you might be describing khukri knives (I'm not sure). These are carried by the Ghurka, the famous warriors of Nepal who since they were incorporated into the British Army in the 1800s (i think), they have seen combat in every major war and numerous other wars around the world. These knives were famous for cutting off the heads of Germans during the World Wars. In fact, during the fighting in the Falklands, many Argentines ran away when they saw the Ghurkas carrying these knives... Of course, I could be wrong about what you are referring to, but they are straight in front and curved in the back...

I, for one, find the sai really fun to learn. However, I find the bo a lot more practical. You can find a lot more items that resemble a bo rather than a sai. In training, it just depends on what you are looking for. If you're looking for just fun, go with whatever one you like the best.

Open hand...knuckle...whether you use either of these, remember that these are only two of the numerous weapons on your hand itself. You can't forget fingers, thumb, the bone of your thumb, the knuckle of your thumb, back hand, etc. Personally, I have no problem using palm strikes while fighting. They are especially useful when parrying or striking pressure points...or just hitting in general... All this talk about hurting your knuckles when hitting people...why don't you practice on makiwara to help this? Also, a lot of injuries happen when striking with knuckles simply because their opponent has hit one of the pressure points on their arm (either blocking or obstructing or otherwise) that causes the wrist or hand to relax a little bit. This is by no means the only cause, but a big one outside of improper technique. Another cause of damage while punching is the full twist punch, which was really introduced to karate when they had to "water down" all the techniques to teach them to school children in Japan and Okinawa. The full twist punch is far less effective than the 3/4 turn and due to the body's anatomy (Is designed to withstand head-on attacks) can be a cause of injury.

You have to remember that the best way to improve yourself is to surround yourself with people better than you are. This goes for sparring as well. By sparring people who are better than you are, you really get to learn firsthand what makes them better. This goes for whatever martial arts you do. When I used to be a boxer, I would always enjoy fighting the best person in my weight class. I usually got pounded, but I always tried to take at least one lesson from my defeat. I try to take the same attitude with karate as well. Its the whole point behind having an instructor in the first place, because he or she is better than you. A good instructor or senior student should only bring it as hard or just a little bit harder than the person they are sparring when teaching a newbie. Also, agreeing with the other posts, you can't be afraid of defeat and you have to have confidence in yourself. We can go on and on about simple strategy or tactics, but unless you believe in yourself first, then you will not be able to use them. That being said, just one thing to look out for is distance. Many new people will inappropriately try to attack with a long distance attack in close range or vice versa. Just try and keep your cool during a match. If you do that, even if you lose, then it is easier to learn from your experience.

I think that if it seems unreasonable, it probably is. My instructor actually doesn't charge or get paid since he volunteers at my university. There is a plus and a minus to this. The minus is that since it isn't his actual job, he can not spend as much time as regular instructors teaching us and his job takes priority for the most part. The plus is that he is doing this entirely of his own volition and is very motivated to teach us. My little brother takes karate back home and he has to pay about $75 a month, I think. In the end, its entirely a matter of how much it is worth to you.