Sauzin

I’m really getting the impression here that you don’t know what you’re looking for. These first two statements conflict. The first thing anyone learns about weapon training is that slow technique breeds effective technique, and fast is slow. With nunchaku, fast is ineffective as well. The most common mistake with nunchaku is assuming that spins and strikes behave the same when striking an opponent as they do with solitary practice. They don’t. Practical nunchaku practitioners learn to swing away from their body, spin purposely at control points, and above all to start slow. Being realistic though, you’re not going to find a nunchaku instructor who will only teach you practical nunchaku. It’s ineffective and just not worth his time. You might find a spin master to teach you and that’s fine, but it won’t work on the street and you just have to understand that. Even if it did it would be stupid to use in almost any self defense scenario. The cops would just assume you were looking for a fight if you used nunchakus and they would treat it as though it were a gun, which you’d be better off with from a legal standpoint. What you should do is go back and question why you want to learn them again. Any good reason you could give would be reason enough to learn kobudo (the art of Okinawan weapons) as a system. This is really how it should be, as each weapon teaches different aspects while still tying into the others. As far as learning kobudo separately from karate, it can be done. In fact that’s how I started, but eventually I saw enough finer points in how the teacher applied the techniques that I wanted to learn the whole ball of wax. And this further enhanced my weapon arts. Still there are practical teachers who will teach just weapons, and perhaps this is what you should look for. But don’t ask just to learn the nunchaku. Try learning an art rather then a weapon.

Oh man, did any one catch that "less fashionable" statement. Ouch! Well here's my view on it. First, Go-ju ryu originated from Okinawa. When Okinawans trained, especially when I was on the island, looking good wasn't an issue. Sure the gi's were white and everyone entered well groomed, but when class started, image was not even a factor. These guys were what I like to call "hard core". Fashion was for outside the dojo. There is no reason in the world you can't look good outside the dojo. If fashion is you're thing, then great. But the moment you enter that dojo, that focus should stay at the door. This might sound harsh, but I don't mean it to be. In the dojo people learn to focus on perfecting an art that is very internal in nature. They learn to define self worth by something other then image or perception. In karate you shouldn't care about society, what you're mother taught you, what politician should be president, or how you're doing at you're job. You are there to perfect your art, and maybe help someone else do the same along the way. Anything else is a distraction inside the dojo. Outside, all those things will be waiting patiently for when you are done. Respectfully, -Paul

There's a mental picture

I practice a Koa (3 pronged hoe) kata. Now there is a true Okinawan farming implement.

I like to compare flashy nunchaku techniques to my cousin who juggles clubs. He can swing 5 clubs in the air, around his back, under his legs, and around his arms. But you ask him to fight with them, and the best he could do is lob a wide arched swing. Kind of like a cave man with a club only with less commitment. Juggling may teach him coordination but he doesn't have the knowledge or the practice to apply it to combat. There are certain aspects of nunchaku that you must know if you are to fight effectively with them. The only way you can know them is if you are taught. No one man developed these techniques. So I don't know how any self taught individual can expect to develop them himself. YOU SIMPLY MUST LEARN THEM FROM A QUALIFIED INSTRUCTOR.

Okinawan Kobudo taught by a teacher who knows his kata. I have specific experiance with Okinwan Kenpo Kobudo. At least 1/5 of our kata is pure locks, grapples, and disarms.

Sai's can trap swords, just not well. Sais were originally designed to trap staffs. This is why the curve of their prongs is so wide. The thin blade of a sword is harder to to trap with a sai. The Jitte was actually developed for trapping and snapping swords. It is usually made with only one prong, with a much narrower curve.

90% of all staff locks I practice are used against another opponent who is armed with a staff as well. Basic staff locks are pretty simple. Have a guy perform an overhead strike against you. There is a space on your opponent's staff that exists between the grip of his two hands. As he comes down with the over head strike, move slightly to the side, insert or strike the inside (closest to his body) of this portion of his stick. Naturally as he swings down, his arm will come down on top the end of your strategically placed stick. Once that occurs, rotate or twirl the opposite end of the stick, using hand closest to your opponent as a fulcrum. This will quickly lock and throw any opponent who attempts to maintain his grip. You can do this from many different angles and eventually learn to apply it from different strikes. While doing it you may ask yourself why the opponent doesn't just let go of his stick. Practiced from the correct angle and at full speed however, this is very difficult to do. There are of course many other locks, but this basic lock will give you an idea of what to play with. There are ways to use a staff to aid in grappling with an unarmed opponent. Some ways include: Inserting the staff under an opponent's armpit and cranking outside and behind his body into an arm bar. Allowing an opponent to grab your staff and circling around to apply pressure down on his wrist. Using the shorter end of the stick to apply pressure to the neck while grabbing the arm or belt. These are just a few. I don't know of any videos or web links though. Perhaps someone else might be able to provide this. I hope this helps.

Traditionally I compete with the bo, but I have done sai before, though it didn't go quite as well. I'm now working on my kama, I think potentially it could do very well in a tournament. The fluidity of the weapon looks really good and it is very easy to get lost in (once you have the safety’s down).

I'll try to keep this as non opinionated as possible but please forgive me if a few slip out. First, full contact, no holds bared, anything goes but eye gouging, sparring without gear with true karate is suicide. Some-one's gonna die. Not maybe someone might get hurt, no, someone is leaving the dojo in a body bag and most of the time the other person is catching an ambulance. Why? Well Karate, traditional karate, is not a sport. Never was, never should be (oops that's an opinion). They don't teach just how to fight, they teach how to very effectively end a fight. That said the idea of no gear fighting with the above conditions is insane. Secondly their history is *. They should try reading John Sells “Unate”, they might learn something. Thirdly I have serious issue with the following which was posted on their site: "There is now on Okinawa only one school for Ancient Okinawa Combat Karate and Kobudo - "Sindo Ryu" (its name can be translated as "The School of the Truthful Way") headed by the 68 year old Sensei Hanashiro Naito. What distinguishes the Sindo Ryu school from others, is that all fighting is full contact, no protective equipment is used and it takes place in accordance with Ancient Okinawa Combat Karate rule- "Uri Kumi Go", by which only the blows forbidden are ones to the eyes and any and all styles are permitted" I practice a legitimate fighting art that I can trace back about 600 years and has been around for about 80. There’s was created this decade and they call it the “only one school for Ancient Okinawa Combat Karate and Kobudo”. What kind of drugs give a guy these kinds of delusions of grandeur? If they let this kind of crud slide one must wonder what other kind of fictional nonsense they believe and practice. Forth, the name Okinawa-Te was taken by two other systems, which undoubtedly will be suing them. These systems have very different Chinese roots and descend from Okinawan royalty. They are unique in their Aikido like foot work and use of the rope as a weapon. Again, see John Sells book. Last but not least the styles they refer to are legit styles, and it seems like they have studied under legit teachers. Why they have to go and tarnish their reputation by posting stuff like what I quoted above is beyond me. P.S. Sanchin is Chinese in origin. Actually most kata with a number divisible by 3 in its name come from China and can be traced to certain systems. Certain Chinese systems kept track of what kata made up a system by simply adding their numbers together. Chinese numerology is a bit odd like that.

Paul Holsinger San-dan Shinjitsukan Kenpo (Okinawan Kenpo) San-dan Shinjitsukan Kobudo Go-kyu Goju-Ryu

It will likely be a difficult transition. There's a lot of "habits" that will have to be relearned. Stances are a little different. Movement and sanchin will be the biggest differences. My suggestion is that you not assume you know anything when going to class. Pretend like you are a white belt with no experience and take everything for face value. You will learn faster this way.

On that point I completely agree with you. You should not be teaching a kata you learned from a video. Practicing, well, that's up to you. Really a guy's got to work with what he's got. But to teach it, you should have to learn the soul of it from a real person. Otherwise you miss the oral, and application traditions around the kata. This goes to create what I call soulless kata, and they should not be taught. "Masters" who's compliment consists of kata such as these disturb me as well. We agree on that point.

You see, now you're confusing me, informer. Some of you're statements appear rather pretentious. You first open by saying that a bo kata named Sakagawa no kun performed by a style named Sakugawa Koshiki Shorinji Ryu that can trace their lineage directly to Sakagawa is not in fact Sakagawa no kun. I don't care who your sensei is, you have no basis by which to say that a kata that another style practices is not what they choose call it. Especially when they can trace their lineage as they can. Now I practice a very different kata that happens to have the same name. I too can trace my lineage back to Sakugawa. Still, I'm not about to tell them that the kata they are practicing isn't what they are calling it. That's just not my place. Now unless you practice the style in question and know of a mistake with their web link to where it is pointing to the wrong video stream I don't think it is your place either. Forgive me if this is the case, but you comments don't seem to infer that. Please provide more information. As far as him learning the kata from a video, I too think that this is not the best thing to do. But I also understand circumstance, and there are many which would justify what he is doing. Say he started in kobudo but then moved and wished to continue his training over a distance. Say he lost contact with his original teacher. Say he always liked the kata but cannot find anyone who knows it or can teach it to him. Why not give it a try? He's bound to learn something from it either way.

Personally I would like to see a film with traditional karate applied properly. Of course it would be less flowery then say Jet-li but I think the raw representation of the efficiency, grace, and brutality of karate would capture audiences by itself. It would make for shorter fight scenes though. Of course sometimes the shortest scenes are the most powerful ones.

In Okinawa, when it got really hot the gi tops came off all together. Especially when doing Sanchin. It was necessary to see proper breathing and muscle tension not to mention people passing out was less of a concern. In Okinawan heat sweat sticks to you like gum, it's a bit different then here in Boise, ID. Anyway, I don't see a problem with t-shirts. The value of a class is represented by what's underneath them. You cannot judge an art based on what is being worn. That should be one of the first things anyone learns about karate.

Any hardware store will have it (Lowes, Home Depot, heck even Fred Meyer). You want to put 2 or 3 coats and space them out by 3 or 4 days. Make sure the coats are very thin by wiping off as much as possible after an application. A coat that is too thick it will feel kind of sticky, even after a week of drying. If this happens, lightly sand it down and apply another light coat. After that a coat every 6 months to a year will keep your weapon well maintained. Keep in mind, different woods dry at different rates. Red oak is notorious for drying out and becoming brittle with age. That is why oiling is really the only way to keep a red oak weapon safely usable past 10 years, sometimes 5. Other woods behave differently. High grade hickory is really the best wood for a jo. Nothing takes a beating like hickory and traditional jo exercises will dish out a beating. It’s the most impact resistant wood out there and it doesn’t dry as badly as red oak, so if you do upgrade consider a hickory jo. $60-$80 will get you a good one from a weapon maker. I hope this helps! P.S. By the way don’t leave oil soaked rags in the sun or any place that gets much above room temp. They have a tendency to spontaneously combust.

I prefer to not stain jo's. Any way you go, staining can remove some of the natural oils in the wood and make it more brittle. Applying finishes really prevents the wood from moving though you're hands as easily. Personally I think the best thing to do is just apply a couple of very light linseed oil coats. Wait about 3 or 4 days in between each coat. What this does is enriches the woods natural color, strengthens the jo, and still allows the woods natural pores to continue to soak in oils from you're hand and future linseed coats (about 1 a year). Doing this for 10 to 20 years will give you a jo that is about as dark as if it was stained. It will also get stronger year by year.

Uh, huh. Well everyone’s got their opinions. Why you would need to post yours on hating kata to a thread specific to favorite kata on a karate forum which is based on kata kind of bets me but hey, maybe you felt the itch and just needed to scratch it. Still you might re-think the appropriateness of it. Anyway, to the topic, yes there was a kata like that. It was Haksuryu. The white crane kata we practice always fascinated me and I really hated having to wait to learn it, especially after I saw some of the bunkai. The grace and lack of effort required for some of the techniques really amazed me.

As I understand the bunki, you aren't really kicking in the air. You're grabbing you're opponent (hair, shoulder, arm, head, lapel) stepping up on him or kneeing him, kicking his back leg or chin then throwing him to the ground. In this case though, when you throw the kick, you are fully anchored on to you're opponent, not in the air. Just look at the hand position. Likewise there is a place in Chinto where you grab your own arm a couple of times, in that situation it is done to simulate grabbing up on your opponents arm. In Karate there are several movements that are practiced a certain way during solitary exercise such as kata, but in application they are applied slightly differently when there is another body to apply them to. The "jump kick" in Chinto is a favorite Okinawan kick that I practice similarly in both Kusanku Dai and San Se Ryu. They like to raise one knee and then kick with the foot they were standing on. In application the raising of the first knee can be a step up on an opponent, a parry of another kick, or a knee. But as a rule they don't use it to go flying at their opponent. Instead it's more of a utilitarian kick, not so much a power kick. Also I was told Chinto based it off of a fight he had on a bridge overlooking a river. I haven't seen the Isshin-ryu Chinto but I assume it is similar to the one I practice since they are both based on Shorin-ryu's. I hope this helps. .

It is difficult to offer a general answer to this question. I think that Karate as it was on Okinawa does exist in the west, however I think that it is much less common then its modern counterpart. I think there are still dojo's where the instructors and students are true and committed enough to still practice the traditions and arts from Okinawa. There are a lot of dojo’s that perhaps the students or the instructor have other things in their lives that prevent them from 100% dedication but they still try to keep the values and culture of the art as best they can. Everyone has lives and in the west life can be more distracting. Still in modern Okinawa the same is becoming true. There are a lot of Mcdojo's. There are a lot of "karate" schools that are really tae kwon do. There are a lot of Shodans out there teaching when they really should be starting to learn. There are a lot of schools where the instructors collect shodans from every art they can pay to get one. There are a lot of schools that get most their material from a video tape. But to say that all schools in the west are this way is inaccurate. Each dojo is unique and defined by both the individual instructor and his students. There are many that are Okinawan, and many more that are legit in other ways. What I have a difficult time with is that in the west karate no longer means the art is Okinawan in origin. Sometimes it does, but these days the only way to know for sure is to walk in the dojo door and see for yourself. This too is difficult to generalize. Each dojo has it's own story. Many always had the cultural aspect. Many more never had it and never will. It depends. I will say that most dojo's that don't have any of the cultural aspects of the art aren't interested in putting them back. They have usually believe that the modern culture is better for adaptability, improvement, open mindness, and applicability. I have never seen a dojo that started without the culture and then included it. I'm sure it exists but I would not be able to comment on the success of this occurrence.

I would tend to disagree. Certainly the Ryou we think of as Karate todat can trace their Island history to a time when Okinawa was under Japanese occupation. Armies and weapons were outlawed. That's why traditional karate weapons are farm implaments instead of "real weapons". Karate sword forms are pretty unherad of. Uh...I believe this to be a common misconception. Almost all of karate's forefathers were not farmers. In fact they were soldiers, policemen, Okinawan royalty, tradesmen, and scholars. Most Okinawan weapons descended from China. Nunchucku, sai, Nunte-bo, tecko and a good amount of their staff fighting. The only arguable farming impellents that I know of in kobudo are the tonfa and the very rarely seen kua. There is much debate regarding the tonfa however. And there are kobudo practitioners who practice the chinese broadsword. Though they are about as rare as the kua. Still kobudo is older then the Japanese occupation and I really believe that the lack of swords in the art has less to do with the outlawing of such blades to non-Samurai and more to do with the Okinawan's general attitude towards a weapon so strongly connected with Japan. They simply didn't like it. My reference to "art of war" is really just another way of saying martial art. Martial literally meaning "of, relating to, or suited for war or a warrior (Merriam-Webster dictionary)".

The interesting thing is that before that 1936 meeting, the term karate was widely disputed. Some thought all Okinawan arts should be called Tote, which I was under the impression literally meant "Chinese hand". Another guy wanted all the arts to be called "Okinawan Kenpo". At last Karate won out, but by the time everyone decided to start using it, the established meaning was empty-hand. I did also hear that “kara” was originally written with the character for Chinese but I have heard this both ways. The way it was explained to me on Okinawa, from my Sensie Wade Chroninger was that it meant “empty” and was a description of the state of mind used while practicing the art, not a reference to whether or not something was in a person's hands. You see I think were a lot of confusion comes from is around 1900 on Okinawa people called their arts a lot of different things. Which I believe was a large reason behind the 1936 meeting, to obtain some standardization in practice, name, and competition. Still by the time it was commonly used to describe most all the arts from the Island it most assuredly meant empty-hand. You know, I understand where you are coming from with you're belief of philosophy in karate, but I still disagree. Truly there is philosophy in any life endeavor that one should commit themselves to fully, however karate doesn't inherently contain this, and I don’t think it should. I truly believe that when you invite either philosophy or religion into a dojo you invite division. People have different opinions, different perspectives, different cultures, but still they should be able to practice a martial art side by side. And idealist and a realist, a Buddhist and a Christian, should not have conflict in a dojo. Because the art isn't about who created Adam and Eve or whether the glass is half empty or half full. Now if you study karate closely, you will find principles that apply else where in your life. But that doesn't mean you are applying the philosophy of karate to life. It means you are finding the philosophy through karate, and applying it elsewhere. There's a big difference. Just because when you drop an apple it falls doesn't mean every time something falls it's because of the apple. Yes the same principles apply, and yes you may have first learned it from the apple, but the apple and the physics are still separate things. When you study karate you study the art of war. When you try to add things that are not directly related to the subject at hand I truly believe you risk diluting its value. A good understanding of philosophy will also contribute to skills in karate. But the same is true of handwriting yet we don’t teach philosophy in 3rd grade. My suggestion is that people look to karate to learn the art itself. Practice the kata, work hard, and then if at the end of the day whey you’ve done all you can do to perfect you’re art, you learn something about you’re self, so be it. But don’t go into it looking for some kind of special enlightenment. If you do, where does that leave the art?

Karate the art has its origins largely in southern Chinese systems, but Karate never meant Chinese hand, though that is the style it referred to. As you stated in the second paragraph Karate has always meant Empty Hand, which refers to the state of being that is obtained in its practice (when done right). Tote literally means Chinese Hand. The decision to call the Okinawan arts Karate do was made on the island in a very famous council in 1936. Also China didn't so much rule Okinawa as one might think. Yes the Chinese empire did stake claim but they rarely made any visits to the forgotten island and it was largely ruled during the period by local monarchy whose Chinese relationship was formal at best. Really most of the arts in Okinawa arrived there from a small Chinese settlement in Shuri, trade, and Okinawans who left to China to study and then returned. When you speak about Karate's intent and practice I feel it has dramatically changed with its introduction to the "West". To understand this you need to understand Okinawa. It was and still is a Mecca of martial arts. To be a lifetime martial artist in Okinawa means more then just running a successful studio. It requires a devotion that westerners rarely had the opportunity or convenience to take. Daily practice was only the beginning. Conditioning, repetition, and extensive practice were rights of passage. To be a karateka meant 100% devotion. On Okinawa, during the golden years, Karate was not a sport or a hobby, it was a life. And they treated those who chose it very well. To this day, a legitimate grand master is still considered a national treasure on the island and is given special privileges. You also have to understand the Okinawan mindset. The older ones are very stubborn. They lived through world war 2 for Christ's sake. The island was decimated during that war by both the Japanese and the US. But still they continue their traditions. Try walking up to an Okinawan Master and asking him to add or change a kata in his system. If you're lucky, he'll laugh. The old ones don't do it. Their fathers and their father's fathers trained a certain way. And while they recognize the need and inevitability of modern times there is one thing they want to be the same; that's the spirit of the art, it's soul. And if that isn't found in their kata, I don't know what is. With the introduction of American bases to the Island it was inevitable that it would migrate. And when it did, of course it changed. The people who migrated it had jobs, they had families, they had other hobbies. Many had short attention spans. Somewhere the term "black belt" become synonymous for "I know it already" and things got really messed up. But I think things are getting better. I think people are rediscovering that Karate doesn't mean "I can beat you up real good" it means something more then just an end result. To me it's a life enhancement practice, an art, a science, and tradition that all the bombs in world war II couldn’t burry. One thing that I think you need to keep in mind that jerrylove made clear. Karate is not a philosophy. In a karate class, students don't and never have learned about creation or man's happiness. It's a discipline, an art, but it's not a philosophy or religion. The people who practice karate have those things but that's not what they pass on in karate class. The closest you'll ever get is the saying that "karate is defensive" but really that's a tactical statement not a philosophy. Karate is as separate as anything can be from philosophy and religion.

So the senior student of the guy Otata learned all his ki stuff from, exposed to everything Oyata was, said that there was no ki? Seems that anyone with the eergy skills you infer would easily be able to prove the exitance of ki.There's something I would again like to stress. Oyata learned a lot from Nakamura. Not just "Ki stuff". Nakamura was known for having developed rules and gear around full contact sparring on Okinawa. His nick name was "punch knight" and if he was known for anything he was known for knocking people out, down, or breathless with a single punch. He nor Oyata was or is known for pressure points (or at least they shouldn't be). Oyata simply includes them in his instruction to senior students to explain and demonstrate one small aspect of his art. It just so happens that he sees and teaches this aspect differently then Odo. To understand why one top student had such a different view on this subject then the other you would have to know them. It's not that Odo wasn't taught pressure points. He just made his own mind up. He was very stubborn about the subject. Even if he had seen someone light a cotton ball on fire with thier ki I don’t think he would have believed in it. It's not the only thing Oyata did differently from Odo. While they have largely the same kata they perform them very differently. It's actually somewhat difficult to recognize the similarities between the two. Oyata makes much larger movements and is a much bigger guy then Odo ever was. They had different attitudes as well. I can't speak for every reason one included pressure points and one didn't. What I do know is that Oyata is the real deal in many aspects, pressure points included. Oyata credits his teachings to Nakamura. If you want more detail then that, you'll need to ask him yourself.