Sauzin

In Okinawa drinking plays an interesting cultural roll for men and especially for martial artists. You see it is completely socially unacceptable to loose your cool and/or get into a scuttle in Okinawa. Unless...you're drunk. Then, for some crazy reason, it's understandable and forgiven. It is actually not unheard of for someone who is extremely frustrated with a specific person or life in general to go to a bar in Okinawa and get completely plastered for the sole purpose of getting into a fight or going off on someone. Afterwards when the effects ware off, apologies are expected, and everyone gets back into their suits and ties and goes to work like nothing happened. Another interesting practice is drinking after working out. It is very common, especially for guests to go out and treat the sensei and senior students to several rounds of drinks. Not only does this work as an expression of gratitude, but it also loosens the lips of the instructor giving the guest the opportunity or ask questions and get details that he would not normally get responses to. An enormous amount of karate trade secrets and ideas have been passed over a bar table in this manner. Now these are just cultural phenomenon that I observed while on the island. As far as drinking in general goes I'll reserve most of my opinion, but I would like to say that excess in many things in life bring woe. I would also like to say that I've seen the effects of those who become dependent on alcohol, and it's not pretty. For example there was a man a few months ago who actually came to my sensie's class inebriated. He spoke with him and sat him down, but had it been my class I would have asked him to leave. I have personally chosen not to drink much if at all. I don't have a problem going out with my friends while they drink and I don't feel uncomfortable. Maybe that's just because I've got great friends but I usually have a pretty good time.

In the martial art that I practice pride has very little place. I would say honor plays a more prominent roll in guiding our respect for our forefathers, kata, and art. We don't teach pride and we try to take every oportunity we can to humble each other both by demonstration and example. Personally pride is a two edged sword. It exists and always will in any intelligent creature who has any love for himself. It serves to reward us for our accomplishments and achievements and motivate us to be more. But there is no such thing as accurate pride. It is always based on flawed perception. In fact it serves to further flaw our perception. What I strive for in my life is to wipe my window of perception as clean as possible and observe my accomplisments with as much objectivity as I can. This way I can appreciate the true fruits of my achievements in the moment rather then being distracted by a feeling that lingers past it's relevance.

Um, well I'll just say Okinawan Kenpo is good.

I've got to agree with caged warrior here. You can put a lot of body into a hook if you know how to execute it properly. Proper hooks don't swing wildly. They stay in close and tight allowing your weight to stay behind it and even drive it down. Of course a straight lunge or reverse punch is powerful too, but it would be a mistake to assume you can't get the same drive into a hook. As far as jumping goes, 99% of the time it's a bad idea. Aside from the potential sacrifice of balance, giving up your base prevents you from being able to drive the punch forward. The reciprocal force will knock you back if you are in the air. A good punch means good structure and good timing. Hip, torso, arm, then a little more hip is generally what I use. Using only the muscles that are needed to drive the fist forward is important. Pushing and/or straightening the back leg at the last moment also gives it a bit more thump. Moving the hip forward toward the target instead of just turning it is also important. In fact everything on the striking side needs to move in concert in the same direction for the greatest efficiency.

OK, I think something is being missed here. Okinawan Kenpo is a style (or type) of Karate. Kobudo is the name for the weapon arts that are taught with Karate. So what we practice is Kobudo. Kenpo means "fist law" and is not a style or even a group of styles. It's just a name that some styles use. Most styles with the word "kenpo" in them have almost no relation what so ever. So there's no such thing as Kenpo weapons, since Kenpo isn't a style. To refer to a style or even group of styles with any kind of relation you really have to be more specific. I hope this clears it up.

Any Okinawan art that practices weapons is Kobudo, since Kobudo refers to Okinawan weapon arts. In fact Okinawan Kenpo is responsible for quite a bit of the proliferation of Kobudo that exists. Odo was one of the most "American friendly" Okinawan teachers out there and he taught weapons to many people outside of his art. Oyata still does the same. So if you practice Kobudo in the states then there's a very good chance at least some of it came from Okinawan Kenpo. If not Okinawan Kenpo then it came from Shorin-ryu such as what came from Matsumura. This is where Gojo got theirs.

Oh absolutely none of the katas are the same. They don't even look similar. My understanding is that Ed parker made up most of if not all of his kata. But even if he hadn't, since we don't have a common lineage, they still would be different.

Well I'm sure Kosho-ryu or Kajukenbo would have more similarites to Okinawan Kenpo then American Kenpo would. And hey, don't worry about the wrong foot thing. I get a bit uppity when my art gets grouped in with arts that it has not connection to. Not because I dislike the other arts, but because I, like anyone, don't like to be labeled with things that don't fit. I'm sorry if I come off a bit strong as a result. It's difficult to specify a specific motto or a single sentence foundation that Okinawan Kenpo revolves around. The branch of Okinawan Kenpo that I practice is a small man's art. It comes from a man by the name of Seikichi Odo who trained under and was the senior student of the founder of Okinawan Kenpo Nakimura Shigeru. Odo was unique though. You see Okinawans are small people, but even around them he was almost a midget. He was a little over 4 ft tall if I recall correctly, and giant tossing was his forte. You can imagine a little 4ft 2" 80lb man walking up to a 270lb marine and effortlessly tossing him across the room. It seems impossible but that's exactly what he did, and he had this funny smile that he got when someone who didn't believe it could be done saw it done so easily...or had it done to them. Because he was so small he had to learn how to effectively generate power, and how to effectively remove it from others. Odo moved with such emphasis and power that he often resembled a rag doll who was ripping his own arms off by shooting them out so powerfully. In Okinawan Kenpo we make a lot of sacrifices for these things that others might not make in their art. But the results are exponential. Odo also had a great fondness for weapons. He was known as being without equal with the bo. He taught new students this weapon from day 1. And he used it to guide the empty handed arts that he taught as well. As far as stances go, well we use all kinds. Our main fighting stance is a shortened version of a front stance. Shoulder width wide and about the length of the lower portion of our leg, perhaps a little less. Since we enjoy taking opponents down and controlling them we also use a lot of deep stances to support such maneuvers. We really don't stay in one stance for long though and we move between them so frequently and fluidly that you'd be hard pressed to single our stances out. In our art, since it is a Karate-do, kata is everything. Every move in every kata is utilized and has a purpose. Each move has at least 10 meanings and even a yellowbelt could show you at least 5 for each move they do. That's because we teach our kata with heavy emphasis on applications. We have a lot of kata. I practice about 70. Odo practiced closer to 50. As you could probably figure we are a bit less of a striking art then most. Grappling is included from day 1 and we combine it with strikes, throws, and blocks which we rarely use just for blocking. We are very heavy believers that having a straight back does not mean having it perpendicular to the ground. We always maintain a forward cant. This affects every aspect of the way we fight. We use our hips. A lot. More then any other art I've ever seen. We use our hips for punching, throwing, stepping, blocking, evading, everything. We do both subtle and not so subtle hip work and we do it almost everywhere. It is a huge emphasis in our art. We do very little sparring, but what sparring we do is largely full contact with traditional budo gear or continues controlled. I'd call it light contact but it really isn't ever light. We are heavy believers of crossing our arms when we block and transition. We don't believe in bringing both our arms back while advancing and we like to use the arm that is already at lead to transition to the arm at the rear. We aren't huge into kicking, what kicks we do use are largely low and utilized to remove balance and manipulate an opponent’s base. We love to kick out knees and then stand on them. We don't believe in speed and we don't focus on it. Timing is everything. Speed means nothing. We will often purposely wait to move when we see an attack. Well that's a summary, anything you would like me to expand on?

Yea you've got the idea! About that different. OK, that's not what I'm trying to say. "Kenpo" means "fist law" and is a generic Chinese/Japanes term for a martial art. Anyone can use the name Kenpo for any art that has any origins in China. Just because two styles choose to use the term Kenpo in their name doesn't mean they are related in any other way then haveing a loose connection to China. By the way, I have yet to find a asian single art that doesn't have a loose connection to China. This includes Silat all the way to Tae kwon do. So saying the art has a connection to China isn't saying much. I'm not saying that American Kenpo is a "wannabe knockoff". It doesn't even have that much of a connection to Okinawan Kenpo. It is it's own art. For better or worse it's completely different. Okinawan kenpo isn't a special "eccentric yet eclectic art". It's an Okinawan mutt. A collection of various karate-do from all over the island. It just happens not to be a collection of anything that formed American Kenpo. I'm sure this is just by chance but it is never the less true. So let me repeat. American Kenpo is not stealing a name and they are not a knock off. What I practice isn't special and both arts simply are what they are...separately. Now if you want to discuss differences in the technique, teaching, and style I could do that...for pages and pages. But you don't practice either art, so I'm curious as to why you don't just take my word for it.

As far as Mitose's background, you are correct none of it is verifiable. Let me provide a couple of links though... http://www.urbin.net/EWW/MA/KEMPO/motobu.html http://www.kosho-ryu.com/21st_grandmaster/Great-Grandmaster_James-Mitose.html This one seems to be a bit of a fantasy... http://www.atlantamartialarts.com/styles/kempokoshoryu.htm And then there's this link which I think is the most informative... http://www.kempokan.com/Glastonbury/ArticlesJamesMitose.html While the articles assertion that every style of kenpo in north America can be traced to Mitose is definatively inaccurate (and I can prove it), his discussion on Mitose's claims are very enlightening. As far as the origins of Okinawan Kenpo, they are well documented. To say they were a family art is not really very accurate since most of it was not passed on from father to son. To say it came from Sholin monks is more then a bit of a stretch. There was one monk who indirectly taught one of the teachers of a teacher of one of the students of Nakimura Shigeru. I don't call that much of a connection. If you really want to see what the origin of my branch of Okinawan Kenpo looks like try this link: http://www.ikkf.org/lineage.html I suppose saying that the differences are day and night would be a relative statement. For example kosho-ryu and Okinawan Kenpo are much more similar then say Okinawan Kenpo and line dancing. But Okinawan Kenpo bares more resemblance to Shorin-ryu, Isshin-ryu, Goju-ryu, or any Okinawn style then it does to Kosho-ryu or Kajukenbo. It bares even less resemblance to Kara-Ho Kenpo. And I swear by all that is holy that there are no two martial arts on this green earth that are more different then American Kenpo and Okinawan Kenpo.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, back up here I think there's some confusion here. First of all James Mitose, a Hawaiian, studied in Kyushu (not Okinawa) where he studied under his uncle Choki Motobu who was an Okinawan. Motobu practiced under Kosanku Matasumora, but none of these guys had any ties to Okinawan Kenpo. Let me repeat, neither Motobu nor Matasumora practiced Okinwanan Kenpo nor were they associated with someone who taught someone that latter did. They all practiced Shuri-te (Shorin-ryu). Now yes, Okinwan Kenpo does have it's Shuri-te ties, but they don't come from these guys. They come from Chotoku Kyan and Seike Toma. In fact Okinawan Kenpo has a lot of different pedigrees but you can go up and down the family tree and you won't find anything that connects to Motobu. If you merely compare what Ed Parker devised to Kosho Ryu Kempo there's little to no resemblance let alone comparing Kosho Ryu Kempo to Okinawan Kenpo. You won't find a single kata nor technique that we do that is the same. Also people seem to be referring to any kind of Kenpo (which itself is a generic term for a martial art) that came out of Okinawa as Okinawan Kenpo. In fact Okinawan Kenpo is a very specific name given to arts originating from Nakimura Shigeru. Anything else may be Okinawan or it may be a Kenpo but it's not Okinawan Kenpo. Again American Kenpo has no direct nor indirect ties to Nakimura Shirgeru what so ever. As far as comparing the arts, well they're night and day. About as different as BJJ and TKD or JKD and Aikido. Which one is more street applicable, well I'm biased but I'll just say my vote is for Okinawan Kenpo.

Admittedly not huge. One guy (who was amazingly strong) had about a year of Judo the other 2 guys had high school wrestling. As I said, I'm a work in progress. The more experience I have in applying these principles and refining their practice the better the results will be. So far, so good. But if at some point, something that I try doesn't work then I'll either learn more about the principle I'm applying or I'll work a slightly different set of principles. That's why I have a sensie and why I'm always looking for test subjects.

You know for the longest time I didn't think much of what we do worked on the ground but I've since learned differently. Principles that translate to guard positions are fulcrum and lever, isolating a limb to gain control, overextending your opponent, working in your power zone, redirecting an opponent's force while collapsing, joint trapping especially against the ground, and weight shifting and timing while doing so. Defending against a shoot was something I was playing with last month and again last week. The primary principles I used there, weight dropping/shifting, splitting the attack, redirecting an opponent's force, and dynamic use of low stances. Each of these principles used other principles such as fulcrum and lever, what happens to a body in motion and one portion of that body gets stopped, how to generate power by dropping weight, a low center of gravity makes something harder to tip over, etc... Really there are too many to list. As far as making them work, well I'd like to think that they work pretty good for me. Having seen my sensei use these principles I have to say that I'm no where near the definitive testament to what can be done though. I'm a work in progress.

Because they don't need to. I'm having a difficult time breaking this part down but let me give it my best shot. A complete art isn't about grappling and striking. When you separate these things as much as many non-traditional striking karate schools or Mcdojo's have then you loose something. Same with any school that just looks at grappling. What makes a good strike, makes a good throw. You may disagree with me here and that's fine. But at some point most people come to the conclusion that there are physical principles that make things work. Every art uses them to some degree. The epiphany is that you're not practicing how to throw or lock up someone you're practicing a principle, that if in a given situation a throw, lock, strike or any combination of the above happen to present themselves that it will be the principles you practiced that allow you to do it. Not the technique. Because the opening for a technique might not be there, but the principle will aways work. You just have to know how to apply it. So to say that a karate practitioner has the equivalent of a 3 month white belt in a grappling art is inaccurate in my view. He doesn't even have that. What he has is a certain development of principles, that if he's learned, he can apply as well with a strike as he can in close. As I have learned recently, even on the ground, principles remain. Usually what happens when you see someone who works more on principles then techniques is most things he does are a combination of strikes and grappling. When you've got principles you learn to do whatever presents itself, effortlessly flowing and combining both. In fact it looks less like a combination and more like the whole thing was set up from the beginning as one technique. But it's never performed the same way twice. Now it is true. Many karate "traditionalists" have fallen victim to practicing techniques and without realizing the broadness of the principles. But is the same not true of grapplers, even mixed martial artists? How about we not assume that all that exists in an art is what we've seen from the masses? As I said, any art looses things like the understanding of principles over techniques when it is catered to the masses. As far as not practicing resistance, I agree here. Practicing with a resisting opponent and an understanding of what a resisting opponent might do is critical. There are two problems though. When you are first learning principles, too much resistance too early on prevents you from seeing their effect. You have to get good at applying the principle before it works well against any or all types of resistance. So first you start off with minimal resistance. Then you build. The second problem is safety. The effect of a good principle against full resistance is often painful, debilitating, or worse. So you have to learn safeties and control. Not automatic control. Real control. This also requires a gradual building process. As far as the adrenalin rush and targeting goes, I also agree. Fine motor control and especially targeting while under increased stimuli and no time is definitely not something that should be taken for granted. That's why you need techniques that target for themselves. As a grappler you know that you have to learn to feel where the joint is and you have to have techniques that place themselves there automatically without having to make unnecessary on the spot changes to what you practice to make them work. It needs to work instantly and to do that your technique has to place itself guided only by your feel and instinct. This is true of traditional karate as well. Karate should work blind. Techniques should place themselves. The primary use of looking should be for balance and focus, not to identify an attack or target. You should feel those things coming before your opponent even thinks about it or realizes it's there. In my opinion karate works very well against non-lethal combatants after about 3 years depending. Before that it might help, but chances are you're going to hurt someone, possibly yourself if you try to water it down and use it. Usually by the time you're a black belt you're in enough control to know what needs to be used and what doesn't. Still this isn't much of a gain in my opinion since, unless I feel a life is on the line, I'm either leaving or not there to begin with. Lastly, while I don't want to turn this into another kata/form debat, I really feel that's what it all really boils down to when you're speaking Traditional vs MMA. The only real way to practice full bore, no rules, go all the way, is to do it without an opponent. This is the only way to remove the body bag factor. This is what kata/forms are. Yes resistance is important, so no I don't think kata should be practiced alone, but if you get rid of kata, of practicing everything you got, no holds barred, then you risk seeing arts that don't train lethality and rarely understand principles over techniques. If you get rid of resistance drills then you risk seeing arts that practice things that don't work. You need both, and I don't think you can judge any art just by looking at one or the other, which is why I don't think that UFC is by any means the ultimate judge of an art.

The "lethal" is taken out of it by the referee who stops the fight when a clear cut winner has been established. Good point, the ref is another thing traditional arts don't train for. You see I think when I refer to a primarily striking based art vs a primarily grappling based art I am reffering to something different then what you and the other gentleman are reffering to. I'd consider karate a primarily striking based art even though it contains grappling and at least 40% of the art (traditionally) is taugth with it. Strikers grapple enough to get to a position to strike some more. Quick things like what are spelled out as foul in the UFC are practiced all over the place in kata or forms. From my perspective this puts a striker at a real disadvantage when you say he can't use them. It's integrated into the art. Plus it's a lot easier for a grappler to be non-leathal or to stop a fight before he finishes a chock, then it is for a striker to play it safe. One good hit and a guy can go down. Not just out but dead. You make these strikes illegal and a striker is severly handicapped. As far as spawling when you meet a grappler, well I'll just say there are plenty of things to do depending upon your position. Not everyone theorizes. People do die in fights. I find it intersting that there have been so few deaths in the UFC. But I guess that wouldn't be good for buisness at least not in the long term. Still I firmly believe that if you told both the fighters in the "cage" that only one guy was comming out alive, you'd see a very different fight. Funny that in the UFC, an arena with rules and a ref that other sport arts (ones that also trained in an arena with rules and ref) did better in that arena then arts that trained solely for the street. I'll just say that it doesn't come as a big surprise. While there are many arts that people consider traditional gaining wide spread popularitly, they cease to be traditional when they begin to cater to the masses. Still even in these arts you can find those who cling to the old ways. They are always the minority though.

Personally, in my opinion, I think you really become a martial artist when you learn to express yourself through your art. 'Till then I think you're learning the tools and the methods. I can't really explain it better then that. It's one of those "think about it" statements.

You know this is definately a matter of opinion. Myself and a lot of other traditionalists that have been around for a while believe the exact opposite. In martial arts, popularity is almost never a good thing for long.

Eye gouging and biting? What about... ...hair pulling? ...trachea crushing? ...attacks on the spine? ...groin strikes/removal? ...throat strikes? ...striking downward using the point of the elbow? ...neck breaks? ...strikes to the back of the skull? ...hooking under the neck? ...small joint manipulation/breaking? ...removing or popping the ears? ...clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh? These rules seriously change the nature of a fight. They basically take the "lethal" out of it. Of course BJJ and other grappling arts are going to have an advantage. The UFC rule list reads like a striking arts handbook on what to do if you meet a grappler. On top of this, what kind of traditional martial artist would want to do what was necessary (likely killing) an opponent in a ring just to prove a point? Certainly not anyone of any repute or skill. Don't get me wrong, I think BJJ is great. But the UFC is not an arena made for traditional arts. It can't be. Old traditional arts have spent thousands of years trying to figure out how to train real fighting without killing each other. I think they do a pretty darn good job. Cross training is nothing new and has been done for centuries. The trick is to learn one art well enough so that when you find other aspects of other arts you like, you can realize them within the art you already know.

What? I'm going to have to call you out on that one...Spinning the bo is just to look fancy or maybe develop wrist strength?...whatever it is, it doesn't really have anything to do with what you would do in a fight. The sooner as people understand that, the better. I got into this argument before. The argument goes, "If I spin the natural reaction for 95% of all individuals is to back up, thus giving me the necessary distance for an attack." The counter argument is, "If they know what they are doing they won't back up and they'll disarm you. Also there are many other ways to gain distance, like say using a legitimate attack that doesn't render you helpless." And then you go back and forth about how spinning is more intimidating and actual attacks are more effective, yada, yada, yada and then you both agree to disagree. Or something like that.

The problem with that is in a bo fight, if you can't strike with what you're doing then you are rendering yourself defenceless. Simple question: Do you use a full sized bo or a toothpick bo and what is it made out of? Secondary question: Do you really want to learn how to fight with you're bo or do you just want to be good at twirling it?

Agreed. What the Shotokan stylist lacks in grappling he should be able to compensate for in firepower. However, Shotokan karate, as well as other traditional karate styles, have more grappling techniques than they are given credit for. The problem, as always, is the amount of mediocre schools out there who claim to be teaching traditional karate (as well as kung fu). Shotokan does indeed have some grappling, but traditional Okinawan karate has a lot more (in general). The art I practice is at least 40% grappling/locking/throwing for example. And very little of it is "hidden".

Well if you want to be effective with the bo, stop spinning it. There's just no other way to put it. We've had a lot of discussions on these forums about the advantages and disadvantages of spinning and some would argue with me. But it really boils down to a simple point. Real bo fighting isn't about spinning. It's about striking. It's about maintaining control of the bo. It's about timing. It's about allowing the bo to protect you. It's about moving up and down the bo to make the most of it's length. It's about knowing how to use a stick to lock up a joint. And often, it's about power. But spinning means having very little control over the bo (your hands are too close together). It means your timing is obvious to your attacker. And most of all there's no power. I've taken a full speed spin to my arm. It hurt, gave me a nice bruise. But I could still use it and he nearly lost his bo when he hit me. Here's a suggestion. If you haven't already buy a full size oak bo. Not a toothpick bo but something that is at least 1 1/8th inch in the middle. Tapered is good. Practice your striking. Work combinations of steping then striking. Always finsh your step before you strike. Always keep one end of the bo pointing directly at your opponent as you step. And if you can, find a traditional karate dojo that practices weapons. Ask about the bo, you won't be sorry.

I do find the idea of flat vs round so that you have something to push up against interesting but I must ask, in your testing and use of the sai do you use the tip of the thumb or the pad to push up against the moto? I have never seen a round moto that is not hallow. It would be extremely heavy if it weren't. I don't see how sai vs sai kumite would tell you if it were hallow unless you were unlucky enough to have a sai snap. I wouldn't suggest using the logic that it hasn't happened yet to assure myself that it won't happen in the future though. It only needs to happen once. Usually you can tell whether or not they are hallow by the sound the sai make when you hit them together. Hollow sai will make a "tink" noise and non-hallow (forged) sai will make a "tonnnggngngn" noise. Aside from that you can also do what my friend did and file the round moto down. Of course if you like the roundness then you probably wouldn't want to do this.

Alright let me make a few quick opinion based points. First of all Shotokan has a tendency to become static, more focused on striking, and in many ways can depart from realistic fighting. This can happen in any style really but I've seen a lot of it in Shotokan. So what do you do? Well you've got options. Your first option is you could find another Shotokan instructor who might shed a different light on what you've been doing. Your second option, as suggested previously is that you could look up Shorin-ryu which is Shotokan's root system. If you're looking for meaning in your kata and for the dynamic/practical roots of your system this is a good place to look. I'd say 90% of the things you are complaining of in Shotokan you will see less or none of in Shorin-ryu. I practice Okinawan Kenpo which is very closely related to Shorin-ryu. We don't stop our punches 5 inches in front for safety. We practice bunkai from 100% of our kata, we leave nothing out. And it all translates to practical street combat. There is nothing in our art that doesn't directly relate to real world fighting. We have Sanchin and use that for conditioning. We are just as comfortable grappling as we are striking though we do have a preference for staying on our feet. We have very dynamic stance and hip work to accommodate this. And get this: We practice many of the same kata Shotokan does. We practice all the Nahanchi's (tekki's), the Pinan's (Hinians), Wansu, Kusanku, Gojushiho, sound familiar? Ours come from Shorin-ryu as yours does. So what's the difference? Maybe it's the instructor. Maybe it's the instructor's instructor. Maybe it goes far enough back to where it is the system. Were I you I would explore both these possibilities.

Yes I have. It does happen. I would suggest looking into any traditional karate dojo's that might be in your area and asking about kobudo. The bo is almost always the first weapon taught in kobudo so it'd be easy enough to have someone teach you just that weapon if you liked.