Harlan

Congrats, old man.

Never heard of sai referred to as 'light vs heavy'. Which version would be 'light'? http://www.shureidousa.com/kobudo/sai.html

It depends on your school/style. Some schools want a solid foundation in empty-hand, and weapon study is really an adjunct study that complements it. This is probably especially true with styles that have to borrow weapons study from other styles/traditions. There are other traditions that study weapons either very early on or from day one of study. And schools that just focus on weapons (Matayoshi kobudo, for example).

My vote: to train bunkai, applications, techniques - whatever you want to call it - from day one of training. Reasons: 1. We have inherited a fractured, and incomplete study from which our own teachers worked hard to find answers. To NOT pass along information is to ensure that one's school/dojo/style is always starting from the beginning and never evolving. 2. Considering the modern student and fast paced society, in order to retain intelligent students exposure to bunkai from day one engages them mentally.

Call it anything you like, except 'traditional'.

If your neck hurts, you are training improperly. Frozen muscles...over training. Kobudo is a great way to study and practice good body movement and hojo undo, but bad movement gets you hurt.

As I read this, you are stating that seniors attending your teacher's class (NOT yours) are critical/gossiping of the juniors training with you that are invited to train with them. Your teacher's problem. Pass it along, that there is a lack of dojo mojo on the part of XXX. Ask him if he thinks you should change your curriculum at all. If it continues, and seems personal, a beat down isn't a bad idea.

Average? 10 years. But we only see a new student every 5 years or so. Depending on your POV, we are either a stunning failure or quiet success.

IMHO, seems like the decision for a regular training for specific grades would depend on how many students are in attendance. Small groups can accommodate beginner, but at a certain point the benefits realized by either 'beginners' or 'advanced' students necessitates targeted training.

IMHO: Beware the 'strict' Oki vs Japan categorization. Japanese = low stance for instance. You can train Oki karate in low stance...for strengthening. Fighting...everybody goes higher. Some invoke 'Okinawan' karate as the real deal...but you've got empty karate, and 'schoolboy' karate everywhere.

Personally, I think the 'uniformity' of bo is just useful for a class situation; one should train with different lengths, weights, woods, etc. and train with the bo one feels most 'comfortable' with. If you think about it, if Okinawans were using 6 ft staff decades ago...that would probably translate to at least at 7 ft staff for you. But it's very hard to find someone with a lathe that makes anything larger than 6 ft...or affordable.

Good goju! Met DeWet sensei once...impressive teacher.

'Like all endeavors - it's what one makes of it - what one brings to the training; Two students can be in the exact same class, with the same teachers and curriculum, and experience it differently.' That's my reply.

A fishing kata...assuming a 'deserted isle' has no human threat.

One to one.