Tommy_P

Yes, that is a good reference to Kyokushin terminology. I was addressing the original question which referred to Shotokan's yoko geri keage and then saiha's post stating that yoko geri keage wasn't actually a kick but a stretch. I was attempting to make clear the differences between schools and terminology Tommy

There's a good point made here about old school being self defense. If you want "old school" then you have to look at traditional Okinawan arts. This hard military type training that we see in the Japanese stystems is just that, pure Japanese. The art was made this way once it left Okinawa to Japan and the reason was based on making it competitive along the lines of Judo and Kendo. Ok, there were other reasons such as preparing the Japanese youth for the military but that's another story. Traditional training was hard but it wasn't about which school does kumite harder or full contact vs non. That's all a modern sports thing. Old school is still practiced in some Okinawan based dojo and it isn't about kumite as we think of it. It's about self defense coming out of kata, there is no competition of any sort, full contact or not. It's kihon, body conditioning/strengthening and equipment training (hojo undo), kata and working defenses. You're taught how to defend and hurt or kill someone, plain and simple. I would venture to say that if it's Japanese it's a combat sport more than it's a traditional martial art. Tommy

Hi, The basis behind your opinion is good but a little more experience would have showed this not to be the case. Many systems were pretty much full contact at one time. They can now be considered "watered down" if that's the term you want to use, because they now fight point kumite thus the training has changed. If Kyokushin decided to get into the point circuit for some reason the same would happen. Why would that happen? It probably won't but you never know. Maybe insurance becomes an issue because insurance companies want safety sparring gear. Maybe they don't want to insure knockown schools anymore as being too violent. Maybe "people' change and don't want to learn karate by fighting hard all the time and attendance falls compared to the softer schools. Then to stay in "business" which is what it is, Kyokushin would have to compete with other schools and soften up. This is what has happened to other systems. It probably won't but my point is that it can. To be honest, when I trained in Kyokushin I was amazed that we could get away with fighting bareknuckle knockdown in class (or tournament). When I had my own school (Shotokan) you couldn't get insurance unless students wore gear including hand/foot gear as well as "headgear" This holds true for all schools I've seen. Some how Kyokushin gets around this. This is what has helped the so called watering down of some systems. I also trained full contact and bareknuckle in my dojo but was forced to have the safety equipment laying around in case inurance reps walk in, or the owner of the building. Tommy

Those are only descriptions according to a particular style. Each style uses the same labels for different things pertaining to similar techniques (see my Japanese descriptions in a post above). This is common for many techniques. Another one that comes immediately to mind is Kizami Zuki. This is how we say "Jab" in Shotokan. Others use Jun Zuki. Still others use Jun Zuki instead of Oi Zuki when describing lunge punch. And I believe a lunge punch may actually be correctly termed Oi Jun Zuki (Jussi?). Different systems use there terminology differently. As I explained in my post above, the techniques didn't come with names. Names were applied afterward, many many years afterward. The names are meaningless in the grand scheme of things. I would guess that they came about after 1908 or after Itosu revamped the kata and developed the Pinan's. I believe he applied names or "labels" to techniques, calling them by names describing blocks, kicks and punches when in actuality what we call a block may not have been a block at all. The same for kicks and punches. Before the labels (names) maybe the technique wasn't a kick, maybe the punch we see in a kata wasn't ever a punch at all. So a Yoko geri keage (or yoko keage) may be a straight leg kick with the blade of the foot in one school and a rising kick to the side using the toes in another. Both correct. Tommy

Yes and no. I have seen many changes over the years. I can say that training isn't like it was years ago and agree with some of what you said but I could also look at it in another way. I could say that those "old schools" remain the same but now there are also the addition of other schools that are more geared toward sport and seem watered down. So that would equal a "no things haven't changed" but there are new schools out there practicing something different. Back in the 60's what was popular was Judo. Well, not exactly popular what I should say is more well known. "If" you came across a martial arts school which wasn't too common it was usually Judo. Karate wasn't so well known yet and it may have been thrown in at a Judo school here and there. When I had my first class it was in a basement back then. There weren't "kids" classes in the 60's like today. What was common when I started was to be taught by a student who taught outside the school in a basement or some such area. If you could find a school and you were young, and I'm talking about young teen, not a pee wee or 7 or 8 year old that was unheard of, and could find a place to take you in you were thrown right in with the adults. Didn't like it, there's the door. There were no young kids. Instructors were big on hitting students who didn't perform well and quite often with a wooden weapon or a swift kick to the gut. No mats, no carpeting, no A/C, no kicking sheilds, no safety equipment, just hard work and a heavy, bloody canvas heavy bag. It wan't for everybody. But was this because it was better or "the way to train" or is that the "old way"? No, it was because safety gear for kumite wasn't invented yet, not until Jhoon Rhee in the 80's. Puzzle mats didn't come about until years later. The list goes on, things just weren't available yet. It's kind of like saying, " a cell phone?" "Ha! When I started out I had to "dial" my phone, "if" I could find one". Does that mean it was better? When the 70's rolled around and TV and movies made MA more popular it set the stage for the 80's which became the commercial age. Now people wanted to train for things like discipline, focus at their jobs, weight loss, some Asian culture and all kinds of things other than "fighting". This brought about the new breed of happy smiling fun karate. To pay that rent for a place big enough to hold all the new students you had to commercialize. In comes the money makers "the kids" The rest is history. Meanwhile some of the "old school" remained the "old school". Like me! Tommy

I was also taught to cross in the back. If you look at some hakama used in Kendo there is an extra piece that extends up the back. A belt would cross back there combining with that stiff support to strengthen it like a back support. Tommy

Sometimes perhaps but it's not always ignorance. Sometimes people go by their experiences and maybe their experiences have only exposed them to certain individuals and not representations of complete systems or training. Sometimes tournament competitors aren't the best people to use as templates for a style. We have many who like to fight in our organization and there are also many who "think' they do. They are competitors and their fighting is different, that's "their" goal. They're good at what "they' do. Schools are varied and some have very different goals or beliefs. Don't forget that sometimes what's being talked about may be intermediates and not advanced students in some cases on both sides. Then again I've heard similar stories from the other camp and the results favored the story teller so there's always bias I go by a simple rule. Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear Typical from what I've experienced in my generation. People I associate with these days from all walks seem to be training my way or close to it also. Many are still doing kumite hard in regular training and when it comes time to compete, if that's what they're into, they practice that separately. Are there dojo that play tag? Of course, but that doesn't represent Shotokan as a whole. I'm sure many full contact fighters can claim never having a problem against a Shoto practitioner. I don't doubt it, and that's because it's not common for a Shotokan practitioner to enter those type of events so now you're playing the odds. Out of their element too I guess, it's natural. Again that's only a small portion of the Shotokan community and not representative. If a Shotokan practitioner enters the full contact ring against a Kyokushin fighter he may be in for a surprise if he's ignorant to what they do. His mistake. But that's the fighter not the style. Point and knockdown are two different things and not constantly training for a knockdown sporting event is not a style weakness, that's a school or particular training weakness. There are a lot of things out there that you have to truly experience or study before making a sweeping statement. Knowledge is a wonderful weapon. Here is something I wrote concerning point sparring and full contact awhile back. It's the 9th post down the thread on page 1. Click here Tommy

A side kick can be a good weapon but timing is crucial as well as "distancing". If your kick is landing while it's too far extended it will lack oomph, too close and it's jammed. Balance is important and if you're kicking too high (possibly the chest) that may weaken the kick and effect distancing (or perceived distance). Without being in front of you and seeing what you're doing the best advice I can give is practice, practice, practice on a heavy bag and kicking shield. The bag shouldn't swing, that would be a push. If it's a water bag or a softer type heavy bag it should fold. If it's a good hard bag folding it is near impossible but it should dent with the feeling of wanting to fold. Properly punched or kicked it doesn't swing it "pops" by the chain. Tommy

I seem to hear this a lot, the idea that no one trains like Kyokushin. I have been on both sides of the fence so I will give my thoughts and experience on the matter. I have spent many years training in Shotokan and have seen many things as well as changes. I have also, as a Shotokan black belt, trained for a couple of years at a Kyokushin dojo regularly about 7 or 8 years ago in between my Shotokan trainings. I still visit there once per month for some supplementary training. When I first entered the Kyokushin dojo I immediately noticed the focus on spirit and hard training. Was it a surprise? Well, more of a welcome one since my Shotokan training was also very demanding when I was coming up. We regularly fought hard, were put through grueling training and conditioning as well as the endless techniques. Busted noses and ribs along with some lost teeth weren't uncommon back in the 60's and 70's. We wore the blood stains on our gi like badges of honor. Some things were different at the Kyokushin dojo obviously but I adapted fairly quickly. When it came time to spar I will admit that the leg kicks took some getting used to "but" at the same time they couldn't deal with my punching to the head and face since that's not allowed in Kyokushin. I stopped as per they're rules even though I still had to take and learn to defend the leg kicks. That takes away a weapon from me and adds one for him, unbalanced don't you think? Anyway we went on. As far as the contact I have to say that in no uncertain terms the kumite is fierce, but here again, other than the leg kicks it was the same as we practiced at our dojo. Same contact with the exception that we made light contact to the head and face in our Shotokan dojo and I was used to it, Kyokushin allowed not even "non contact" to the head/face. In the beginning until I got more used to the leg kicking, they would leg kick and I would sweep, kind of evened things out. The kumite was hard, yes, but that's what I was used to. I had trained this way for years and with no safety equipment. As a matter of fact when I started training those safety foot and hand pads weren't even around yet. I found Kyokushin "different" not better or worse. The training methods were a little different but a lot was the same. I found we had a lot in common but have to say I also learned a lot. I like to practice with my partner using hard blocks, in Kyokushin I was encouraged to use a softer block. So things were sort of a trade off. In Shotokan did we practice for point sparring? Sure, but that was in addition to our "regular" sparring. Our main sparring training was all out, same as I experienced in Kyokushin. The difference and what took a little getting used to, like I said, was different techniques. Shotokan was more linear techniques and punches to the midsection and ribs. Kyokushin focused more on punching over the top to the chest and uppercutting the midsection. We both used knee kicks and as a matter of fact my first match I got off more than my Kyokushin opponent. There are Shotokan schools I'm sure that focus only on point sparring but that hasn't been my experience. I'm not JKA but I do know that early JKA was a bloodbath and the JKA instructors course in Japan, from what I understand is still pure brutality. Like I said, I still visit the Kyokushin dojo for my supplementary training and still kumite hard for a few rounds. Is the fighting hard and fierce/spirited? Yes, but that's what I prefer. Why? because that's how I was raised in my traditional Shotokan dojo. My feelings about Kyokushin? I love it and feel it's one of the best systems out there. It's no nonsense straight ahead strong karate. How do I feel about Shotokan, pretty much the same when trained right. I wish Shotokan had some Kyokushin traits and I wish Kyokushin had some Shotokan traits. They compliment each other IMO. I'm just a bit weary of people thinking they know the real Shotokan judging by tournaments. Tournament training and regular training are kept separate and are two different things ususlly both practiced in the same dojo. This may be a sore spot for some but here is something to ponder. There are many traditional Okinawan systems out there that are true Martial arts. They don't have any competition since what they practice is for real and can't be toned down for tournament. They don't line up and march up and down the floor punching, blocking and kicking. That's a Japanese thing. They take a defense practice it to it's end, which would be the incapacitation of the opponent and do that over and over. The technique they use is a piece of a kata. Then they do the next until they have the whole kata ready to be used for taking someone out. There is no ring and no judge, it's not target practice and it's not knockdown, it's practice only to take your opponent out permenantly. If your system is in competition then training is geared toward that end. For Shotokan it's points for Kyokushin it's knockdown. Points has limited targets and knockdown doesn't allow face punching or joint attacks, throat etc. Therefore training is geared towards that or "toned down" at least somewhat. If that's the case then what we're practicing is a "combat sport" rather than a true martial art. This is what it has evolved to in both cases. Kyokushin competition may be a bit more of a test of spirit and will than Shotokan but the fighting is still "in the ring" and training is geared toward that. Can it be used for self defense? Sure, just as Shotokan can although there are other methods more geared toward that end. I have always thought that Shotokan practitioners could benifit from a little Kyokushin training, I have. It's an opportunity to see and experience some diferent fighting techniques and strategies, such as close distancing rather than mid to long range fighting distance. However Kyokushin can also benifit from a little of Shotokan's tai sabaki and swift closing of the gap. I like being on top of my opponent and keep moving forward so it suits me but then again that's how I learned my Shotokan. My Kyokushin training enhanced that and gave me a new insight, it could also work the other way around. See the similarities, not the differences. Tommy

There's body conditioning or conditioning of specific weapons such as knuckles and hands, elbows, shins, forearms etc. Then there is overall conditioning that comes from hard training in all areas. Putting your body through the paces, reaching it's limit (or percieved limit) and then pushing beyond. It's kind of like playing foot ball (or wanting to) and conditioning the shoulders for tackling by hitting them with a stick or using tackle dummies. That covers one area but to truly be conditioned for the game you need to get out there and tackle and be tackled over and over for hours and days. "AND" you need to play the game. Tommy

my apologies, i guess that the name applies to different techniques in shotokan and kyokushin, and what we call yokogeri ke age is your yoko geri no undo. as a point of interest, would you be able to describe the difference between yoko geri and yoko geri ke age (in shotokan) Hi saiha, I am a Shotokan practitioner but have also spent a couple of years in Kyokushin and still do once and awhile. The word "age" means rising as in Jodan Age Uke for example (upper level rising block). When we speak of any technique that rises in it's trajectory we use the term age. That could be for exercise or techniques, doesn't matter since all it means is rising. Ke, placed in front of age makes the word keage. The "ke" comes from keru (to kick) or keri (kick; noun). So when we say rising side kick we only need to say "yoko keage". The word "geri" is not necessary since "ke" is already in there describing kick. Yoko keage=side rising kick. In Kyokushin we used a straight leg from beginning to end, swinging the leg for height as a stretching exercise. We also performed this to the front keeping the foot formed for a mae geri (front kick), with the ball of the foot, leg straight throughout...a common stretch. I believe in Kyokushin we called regular side kicks yoko geri and didn't differentiate between snap or thrust, maybe it was just my dojo. In Shotokan we have Yoko kekomi (side thrust kick) where the kicking leg is chambered and the leg is thrust straight to the side using the hip to thrust the foot/leg in a straight line with the knee following the foot, much like a fist leads the elbow in a straight punch. In our yoko keage (side rising kick) The kicking leg is chambered but the knee may point 45 degrees toward the target with the foot chambered at the support leg knee. This time, as in snapping as opposed to thrusting techniques, the knee leads the way and the foot follows. So the foot is swung upward from the knee in an arcing motion and the hip isn't used in the manner of a thrust kick. A dramatic pivot isn't needed of the support foot either. The foot is bladed and is snapped out and back hinging off the knee. I personally don't use it and opt for the thrust kick instead (yoko kekomi). It's the cause of some debate in Shotokan over the usefulness of this kick. It's used against low targets or the ribs while evading a punch or holding your opponents attacking arm outstretched to the side while you kick up under it, or under the armpit etc. Names can be confusing as they never truly describe a technique thus the many variations. For you yoko geri keage describes a leg movement (kick) that rises to the side and it's an exercise. For Shotokan it describes a kick to the side that is arcing upward or "rising" both correct terminology I guess but kind of describing different things. This is the problem with only knowing "jargon" or small portions or "words" of a language. In Jussi's case he has a better description as far as terminology goes concerning the exercise version. Yokogeri no undo. Roughly, exercise of side kick or side kick exercise or training. Yokogeri (side kick) no (of) undo (exercise or training). Tommy

That is a very well known myth. Story about a belt that gets dirtier and eventually black...well, it's not very plausible in Japanese society, which has been almost obsessed to cleanliness for ages. It has been my understanding that The Japanese used to dye their belts to the next color. There weren't that many colors anyway. Tommy

I got mine from Japan (Tokaido) through Doshin but didn't like the service. It's also more expensive shipping from Japan. Jon Keeling is your best bet through the JKA of Silicon Valley. He is the rep for the US and can help you and for less money. http://www.jkasv.com/ Tommy

I always prefer a heavy gi. I have a Tokaido heavy weight that is like cardboard! I find the heavy gi last longer and withstands "heavy" training and kumite. When it's heavy with sweat it may even be a slight weight workout Tommy

Practicing holding your leg out as your instructor had you do over and over is a good idea as already suggested. Just keep doing the same exercise and you will improve. Another aid that might help is something akin to weightlifting where you use a "spotter" to help you lift a weight just a bit too heavy for you to do on your own. What you will do with your kicking is place the hand of your non kicking side "lightly" on a wall or a chair to balance yourself and use your other hand to hold the kicking leg up. Take a roundhouse kick for example, raise the leg to chamber with knee bent and pointing in the direction you are kicking. Place a hand under your thigh or grab hold of your gi and extend the leg keeping form. Re chamber the leg and repeat for ten reps then switch legs. You can do this for front and side kicks to. This will assist you in strengthening all those little stabilizer muscles until you can do it without aid. Little by little lessen your hold (aid) of your leg as well as use less balancing with your hand on the wall or chair. Also work on your abs as they are a big part of holding the leg up....midsection strength is important for karate. It all takes time and constant practice...but you have to practice Tommy

Good apps Rob. Concerning the double punches, I like to look at the fact that most kata use mid level punches. Is this to say we don't punch higher? Well, maybe after the preceding move his head is now at a lower level due to you taking out a knee or throwing/taking him down etc. With that in mind I like the first punch to be a grab of the hair, ear, collar or whatever to pull his head towards me as I punch with the other...control of my opponent. Tommy

I have a guitar amplifier that the volume goes to 11!!!! (And I'm a chain belt) Tommy

Are you sure you're not talking about "Jitte" ? Tommy

Shito Ryu is one of the four major styles of Japan and was founded by Kenwa Mabuni. He studied under Anko Itosu and Kanryo Higashionna. They have a long list of kata which include versions of kata included in Shotokan and Goju. It's not an offshoot of anything. I don't know much about their Naha kata but the Shuri kata are (IMO) more complete versions of the same kata performed by Shotokan (Itosu lineage) Tommy

This isn't my area of expertise but from what I know karate was exported from Okinawa to Japan in 1922 By way of a demo. The arts practiced by Japan at the time were Jujitsu, Judo and Kendo. The Japanese, who didn't favor anything Okinawan believing them to be a lower class of people took a look at karate and saw the potential for a new sport... a combat sport. The Okinawan art of karate contained grappling and weapons but the Japanese looked at it and said, ' we already have a grappling art called Jujitsu and we have Judo". They looked at the weapons practice and said, we have weapons arts and probably a better one in Kendo, get rid of all that nonsense and just teach us that kicky punchy stuff, we'll add the bushido element to it, make it look more like Kendo and use it as a combat sport. Sort of like Judo. Other Okinawan arts started to follow and then the offshoots and the Japanese offshoots etc. Organized karate as we know it is very new. Tommy

Great post jussi

I don't think they "copied" Shotokan, I think they learned it. I am not sure of the facts and don't have the data to support the statement at the moment, but I have read in the past about a Korean gentleman that studied in Okinawa or Japan Under either Funakoshi or maybe, is it Toyama? Tang Soo Do pretty much retains the same way of teaching and some admit to the lineage while main stream TKD wanted to break all ties to Japan/Okinawa and denied any overlap in styles claiming a long history of their own. Thus the revamping of the forms, which were Japanese kata, to no longer look like their original Japanese configurations. The plan didn't work so well and they ended up becoming the modern Hyung which is just Heian kata with the technique order changed. I had also read somewhere in a Korean history that the ties claimed to an ancient original art called Tae Kyun (sp?) or something like that, turned out to be not what originally thought. It was discovered that Tae Kyun was just a kids "Kicking game". I thought there was the possibility of getting some insights into the history here in this forum as the normal history usually seems a little off the mark. Tommy

That's interesting, can you say what makes Mr. Alexanders translation better in your opinion. I've never read Pat McCarthy's version but I did brief through George Alexanders a long time ago. I'd be interested in hearing your comparison. Tommy

Blocking techniques as well as their effectiveness are varied. Depending on the type of attack and the situation at hand you may have to pick and choose among your tools. If you are caught off guard by a haymaker you may only have enough time to use a flinch response which may come out like a half high block, I think the important point is where you block and what do you do from there. Body positioning is what makes what we call blocks work. A problem arises at times due to translation and the mental image it presents. I'd be interested to hear what the actual translation is for the Korean or Chinese word used for "block". In the Japanese arts we use the word uke which in most books and all schools is said to mean block. This immediately conjures up notions of "stopping" something or blocking it's path...force against force. The truth is the translation of uke is closer to receive or reception. With this in mind (and our practice) we can start to look at defenses not as blocking or stopping but accepting or receiving our opponents attack. We do this by combining our hand movements (parry and blocking hands) with body shifting and unbalancing. A reception should in one motion redirect the attack while we move off line and away from any other potential danger (limbs) which at the same time is unbalancing our opponent. This makes him ripe for counter attack. It's evasion with control of our opponent. The ideal situation is while controlling the limb you also damage it. I don't like to view blocks as against specific techniques such as a punch or a kick. I just think of a limb coming at me, like an arm. It may be a punch or it may be a grab attempt or a choke whatever, the blocking (receiving) principle remains the same. If I take an inside to outside block and an outside to inside block combo I can give a simplified example for the sake of demonstration of the principle. A right hand is coming at me to grab my shirt or jacket. I use the setup hand (left) of my inside to outside block to parry it as I move to my left and slightly forward (towards his right rear). Almost simultaneously the blocking arm (right) is taking over the redirecting of his attack and grabbing hold as I begin my outside to inside block now being used as a forearm smash to the back of his arm at the elbow. He is in a disadvantageous position while I am at an advantage, he is bent over forward with his arm/elbow/shoulder hyperextended and I am in position to knee him in the head, stomp his knee into the ground, reverse punch the base of his skull, grab his hair and pull his head back so I can knife hand his throat...the choice is yours. Two simple blocks applied without force against force. Evade/parry, control and damage, finishing blow. ' Then there are those times when you can use a traditional "block" to clear the way of arms in your face!!! Tommy

When I studied Ji do qwan (TKD) it was basicly Shotokan with a Korean name. I really don't see the difference between TSD and Shotokan either. It appears to be Shotkan with a Korean name. This is why I question the dates and lineage as well as the claimed age of the forms. There is no question that they are Heian kata. Even regular TKD seem to be Heian kata with the order of techniques jumbled. I'm merely looking for more concrete data. Tommy