Which kata best represents your style?

[Shoto4Life]

Just throwing out a version of Naihanchi that isn't done at half speed. Hands are a little "lose" on this guy, and his knees a bit out, but it's the best I could find in a quick search at this hour.

Yea thats a pretty good one too. Amazing how much pop some of these guys are getting out of this kata.

I always thought that Tekki 3 looked the coolest. I should try and find a quick snappy one of that.

[Shoto4Life]

Naihanchi Kata was used in James Bond - Casino Royale when he fought that guy on the crane. I’m Wado trained so I’m calling the kata as Sosai called it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPYOQRJ7PRc

Good call - for sure visable. Good movie too!! I might have to rewatch that one.

[Shoto4Life]

Most of the Isshin Ryu forms are different, they are from the older Okinawan styles...

That's just my point. Its a perfect example. Seems as most of you are really just doing Tekki and calling it Naihanchi. True Naihanchi would be from before it was broke into three parts and it would not be the same as our Tekki 1.

[bushido_man96]

Naihanchi Kata was used in James Bond - Casino Royale when he fought that guy on the crane. I’m Wado trained so I’m calling the kata as Sosai called it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPYOQRJ7PRc

Very nice. That was a cool scene.

I'll have to watch that movie.

[ShoriKid]

That's just my point. Its a perfect example. Seems as most of you are really just doing Tekki and calling it Naihanchi. True Naihanchi would be from before it was broke into three parts and it would not be the same as our Tekki 1.

So, your saying saying the only difference between the Okinawan Naihanchi and the Japanese Tekki is the way the kata is broken up? Do you see any difference between the Okinawan Pinans ad the Japanese Heians?

I've done both the Matsubayashi Ryu Naihanchi and JKA Tekki, and there is a world of difference between them. Footwork, the stance, the techniques and the timing are different. Naihanchi, at least the version I was taught, is a closed stance, with tight step overs, the hands are tighter to the body and the techniques are different. The timing is a whole differnt matter in and of itself.

[Shoto4Life]

That's just my point. Its a perfect example. Seems as most of you are really just doing Tekki and calling it Naihanchi. True Naihanchi would be from before it was broke into three parts and it would not be the same as our Tekki 1.

So, your saying saying the only difference between the Okinawan Naihanchi and the Japanese Tekki is the way the kata is broken up? Do you see any difference between the Okinawan Pinans ad the Japanese Heians?

I've done both the Matsubayashi Ryu Naihanchi and JKA Tekki, and there is a world of difference between them. Footwork, the stance, the techniques and the timing are different. Naihanchi, at least the version I was taught, is a closed stance, with tight step overs, the hands are tighter to the body and the techniques are different. The timing is a whole differnt matter in and of itself.

I think it’s pretty easy to see what I’m saying and that’s not it. Go do your homework and find out that your Naihanchi isn’t the old way/original way. There seem to be a lot of little varieties out there but in my opinion if it’s not the full version of the original form it’s not truly Naihanchi and as such it’s similar if not equal to Tekki.

That’s also your opinion I have seen it and wouldn’t consider there being a world of difference.

Your kata will be like Tekki as the founder of Matsubayashi Ryu was a student of Motobu Choki who was prolly the other most commonly known student of Ankō Itosu other than Funakoshi. Ankō Itosu CHANGED the kata, broke it up and yes he also created the pinans which is a different story as he did not create the Naihanchi but changed it. He then taught the new way and discouraged practice of the original way. People that aren’t in the Itosu lineage are going to have a more true to Naihanchi form.

Peace - Tekki rules!

[joesteph]

Do you see any difference between the Okinawan Pinans ad the Japanese Heians?

Ankō Itosu CHANGED the kata, broke it up and yes he also created the pinans . . . He then taught the new way . . .

Looking at the references to pinan and heian, as well as Itosu, I remembered an article published online about this at:

http://www.brotherhoodofmartialartists.com/

Once there, select Online Magazine from the menu, then choose Vol. 3: May 2008. The article is titled "History of the Pinan Forms" and is by Brad Reynolds.

[ShoriKid]

Go do your homework and find out that your Naihanchi isn’t the old way/original way

I have done my homework, for a good while at that. By some accounts, the dirrect decention of Naihanchi falls from Soken Matsumora

Your kata will be like Tekki as the founder of Matsubayashi Ryu was a student of Motobu Choki who was prolly the other most commonly known student of Ankō Itosu other than Funakoshi

Motobu was also a student under Soken "Bushi" Matsumora, Kasoku Matsumora and a few other Okinawan notables. While Motobu was one of Itosu's students, he was not the most famous other than Funakoshi, at least not to me. I would rank Mubani, Kyan and Chibana as well ahead of the rough and tumble Motobu in fame. Other bits of history, such as the rough character of Motobu leading to his expulsion under Itosu. Then there is the writing of Motobu himself. On page 20 Okinawan Kempo he lists the "styles or kata which have been used in Ryu Kyu from ancient days.."

"Sanchin, Jo-Ju-Shi-Ho, Seisan, Seiunchin, Ippakku-Re-Hachi, Naihanchi(Ichidan, Nidan, Sandan), Passai, Chinto, Chinte(bamboo-yari spear style_, Wanshu, Rohai and Kusanku."

Further down the page he mentions the "Pinan(5 katas) the modern time warrior Mr. Itosu orginated.."

Why attribute all of the other katas that he knew(7 of which are found in Matsubayashi Ryu) of as ancient in origin, while the Pinan he attributes specifically to Itosu? If the Naihanchi kata, as he knew them, were the work of Itosu why not give him credit there as well? Did he hold them to be the modified versions that Itosu taught, or a more orthidox version he's learned from Matsumora?

[Shoto4Life]

Go do your homework and find out that your Naihanchi isn’t the old way/original way

I have done my homework, for a good while at that. By some accounts, the dirrect decention of Naihanchi falls from Soken Matsumora

That's right Sokon Matsumura is credited with handing down Naihanchi. Those that learned it from him or his students other than Itosu would probably be doing the original form.

Your kata will be like Tekki as the founder of Matsubayashi Ryu was a student of Motobu Choki who was prolly the other most commonly known student of Ankō Itosu other than Funakoshi

Further down the page he mentions the "Pinan(5 katas) the modern time warrior Mr. Itosu orginated.."

If the Naihanchi kata, as he knew them, were the work of Itosu why not give him credit there as well? Did he hold them to be the modified versions that Itosu taught, or a more orthidox version he's learned from Matsumora?

That's a good question. I would guess he was biased. Can't imagine that being expelled from Itosu helped this. It is quite well known Motobu was a major proponent of Naihanchi and it was his favorite kata. The other factor would be that Choki Motobu learned from not only Itosu but Sokon Matsumura, Sakuma Pechin, Kosaku Matsumora, and Tokumine Pechin. I'd like to say that he probably held to Sokon's teaching but I'm sure by viewing the handed down kata's that they are not the old way/ full version so I'm guessing he just did the new way without crediting Itosu.

Just the way I understood the popular opinion.

[joesteph]

. . . I'm sure by viewing the handed down kata's that they are not the old way/ full version so I'm guessing he just did the new way without crediting Itosu.

In Soo Bahk Do, the Pyung Ahn (Pinan) forms are credited by Grandmaster Hwang Kee to "Mr. Idos," who is interpreted as Mr. Itosu (especially after reading the article by Brad Reynolds that I cited in an earlier posting).

When I first learned of Pyung Ahn, it was not through GM Hwang Kee's Soo Bahk Do, but GM Duk Sung Son's "Korean Karate" as his art was called when I studied it years ago, and is the title of his book. There in the book is GM Son's rendition of a Pyong Ahn hyung, not exactly the same, but similar to, GM Hwang Kee's. My instructor explained to me that there are interpretations of what the originator, Mr. Idos/Itosu, presented. However, nowhere in GM Son's book, Korean Karate, is there mention of Idos/Itosu. I had thought until recently that all hyungs in GM Son's art were his own.

It's entirely possible that, when Grandmaster Son presented his art in the US, he simplified it not only by using virtually no Korean (so he would not say "Sang Dan Mahk Kee," but simply "high block"), but also not going into the origins of the forms (he did not call them hyungs).