Shotokan vs. Shito-Ryu

[LordBucket]

So who'd like to give me some insight on Shito-Ryu?

 

I've been doing Shito-Ryu for about a year now, after a couple years of Shotokan...and I'm afraid there are some things I just don't get about the forms. Say what you'd like about Shotokan being hard and linear. It may be that, but its CONSISTENT. Take a look at the forms. You're in forward stance most of the time...there's a certain 'mental state' that goes with it...a certain 'feel,' and that 'feel' stays pretty much the same, whether you're doing forms, or point sparring, or distance drills, or basics, or anything. It's not that with Shito-Ryu. It almost seems like somebody decided that they wanted to be different from Shotokan just for the sake of being different, rather than having a good reason for making changes.

 

What's the rational behind the change of stances throughout the first five kata? Making just about everything into a cat stance doesn't really make a lot of sense to me. Sure...the original Shotokan kata include such logical things as blocking an attack without countering and then immediatly turning your back on them, but the Shito-Ryu versions don't correct this, but they add a bizzarre quality to the forms by having you constantly move towards your opponent in cat stance...an odd thing if ever I've seen one. If it were consistent with the rest of the 'feel' of Shito-Ryu that would be one thing...but when we practice basics, it's 90% forward stance. When we practice point sparring, 100%. Distance drills? 100%. Why cat stance in the kata alone? It just doesn't 'match.' And what about the use of shiko-dachi instead of kemo-dachi? Horse stance with feet out at 45 degree angles instead of parallel to one another. Kemodachi just doesn't seem to be used in Shito-Ryu. Why? The only reason I can think of is that it's harder to do and requries more ankle flexibility. That seems like a really bad reason to make a change like that. 'Oh this is too hard, so we'll do it this way instead.'

 

From the training I've seen, Shito-Ryu seems virtually identical to Shotokan except for the changes in the kata, and the changes in the kata don't make sense to me, and aren't really reflected much in the rest of the style. It's not even just that somebody decided that Shotokan was too rigid and 'hard' for them and decided to soften it. There are places in the forms where Shotokan is more hard and more linear, but there are also quite a few instances in which the Shotokan version of the forms is softer and more rounded than the Shito-Ryu version. Take Heian vs. Pinan Yondan. The Shotokan opening is a slow, tension movement, the Shito-Ryu version is a fast block. Later in the same form, the same thing occurs. After the nose bash on the first kiai, the shotokan kata is again a slow warding-off motion, vs. the fast, hard block of Shoto-Ryu. In Godan there are places where Shotokan uses a cat stance, but Shito-Ryu just has you stand there in natural stance.

 

So what's the deal?

 

Bucket Man

 

----------------------------------------------

 

http://www.freewebs.com/ocmartialarts

[Shorin Ryuu]

First of all, there is already a huge topic about Shito-Ryu: http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=9254&start=0

 

The main flaw in your argument is that you seem to assume the founders of Shito-Ryu (Mabuni Kenwa and Shinpan Shiroma) trained in Funakoshi's Shotokan before they founded their respective versions of Shito-Ryu, but this is entirely untrue. They both studied under Higaonna Kanryo and Itosu Anko. Itosu was influenced heavily by Matsumura Sokon (who was influenced heavily by Okinawan ti and Chinese martial arts) and Higaonna Kanryo (who was extremely influenced by Chinese martial arts). Note that Higaonna's method of fighting was very different than what you see in Goju-Ryu, which his student Chojun Miyagi founded.

 

Edit: Regardless of the first assumption, this is more important: Anyway, remember that rather than Shito-Ryu being changed from Shotokan, it is Shotokan that broke away from its Okinawan karate and Chinese origins. Japanese Shotokan is markedly different than what you would see in any traditional Okinawan arts, but I'm not going to discuss the merits or demerits of this (I am biased). Funakoshi stated on several occasions that his karate that he taught, even while he was alive, changed so much from what he originally learned from in Okinawa (and taught in Japan). Some of this was his emphasis, and some of it was his senior students' changes.

 

"Accordingly, even fewer realize that karate in Tokyo today is almost completely different in form from what was earlier practiced in Okinawa.

 

A few years ago I took my students to the Butoku-den in Kyoto to participate in a dedicatory martial arts demonstration...when it came time for their demonstrations, I was even more surprised for their so-called karate was unlike karate. Deeply embarrassed, I felt I should apologize to the other observers. It was the karate that I, who have devoted many years in the art, could not recognize as such."

 

~Gichin Funakoshi 1943 In Karate-Do, Way of My Life

 

Also, in the same vein, he also mentioned that "It is impossible to speak of in the same breath the karate that is practiced in Tokyo today and the karate that was practiced 10 years ago". I believe that was in 1936.

 

"Times change, and karate must change. Hoping to see karate become popular among high school students...I set about simplifying the kata as much as possible"

 

Those are all Funakoshi quotes.

 

Just something to think about.

[John G]

LordBucket.

 

Many of the answers you seek are in the Bunkai of the Kusanku kata from which the Heian/Pinan katas were developed. If you wish to go that extra step take a look at the Chinese quan fa White Crane and Tiger forms to gain even further insight behind the Bunkai.

 

Shorin Ryuu,

 

You guys get to go to all the interesting places, us ITF guys can only look forward to a trip to Pyongyang (North Korea)

 

...

[Shorin Ryuu]

 

I think I'll keep my distance from Pyongyang...

[BudoPunjabi]

I think shotokan ( not saying other styles are not) is great for developing zanshin....or mental focus. The deep stances and somewhat powerful movements help develop energy flows around the body and help the person exert mental energy with each technique.

 

Having said that, I think all techniques should always be excercised with zanshin and kime.

 

In Budo

[Drunken Monkey]

ok, maybe it's time i asked a few questions but before i do, a few notes about myself.

 

i practice wing chun and have trained in choy li fut and hung gar briefly.

 

as you know, there is a lot of stance training in all three styles, as there is in all chinese styles but not once are we told to fight in the low stances.

 

the first thing we do every training session is half an hour of stance training in which we sit in stances for five minutes at a time before changing.

 

after this we kinda do a slow changing stance exercise where we change stances slowly, like a dance for about ten minutes non-stop.

 

the point of this is purely to strengthen our base (legs).

 

when it comes to forms pravtise, we are told to practise them in three stages: accuracy, strength, speed, before attempting to combine all three but again, we are told that the forms are not for fighting but for training the body to do the moves and build strength.

 

what i want to ask is, just whatare you told in your kata training?

[SaiFightsMS]

You didn't say what branch of shito ryu you were speaking of.