Decisions....decisions....

[Mekugi]

This is really applicable to any martial art, but I thought I would through it out here and see what comes.

When is it "correct/proper/advantageous" to throw, strike or restrain/lock? When are combinations important?

Looking forward to the replies!

-Russ

[Rasputin]

I am sure this comes under the heading of "Teaching one's Grandmother how to suck eggs", but...

I would not throw someone who I did not want to injure. Random factors would most likely add up to permanent, debilitating injury otherwise.

I also wouldn't "strike" them, in the sense of punching or kicking, unless I intended their incipent demise. I might bitchslap someone to get their attention, but nothing harder.

I would restrict myself to immobilization/pain compliance if I did not want them injured.

It ramps up from there. If they are merely misguided and in need of direction, I wouldn't have any philosophical problems with spraining their joints, choking them out, or doing a little wall-to-wall counseling.

If I truly feel in danger or am protecting others from danger, I would move up the chain to include throws, some of which might end up with their hitting the ground on their head/neck. Joint destruction comes in to play at this level as well.

My bad knee being what it is, I would truly have to be in a unique set of circumstances before resorting to nage waza.



Combinations work best for me as "oh sheet" techniques. If I attempt a jointlock and it goes south, I would transition to something else which presented itself. This could include atemi, another jointlock, a throw, or whatever is handy.

[Gene Williams]

This is really applicable to any martial art, but I thought I would through it out here and see what comes.

When is it "correct/proper/advantageous" to throw, strike or restrain/lock? When are combinations important?

Looking forward to the replies!

-Russ


This is sort of an odd question.

1) In a professional situation, i.e. LEO, prison guard, mental health worker, etc. there is much more room, as well as need, for discretionary thinking. Generally, there are legal limits as to what you can do.

2)In a true "street" self-defense situation, the least of my concerns is what is correct/proper. Advantageous is the only criteria.

3)In such "street" situations, it is not as easy to "choose" or control what you do as many seem to think. If you are seriously threatened, you are going to respond viscerally, especially if you have been struck or grabbed. Talk of "controlling my ki" or "measured responses" are largely BS.

4) Being a karateka, my reflex responses are primarily atemi, to be followed by some kind of takedown or joint technique. My preference is always just to knock the piss out of the attacker.

[rgoad]

What are your goals for the combat? This is sort of David and Gene's point(s). In reality do want to capture or kill the person? Do you need to remain mobile for any additional attackers? In training/competition, do you want to submit the person or are you going to maintain a kumite/randori exercise?

It depends on how you want the combat to evolve and what you want to be doing when it's over.

[Mekugi]

This is exactly what my post wants to know...what are the goals of a melee, and what could/should be done. Widgets are open for debate!

My heiho/strategy is almost always a variant of defend, soften, control.


What are your goals for the combat? This is sort of David and Gene's point(s). In reality do want to capture or kill the person? Do you need to remain mobile for any additional attackers? In training/competition, do you want to submit the person or are you going to maintain a kumite/randori exercise?

It depends on how you want the combat to evolve and what you want to be doing when it's over.

[Musubi Dojo]

"When is it "correct/proper/advantageous" to throw"
When the throw presents itself, don't wanna have to work for it. (street)
When I want to damage/stun for an escape (street)
See above and when I attempt to set it up for educational purposes (randori)

"strike"
To stop/pause immediate aggresion, to create an opening/off balance for another techniques, to smash his face in or break his small bones . (street)
To set up a throw, distract or off balance (randori)

"restrain/lock?"
When I want to control without damaging my drunk uncle (home)
When I'm not sure what the hell is going on but want it to stop (street)
To use thug # 1 as a human shield (street)
When I decide it's time to disable arms and legs (street)

"When are combinations important?"
Always. Combinations can be used offensively to change attackers direction, up the ante or use as a human shield. (Street)

Combinations allow you a greater depth of vision in regards to individual techniques, seeing where each overlaps and perhaps developing henka. (dojo)

Is this what you were asking?

Cheers
c

[Gene Williams]

I guess my feeling is that everyone believes they can bring a fair amount of rational response/cool judgement to a sudden, serious attack on the street. I know that LEO's are trained to do this and have a huge support/backup system that assists them in maintaining control of themselves and the situation. Most of us do not have such training and support. I suspect that most of our responses are going to be far less calm, cool, and rational than we imagine, even more so if weapons are involved or if our loved ones are threatened.

[jwinch2]

Combinations work best for me as "oh sheet" techniques. If I attempt a jointlock and it goes south, I would transition to something else which presented itself. This could include atemi, another jointlock, a throw, or whatever is handy.

Dave,

From what I remember, Robert teaches the use of atemi to set up many of the locks and throws used in JJJ. How do you mix the need for use of atemi to establish kazushi with your not wanting to use atemi as a first option.

I'm not trying to start an argument here, it just seemed a little odd to me. Maybe I was not correctly interpreting what you were saying. It certainly wouldn't be the first time!
:)

Later,

[Musubi Dojo]

I guess my feeling is that everyone believes they can bring a fair amount of rational response/cool judgement to a sudden, serious attack on the street. I know that LEO's are trained to do this and have a huge support/backup system that assists them in maintaining control of themselves and the situation. Most of us do not have such training and support. I suspect that most of our responses are going to be far less calm, cool, and rational than we imagine, even more so if weapons are involved or if our loved ones are threatened.

"Men plan, God laughs..."

[Bengel]

When is it "correct/proper/advantageous" to throw, strike or restrain/lock? When are combinations important?

Your ma-ai (loosely translated 'fighting distance') is of importance here.

Impact tools: strikes, punches, kicks, etc.
Long range requires the use of weapons.
Mid-range would be mae-geri (forward kick) or oi-tsuki.
Short-range would be headbutts (atama ate), hiza-geri (knee).

The advantage with impact tools is that you can more or less control the amount of damage you do by targetting a specific area on the body. Punching a bicep will hurt but won't do a lot of damage. Striking the throat is potentially lethal.

Contact tools: throws
Short-range throws such as de-ashi-barai and kata ashi dori
Body-to-body throws such as ippon seoi nage or tani otoshi.

The advantage with throws is that if they are done well it can seriously bring the advantage in a fight or assault to your side. Someone who's on the ground will need a few seconds to get up again which gives options: running away/counter attacking/going for locks or restraints. The disadvantage is that you usually cannot control the amount of damage since this depends on the surface, body weight, (lack of) breakfall ablility, etc.


Contact tools:: locks/restraints

Short-range and body-to-body type of locks and restraints are available.

Great as they give you options: control, pain application to force people into following orders ('spread your arms'), or damage (break stuff). Disadvantage: keeping one person in control doesn't control the rest of your environment (e.g. multiple attacker senario).

I think any training any combination is important especially your favorite techniques. When you're under stress only those basic techniques that you favour will be of help since those are the non-cognative tools.

[Rasputin]

Dave,

From what I remember, Robert teaches the use of atemi to set up many of the locks and throws used in JJJ. How do you mix the need for use of atemi to establish kazushi with your not wanting to use atemi as a first option.


Because atemi is not always a strike. A strike is not always a punch.

You will notice that I did not say I would avoid atemi, only that I would not strike them if I did not intend to damage them. That leaves lots of atemi available to me.



Gene has much more experience than I in fighting, so I cannot effectively challenge his assertion that everything dissolves into chaos for most people during a melee. However, I have not yet found this to be the case for myself, personally. It may have something to do with my lifelong attempt to assert rational thinking over emotions.

[Gene Williams]

Because atemi is not always a strike. A strike is not always a punch.

You will notice that I did not say I would avoid atemi, only that I would not strike them if I did not intend to damage them. That leaves lots of atemi available to me.



Gene has much more experience than I in fighting, so I cannot effectively challenge his assertion that everything dissolves into chaos for most people during a melee. However, I have not yet found this to be the case for myself, personally. It may have something to do with my lifelong attempt to assert rational thinking over emotions.

Well, not exactly chaos. But, in a situation in which you have already been attacked/struck your reflexes, adrenalin/testosterone take over...at least initially. You simply respond in order to re-take the initiative (that translates as "save your a$$"). Generally, people will fight the way they train; that is why I grill repetition, regular training, makiwara/bag, partner work into my students and everyone else. Now, once you have re-taken control of the situation, as in having your attacker broken and bleeding or gasping for breath at your feet, rationality has the luxury of returning and suggesting that you not stomp his head until it looks like a strawberry milkshake. :bow:

[jwinch2]

Because atemi is not always a strike. A strike is not always a punch.

You will notice that I did not say I would avoid atemi, only that I would not strike them if I did not intend to damage them. That leaves lots of atemi available to me.


Thanks! It was, as I assumed, a lack of understanding of what you were getting at on my part... typical

[rgoad]

This is exactly what my post wants to know...what are the goals of a melee, and what could/should be done. Widgets are open for debate!

My heiho/strategy is almost always a variant of defend, soften, control.That’s a good question, but it assumes you always have the same needs in every situation. Generally speaking you may want to survive, but that is the only common goal. If I am out with my family I only want to get them out of the situation as quickly and safely as possible. I don’t care if I never lay a hand on anyone. If I am military or LEO, then I may need to kill or capture.

My responses will vary depending on the situation.

[CEB]

I have had 2 situations occur in my life. One about 20 years. The other a serious threat about 12 years ago.

Both times I acted. No thought pure reaction. I got lucky both times. Next time I might just pee my pants instead. You don't know what you are going to do until you do it.

You just act. There is no thinking.

Same thing when I was driving way too fast and popped a front tire on a Chevy Citation back in 86 and hit a tree. I just reacted and I tried to calmly steer out of it. It didn't work and I stopped by hitting a tree. Then got scared after it was all over.

I can't explain it you just act. Fear and thinking about strategy and crap like that happens after it is over.

[Gene Williams]

I have had 2 situations occur in my life. One about 20 years. The other a serious threat about 12 years ago.

Both times I acted. No thought pure reaction. I got lucky both times. Next time I might just pee my pants instead. You don't know what you are going to do until you do it.

You just act. There is no thinking.

Same thing when I was driving way too fast and popped a front tire on a Chevy Citation back in 86 and hit a tree. I just reacted and I tried to calmly steer out of it. It didn't work and I stopped by hitting a tree. Then got scared after it was all over.

I can't explain it you just act. Fear and thinking about strategy and crap like that happens after it is over.


Thank you. :bow:

[Rasputin]

Care to weigh in, Rory?

[Jeff C.]

Russ, you have asked for a book to be written by asking your questions in this thread. Not going to do it - I have been involved in hundreds of altercations, and I have seen that the possibilities are endless. But I will make some observations.

The more training one has up to a certain point, the more damage is caused to an assailant, sometimes well beyond what is needed to neutralize.

After a certain point, at "expert" or "skilled person with combative experience" level, the defender is able to measure his response more skillfully, usually resulting in LESS damage to the attacker.

Throws don't necessarily result in dramatic damage to an assailant, although they certainly can, and it is fairly easy to throw an assailant and control his impact with the pavement. Your intent determines the end of the throw - are you putting him down to handcuff him, or are you driving his head through the pavement?

Assailants don't always stop the attack after sustaining a severe dislocation or fracture. Thank alcohol, drugs, and adrenaline for that.

Jeff Cook

[Jeff Burger]

"When is it "correct/proper/advantageous" to throw, strike or restrain/lock? "

Depends on goal, opportunity and range.

"When are combinations important? "

Pretty much always. Think combo and if it ends before that no problem.


Jeff

[Mekugi]

Wow...good stuff. Great contributions and insight.

OK...so where does kata fit into all this?

[Jeff C.]

Wow, you ARE trying to start a fight, aren't you? ;)

For me, kata is an outstanding drill for working on a number of things - balance, refining individual technique, internal dynamics, speed, rooting, etc. I do NOT look at kata to learn strategy or specific applications for self-defense. Others do, and I certainly don't disagree with that. I do point out, at times, the myriad possibilities of bunkai when working kata with others.

Jeff Cook

[Gene Williams]

Wow...good stuff. Great contributions and insight.

OK...so where does kata fit into all this?


Kata comes between "does" and "fit." :bow:

[Mekugi]

I've heard that kata (organized forms) are a bowl in which we put lessons. In this way of thinking, kata are a teaching method as much as they are a container for learning. When we practice kata, we are not only learning how the body works (ours and other peoples), but also starting to internalize things in an organized manner. Where do your decisions come from? Could kata be considered a form of strategy?

[Gene Williams]

That is a pretty good start, Russ. :) Why do we have to do this kata thing again? It is better to do the damned things and not worry about their "purpose" or whether they are strategy or not. After someone has done them a couple of thousand times, they may be ready to ask those questions. But, by then, they won't care about asking them anymore. Once in a while, they may get dragged into an internet discussion about kata, usually with some twit that says, "Well, they don't teach you to fight. What good are they?" Hohum, Jesus Christ, and god damn... :(

[Bengel]

Along the lines of Russ's reply to his own question and, also, straight from a teacher's coursebook:

- to 'grind in' techniques both physically as mentally using a fixed structure with the purpose of training to such an extend that those techniques can be executed without having to think them through. It becomes part of an non-cognitive proces.

- to preserve the execution of techniques that is stereotypical for a particular style. This is especially true for the days when they didn't have the possibility of recording images. It was the only way of passing techniques on from one generation to an other.

- to perfect the form. As Russ stated: to internalize the skills/techniques.

- to be able to objectively judge the skills of others. A fixed form that has been drafted and well-established enables others to notice any deviations .

And it's indeed better to practise them than to talk about them.

[RA Miller]

This is really applicable to any martial art, but I thought I would through it out here and see what comes.

When is it "correct/proper/advantageous" to throw, strike or restrain/lock? When are combinations important?

Looking forward to the replies!

-Russ


Russ-
It looks like the tactical and strategic parts have been addressed- level of damage should be based on the goal. I use a Movement-Pain-Damage-Shock continuum of what I need from (or to) the threat.

So, to be unique, I'll hit it from another end. It's imperative in a conflict to do something. The person who takes the damage is the one who freezes, so you need to move.

Every move should have a benefit: it should better your situation and worsen the opponent's. Damage does this, and so does unbalancing. That makes the two grand strategies. So in each motion, you should do structural damage (hampering their ability to harm you- the primary goal of strikes and fast locks) or unbalance (stealing their power and initiative- the primary goal of throws and slow locks). Most of the styles based on throws and locks were historically aimed at an armored opponent, where unarmed damage was far more difficult.

Combinations can be artificial. As long as you continue acting and each act has a benefit, everything you do is a combination.

That said (shame, Russ, I am disappointed in thee!) the goal, especially of good jujutsu, is to get multiple effects from a single move- eg michi-zuri ni, where a simple osotgari is not just a throw but a strike to the throat combined with a kick to the back of the knee- one action resulting in a drop, a collapsed trachea and a blown knee.

Rory

[rgoad]

I've heard that kata (organized forms) are a bowl in which we put lessons. In this way of thinking, kata are a teaching method as much as they are a container for learning. When we practice kata, we are not only learning how the body works (ours and other peoples), but also starting to internalize things in an organized manner. Where do your decisions come from? Could kata be considered a form of strategy?I have wondered if kata are non-verbal cultural records. They probably are doctine lessons, hence Bruce Lee's distaste for them. But they are great ways to learn movement.

[Gene Williams]

I have wondered if kata are non-verbal cultural records. They probably are doctine lessons, hence Bruce Lee's distaste for them. But they are great ways to learn movement.

Maybe they are a type of koan.

[Jeff Burger]

Wow this answered the first question.........

"That said (shame, Russ, I am disappointed in thee!) the goal, especially of good jujutsu, is to get multiple effects from a single move- eg michi-zuri ni, where a simple osotgari is not just a throw but a strike to the throat combined with a kick to the back of the knee- one action resulting in a drop, a collapsed trachea and a blown knee."



"Kata comes between "does" and "fit." "

Perfect


Gene I read your sig and laughed. Then laughed harder cause I saw its my quote.


Russ I thought you were fishing when you asked where does kata fit in.



Jeff

[Gunyo Kogusoku]

Russ-
It looks like the tactical and strategic parts have been addressed- level of damage should be based on the goal. I use a Movement-Pain-Damage-Shock continuum of what I need from (or to) the threat.

So, to be unique, I'll hit it from another end. It's imperative in a conflict to do something. The person who takes the damage is the one who freezes, so you need to move.

Every move should have a benefit: it should better your situation and worsen the opponent's. Damage does this, and so does unbalancing. That makes the two grand strategies. So in each motion, you should do structural damage (hampering their ability to harm you- the primary goal of strikes and fast locks) or unbalance (stealing their power and initiative- the primary goal of throws and slow locks). Most of the styles based on throws and locks were historically aimed at an armored opponent, where unarmed damage was far more difficult.

Combinations can be artificial. As long as you continue acting and each act has a benefit, everything you do is a combination.

That said (shame, Russ, I am disappointed in thee!) the goal, especially of good jujutsu, is to get multiple effects from a single move- eg michi-zuri ni, where a simple osotgari is not just a throw but a strike to the throat combined with a kick to the back of the knee- one action resulting in a drop, a collapsed trachea and a blown knee.

Rory

Good post Rory. You forgot the broken wrist from the grab escape and broken nose from the uraken uchi though ;)

[Mekugi]

Russ I thought you were fishing when you asked where does kata fit in.



Jeff


I am "fishing:...for opinions. :D Being vague (more or less) has its advantages at times.

[Mekugi]

Good post Rory. You forgot the broken wrist from the grab escape and broken nose from the uraken uchi though ;)

Or the concussion from the impact of being thrown on the head or possibility of broken ribs and limbs, too. There are a number of things that could happen that one could overlook (intended or not). I am sure that I am overlooking them as well. Maybe it is truly better to think about the little things, as the big things should already be taken care of?

Anyway, what does this all say about "strategy" (how about outlook here, or perhaps mindset) and training? Should we "just do it" until we figure it out, or should the process of oyo (application) be revealed from the onset? What does this say about the riai (also called Kyoutsuurikai - an agreement, and understanding or co-operation) between you and your training partner, imaginary or otherwise?

[Bengel]

Being a newbie compared to most people in this thread, I'll venture on the fields of possible ignorance and stupidity:

Isn't 'application' revealed in jiu-jitsu kata's from the onset anyway? In karate the kata is performed individually and the context becomes clear in the bunkai (if the teacher points out who and what you are attacking and/or defending yourself from when going through the movements and techniques). In jiu-jitsu you perform the kata with an uke so the context (an atttack) is more evident from the start than in karate katas.

Of course, the context has many levels: grabbing someone's lapels with both hands and pulling tori towards uke can be considered an attack but it's usually a introduction to the real attack (a headbutt or a knee to the groin). With that knowledge it's a good strategy to point your elbow towards uke's face as a obstacle for the headbutt when you grab his wrist for a lock and to step away to remove your wedding tackle from the line of attack.


Having said that, giving away all answers away from the onset is a bad plan when teaching people. Self-discovery of the principles behind movements and techniques makes sure you have experienced why things work yourself. In which case you are more likely to appreciate and comprehend the techniques. In this case uke plays a major part in this learning proces. If you do not perform the kata according to the established routine and you drop your guard for example than a good uke will let you know by smacking you in the face (in a controled manner, preferably).

[Gunyo Kogusoku]

Or the concussion from the impact of being thrown on the head or possibility of broken ribs and limbs, too. There are a number of things that could happen that one could overlook (intended or not). I am sure that I am overlooking them as well. Maybe it is truly better to think about the little things, as the big things should already be taken care of?

Well I see it this way, before you can go on to the big things (i.e. the throw and impending boot fornication that the attacker is going to experience), you have to address the little things (i.e. the wrist grab, his response to you escaping from the wrist grab and you creating an opening for the throw).

[rgoad]

...Anyway, what does this all say about "strategy" (how about outlook here, or perhaps mindset) and training? Should we "just do it" until we figure it out, or should the process of oyo (application) be revealed from the onset? What does this say about the riai (also called Kyoutsuurikai - an agreement, and understanding or co-operation) between you and your training partner, imaginary or otherwise?I am unclear, now, about what you mean by strategy. What is the goal of your strategy? A training objective? Or a combat objective?

In the case of the former, you'll need to pick an objective based on educated guess: a known short coming or something you expect to see in a possible combat situation. In the latter case, you will develop a strategy based on the best alignment of your strengths and weaknesses with the opponent's same that allows you to attain your goal.

[comanighttrain]

Kata are wrong. Its like playing football without a ball.

[Oscar Recio]

Are you really serious?....or you don´t really understand what Kata is...

http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=222

"Some practitioners of modern martial traditions dismiss kata and shu-ha-ri as being too confining or old fashioned. In truth, this position is flawed because they misinterpret the purpose of kata. Like so many armchair experts, they have not been properly trained beyond the shoden level in kata and are commenting on a subject about which they simply are unqualified and therefore unable to comprehend. Like most observers outside the experience of deep study, they see the kata as the art itself instead of a sophisticated teaching tool that is only a surface reflection of an arts core concepts. The kata, in their flawed interpretation "is" the art. This is like the flaw of assuming a dictionary to be a complete representation of language. Unfortunately, numerous older martial traditions in Japan unintentionally reinforce this misinterpretation by overemphasizing the kata. Often with these schools significant core elements and knowledge have been lost to antiquity so that all that remains is the omote or outer shell of the kata. With nothing left but the kata to embrace, these schools often reinterpret their mokuroku (technical syllabus), making the kata the primary driving force of the ryu. When this happens the ryu inevitably degenerates into a simplistic dance where the ura and applications of the kata become of secondary focus. These traditions are effectively dead. They are like skeletons attempting to represent a total person."

Just my 2 cents.

[Gene Williams]

Are you really serious?....or you don´t really understand what Kata is...

http://www.aikidojournal.com/article.php?articleID=222

"Some practitioners of modern martial traditions dismiss kata and shu-ha-ri as being too confining or old fashioned. In truth, this position is flawed because they misinterpret the purpose of kata. Like so many armchair experts, they have not been properly trained beyond the shoden level in kata and are commenting on a subject about which they simply are unqualified and therefore unable to comprehend. Like most observers outside the experience of deep study, they see the kata as the art itself instead of a sophisticated teaching tool that is only a surface reflection of an arts core concepts. The kata, in their flawed interpretation "is" the art. This is like the flaw of assuming a dictionary to be a complete representation of language. Unfortunately, numerous older martial traditions in Japan unintentionally reinforce this misinterpretation by overemphasizing the kata. Often with these schools significant core elements and knowledge have been lost to antiquity so that all that remains is the omote or outer shell of the kata. With nothing left but the kata to embrace, these schools often reinterpret their mokuroku (technical syllabus), making the kata the primary driving force of the ryu. When this happens the ryu inevitably degenerates into a simplistic dance where the ura and applications of the kata become of secondary focus. These traditions are effectively dead. They are like skeletons attempting to represent a total person."

Just my 2 cents.


Very nice, Oscar. Thanks.

[comanighttrain]

enough of the similies, kata are out dated by modern training. i dont need the quote of anyone to help me prove this point. kata without another persons body are pointless, only through realistic trainign can the truth be found

[Oscar Recio]

You don´t really know what are you talking about.

Kata is any type of pre-arranged exercise. Maybe you don´t use the word kata but, is a fact, you use it. Boxers use, MMA pratitioners use it and you used at school to learn how to write and read man. Those pre-arranged situations of learning gives you the tools and strategies to REALLY develop the skills to deal with a one-on-one situation but...

Let´s get clear:

THE DOJO/GYM IS A LABORATORY, i hope that everybody agree. In your training you should be encountering, in a progressive approach, more and more adrenaline stress ´til reach the higher and closer level of reality. That´s it...if your training got this, ok...if not..ok...not everybody trains for the same purpose, some trains for social interaction, some for competition, for sport, for love of the MA...nothing prepares you for a real fight, nothing...your training, that will be the ideal, needs to adress a way to present "reality" factors as your skill progresses.

So we agree about first doing basic drills and then, progressively, adding more and more ingredients of "realistic" combat situations. First learning the basics of the movement and mechanics of "what you want to learn"" (shooting, climbing, drawing, flower arrangement...) and then making the basics skills evolve to adapt, first to your body structure, then to your own idea of what are you looking for and then, final step, confronting a stressfull situation from the very basic stress to the higher stress( first sparring with a friend at the dojo or ring, climbing indoor at a local competition, doing your ikebana at a local flower arrangement championship. The the same thing againt the "TIME" factor, so you need to do it in less time but with the same level of proficiency and the, just to get over the middle steps, agains the higher stressful situation (climbing outdoors in deat valley at midday with strong wind, world kick boxing competition, shooting your weapon in a "90%" real situation at a SWAT training camp with people shooting at you, doing your Ikebana at the Tokyo Flower arrangement championships....) Generally speaking and not specifically about LEO, cops and soldiers, just to have a general view, ok?.

SO when MMA practitioners are training for a fight they are USING KATA, but they don´t call it Kata they call it "training routines", BJJ guys do the same when practising how to pass the guard from different positions or how to escape from a mounted position: a guy is working with you in a SAFE enviroment with a pre-arranged situation (somebody is with you and you are trying to learn how to escape/strike/evade/choke/kick/bite/spit/......from that PRE_ARRANGED situation).

Realistic training will kill EVERYBODY too fast, or anybody would be surviving a "realistic training" when training with edged weapons or firearms?? (as per example, Arnis or Eskrima or any LEO).

The thing is that people still believe in kata as "an individual fighting with the air". This is a flawed view of the Kata; this shows a lack of understanding of what´s going IN and ON the situation of Kata study. KATA IS NOT A WAY OF FIGHTING, just tell any Karateka about it. Kata is A WAY OF KNOWLEDGE TRANSMISSION AND CODIFICATION OF THEORIES AND PRINCIPLES...no more but no less, and that is a really intrincate subject to talk about. And again, just using an example, calssical MA Kata are ALWAYS worked by pairs: look at Judo and Aikido for example, the same with Kendo (and those are forms of Gendai Budo) but the same with MMA, BJJ, Wing Tsun and so on...they have Kata but under different names.

Keep your eyes and mind wide open, is the ebst way to learn instead of claiming that your view is the right one and that´s all, because is actually what people will understand from your words, and maybe is a wrong idea about you, isn´t it?.

Respectfully,

Óscar Recio

[Gene Williams]

Oscar, I've got to hire you to say this to people when I run out of breath...and patience. Great post. Thanks. Gene

[Bengel]

Óscar, well stated!

I see that you haven't been posting on this forum very long but as far as I, and undoubtedly many others, am concerned you are a very welcome addition to this community.

[Gene Williams]

Óscar, well stated!

I see that you haven't been posting on this forum very long but as far as I, and undoubtedly many others, am concerned you are a very welcome addition to this community.


Indeed, it is posts like Oscar's that give me hope for the future of Japanese/Okinawan martial arts.

[Oscar Recio]

Thanks guys,

Actually i´m always "lurking" the board but only from time to time i write something, only when i´m able to make a "real" contribution, my experience is limited to certain aspects of the MA so there´s people who knows better about the intrincate aspects of Japanese Culture/Martial Arts/Traditions than me (Russ Ebert, Steve Delaney, Toby Threadgill....).

BTW...after my little contribution to the debate i wrote this:

http://www.aikidojournal.com/?id=1940

Basically is the same i posted here but with a different example.

Thanks again for your kind words

Respectfully,

[johan smits]

Russ,

I got a question, about what kind of kata are you talking? Kata as modern jujutsu organizations prescribe them for instance kime no kata or goshin jutsu no kata (both Kodokan judo kata) or kata from Danzan ryu jujutsu, hakko ryu (rather recently developed systems) or kata of let's say really old schools for instance Araki ryu, Sosuihitsu ryu, etc.?

I think that makes a lot of difference.

Best,

Johan Smits

[Oscar Recio]

I don´t think that´s a difference at all...if you are talking about WHY and HOW it were desgined for...well...that´s a lot of cultural, historical and conceptual context to discuss, as well as the HEIHO..if we are talking about the skeleton, teaching by pairs on a pre-arranged situation...well...that´s similar concept.

Sorry for not waiting for Russ answer.

Respectfully,

[RA Miller]

Can I take this one, Russ?

IMO, most of the modern kata were designed as a way to accurately preserve and transmit information. The older style, battlefield kata were a very specific training method.

The challenge was to train a young bushi to react reflexively to an immediate threat to life. He needed a programmed response that could reliably kill an armed and armored man. Training armor wasn't the solution, because many of the techniques centered around using the armor. Unlike swords, there was no way to make a safe training version of your hands and body. Any of the modern safety innovations (pulling strikes, the judo follow through for throws) would have been fatal instinctive flaws.

The answer was to have uke attack with a real full force, full speed, full intent attack (pre arranged at first, but later any attack) and tori would respond... then uke would have to do one thing specific for the kata to prevent death or serious injury.

In muna dori ichi, uke must jump purely with toe flexion or his collarbone is shattered. (found that out the second hardest way). In shi garami, uke must lift his right foot and fall or his knee is torn. In hane goshi, uke drops his weapon or he lands with the tsuba under his floating ribs. In kawashime, he must go limp as his head crosses the plane of his shoulder or his neck is sheared...

Modern schools have come up with modified safe versions for some of these, but my point is that before the kata were used as a way to store information, they were used as a pretty sophisticated Operant Conditioning training system.

Rory

Edited add: I did an article on this here.

http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/article.php?a=11

[johan smits]

Thanks for your answers guys,

In fact there is a huge difference between the kata of the really old schools and kata of modern jujutsu organizations. One thing that really stands out is the fact that in most (maybe all) modern kata the defender never takes the agressors role. In a lot of the older kata, the defender acts first , learns to take the superior position (in a given situation which the kata represents) and then takes tori out so to speak.
Also (the posibility) of a weapon present is always taken into account even if the kata itself uses unarmed techniques. This is not always the case with modern kata.

That is why I asked what kind of kata Russ had in mind.

best,

Johan Smits