Basics - What are they really?

[cejames]

Hi, Forum Folks:

This may have been covered elsewhere but can't find a topic specifically addressing this term or set of terms. So, here goes, comments and conversations please:

One of my pet peeves is reference to basics in a martial system. That term and its suppositions when used tend to misinform folks as to true fundamental aspects of any martial system. Basics as it is used is too limited in scope. So, I proposed long ago thinking of basics only as actually basic techniques which Isshinryu teach as the upper and lower basics. I posed that all systems of martial practice must consist of two elements, call them yin-yang or in-yo, which provide fledgling practitioners the foundation that supports all martial systems. This is what I wrote:

Fundamentals or "basics" in Isshinryu are the upper and lower exercises which are comprised of some exercises and both hand and foot techniques. Basics is the word provided by Americans and in my opinion are negative in their connotations. Giving folks the impression once you learn them well enough to move on to kumite and kata you can forget them completely (unless you plan on becoming a teacher, etc.).

Tatsuo didn't create the basics of Isshinryu. One of his most senior practitioners put them together and it was taught to students, both Okinawan and American.

"A basic is an introduction. A fundamental is a foundation. A fundamental is a premise, idea, or fact that an entire system arises from and is based on. A fundamental determines the shape of what arises from it, much as a foundation of a house dictates its layout. A basic is how you introduce people you are teaching to the system. It is a beginning concept, often simplified to assist learning. If a fundamental is the foundation, a basic is the front door to enter the system." - Marc MacYoung - Secrets of Effective Offense - Chapter Eight: Blocking and Deflecting - page 124.

You practice basics so you can ingrain fundamentals. The novice, beginner, works on the gross movement; advanced practitioners focus on different aspects, making little tweaks and adjustments. Basics can be learned in five minutes, but fundamentals can take years to fully understand.

I would be grateful and interested in your views on this aspect of my thoughts on basics, fundamentals and of course principles as follows:

Principles: A compilation of fundamental principles that guide the individual martial artist to the ideal actions. The basic set of principles provide a path to martial power open to all martial systems, a path that crosses all boundaries of style without compromising the techniques of the original discipline.

"Principles of martial systems are, or should be, the common denominators between anatomy, physics, kinesiology, biomechanics and psychology in the context of martial arts. They guide us and teach us understanding of ourselves, our bodies and how they/we relate to others and to movement in general." - Steven J. Pearlman, The Book of Martial Power

Respectfully Submitted,

Charles J.

[Hack Foo Doe]

I would like to add that when all the basics come together even without the addition of Kata one can provide skills like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4wtQ...ature=youtu.be

this is awesome and proper Ole Skool

[Webmaster]

I would like to add that when all the basics come together even without the addition of Kata one can provide skills like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4wtQ...ature=youtu.be

this is awesome and proper Ole Skool

LOL, that was... interesting.

[CEB]

That is one word for it.

[Tripitaka of AA]

I'm not well versed on UK Karateka, but these chaps are well known and the video looks like old VHS to me... I wonder if Ken can provide more details (Nothing mentioned on the YouTube details about when the performance took place). See the wiki details on
Karate Union of Great Britain,which lists Bob Poynton and
Terry O'Neill.

As a casual observer, I'd say that it was an interesting demo, that needed someone from a theatrical background to fine tune it for a performance. Rather like watching some world-class boxers trying to present a Sports show on TV, without having had any rehearsals. They obviously know their stuff, but they aren't entertainers.

[CEB]

They are legends in British Shotokan. Very early students of Enoeda Sensei. Terry O'Neill's Fighting Arts Magazine was a great publication. I have an interview they did with Chinen Sensei on the wall of my office.

Others I remember were Andy Sherry, Billy Higgins and Bob Rhodes. Mr. Sherry was a smaller guy who had a reverse punch that was blindingly fast. That was a good Shotokan dojo.

[Abbax8]

That was fun !

Dennis

[CEB]

Zenkutsu Dachi

619-01719825w.jpg

[Hack Foo Doe]

I'm not well versed on UK Karateka, but these chaps are well known and the video looks like old VHS to me... I wonder if Ken can provide more details (Nothing mentioned on the YouTube details about when the performance took place). See the wiki details on
Karate Union of Great Britain,which lists Bob Poynton and
Terry O'Neill.

As a casual observer, I'd say that it was an interesting demo, that needed someone from a theatrical background to fine tune it for a performance. Rather like watching some world-class boxers trying to present a Sports show on TV, without having had any rehearsals. They obviously know their stuff, but they aren't entertainers.

I'm actually attending a seminar with Sensei Terry in the Fall so will ask him directly when this was.

It just shows regards to basics HOW effective they can be. Kata at times is just a handful of basic techniques thrown together to aid practice and dare I say nothing more than that

[TonyU]

And here I thought kata contained the core principles, concepts, and tactics of the style. Silly me.

[RickMatz]

The kihon waza of the aikido style I used to practice, Yoshinkan, primarily taught two things: the movements taught the student to move with whole body power, and the movements were the pieces from which the named techniques were built.

[Mekugi]

Here's something to kick around.
In my time in the martial arts there is a theme that keeps repeating itself, so much that once you think of it you cannot unthink it every time you are doing something "advanced". It pops out at you everywhere. Unless you are doing something totally sport oriented, where conditioning naturally follows the play of the game, it's not that obvious.

Here goes:

"Kihon are the oku." or "the basic techniques are the secret/advanced/high level techniques".

That's why they are started with first and foremost.

[Chunmonchek]

My take on things...

Training is training...its all about the Training.

IMO,before the major Ryuha, when teaching was mostly with a few personal students, training was what it was, with little need to categorize and label everything. My understanding that early Okinawan Goju training (pre-1960) was a lot of "do what I do, and we will fix what we feel needs to be fixed". There were no rank restrictions on what could be learned, so if you could keep up you did.

When Ryuha grew and the masses needed instruction, the pedagogy of the arts seemed to require labels and categorization. And it was/is probably helpful...if kept in perspective.

When teaching, I don't really use the terms "basic" and "fundamental" as nouns. If I use them, they are used descriptively, as there is basic breathing, basic stance, basic movement, basic techniques, basic two-person training...and what is basic may change at each level of development. To me, basic is the starting point for future development and cultivation. So, a brand new white belt may learn a basic punch, basic block, basic kata, and basic 2-man, etc... , and a brand new yudansha may learn the basic punch, basic block, basic kata and basic 2-man for a yudansha...and so on. I guess for me, basics are the starting point on a continuum of cultivation and development.

Its all about the training...

Chris

[cejames]

My take on things...

Training is training...its all about the Training.

IMO,before the major Ryuha, when teaching was mostly with a few personal students, training was what it was, with little need to categorize and label everything. My understanding that early Okinawan Goju training (pre-1960) was a lot of "do what I do, and we will fix what we feel needs to be fixed". There were no rank restrictions on what could be learned, so if you could keep up you did.

When Ryuha grew and the masses needed instruction, the pedagogy of the arts seemed to require labels and categorization. And it was/is probably helpful...if kept in perspective.

When teaching, I don't really use the terms "basic" and "fundamental" as nouns. If I use them, they are used descriptively, as there is basic breathing, basic stance, basic movement, basic techniques, basic two-person training...and what is basic may change at each level of development. To me, basic is the starting point for future development and cultivation. So, a brand new white belt may learn a basic punch, basic block, basic kata, and basic 2-man, etc... , and a brand new yudansha may learn the basic punch, basic block, basic kata and basic 2-man for a yudansha...and so on. I guess for me, basics are the starting point on a continuum of cultivation and development.

Its all about the training...

Chris

You make a very good point yet it seems that how an individual perceives "basics" varies with each person where one may use it as you suggest while another may perceive it as something you do at the beginning but then once done you lose it for the more exciting stuff.

So, when someone suggests you go back and work on the "basics" it can, depending on perceptions and interpretations, cause resentment, i.e. I did that so why do I have to go back and do that again?, which in and of itself brings up other issues on what and how long you practice any given thing.

This speaks to your reference of how the larger group teachings brought about changes that may or may not have benefited marital arts, etc.

It can go on and on with each thread when pulled leaving another thread that needs to be pulled.

Regards,

Charles J.