|
Post by garage on Jun 15, 2014 10:06:34 GMT
What would make someone keep writing this at the bottom of lots of threads without explaination? Does not share understanding.
So google takes you to Jesse the cunning linguist from Sweden who says that Uke means recieving, which makes sense when you do Aikido there are no blocks and they still keep referring to Uke.
Changing the path of something makes a lot more sense than stopping it dead. Most of the the uke's have a preparing movement which normally feels like a grab as the movement makes a break.
In karate they may not be blocks, in real life there is, when it better to survive, to train these reflexes out altogether may be folly.
|
|
|
Post by Allan Shepherd on Jun 15, 2014 18:51:53 GMT
Tori is giving...hence when practicing Judo the exponents are referred to as Uke and Tori.
Best Regards Allan
|
|
|
Post by jimlukelkc on Jun 15, 2014 20:23:59 GMT
There are blocks,checks,traps, re-directing, tai-sabaki etc, it is just that the traditionally taught end of the block is not the block ( mostly ) .
|
|
|
Post by daveb on Jun 16, 2014 7:40:42 GMT
Blocks stop attacks from hitting. Differentiating between obstructing and redirecting is a level of semantics beyond what is necessary.
The enemy is our own fixation with labels and other tiny details. We try to box everything in a way which limits our understanding and thus our ability.
The traditional forearm blocks do work as forearm blocks, but that is not all they do and depending on the context it may be their least useful aspect.
Suggesting that their are no blocks in karate is just as limiting as it is liberating.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Jun 16, 2014 10:25:25 GMT
Blocks stop attacks from hitting. Differentiating between obstructing and redirecting is a level of semantics beyond what is necessary. The enemy is our own fixation with labels and other tiny details. We try to box everything in a way which limits our understanding and thus our ability. The traditional forearm blocks do work as forearm blocks, but that is not all they do and depending on the context it may be their least useful aspect. Suggesting that their are no blocks in karate is just as limiting as it is liberating. Agreed. Take Age-uke in point. Traditionally taught as a a crossing-hands preparation and then a fore-arm block whist stepping forward. Each phase of this movement should be trained with blocking-style application and each would be valid in different scenarios..However there are three really important fighting principles for close range violence that are missed if you only focus your training on the function of the secondary block as a block: - Use both your hands, if available: You will be dealing with a flurry of blows, flinch response and cover up are the most high-probability response to reduce damage. Especially if you focus your training so that it becomes your natural flinch reaction
- create the opportunity to control: the transition between the "primary block" to the "secondary Block", just as your hands cross over, creates the opportunity to wrap your opponents attacking arm which prevents the repeated use of your opponents main weapon. This is based on the obvious assumption that your opponent is i)not attacking you at range and ii) not going to strike you just once and then stop;
- Take the initiative: We train to step-forward with Age-Uke, which doesn't really make sense from a long range blocking perspective, however at close range your opponent will be attacking with momentum and if you step back, he will continue to have the opportunity to keep you on the back foot raining blows on you... so having lost the initiative, obviously as he is attacking you, stepping forward having trapped his lead arm breaks that continuum and if he doesn't fall down in a heap will give you the initiative and enable you to continue to dominate as you follow up.
It is in my opinion that many of the "fundamental" techniques taught in Karate are designed to cope with the uncertainty principle. Given the ferocity and unpredictability of real violence each basic "blocking" technique provides a range of options that support the three fighting principles I outlined above. If I had used uchi-uke as the example, rather than Age-uke, those three fundamentals would have been met, albeit with a different emphasis (shifting to the side rather than driving forward.. for instance).
|
|
|
Post by ruestir on Jun 16, 2014 12:58:19 GMT
Another interesting way to teach the 4 basic blocks is as defenses against being grabbed by the wrist. If you consider a cross hand grab and perform each of the rising(age uke), inside-out(chudan uke) and lower(gedan barai uke) blocks by rotating 90 degrees to the outside of the attacker, it helps to solidify the proper feeling of how the "block" and stance connection should be. You can do the same thing with a same side wrist grab utilizing the outside-in(soto uke) block performed in the same way. In this way they are more counters than blocks, and has the additional benefit of helping the student get the idea of putting themselves in a safer position away from the hand that will most likely be trying to hit them.
Other benefits: 1. Helps the student with the idea of maintaining contact with the attacker 2. Teaches student to get off the attackers power line 3. Maintaining contact makes transitioning to locks, holds, throws or striking counters more effective.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2014 12:56:08 GMT
What would make someone keep writing this at the bottom of lots of threads without explaination? What would make someone create a forum post instead of messaging me? I have explanation this numerous times in numerous different posts, but for those of you who have missed them:- There are a few things to consider Firstly “Blocks” do not work, or more accurately, they only working in the dojo when a) Your partner attacks from far enough away and b) you know what attack is coming. In a live situation at a realistic “in your face“ distance when you don’t know what attack is coming it is impossible to “block” unless you are a) Derren Brown or b) you are Spiderman and can use you “Spidey sense” to detect what is coming. Watch this video and then asks yourself which makes more sense, that Gedan bari is a take down, or that it is a “block” designed to stops kicks which would never have hit you anyway. youtu.be/6dDIJN7647sWhich makes more sense, that Shuto Uke is used as a “block” and that your hikite hand is "protecting your sternum", or that the Hikite hand is puling your opponent onto a neck strike? youtu.be/71x83iZKB2gSecondly, when Anko Itosu introduced karate into the Japanese and Okinawan School syllabus he realised that the true purpose of these movements where too dangerous to give to children (e.g. neck strike for Shuto Uke mentioned above). Therefore, in order to hide their true purpose he disguised them by telling children they were blocks. Unfortunately, it was this children’s version that became popular and spread around the world, hence you now have generations of karate instructors teaching people to “block” kicks with Gedan Barai and utter such nonsense. Thirdly, explain these movements as “blocks” only gives us an explanation of what the “blocking” hand is doing, it offers no explanation for what the non striking hand is doing. Once you realise that these “blocks” are in fact attacking strikes, takedowns, arm bars, throws etc etc these explanations give us a purpose and a reason to explain what the non striking hand is doing. Again, ask yourself which of these is most likely to make sense, the explanation that it is a “block” which only explains what one hand is doing, or that it is a strike, joint lock or takedown which xplains what both hands are doing? Common sense tells us to accept the explanation which explains what all the parts of the body are doing, not the explanation of what just one “blocking” hand is doing, and explaining away the other hand with such nonsense as “chambering it on your hip” or “protecting your solar plexus.” Unfortunately when you have spent decades teaching the children’s version of Karate, when someone comes along and points out your folly it can either be liberating and infuse people with a passion to re-examine their karate, or it can make them realise they have been living in a fantasy world and they recoil, sweep common sense under the rug and go back to doing this. youtu.be/xiZ9qJB4CSkand this youtu.be/wB-I3gXxBPAinstead of this youtu.be/IsXfjHkZmLcIf your instructor is teaching “blocks” then they are a) teaching you the children’s version of karate, b) have no understanding of the realities of civilian violence* and c) don’t even have a basic understanding of the art they claim to teach. Remember, Karate isn't a "martial" art. Martial means warlike (From Mars the God of war). martial arts comes from the battlefield. Karate doesn't come from the battlefield, it is a PRAGMATIC civilian self defence system.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Davis on Jun 25, 2014 15:00:32 GMT
Ok, whilst I don't disagree with (much of) anything said above I do have to point out the YOUR (and much of my) karate may be practiced as a pragmatic self defence system and that may well have been it origin BUT the reality is that much modern "classical" karate isn't either practiced or intended that way.
Many of the students who practice this style of karate are not bothered that it is not "street" ready or pragmatic, they study as a sport or a hobby or an exercise class or even as art for arts sake and there is nothing wrong with that (as long as they understand that). It may well be that this has developed from "kids" karate (although, whilst I have use this line myself in the past, that's not really the whole truth) but that is not to say that there are not some very impressive practitioners of what had become an adult art form (albeit a very stylised one) and I wish I had some of their physical skills and dedication.
The only bit that really bothers me is when people promote classical "art" form Karate as "street ready self defence" and that their students don't understand there is a difference, other than that I'm happy that people are doing what they want to do (not that I get a vote anyway ).
I think it would be fairer to say that "in it's origin Karate WAS a pragmatic civilian defence system", some of us may still train that way, or have gone back to training that way after many years of "classical" training however that is not what modern karate is and despite all our complaining (and I'm as guilty of that as any ) the majority of students do practice modern stylised Karate-Do.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Jun 25, 2014 15:45:58 GMT
Hey Bert, Way to start a great debate and discussion! My take on the saying is that it’s a bit shallow in perspective. First off of course there are blocks in Karate…Duh! But the term Uke is used in place of Geiku for a reason. Karate blocks by nature may be seen as redirecting a blow, the amount of “ARM SMASHING HULK MOVE” will be different from person to person and style to style. I remember training with Del Phillips and he blocked and “moved” your arm in such a way as you ended up punching the roof and not his head, and with so little power that your arm was not hurting, but his counter rocked you so hard you really rethought the whole attack him thing…even when he was asking you to attack him. I have also trained with people that thumped your arm so hard and did not move it half as much…same change in mental state however. Like many of our Karate terminologies I am going to guess we borrowed it, hell we borrowed the PJ’s we train in why not a simple term. And the borrowing would have come by way of Judo! Funakoshi and many of the early Karate masters were wooed by Kano and they ended up adopting a lot of things….like Dan levels (and Kyu), the uniforms, Japanese terms and tournament structures and ideas. Let me say that Karate does have blocks, but those blocks can be strikes, throws, deflections or whatever your mind can make of them. The only thing that I say to my students and juniors is that they must be able to duplicate this in a “real” situation and not just when in the Dojo.
|
|
|
Post by daveb on Jun 27, 2014 7:10:51 GMT
Firstly “Blocks” do not work, or more accurately, they only working in the dojo when a) Your partner attacks from far enough away and b) you know what attack is coming. In a live situation at a realistic “in your face“ distance when you don’t know what attack is coming it is impossible to “block” unless you are a) Derren Brown or b) you are Spiderman and can use you “Spidey sense” to detect what is coming. Watch this video and then asks yourself which makes more sense, that Gedan bari is a take down, or that it is a “block” designed to stops kicks which would never have hit you anyway. This idea that blocks don't work in real life is utter nonsense. It was one of the claims that put me off Iain Abernathy's work when he first started writing articles in UK magazines. He would (just like you have done) state that blocks don't work then demo an application starting with a block. Thankfully he seems to have moved away from such absolutes to a more balanced viewpoint. Your gedan barrai clip actually shows two applications of the block, the first is the opening movement, blocking high with the forearm and pulling the attacking wrist down (in this case with a pivot). Understand that it's not that I think you are wrong about the variety of applications available, but that you have focussed on one application of one gedan barrai in one kata. Application of techniques is dependent on the context of the movement in the given kata. There are many kata with many different contexts. As to it being impossible to actually utilize a block, well there's no nice way of saying that's just plain wrong, so here it is: that's just plain wrong. If you look honestly at your pragmatic drills you will see blocks all over them. The issue with traditional (so called) karate and blocks is much more about realistic training. As you point out, starting a kick that the student has to step in to make contact with, is not a useful way to train. Drills need to be in the appropriate range, there should be a continuous element to add momentum and elements of randomness and gradually adding more freedom of attack and natural habitual attack movements should do the trick.
|
|
|
Post by garage on Jul 11, 2014 10:55:52 GMT
To quote from Funkoshi's 21 principals "Do the kata correctly, the real fight is a different matter." which makes the whole discussian a little mute?
|
|
|
Post by ruestir on Jul 11, 2014 17:04:34 GMT
To quote from Funkoshi's 21 principals "Do the kata correctly, the real fight is a different matter." which makes the whole discussian a little mutemoot? FTFY Why does it make the discussion moot? If you've ever heard of the idea that you "play the way you practice" I think it's an important exercise to discuss the potential of all techniques learned and not get stuck in label disease.
|
|
|
Post by garage on Jul 12, 2014 19:06:17 GMT
At the start was from Mr no blocks in Karate says that because you step forward it is impractical, and cites Mr Cumberland wrestling to justify why the kata have no blocks. This quote would explain why the kata's are not real but a method of practice.
FTFY sarcasm right, play the way you practice, I suppose this nit picking detail is why so few people bother to post here. I notice this is a common to many karate forums where karate gets lost in the detail.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Jul 14, 2014 18:15:01 GMT
Hey Gang,
First off I think most of us who have used Karate on the "Mythical and mystic street" that everyone talks about will have to say that blocking in Karate DOES exist...or they wont be able to answer because their jaws are wired shut!
I think that suggesting a technique does not actually exist shows one of two things, first a complete misunderstanding of the technqiues or a complete inability to verbalize the proper Idea you are having...which the second is normally something I am guilty of.
Not only do I fell blocks exist and that I have had to use them, but they can be a great tool and altered slightly to use them in different ways. The variety of Karate is really its strongest aspect and its biggest draw back in some ways.
|
|