|
Post by th0mas on Sept 14, 2012 9:38:20 GMT
There is a chap on Iain Abernethy's forum who has submitted a range of Bunkai videos to demonstrate his interpretation of Enpi kata. I think he has done an excellent job... and top respect for putting it out there... iainabernethy.co.uk/content/enpiwanshu-video-bunkaiWhat do you all think?
|
|
|
Post by makoto on Sept 14, 2012 14:12:28 GMT
The bunkai is well thought out. Some of it seems pretty complex to me. Which I find a bit of a problem. But, I guess if you do it enough times, and make it an automatic response it could work for you. I am just thinking nervousness, a resistant opponet, and the chances of it not going to plan are things that need to be considered. But, many of his ideas are very good.
|
|
|
Post by malk103 on Sept 15, 2012 20:13:25 GMT
Yep, some excellent ideas there. I had to re-adjust some of my thinking the other day though when sparring/grappling with a seasoned Army bloke who is taller and bigger then me, some of the take down arm locks just didn't work or I hadn't had enough weetabix! The Bunkai should fit the attacker and some of the more complex moves may not have worked on a larger person, there was also one bit where he had his forearm in front of the attackers mouth - i'm sure a good bite may have him rethink it.
All in all though an excellent set of vids, it takes a lot to put yourself online and open to critics, the main thing is the closeness of the Bunkai and not some of the distant basic stuff we have seen. It makes you realise how fantastic the Kata really are when you can start getting hundreds of applications from them, not all in sequence and some overlapping sequences.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Sept 16, 2012 12:58:43 GMT
First let me say I totally respect anyone that takes the time to make a video of themselves and has the "balls" to post them. its very hard to do this and I dont want my next comments to really be harsh because I really do respect the hell out of this guy for doing these....
But, the Bunkai was based on what I would think is false assumptions, reaching for ideas and I just dont see them as being the intent of the Kata.
He spends a great deal of time suggesting the first move as a wrist lock of some sort, but you have to switch it from a Kamae a great deal to accomplish this, Now I know that some will say that you need to expand your thinking to see this...but I simply dont think its worth making that huge change to accommodate that move, it changes the very nature of the original move.
The way Empi was taught to me by the masters I trained with was that this was a ready stance that was used to start the kata by sucking the attacker in close for the true first move.
I see how if you change the movement to a wrist lock that the first "real" move makes sense, I do...but I am a bit of a purist at heart and dont like to change Kata to suite a application, I prefer to see what the actual move could be suggesting and a few of his were stretches.
Implications of a Kata are such that you can draw literally hundreds of applications from a single move.....if you had the time, but it also, to me, should not include changing that movement to accommodate your idea. The hands should not move that far away from the body then circle back to the side.
Again, Kudos to him for putting it on line for us to view, but while I respect it and probably will work some of his ideas with students, I just dont see them as being grounded in the original intent of the Kata.
good job...just dont personally agree with his changes.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Sept 16, 2012 18:53:22 GMT
Hi James, ...and this is why we have a forum to discuss our views, especially when they are different... which for us may be true in this case :-) I am not a kata purest, certainly in terms of having to make tortuously unrealistic bunkai applications to fit the form of the kata, which has in all probability changed (for stylistic not realistic reasons) over the many years, and many generations, from the originators intent... So personally when I interpret kata I like to follow some simple rules, which are: - I assume the techniques include follow-through, in other words it incorporates the full range of motion of the technique even when in reality it would be much shorter (i.e. a basic punch or a golf-swing).
- Secondly the focus of the kata should be the transition movement not the end techniques or stances, i.e. horse-stance is representing dropping your weight to facilitate the application.
- The third is you are fighting the person in front of you, changes in direction or changes in aspect are in relation to that opponent not others... (there has been a lot written about this elsewhere ... happy to elaborate if requested)
- The fourth is that the kata is trying to demonstrate fighting principles with a range of techniques to illustrate the principles as an example. This then means that most kata's have a theme and tell a story. (OK I may have lost a few people by this point)
- ..and fifth, The kata is showing something that you would not pick up if you just trained to punch and kick...
So this is why I really like what has been shown in the video series. His interpretation has a theme (attacking/incapacitating the arm to facilitate a finishing technique), It tells a story (If you are unable to head-hunt, try controlling and finishing via arm lock and if that doesn't work here are a range of alternatives to attack the arms and then dominate). It has a signature technique (what he calls a cornerstone technique) and he has grown the bunkai implication from that. It also fits the form rather well and meets my personal criteria for Bunkai interpretation (as I outlined above). Finally if you accept the theme then you have a whole raft of alternative interpretations for techniques which don't change the underlying principle of the kata. For example if you go with your interpretation of the kamae as a pull then a strike rather than directly into an arm lock, the underlying principle of the kata does not change...
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Sept 17, 2012 12:26:03 GMT
Hey Tom, Yes, this is why we have forums. I totally respect your point of view so dont take this the wrong way....I dont agree 100% with what you are saying...and that is the lovely part of the forum...as a "Sherif" in these part I really enjoy a disagreement, but keeping it respectful I will reply to your post the best I can...and if I sound like an ass, let me appologize upfront...I will do my best to respectfully say I dont agree with alot of your points..... I am not a kata purest, certainly in terms of having to make tortuously unrealistic bunkai applications to fit the form of the kata, which has in all probability changed (for stylistic not realistic reasons) over the many years, and many generations, from the originators intent... By FAR I am not a Kata Purest, if by that you mean someone that eats the tired old Bunkai sold to us by the "Masters" who grew up doing tournament Karate and now are playing catch up ....and doing a bad job of it at that. I often do my Kata and draw from my own days working the door at bars and getting into street fights. I also see alot of Judo in the Kata from my old Judo days and YES I see the applications for joint locks, hell I took Aikido as well so Wrist locks and arm locks are like second nature to me. But I often think that some of these "Non-purests" See what they want to see in a Kata. If you said count the groin punches or eye pokes in "ANY KATA" and said to count them I swear they would find a number of ways to add them in. Just because they "Could be their" does not mean they should! So personally when I interpret kata I like to follow some simple rules, which are: Totally respect your interpretation skills, that being said I feel that we all have to realize that interpreting the Katas is kind of like when you Christians (Note, I am not pointing directly at you this is mostly for comic seasoning) Look at the bible. I have sat down with souther evangelists that had one view and Anglicans that had another...its the same damn book! Kata is alot like this, you have one bloke say, First move in Empi is a wrist lock, second guy says its a knee strike to take a guy down, next says its a down block and ducking motion......and all will fight to the end saying the other person is stupid and the next thing you know its a bloody Holy war over Kata applications...IT CAN BE ALL OF THEM OR NONE OF THEM! Kata interpretation is a dangerous thing man, if you live and die by your thoughts on it then you never see the other applications. I tell my students to relax and just do the Kata and we can introduce a few implacations down the road. I assume the techniques include follow-through, in other words it incorporates the full range of motion of the technique even when in reality it would be much shorter (i.e. a basic punch or a golf-swing). Good point. I try and tell the students that the Techniques may be altered slightly to show power and the technique may be shorter or longer than an aplication we are doing. For instance the Down block/Step punch in Heian Shodan may only be a down block to reverse punch. it can be a throw to a downward reverse punch but to get the hips into it we do a step punch. It could also be a down block to a kick, the guy steps back and you follow up with a reverse punch...and the target varies. Follow through or even shortening up or lengthening the movement will change based on the application/implacation you select for that move. So, in this case I kind of agree. Secondly the focus of the kata should be the transition movement not the end techniques or stances, i.e. horse-stance is representing dropping your weight to facilitate the application. I dont disagree, but I think that this is a bit narrow in its view. The stance can be the final movement and the new age fancy thinking often gets in the way of just doing the damn movements as a whole. Moving from a front stance to a side stance can be the start of a hip/shoulder throw, but it can also be a end movement for a stepping punch or blocking move. IE Bassai Dai has the Kiba dachi and three augmented down blocks....I do believe that stance is an end techniques....you are not transitioning during the blocking....Heian sandan uses the turn to Kiba dachi as a shoulder/hip throw or a spin and elbow strike while protecting neck/punching back (I like the choke defense)...end movement to facilitate throw. I have been told in some seminars that no stance is perminent its all transitionary....but I disagree ans say thats new age mombo jumbo that gets in the way and mucks up the "JUST DO IT" mentality that I like. Its like my wife and i were agrguing the other day about a color for painting ...she says Peet Moss and I say Green, she said Heather or some such thing....Green...She says Manits....Green....Hunter....Green..... For gods sake this is a fighting art not some philosophy course! ;D The third is you are fighting the person in front of you, changes in direction or changes in aspect are in relation to that opponent not others... (there has been a lot written about this elsewhere ... happy to elaborate if requested) I agree 100%. WHile I am not one of those guys that says...."Heian Shodan" You are fighting Four guys....Bullocks! You are fighting one guy at any given time from different angles! Heain Shodan, a guy attcks from the left side, you "block" and counter. DONE! a guy attacks you from the right side...you "block" get your hand caught and get out of it, strike and counter. Nuff said. I hate when people say you are doing such and such Kata...this many people attacking....shows they have NEVER been attacked by more than one person before...and probably never been attacked by one person before. The fourth is that the kata is trying to demonstrate fighting principles with a range of techniques to illustrate the principles as an example. This then means that most kata's have a theme and tell a story. (OK I may have lost a few people by this point) Did not lose me at all. Each Kata has a theme, Empi is changing hights and distance quickly and faking guys out using the "herky jerky" style...but the young man teaching....who by the way looks HORRIBLE doing Empi and would look world class doing Gankaku.....was teaching a inclose style and his whole system of grappling is counter to empi's get in...smash...get out...screw with the attackers sense of distance by standing around grabbing each other...is wrong in my thinking. Not wrong...just in my thinking. Grabbing each other and standing about is for bigger guys, but empi clearly is for fast small guys...I am a big guy at 5'6" and a old school grappler who used to wrestle with guys 6' and better...I love wrestling and if someone small grabbed hold of me...even at 41 I am sure I would put them on their arse...Empi is a great kata to learn for ducking, jumping, shifting in and out and playing with distance from opponents....its not a grappling Kata even if you want to make it one....IN my thinking. ..and fifth, The kata is showing something that you would not pick up if you just trained to punch and kick... You can put a pig in a sunday dress but you wont change its nature! To much thinking goes into changing the interpretation of a Kata some times. We make up moves, we change techniques, and we make the kata fit to our ideals as practitioners. but that is moving away from the original intent. Granted its okay to study a Kata till you know it in and out and then start making some changes to applications or examin the actual applications given to you and work them till they are natural and then move along to finding alternatives to them...but far to often someone learns a Kata...studies it for a year...declairs they understand the damn thing and are making new changes to the whole Kata to make it their own. ONE YEAR! The fact is that we have been fed some crap Bunkai from the masters because most of them never thought of what a Kata was showing them and only thought of how many points they could make when doing the Kata for a gold medal. But is it any better for us to now make up 1000 applications for moves and make things work simply to say we found a new "correct" way of applying a move...Some times a punch is just a punch! I have seen so many applications for Katas that I just look at and say...wow that guy has a vivid imagination man...and leave it at that. But what I am thinking inside is...this guy has way to much time on his hands and no idea what he is doing. Its like giving a monkey a screwdriver and having them fix your car! I respect that people are trying to understand the text books that we are given, but we have to use some logic and not stretch to far from the Kata. Dont make a Nidan Geri kicking someone off a horse if you dont train with cowboys and dont make the start movement of Empi a wrist lock if you realize its simply a Kamae...can it be a wrist lock...sure...but then the bow is a head butt at the beginning and a finishing head butt at the end....and the dance goes on! So this is why I really like what has been shown in the video series. His interpretation has a theme (attacking/incapacitating the arm to facilitate a finishing technique), It tells a story (If you are unable to head-hunt, try controlling and finishing via arm lock and if that doesn't work here are a range of alternatives to attack the arms and then dominate). It has a signature technique (what he calls a cornerstone technique) and he has grown the bunkai implication from that. It also fits the form rather well and meets my personal criteria for Bunkai interpretation (as I outlined above). I refer back to my comment about Empi and its original intent as a defensive ideal of being made for small fast people to be hard to get a handle on...to move in and out...up and down...and dodge strikes, sucker the attacker into committing a movement and then smashing them by moving in fast and away faster so they cant catch you.....stopping to grapple is not in the cards of the Katas ideals. I think he is making out of the Kata applications he wants. To me they dont fit, to him they are great applications, and again, being a joint lock kind of guy, I respect that he sees these moves in a Kata or puts them their...great, but the very fabric of the Kata is counter to standing around grappling with someone. hell I could make up applicatons for grappling in ANY kata, but it does not mean they are their! I like his videos, he obviously put a lot of time into them and he put a tone of effort into them...And his applications are solid, but I would rather see them as a stand alone.....Not explained as part of a Kata that they dont suit. Again, just my point of view and I liked his stuff, just I did not think it appropriate for that Kata.....and whats with the brown belt with stripes down the middle of his attacker....is that a US or Brit thing?? Finally if you accept the theme then you have a whole raft of alternative interpretations for techniques which don't change the underlying principle of the kata. For example if you go with your interpretation of the kamae as a pull then a strike rather than directly into an arm lock, the underlying principle of the kata does not change...
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Sept 17, 2012 14:20:50 GMT
Oh Awesome! Nice one James, we haven't had some good debate here for ages!
Be clear I will not take any of your comments personally (that being said I haven't read them yet!) Anyway I am at work at the moment, so will reply in due course.
Cheers
Tom
|
|
|
Post by Bob Davis on Sept 17, 2012 14:54:01 GMT
Don't know about the US but definately a Brit thing. Our group uses stripes at brown belt (3rd kyu Brown, 2nd kyu Brown/White stripes, 1st kyu Brown/Red stripes) but I've also seen this in many other places so it's not just us. We do love a stripe over here (at least we've managed to avoid Dan bars at black belt )
|
|
|
Post by Bob Davis on Sept 17, 2012 15:23:26 GMT
I have to own up and say that I haven't been through all the video clips yet, just dipped in selected places to get a feel. My first comment would be well done! there's a lot of time thought and effort gone into presenting this material and I'm happy enough to give it thought. I would say that some of the app's demonstrated are not for me but at least there has been thought put into them rather than the "silly" stuff (and anything that demonstates thought in the karate world I'm all in favor of). I suspect we all approach kata implications based on our experiences, preferences and previous training. I'm not averse to a bit of grappling and close up work but what I tend to see for close up in my own efforts is very much coloured by my brief exposure to Ju-jitsu coupled with a healty dose of KISS and some honest feedback from the boy when I start to try too hard (I think I need to get a t-shirt done with one one of his responses when I was preaching a bit too much, front would say "Karate isn't all about kicking and punching" and the back would say "But sometimes it just is!") I certainly have no problem with using an "unsuitable" kata for hanging this stuff off of, (they are all suitable or unsuitable depending on your point of view at the time ). If any kata can be used as a vehicle to start an exploration then I'm all for it (that doesn't mean that you couldn't work this sort of stuff without the kata but if it's the starting point to a chain of thought why not....?) . The only thing to avoid is the trap of becoming too attached to the results BUT by putting them out there and opening them up for examination you get the chance for useful feedback and can go round the loop again. However, we also need to avoid the opposite trap of "this is too far from the original kata" when the majority of our kata only have a superficial resemblance to the original sources the way they are currently pracitced. Perform them as prescribed by all means, I love a well performed kata but at the end of the day they are only a training tool so use them however gives you the opportunity to expand your practice and knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Sept 17, 2012 17:50:16 GMT
Well said Bob.
My only concern in all this is that we are moving so far away from the intent of a Kata because we are searching for MORE meaning when their appears to be a realy viable reason looking right at you!
My worry is younger students are searching for truth after already being told what it is, looking at a blank canvas that is truely already art! I see some "applications" that seem like the student is just trying to hard to recreate the wheel! This wrist grab/arm bar application seems to be one of those. Does it work? Yes! Is it in place with the idea of the Kata....No! but it works right so why worry.....right?
|
|
|
Post by elmar on Sept 17, 2012 20:00:15 GMT
... moving so far away from the intent of a Kata ... This bothers me - how can a kata have an "intent"? People have intentions, not patterns. One might talk about what the originator of the kata might have intended - a forever unknown - but I think that is also silly. The best one can do is talk about what a particular performer intends with that particular performance of the kata. There is no objective way to judge this intent thing; even judging the appearance is subjective and artistic.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Sept 18, 2012 12:55:04 GMT
... moving so far away from the intent of a Kata ... This bothers me - how can a kata have an "intent"? People have intentions, not patterns. One might talk about what the originator of the kata might have intended - a forever unknown - but I think that is also silly. The best one can do is talk about what a particular performer intends with that particular performance of the kata. There is no objective way to judge this intent thing; even judging the appearance is subjective and artistic. I am glad it bothers you, but hopefully it makes you think a bit outside the box. Of course "intent" may not be the right word, but here is why its appropriate. If a Kata has a series of movements that are "Intended" to show a specific series of reactions to attacks and has several similar applications that can be made, that is that the moves can be interpreted as specifically designed to make a human body do specific movements with itself...then you create an "application" that is counter to that movement..you are going against the intent of the Kata (Or if you prefer the creator of the Katas intent when designing the Kata). I am of course simplifying the terms for the purpose of simplicity alone. Empi is a quick Kata, it is a Kata that has ducks, movement in and out and rapid changes in direction, if you make this Kata a grappling heavy Kata with a series of moves that are counter to the theme...if you prefer...then you are reaching way way way outside the box. By intent of the Kata of course I was not meaning that the Kata is an organic thing, I was trying to explain my thinking in reference to the process of going counter to the obvious theme of a Kata.
|
|
|
Post by elmar on Sept 18, 2012 20:20:20 GMT
I have no argument with the shape of the kata restricting the universe of possible applications - which is I think what you are arguing, and with which I wholeheartedly agree - only with the concept space of non-human things/concepts having anything inherent that is divorce-able from the humans embodying them. Down this road comes the idea e.g. that karate has a purpose, etc., rather than the reality that karate practitioners have purposes. Semantics, I suppose, but I like to be careful with my words. I reference for instance E-Prime en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Sept 18, 2012 20:57:57 GMT
Semantics, I suppose, but I like to be careful with my words. [/url].[/quote] Well, we agree...you are just more Edumakated sounding ;D My theory is if you cant follow along, then I will just tell you again!
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Sept 20, 2012 12:23:42 GMT
Hi James Phew... Sorry it has taken sooo long to get back, I've been away over the last couple of days. Anyway I have tried to respond to each of the keys points, but it has made it a bit long.... I am not a kata purest, certainly in terms of having to make tortuously unrealistic bunkai applications to fit the form of the kata, which has in all probability changed (for stylistic not realistic reasons) over the many years, and many generations, from the originators intent... By FAR I am not a Kata Purest, if by that you mean someone that eats the tired old Bunkai sold to us by the "Masters" who grew up doing tournament Karate and now are playing catch up ....and doing a bad job of it at that. I often do my Kata and draw from my own days working the door at bars and getting into street fights. I also see alot of Judo in the Kata from my old Judo days and YES I see the applications for joint locks, hell I took Aikido as well so Wrist locks and arm locks are like second nature to me. But I often think that some of these "Non-purests" See what they want to see in a Kata. If you said count the groin punches or eye pokes in "ANY KATA" and said to count them I swear they would find a number of ways to add them in. Just because they "Could be their" does not mean they should! I don’t disagree with your statement here. There are some really horrible interpretations of kata that try and be more “str33t” by adding in groin punches and eye pokes. Often they miss the point by requiring a compliant partner to stand there quietly whist the Ed Parker Kempo exponent re-stomps the groin, eyes, groin, neck, groin…. Or you can get a lot of pattern matching, you only see the applications that you recognise, in other words if you just train to kick and punch (a la Sport karate or old school Shotokan) you will be an advocate of “kick, punch, block kata implications”. If you are an Aikido exponent maybe you will see just Aikido wrist locks… However Fundamentally it should not be about techniques.. who cares if you want to slip in an eye gouge or feel that a joint lock is the best interpretation of a particular part of the kata. The Kata is just a method of teaching you a set of fundamental fighting principles, rather than specific techniques, that you apply in situations that will NEVER be exactly how you practiced. What is important is that you learn and unconsciously understand the fighting principles so that you can adapt to a wide as possible range of alternatives. If you goal is self-protection in a real situation then I would argue that your training regime should be geared towards that aim and clearly you would want to recognise in your kata HAOV scenarios… Which I believe better fits the philosophy that Kata was originally designed to defend against habitual acts of violence and not martial arts duels. So personally when I interpret kata I like to follow some simple rules, which are: Totally respect your interpretation skills, that being said I feel that we all have to realize that interpreting the Katas is kind of like when you Christians (Note, I am not pointing directly at you this is mostly for comic seasoning) Look at the bible. I have sat down with souther evangelists that had one view and Anglicans that had another...its the same damn book! Kata is alot like this, you have one bloke say, First move in Empi is a wrist lock, second guy says its a knee strike to take a guy down, next says its a down block and ducking motion......and all will fight to the end saying the other person is stupid and the next thing you know its a bloody Holy war over Kata applications...IT CAN BE ALL OF THEM OR NONE OF THEM! Lol. I really really really don’t think Kata interpretation should be analogous to the interpretation of biblical stories by religious types who use faith as the basis of their argument! You would laugh if you knew me… I am an evolutionary biologist by training (all be it a long time ago). And the thing about science vs Faith is that the scientific method advocates the use of testable theories…And this approach/rigour should be applied to kata interpretation. Test your theories, test your capability and learn how to apply it against a non-compliant partner. So I agree that kata form can be interpreted into many variations of fighting techniques, but I don’t agree that every interpretation has equal merit. Kata interpretation is a dangerous thing man, if you live and die by your thoughts on it then you never see the other applications. I tell my students to relax and just do the Kata and we can introduce a few implacations down the road. But again it should be about a fighting principles and concepts not techniques…it is the exact opposite of what you are saying. In fact if a student can grasp the principle they are free to use whatever technique or application works for them. Secondly the focus of the kata should be the transition movement not the end techniques or stances, i.e. horse-stance is representing dropping your weight to facilitate the application. I dont disagree, but I think that this is a bit narrow in its view. The stance can be the final movement and the new age fancy thinking often gets in the way of just doing the damn movements as a whole. Moving from a front stance to a side stance can be the start of a hip/shoulder throw, but it can also be a end movement for a stepping punch or blocking move. IE Bassai Dai has the Kiba dachi and three augmented down blocks....I do believe that stance is an end techniques....you are not transitioning during the blocking....Heian sandan uses the turn to Kiba dachi as a shoulder/hip throw or a spin and elbow strike while protecting neck/punching back (I like the choke defense)...end movement to facilitate throw. I have been told in some seminars that no stance is perminent its all transitionary....but I disagree ans say thats new age mombo jumbo that gets in the way and mucks up the "JUST DO IT" mentality that I like. We don’t disagree here, my point is not mutually exclusive ( by transition I was referring to the movement to make the stance…) The principle behind stances is about shifting body weight to give you the maximum mechanical advantage, whether that is a throw, a stepping punch, a grab and unbalancing technique ..whatever. I was trying to describe why kata have stances at all! Understanding the principle behind why you shift into a particular stance at a certain point in a kata can give insight into the bunkai. Traditional Kata performance, especially if the focus is on tournaments, puts far too much importance on the form of the stance. I believe when training the focus of your attention should be on the movement into the stance and not emphasise the final static form. So taking your Kiba Dachi /augmented block example from Bassai, the drop into horse stance aids the choke you are applying at that point in the kata. The third is you are fighting the person in front of you, changes in direction or changes in aspect are in relation to that opponent not others... (there has been a lot written about this elsewhere ... happy to elaborate if requested) I agree 100%. WHile I am not one of those guys that says...."Heian Shodan" You are fighting Four guys....Bullocks! You are fighting one guy at any given time from different angles! Heain Shodan, a guy attcks from the left side, you "block" and counter. DONE! a guy attacks you from the right side...you "block" get your hand caught and get out of it, strike and counter. Nuff said. I hate when people say you are doing such and such Kata...this many people attacking....shows they have NEVER been attacked by more than one person before...and probably never been attacked by one person before. …Although the interesting point here is that it is not about defending from the left or defending from the right, but how you have to shift in relation to your opponent to maximise your advantage etc…The assumption here being that you should always face your opponent… So in Heian Shodan, to take your example, You are fighting the guy in front of you; you could grab his arm and pull down to your left (using your body weight), thus turning his body and lowering his shoulders for a punch to the side/back of his head… The fourth is that the kata is trying to demonstrate fighting principles with a range of techniques to illustrate the principles as an example. This then means that most kata's have a theme and tell a story. (OK I may have lost a few people by this point) Did not lose me at all. Each Kata has a theme, Empi is changing hights and distance quickly and faking guys out using the "herky jerky" style...but the young man teaching....who by the way looks HORRIBLE doing Empi and would look world class doing Gankaku.....was teaching a inclose style and his whole system of grappling is counter to empi's get in...smash...get out...screw with the attackers sense of distance by standing around grabbing each other...is wrong in my thinking. Not wrong...just in my thinking. Grabbing each other and standing about is for bigger guys, but empi clearly is for fast small guys...I am a big guy at 5'6" and a old school grappler who used to wrestle with guys 6' and better...I love wrestling and if someone small grabbed hold of me...even at 41 I am sure I would put them on their arse...Empi is a great kata to learn for ducking, jumping, shifting in and out and playing with distance from opponents....its not a grappling Kata even if you want to make it one....IN my thinking. And maybe that is where you struggle with his interpretation. Which is fine by the way, if that works for you. Unlike sparring or completion bouts, real fights tend to start at medium range and very rapidly get to close range. So rationally I believe most of the traditional Kata were originally designed to teach fighting principles at close range. ..and fifth, The kata is showing something that you would not pick up if you just trained to punch and kick... You can put a pig in a sunday dress but you wont change its nature! To much thinking goes into changing the interpretation of a Kata some times. We make up moves, we change techniques, and we make the kata fit to our ideals as practitioners. but that is moving away from the original intent. Granted its okay to study a Kata till you know it in and out and then start making some changes to applications or examin the actual applications given to you and work them till they are natural and then move along to finding alternatives to them...but far to often someone learns a Kata...studies it for a year...declairs they understand the damn thing and are making new changes to the whole Kata to make it their own. ONE YEAR! The fact is that we have been fed some crap Bunkai from the masters because most of them never thought of what a Kata was showing them and only thought of how many points they could make when doing the Kata for a gold medal. But is it any better for us to now make up 1000 applications for moves and make things work simply to say we found a new "correct" way of applying a move...Some times a punch is just a punch! I have seen so many applications for Katas that I just look at and say...wow that guy has a vivid imagination man...and leave it at that. But what I am thinking inside is...this guy has way to much time on his hands and no idea what he is doing. Its like giving a monkey a screwdriver and having them fix your car! I respect that people are trying to understand the text books that we are given, but we have to use some logic and not stretch to far from the Kata. Dont make a Nidan Geri kicking someone off a horse if you dont train with cowboys and dont make the start movement of Empi a wrist lock if you realize its simply a Kamae...can it be a wrist lock...sure...but then the bow is a head butt at the beginning and a finishing head butt at the end....and the dance goes on! So what is logical for kata application? Are you influenced by your earlier instructors in Shotokan? The problem is (and you and I are of the same age) I am assuming you, like me, was taught a load of nonsense about kata application in the 80’s and 90’s: The old three K’s approach where Kata is divorced from Kumite and Kihon; Kata is a “traditional” thing that we do for our art but it does not have any bearing on how we fight, as we all know that real fights are just like our sparring in the dojo!... If you make the assumption that the original intent for kata was to teach fundamental fighting principles it would be about close-range applications and strategies… This means that we have to remember to shift our mental model from the more “traditional” long range Shotokan interpretation of kata applications to a close range fighting interpretation (something I assume is easier for you than me, given all the door and bar work you have done in your mis-spent youth! So this is why I really like what has been shown in the video series. His interpretation has a theme (attacking/incapacitating the arm to facilitate a finishing technique), It tells a story (If you are unable to head-hunt, try controlling and finishing via arm lock and if that doesn't work here are a range of alternatives to attack the arms and then dominate). It has a signature technique (what he calls a cornerstone technique) and he has grown the bunkai implication from that. It also fits the form rather well and meets my personal criteria for Bunkai interpretation (as I outlined above). I refer back to my comment about Empi and its original intent as a defensive ideal of being made for small fast people to be hard to get a handle on...to move in and out...up and down...and dodge strikes, sucker the attacker into committing a movement and then smashing them by moving in fast and away faster so they cant catch you.....stopping to grapple is not in the cards of the Katas ideals. I think he is making out of the Kata applications he wants. To me they dont fit, to him they are great applications, and again, being a joint lock kind of guy, I respect that he sees these moves in a Kata or puts them their...great, but the very fabric of the Kata is counter to standing around grappling with someone. hell I could make up applicatons for grappling in ANY kata, but it does not mean they are their! I like his videos, he obviously put a lot of time into them and he put a tone of effort into them...And his applications are solid, but I would rather see them as a stand alone.....Not explained as part of a Kata that they dont suit. Again, just my point of view and I liked his stuff, just I did not think it appropriate for that Kata.....and whats with the brown belt with stripes down the middle of his attacker....is that a US or Brit thing?? Firstly I don't necessarily agree with your interpretation of the Empi theme..but that's Ok. Secondly I am not sure if it is unique to the UK, but that is a 1st Kyu belt. Anyway, I am not sure if anybody will have the patience to read through all my responses, I sincerely apologise for the length..
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Sept 20, 2012 19:15:29 GMT
I actually don’t really disagree with what most of you are saying, just looking at it from a slightly different point of view. I also don’t agree that you should be working that round peg into the square hole so damn hard sometimes. I have seen way to many YouTube videos of the worst drivel you can imagine with the “answer to Kata” being front and centre, and even some suggesting that they are defence against swords, guns and other such things…bullocks! While I agree that the gun and sword were introduced to Japan around the time some Kata were being developed, the reverse engineered Katas are just crapola when it comes to some of the applications that they show. I admit that I grew up in Karate with the same wholly unbelievable Kata applications that some were, but to be honest I see the whole thing as a lost art that has NOT been revived but reinvented and just about ever silly application you can imagine has muddled the whole mess even more. So, simple is what I look for in a Application/implication. If its too damn confusing or has way to great a chance of not working…I toss it! But again it should be about a fighting principles and concepts not techniques…it is the exact opposite of what you are saying. In fact if a student can grasp the principle they are free to use whatever technique or application works for them. I agree 100%. The principles are what are most important and one of the most important is the “KISS” principle in all things. Trust me, when you get caught in a S*^T storm you don’t want to guess what kind of fancy techniques will get you killed quickest. Keep it simple, learn the Kata moves so you can then start digging into the Kata. I teach the form itself and then the principles and concepts are taught…then move into deeper ideas and characteristics of the kata and finally…applications/implications of the Kata..and again, I keep it simple and believable. So taking your Kiba Dachi /augmented block example from Bassai, the drop into horse stance aids the choke you are applying at that point in the kata Choke? I was referring to the three down blocks that you are doing before the mountain punch. I don’t see any way that you could be doing a choke when blocking downwards. Please let me know what you meant. And maybe that is where you struggle with his interpretation. Which is fine by the way, if that works for you. Unlike sparring or completion bouts, real fights tend to start at medium range and very rapidly get to close range. So rationally I believe most of the traditional Kata were originally designed to teach fighting principles at close range. Real fighting takes place at many distances, if you are a grappler than you close the distance and grapple, and even in the grappling world there are different stages, distances and positions. As a striker you will use long, medium and long distance and back out again, moving and shifting. So the assertion that all fights start out long, move to medium distance and close the fight out with a close fight…well its not 100% accurate. Its to simplistic to say that is how a fight goes. I have actually been in way to many fights and the distance depended on the reactions I had…and I did not move from A to B to C and then done…it was A to B to C to A to C to B to………… I did not really like the application interpretation of the Empi Kata…however I did like his techniques and ideas. I just think that its like dressing up a idea to make it seem like its feasible when it would be with out the assertion that it comes from a different source. I may be sick of the old Kata applications that were forced on us and were thrown together to appease our questions and were weak and not held little real life applications and looked like NO plays…but I also don’t want to replace them with worse ideas made up that make no sense to me. I am a pretty simple guy, meat and potatoes type. My Applications need to be fast, accurate, repeatable and efficient. They need to end a fight as quickly as possible, be simple and not fancy in any way ….and most importantly…they have to be able to be used in a real defensive situation by an y of my students.
|
|
|
Post by elmar on Sept 20, 2012 20:02:24 GMT
Choke? I was referring to the three down blocks that you are doing before the mountain punch. I don’t see any way that you could be doing a choke when blocking downwards. Please let me know what you meant. Let me chime in here, if I may - I think you are focusing too much on the downward moving hand, and not enough on the hand that is pulling upwards (I assume we are talking about Bassai Dai, right?). If you think of the preceding move and knocking the fellow down, then each of the pull ups,. is in fact pulling the guy up sequentially until the final movement does result in a choke.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Sept 21, 2012 7:48:29 GMT
Firstly thanks Elmar, absolutely well explained... also known as the rear naked choke. www.videojug.com/film/how-to-do-bas-ruttens-rear-chokeSo from Bassai, the crescent kick - empi strike is the lead into the choke (from front on to your opponent, the crescent kick strikes the back of the leading leg, pull on leading arm, grip and strike with elbow enabling shift to attackers blind side...), kiba-datch improves the control and enhances the impact of choke by dropping your weight down and backwards. Easy to do, very unpleasant if done at speed. I have also managed to pull it off a number of times during dojo kumite against non-compliant partners... also There are three "augmented blocks" to show/practice both left and right side... To James I think we are all violently agreeing about KISS and the raft of absolute rubbish that is out there and I fully understand your conservative approach to Bunkai interpretations. What is interesting however is that the type of Bunkai implication shown in the original video, although at first glance looking complicated and overly labored, at its core when broken down are some very simple fighting concepts. Things like: - use of big Macro movements not small joint manipulation (excepting the first wrist lock, which I am not sure is necessary anyway)
- control of opponent through the use of mechanical advantage
- joint destruction through large macro movements
- Maintenance of control through dominance
- identification of likely challenges and alternative strategies
There are certainly some techniques and interpretations he has used where I would find simpler alternatives, but he rightly suggests that his ideas are work in progress. For me Karate has always been about the standup game (to use a horrible MMA term) for self-protection. If I get into grabbing range, that is my main strategy for control and dominance and I look to kata implications to improve that aspect of my Karate. Which over the last 10 years has done just that.. I hope it has made me a more effective fighter, but I am now of an age where the opportunites "to test my skills" do not come around very often... thank God
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Sept 21, 2012 12:36:27 GMT
Choke? I was referring to the three down blocks that you are doing before the mountain punch. I don’t see any way that you could be doing a choke when blocking downwards. Please let me know what you meant. Let me chime in here, if I may - I think you are focusing too much on the downward moving hand, and not enough on the hand that is pulling upwards (I assume we are talking about Bassai Dai, right?). If you think of the preceding move and knocking the fellow down, then each of the pull ups,. is in fact pulling the guy up sequentially until the final movement does result in a choke. So, what you are saying,.....if I may, is ignore the possition your body is in and focus on the guilotine movement....I have taken BJJ and Judo and the only choke I can imagine (using lots of my Dream ability that is) would be a Guilotine movement (kind of reverse headlock) Problem is...Kiba dachi with a straight back...not going to let that choke happen, you need to arch your back and a standing guillotine is hard to do because the defender simply has to push you back or step away from you and twist and he is out. The best way to have that movement work is to arch your back and secure your hips into the attacker, pulling up simply is not the right movement and its not efficient enough to make that choke work...and why three in a row? I know you can say lots about taht but the truth is you are flat on your feet and dont stand and arch your back to complete the choke...this is one of those round peg....Star shaped holes in my mind. I dont see that as ever being established in the kata as a choke and I see it as a reach and a half. Again, its like creating a bunkai to suit a move that is not liked or forcing an application in were it does not fit. Having slapped on a few dozen Guillotine chokes in the past...I would have a very hard time saying that is the move to insert at that point. Just my thoughts though.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Sept 21, 2012 12:59:16 GMT
I have a hard time envisioning those three augmented Gedan Barrai as being useable chokes....it may just be me and again, being a visual kind of guy I like to see the move and use it...or have it used on me while I try NOT to be choked to see if it will work.
Having studied chokes alot this year I can tell you that the move is not exactly perfectly set for chokes but I can see with a RNC where you were going with that.
J
|
|
|
Post by daveb on Oct 29, 2012 20:59:17 GMT
As for the Bassai movements I can't say I like the choke either, nor do I think three fast gedan barrai make any sense. For me the sequence is 3 short fast strikes, done low in the form but fired to any viable targets in practice. There a number of tactical points that make this a sensible approach such as the square postureand the reinforcement of the hands.
As for the Empi applications, I'm not especially keen on them but I certainly don't think that there's anything wrong with them if they work as advertised. I think some of them would fall down under real aggression but the idea of using body movement in combination with a major joint control to attack from a strong position is sensible. Does it fit the kata? Mostly yes, but it's taking the kata theme (in my view a slightly different paradigm to that suggested by James) and applying it to the joints rather than to the striking patterns or the relationship between fighters. And while it's unfamiliar it is what we are meant to do with principles once we've sussed them out: we usr them to rework techniques as we need them. Not how I'd do it but not wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bedard on Oct 30, 2012 4:15:28 GMT
Here we go!! A lot of good ideas here & that is what we should be getting from breaking down kata is `nice ideas`. I do like some of Ians suggestions for Empi, but I don`t agree with a lot that is going on. He is kind of flopping his uke around like a puppet who has no response. I`m kind of like the take him down & put him out mentality. Whet here I`m seeing you can do this, which can turn into that, which in turn I can do this other thing. I don`t think so. But that is me. Any one of his ideas are good, but put them all together & Idon`t think so... As far as Bassai Dai, after the crescent kick we are in kiba dachi & facing front, to me this means that we are very close to our opponent, so what I see is using the short augmented blocks as defense against knee strikes. We some times put ourselves in a Muy Tai type clinch & practice this. The augmented support arm can also strike the opponents body as the knee strike is being blocked.. Kind of using the principle that Dave mentioned..
Osu
Paul B
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Oct 30, 2012 8:27:19 GMT
Ok so I want to talk about my rationale for the RNC in Bassai Dai (this might be a bit long winded - but as I get paid by the letter... ) I have a theory (I am not the only one so cant really claim credit for it) about kata that makes the assumption that the originators of the kata applied the "duh, obviously" rule. If the kata is a learning tool to capture and teach fighting principles (through showing examples of applications), there are obvious things you would do in a real fight that just don't need to be shown in the kata. There is also an assumption that the practitioner or user of the kata has some basic fighting skills already (I like to think of kata as a teachers aid rather than a pupils aid). I include in this category all opportunities to perform striking and hitting techniques as punching and kicking, head butting and the concept of wash, rinse, repeat etc. So the kata does not need to show this as it is already assumed you will be trying to do this, but might show ways in which this can be set up, or strategies to maximize the opportunities to dominate your opponent so that you can pile-it-on. So interpreting the three augmented blocks in Bassai dai as a block punch combination, I think, is an example of that "duh obviously" rule. This interpretation also falls into the trap of pre-supposing what your opponent would do and relies on them performing attacks that fit your scenario. So I try and follow the rule that any assumptions about my opponents behaviour (once the application sequence has started) are as a direct result of my actions. To be fair to your application Paul, you are leading into a clinch from the crescent kick. But it begs the question as a fighting principle, why would I want to enter a clinch, that does not give me a fighting advantage and where my opponent may well apply knee strikes etc..? So why the RNC (rear naked choke)? In Bassai Dai you have the crescent kick followed by an empi, shift into horse stance and the three augmented blocks, what is the principle here? If the crescent kick is used to attack the back of your opponents leading knee, pulling on his arm will draw him forward, drop his shoulder and expose his back to you. I would argue this is very good position to be in, you have moved to your opponents outside and he is now very vulnerable to a choke at this point. Another thing I do when looking at Kata interpretation is focus on the movement rather than the end form. I think in most cases that the form includes the follow through of the technique (the old golf-swing analogy). so in Bassai Dai with the augmented blocks I focus on the upward and downward movements of the arms. This absolutely fits the motion of the RNC. The best way of showing this is with a video, but as I don't have the capability I went to the next best thing..youtube...The video goes into a raft of more advanced chokes etc but does show what I am talking about.(look from 1.52). www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=GdMgZ8n9_Ig#t=112sApologies for the length of this and apologies for any criticisms, please take them all in the spirit they were intended. OSS
|
|
|
Post by jimlukelkc on Oct 30, 2012 16:20:15 GMT
Ok, my take on this is, I see lots of Bunkai online, some of it feasible, lots of it questionable. However it should never be necessary to add bits ( unless its a finishing technique after a particular sequence. I think it is reasonable to assume the original thinking would have gone something like " obviously you have him in this position, knock him out stupid!"). It becomes questionable when we manufacture a scenario to fit the perceived bunkai. That makes no sense. You are then in a situation where you have to remember a multitude of responses to every given situation and as the scenario can never be predicted that leaves you with an impossible task. However if you understand the possible functions of each technique you can choose one technique for many scenarios. This to me is why kata contain oft repeated movements. It would be absurd to suggest they expected the exact same scenario to keep cropping up but makes much more sense to say this technique has many applications.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Oct 30, 2012 19:55:31 GMT
Hi Jim
I agree, I think (sorry getting tired at the end of the day).
My take is that the techniques demonstrated in kata, are there to highlight a combatative lesson or principle. They may also not be the most obvious technique of choice (amoungst many many potential options), as they are their to illustrate a point.
For example you wouldn't necessarily attempt to throw your opponent if in the circumstances just holding on and repeatedly hitting him will work... however the throw is being shown in the kata as an alternative approach if initially what you are attempting is not working.
Rule of thumb for me is understand and learn the fighting principles and then adapt and use your most favourate techniques to achieve the goal of that principle.
However there is an 80/20 rule going on here. If you want to train to be effective there are some very common scenario's to which you should focus your training on to ensure you have a strategy to deal with them - as they are the most likely things you will encounter. The old habitual acts of Violence approach... which I think has a lot of merit.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bedard on Oct 30, 2012 22:58:19 GMT
Lot`s of good ideas being discussed here! Thomas I can see your point, but one thing that gets me is being stuck on sequential events. Such as the crescent kick followed by the elbow strike led into the positioning for the gedan moroto ukes. To me that might be one way of looking at things but certainly not the only way. I stopped thinking about the sequential as being the true meaning quite awhile back & I also look at the individual technique. Thinking along the lines of the crescent kick taking the guys leg/knee out, this would disturb his balance as you drove your elbow into his temporal mandibular joint, also know as the button. To me this guy is down & out. So the moroto ukes are not a follow up, but a totally separate excersise. To me kata is not a sequence of events per say, but more a series of one, two , or three move combinations. Certainly no more than that. I don`t believe that we are learning how to flow through 6 or 8 moves or more. Not that it can`t be done, but to me it doesn`t make sense. Set the opponent up for the good wallop & take him down.
Osu
Paul B
|
|
|
Post by daveb on Oct 31, 2012 1:39:02 GMT
Ok so I want to talk about my rationale for the RNC in Bassai Dai (this might be a bit long winded - but as I get paid by the letter... ) I have a theory (I am not the only one so cant really claim credit for it) about kata that makes the assumption that the originators of the kata applied the "duh, obviously" rule. If the kata is a learning tool to capture and teach fighting principles (through showing examples of applications), there are obvious things you would do in a real fight that just don't need to be shown in the kata. There is also an assumption that the practitioner or user of the kata has some basic fighting skills already (I like to think of kata as a teachers aid rather than a pupils aid). I include in this category all opportunities to perform striking and hitting techniques as punching and kicking, head butting and the concept of wash, rinse, repeat etc. So the kata does not need to show this as it is already assumed you will be trying to do this, but might show ways in which this can be set up, or strategies to maximize the opportunities to dominate your opponent so that you can pile-it-on. So interpreting the three augmented blocks in Bassai dai as a block punch combination, I think, is an example of that "duh obviously" rule. This interpretation also falls into the trap of pre-supposing what your opponent would do and relies on them performing attacks that fit your scenario. So I try and follow the rule that any assumptions about my opponents behaviour (once the application sequence has started) are as a direct result of my actions. To be fair to your application Paul, you are leading into a clinch from the crescent kick. But it begs the question as a fighting principle, why would I want to enter a clinch, that does not give me a fighting advantage and where my opponent may well apply knee strikes etc..? So why the RNC (rear naked choke)? In Bassai Dai you have the crescent kick followed by an empi, shift into horse stance and the three augmented blocks, what is the principle here? If the crescent kick is used to attack the back of your opponents leading knee, pulling on his arm will draw him forward, drop his shoulder and expose his back to you. I would argue this is very good position to be in, you have moved to your opponents outside and he is now very vulnerable to a choke at this point. Now all this is fine until the choke. Why choke him at all when you can smash his skull with an elbow that he is defenceless against.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Oct 31, 2012 15:02:21 GMT
Hi David
You make a valid point, if the circumstances warranted it then absolutely "smash his skull with an elbow". But the Kata is teaching fighting principles and strategies, not if "this" happens then you must do "that".
I would suggest (and this is just a suggestion obviously) that the originator of Bassai Dai at that point in the kata was providing an example of how to use a crescent kick to get an advantageous position on your opponent and then gave some examples of what you might want to do when you got there. Also the combination is interesting, as a good rule of thumb is to stun your opponent before trying to perform a throw or any other more complicated maneuver such as a choke hold.
In summary the point is that fighting is messy and there are many many reasons why the simple solution is not achievable... and you may not be able to pull off a decent set of strikes to incapacitate your opponent. If you are in a tight space, with difficulty to move it may actually be easier to perform a sleeper hold than try to bludgeon the chap senseless.
Point is the kata is teaching you principles and strategies... how you apply them depends on the circumstance.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Oct 31, 2012 15:05:47 GMT
Lot`s of good ideas being discussed here! Thomas I can see your point, but one thing that gets me is being stuck on sequential events. Such as the crescent kick followed by the elbow strike led into the positioning for the gedan moroto ukes. To me that might be one way of looking at things but certainly not the only way. I stopped thinking about the sequential as being the true meaning quite awhile back & I also look at the individual technique. Thinking along the lines of the crescent kick taking the guys leg/knee out, this would disturb his balance as you drove your elbow into his temporal mandibular joint, also know as the button. To me this guy is down & out. So the moroto ukes are not a follow up, but a totally separate excersise. To me kata is not a sequence of events per say, but more a series of one, two , or three move combinations. Certainly no more than that. I don`t believe that we are learning how to flow through 6 or 8 moves or more. Not that it can`t be done, but to me it doesn`t make sense. Set the opponent up for the good wallop & take him down. Osu Paul B Hi Paul, I think I kind of answered this with my comments to Dave. Rather than me overlabouring my points more than I usually do, I will refer you to that response.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Oct 31, 2012 15:06:54 GMT
I often think that Bunkai is like fitting a round peg in a square hole when some people get "out of the box" on them.
|
|