|
Post by andyupton on Jul 3, 2013 14:47:35 GMT
In Kata such as Jion, Sochin etc where you do Manji Uke, before you perform the actual block, are your hands open or closed ?
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Jul 3, 2013 16:58:47 GMT
We use the open hands and then as you finish the move you close them. I have seen both ways however.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Jul 3, 2013 17:23:16 GMT
Closed.....no open...no closed...Now you've pointed it out I am not sure :-)
I think it depends if your hands are already open as a result of the last technique - e.g. in Kenkudai after the nukite ?
|
|
|
Post by andyupton on Jul 4, 2013 10:28:48 GMT
Closed.....no open...no closed...Now you've pointed it out I am not sure :-) Thanks for that, Thomas ! ;D
|
|
|
Post by andyupton on Jul 4, 2013 10:30:01 GMT
We use the open hands and then as you finish the move you close them. I have seen both ways however. I have seen both ways too. But I would say open then closed on the block.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2013 11:57:13 GMT
We use the open hands and then as you finish the move you close them. I have seen both ways however. I have seen both ways too. But I would say open then closed on the block. They're not blocks, there are no blocks in Karate. Blocks only exist in the Karate taught to Children, as the combative application are too dangerous to give to school kids. But that is another discussion for another thread :-) Hands open to start, and then hands close as you seize the opponent for the takedown. Type "Practical Kata Bunkai: Manji-Uke in Pinan Godan" into Google. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Davis on Jul 4, 2013 13:34:55 GMT
I'm with Tom on this one, depends what I'm doing (in my head) and what the preceding move was for the set up. Whilst it can be used this way it is very limiting to suggest that this is "the" application as the pattern of the move can be used in a number of ways. There are plenty of blocks in "adult" karate BTW (just my opinion, obviously )
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Jul 4, 2013 17:27:42 GMT
...yes I agree with Bob, we shouldn't limit ourselves to just the Katawa Guruma throw for Manji uke ...can't think of how many times I've been attacked from opposite sides by a mae geri and a jodan oi-tsuki in the steet..
...not to mention the obvious dance implication .. "Saturday Night Fever" anyone?
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Jul 4, 2013 17:59:50 GMT
..ok on a more serious note.
I agree that we shouldn't limit ourselves to the full range of interesting applications for a particular move in a kata, especially when a similar move appears in multiple kata.
The problem I have however, is that in most cases (IMHO of course :-) ) there are a small number of principle strategic or tactical lessons being presented in any particular section of a kata and given that it is important that these "primary" principles are learnt - it therefore follows that the correct example application is required to demonstrate the principle.
An example of this might be... Jion Kata where the first Manji Uke is followed by a "hook punch in horse stance".
So you could suggest something like the Manji uke is being used to block your opponents right hand stepping punch, whilst simultaneously striking him in the groin then scoop his leg and take him down....end of application. Then the next technique is grabbing his head and punching him in the face...
Now both of those applications are perfectly valid however I don't think that that is the lesson that is being demonstrated in Jion at this point in the kata...
So In my opinon, the kata is showing you a tactic with a fail-safe option. The Manji-uke is a Katawa Guruma throw, which is delivered by encircling your opponents head with your left arm and grabbing his majesticals with your right... you then upend him.
Now if that fails because he shifts his weight at the last minute or some other reason... then you perform the next application which is a choke. Now the beauty about this is that the choke also begins with your left arm around his neck but in true grappling style your are rapidly yanking in the opposite direction from the failed guruma. This is a classic wrestling/judo principle (push-pull pull-push) . Your left arm creates the opening for the right, you drop your weight into horse stance as you apply the choke.
Anyway that is my take.
|
|
|
Post by garage on Jul 4, 2013 19:33:58 GMT
I on the other hand think it is sword position, transition to next move. Companion sword in the front lower hand and large sword in the upper hand following a thrust ready for another cut.
As in the picture on the book of five rings and the front of Karate KYohan internal/external carving.
As there is a background of sword play in this.
To the first question my hands are closed open briefly to grab. Too many visits to hospital with the middle finger kicked up and out of place with people who are not quick enough to have their hands open when sparing ( makes me feel sick looking at it ) Habits in kata transfer into fighting thats what katas are for.
My take feel free to knock me down in flames, wouldn't argue with the bunkai crowd as they are bigger than me.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Jul 5, 2013 22:42:40 GMT
Whilst not being a pyromaniac by nature, I do recognise a frisson of pleasure at the prospect of Bert flambe. :-)
I am not sure the sword-thing works for the kata we have talked about (Jion, Kenkudai etc)... do the swords disappear after you perform Manji Uke? maybe the next technique is ceremonial suicide as you plant the blade in your chest?.. now if you were talking Bo staff for Jitte then I think I would be in agreement.
Cheers
Tom
|
|
|
Post by garage on Jul 6, 2013 3:25:37 GMT
To paraphrase Funakoshi in Karate Kyohan "think of the hands as swords or blades". The whole of Aikido is based on an idoit that left his sword at home, perhaps karate is based on someone who can't afford a sword or it has been banned?
The unique thing I read about kanatana is that it has blocking moves. I personally feel if you block a sword with a sword I would expect it to break. So I am suggesting there is an element of sword play built into the kata. The footwork in sword play certainly works in kata and makes sense of it.
I find working with swords helps understand the flow of the move, thrust cut then up into this transition stance before a cresent cut. The swords are there all the time.
The next thing you will be telling me is that hiean nidan wasn't performed with an AK47 originally.
|
|
|
Post by Allan Shepherd on Jul 6, 2013 8:22:37 GMT
All supposition!! anyway Heian Nidan predated the introduction to AK47's Best Regards Allan
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Jul 6, 2013 12:35:46 GMT
interestingly only just... 40 years or so.
|
|
|
Post by elmar on Jul 6, 2013 12:50:43 GMT
The idea that kata postures are influenced by sword postures isn't so far fetched. Kata after all incorporate dance and theatric elements as well as the straightforward SD technical vocabulary. The element of Kabuki-esque exaggeration in our kata is easy to see, especially if the hypothesis that it derived from Okinawan folk dances is considered, not to speak of the idea of exaggerating the movements for physical training purposes.
|
|
|
Manji Uke
Apr 26, 2014 7:39:33 GMT
via mobile
Post by daveb on Apr 26, 2014 7:39:33 GMT
In Kata such as Jion, Sochin etc where you do Manji Uke, before you perform the actual block, are your hands open or closed ? It really doesn't matter. And by that I mean this is one of those points at which karate becomes an art. Detail like this is entirely dependent on what you've decided to do with the opponent in front of you. In solo practice it is simply a matter of preference and comfort as you gain nothing whichever way you do it. That being said I learned a guiding principle was to go from relaxed to rigid: preparation/chamber is relaxed to allow the muscles to lock momentarily into a sharp solid movement. While blocking front and back may be a bit silly, I do see manji as a striking application as well.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on May 14, 2014 11:55:38 GMT
One thing to keep in mind is that the Kata we do in Shotokan is a "Evolved" (read it was Shotokan-ized) version of the originals. And by original I am not saying Shito/Chito/Shorin ryu, Im talking about the origina Shuri Te and if you do happen to see pictures of Funakoshi doing the Kata in its original form or Pre -"evolved" Kata we may get a bit better understanding of bunkai. Its a case of a bunch of Gaijin trying to figure out the application from a form that was changed to have nicer lines and modified to look more like Azato Karate than Itosu Karate.
I have been doing a truck load of research on Funakoshi's lineage and how that may have affected what we are looking at and find that the Itosu katas like the Heian's were first changed by Funakoshi to be more like hsi first masters style, then even further changed By Nakayama to be in line with his Kendo back ground. I went and watched some film of old style Shuri te kata and while I often hated the kihon waza I could say that some applications we do are based on the over all adaptions that were made, the intent of the actual moves was different thant he original because the original is not what we are doing.
PS......I think we teach blocks to adults to, and they are not dangerous....they keep your teeth in place, but only if you are smart enough to counter right away!
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on May 16, 2014 16:28:10 GMT
... Its a case of a bunch of Gaijin trying to figure out the application from a form that was changed to have nicer lines and modified to look more like Azato Karate than Itosu Karate. Hi James Are you suggesting that we can't apply our own critical faculties to the interpretation of the shotokan forms? It has always been my approach, and I assume it is the same for those others who like to reverse engineer kata, to take less notice of unique style differences and focus on the common elements. Also given that there are only so many ways in which to inflict damage on a person, and only so many common forms of assault (Given everyone has some limit on training times and will clearly focus on the high probability ones)... once you understand the correct context for kata - Civilian violence at close range - it doesn't take much application of logic, surely? Whether or not the form has changed, the function is much more resistant to variation, and the principles even more so... Hangetsu is a case in point, it seems likely that it's near ancestor was Matsumura's Seisan, which would have come via Azato not Itosu.. see the topic I started on Iain's forum where this is discussed.. Original form for Shotokan's Hangestsu...? Cheers Tom
|
|
|
Post by garage on May 18, 2014 15:23:28 GMT
Hangetsu is the only shotokan kata with ibuki breathing in it. Yet when you look at the video you posted the breathing is not there. So you feel that Funakoshi added the breathing so it wasn't missed out completely. Perhaps it would have been easier just to perform sanchin rather than add breathing that doesn't belong there.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on May 19, 2014 14:22:59 GMT
...It might be that the ibuki was re-added retrospectively.. There are precedents already set for this this type of evolution in karate.. the example that readily springs to mind is the influence of the Japanese training approach on the traditional Okinawan styles of karate.
There are many types of Seisan and it is not inconceivable that Funakoshi or one of his predecessors added the breathing back-in from another Seisan for shotokan's Hangetsu..
|
|
|
Post by daveb on Jun 3, 2014 7:49:05 GMT
It is also worth noting that Okinawan's only seem to have become interested in preserving kata once the art left their shores. None of the karate masters of old preserved what they were taught, it was not their way.
Mastery seems to have meant its time to go your own way. Choki Motobu talked about developing applications, implying that they were not set in stone from teacher to student.
It is a much more flexible approach to learning and growing than Japanese karate would have us believe. In some ways the rigid hierarchy is necessary now that Karate is global; or any fool could claim mastery and start making up kata. But understanding this aspect of karate's tradition should free us from the belief that Shotokanized kata are some how second tier.
Don't get me wrong; from a historical perspective learning from a whole run with a full traditional understanding of the art as a combat system would be great. But as modern martial artists seeking fun, self defense, exercise, even cage fighting skills, all that really matters is our approach to studying the art and how we translate that into training.
Nothing in Matsumura's or Itosu's personal syllabus will get us to our goals better than what we have to hand, but those two factors will.
|
|
|
Post by Allan Shepherd on Jun 3, 2014 10:21:04 GMT
Hi Dave
It is a classic case of if what you have is kept in house ie within the shores of Okinawa then there would be no reason to shout about it.
Sadly there are a LOT of fools out there claimimg Mastery and sadly "Joe Public" knows no better...UNLESS the students spread their wings so to speak and visit other clubs in or around their respective area's. This is possibly one of the reasons why some schools INSIST on 100% loyalty. There are other reasons but sadly a potential student does not research the ryu in their area to find what and who suits them. Recommendation is not a yard stick as the person recommending might know no different...catch 22.
Best Regards Allan
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Jun 5, 2014 11:29:06 GMT
Are you suggesting that we can't apply our own critical faculties to the interpretation of the shotokan forms? It has always been my approach, and I assume it is the same for those others who like to reverse engineer kata, to take less notice of unique style differences and focus on the common elements. Also given that there are only so many ways in which to inflict damage on a person, and only so many common forms of assault (Given everyone has some limit on training times and will clearly focus on the high probability ones)... once you understand the correct context for kata - Civilian violence at close range - it doesn't take much application of logic, surely? Whether or not the form has changed, the function is much more resistant to variation, and the principles even more so... Not at all, and sorry it took me to long to get back to you, been doing research from sun up to sun down, trying to work and do family stuff as well....not easy. What I am saying is often we look at the "elephant" that is Karate kata and we start making our interpretations like the four blind men trying to describe it. We forget that the whole kata has actually been filtered several times and what we see right now is a sporty version of a interpretation of an interpretation of the original. So, people will look at a kata like Bassai dai or empi and start “Making up” bunkai and Oyo and going for it, and saying “This is the original intent of the kata” but they are using triple filtered material to do so. It would be like trying to explain the model T to a kid and using a 2012 camaro as a model….yes, it’s a car…NO its not a model T or even close to it. Now old cars aside, some of the Kata we practice has been RADICALLY changed to suit different tastes and the original intent was LOST with the changes. And the deeper I look into the whole thing the more I realize that what we are training in is a modern version of a altered form that was filtered when Funakoshi brought the style to his students. We don’t even train in the same fundamental Kata that Nakayama was taught, his changes made the Kata change…and the filters put on to make minor changes since then have altered the course of the katas as well a bit. Also, not to confuse this with more ‘also’s’ but the masters (All of them) would teach their pupils different based on needs and such, it was suggested that Itosu and his karate was greatly affected by not being a student of Sokon Matsumura for very long (Long story short he spent little time with him and trained under Gusukuma and Nagahame Chikudon way longer) but in the end his Karate won out as he lasted the longest (live) and had more students than his peers like Azato. But we don’t really do Itosu Karate…as Funakoshi’s primary instructor was Azato and he only trained with Itosu for conditioning and then when Azato died. So, long story short we are more than capable of interpretation of Kata and personalizing the bunkai…just not the original intent because we were never taught the original katas! Original by definition being the kata that was first taught by those that created them. Even those that Itosu created were filtered through Kenwa Mabuni and then the early JKA, and major changes were made to make the new Katas much more like Azato/Funakoshi karate. However, after all that…Yes, we can take a series of moves from a Kata and say “this is how to apply it” ….but then again anyone with three years of training should be able to do that with most Kata. My point being is that we should never say that this was the original intent. [/quote]Hangetsu is a case in point, it seems likely that it's near ancestor was Matsumura's Seisan, which would have come via Azato not Itosu.. see the topic I started on Iain's forum where this is discussed.. Original form for Shotokan's Hangestsu...? Cheers Tom[/quote] I think you inadvertently hit the nail on the head. All of my research and reading this last month has really indicated that Itosu did not pass this version onto Funakoshi, infact he passed very little onto him. Azato sensei was his instructor, who was directly inline with Sokon Matsumura, so it stands to reason that we would be more in line with Matsumura style seisan than an Itosu version as is taught in shito ryu. However, I think that Funakoshi “dumbed it down” a bit for us and cut big chunks out. Some say he forgot them, but for me its more that he was trying to make the whole approach more user friendly based on his need and want to expand. Ill get to it in a paper I will post on the forum. J
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on Jun 12, 2014 10:50:56 GMT
Not at all, and sorry it took me to long to get back to you, been doing research from sun up to sun down, trying to work and do family stuff as well....not easy. No worries... work life balance as always.. This Road to Damascus moment happened for me some time ago.. and was really brought on by the power of the internet (really rammed home when youtube came along in 2005)... suddenly you could see what all the other styles were doing for kata, kata with the same name or same kata's with different names.. and the variety and quality of the bunkai interpretations was very wide indeed! Yes and no. I think it is accurate to say that we cannot know the minds of the originators of any particular kata (not ones developed prior to the 20th century at any rate). But this is a bit of a pedantic position to take, I think. With suitable research, an awareness of the other versions of the same kata, an understanding of the relative timelines and how the "ontology" or evolutionary pathway is connected can certainly advance the understanding of the original intent. Especially if you take the view, that I do, that in the evolution and development of kata overtime, Principle is more resistance to change than function which is more resistant to change than form. So although there are many influences on all the modern versions of the same original kata, there are ways in which the common functions and principles can surface through all the noise of stylistic variation that changed the forms over the years. ...this is all relative, I believe the understanding of what lessons can be learnt via kata has significantly advanced compared to 20 years ago. The change in emphasis from "karate style duelling" to civilian violence is one key element that is massively improved the interpretation.. MMA deserves some credit, holding a mirror upto traditional karate training and demonstrating the truth that karate was not just a striking art.. We can't know exactly what the originator was thinking, but it is likely that we might get pretty close if we understand the context in which the kata was developed. That was no accident on my behalf. Cheers Tom
|
|