Bujinkan/TSD: Compare/Contrast

It seems that some people are under the impression that Stephen K Hayes has turned his back on Ninjutsu and created a new art called TO-SHIN DO. Let me try to put things into perspective from my point of view, having not only trained with An shu Hayes spoadically over the last nineteen years but also having been to the Dayton Quest Centre to train.

Much of what is taught in the Bujinkan arts today is very traditional, like one was fighting on battlefield in armour in the sixteenth century. For example the Jodan Tsuki where the fist is delivered from the hip into the target. Now this method was used against men in armour, to knock them down and out.

For a beginner this is a great way to start training. It allows one to learn posture, movement and delivery of a punch. It also allows the training partner to see the punch coming and therefore learn, Jodan Tsuki, Taisabaki etc.

But in todays world, people do'nt wear armour and punch like this. In fact a lot of Japanese didn't punch like this either. Therefore as a student once one has learnt the basics of the punch and how to receive that punch one can go on to learn how to defend against faster, shorter ranged, trickier and more varied in their application.

Do the defences change?
well only in the sense that the distancing, timing etc might be different. Jodan Uke, Chudan Uke, Shikan Ken etc are still used as are more advanced techniques like Yokuto, Danshi etc.

Unfortunately so many practitioners of Ninjutsu stop at the stage where the punch is delivered from the hip and progress no further. Yet strangely when one takes the art of Ninjutsu and applies it effectively against todays styles of attack they are labelled as not practicing Ninjutsu, even though Ninjutsu is an art of self protection, which it cannot be if it is only been practiced as if one is wearing armour from the sixteenth century. This is not martial arts, this is historical reenactment.

Isn't it strange that when Hatsumi Sensei shows a defence against a modern punch its Ninjutsu, but when An Shu Hayes does it, then its a completely seperate martial art.

Ok so in Toshindo we practice with air shields and bags, but then they did in Japan. Sometimes they even struck trees (see the Hatsumi Koto Ryu, and Shinden Fudo Ryu Videos)
And in Toshindo we wear armour. Heh isn't there a photograph of Dr Hatsumi or one of the Shihan in the 60s or 70s wearing Kendo armour to defend against a kick?

Oh yes we call it TO-SHIN DO, but isn't Ninjutsu called Budo Taijutsu now, and didn't Takamatsu call it Happo Biken. Its still the same techniques, its just the names been changed to protect the innocent (Just a joke) but you know what I mean. Or maybe you don't.
Ninjutsu was not always called Ninjutsu, and in this day and age where Ninjutsu has had such a bad rep from Hollywood, Books, Comics and the rest of the media, it might just be a good idea to go into hiding a little bit. Takamatsu did, hence Happo Biken. But wait a minute 'TO and SHIN', are these not the characters that make up the word NIN of Ninjutsu and Ninja.

Maybe its the fact that TO-SHIN DO practitioners do a kind of Kumite whilst fully padded up that seperates this art from real ninjutsu.
Well my answer to that is that by using this approach it enables the practitioner to be put under stress safely and is probably the closest one can get to actual fighting. Of course Takamatsu Sensei used to fight people for real to get his training. But in his day there were no such thing as law suits.

Maybe its because people think that An Shu Hayes has added stuff from other martial arts. Well I can't comment on that, but what I do know is I saw no Karate spinning back kicks, Judo throws, kung fu moves, philopino trapping, or anything that I personally would not class as effective Ninjutsu unless of course it was used against the defender so that the practitioner could learn how to effectively deal with a Judo man, Karate man etc. Even the ground work has Movements that are nothing but Ninjutsu' Itami Jime, Hon Jime, Oni Kudaki, Zenpo Ukemi etc.

And if you think that An Shu Hayes does'nt teach Ninjutsu i.e the schools of Takagi Yoshin Ryu, Gyokko Ryu etc anymore, then I suggest you visit his school and see for yourself.

[Grey Eyed Bandit]

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

It seems that some people are under the impression that Stephen K Hayes has turned his back on Ninjutsu and created a new art called TO-SHIN DO.

In a way, Hatsumi sensei has, in that ninjutsu will not be fully revealed until our taijutsu is perfected.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Much of what is taught in the Bujinkan arts today is very traditional, like one was fighting on battlefield in armour in the sixteenth century. For example the Jodan Tsuki where the fist is delivered from the hip into the target. Now this method was used against men in armour, to knock them down and out.

And the methods within the Bujinkan that did not utilize armour and evolved even more with the advent of suhada bujutsu...? Soke actually showed us a new way of punching while wearing armour yesterday, I found it quite similar to a Wing Chun punch in some ways.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

But in todays world, people do'nt wear armour and punch like this. In fact a lot of Japanese didn't punch like this either. Therefore as a student once one has learnt the basics of the punch and how to receive that punch one can go on to learn how to defend against faster, shorter ranged, trickier and more varied in their application.

People don't wear yoroi, true. But it sounds as if you believe other types of dakentai training doesn't exist in the Bujinkan? I'm sorry but if that is the case, that is simply because of your own ignorance.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Unfortunately so many practitioners of Ninjutsu stop at the stage where the punch is delivered from the hip and progress no further. Yet strangely when one takes the art of Ninjutsu and applies it effectively against todays styles of attack they are labelled as not practicing Ninjutsu, even though Ninjutsu is an art of self protection, which it cannot be if it is only been practiced as if one is wearing armour from the sixteenth century.

Ninjutsu is not about self defense and has nothing to do with taijutsu techniques such as these.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Isn't it strange that when Hatsumi Sensei shows a defence against a modern punch its Ninjutsu, but when An Shu Hayes does it, then its a completely seperate martial art.

When Hatsumi sensei does this it is Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu. When Stephen Hayes does...well, I don't know if he wants to call it To Shin Do or taijutsu.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Ok so in Toshindo we practice with air shields and bags, but then they did in Japan. Sometimes they even struck trees (see the Hatsumi Koto Ryu, and Shinden Fudo Ryu Videos)

When I read things like this I actually get a wee bit scared. Do you really think that these things do not exist within the Bujinkan???

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Oh yes we call it TO-SHIN DO, but isn't Ninjutsu called Budo Taijutsu now,

Nope. Budo Taijutsu has wrongly been labeled ninjutsu, but ninjutsu is not taijutsu in this sense.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Ninjutsu was not always called Ninjutsu, and in this day and age where Ninjutsu has had such a bad rep from Hollywood, Books, Comics and the rest of the media, it might just be a good idea to go into hiding a little bit. Takamatsu did, hence Happo Biken.

...and Hatsumi sensei does as well, hence Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Maybe its the fact that TO-SHIN DO practitioners do a kind of Kumite whilst fully padded up that seperates this art from real ninjutsu.

Yes, but then again, combative techniques such as the ones you speak of are not ninjutsu.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Well my answer to that is that by using this approach it enables the practitioner to be put under stress safely and is probably the closest one can get to actual fighting. Of course Takamatsu Sensei used to fight people for real to get his training. But in his day there were no such thing as law suits.

Oh but there was, he was put on trial several times. As for stress training, I refer to my analogy about how people tend to confuse their backyard pool with the ocean.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Well I can't comment on that, but what I do know is I saw no Karate spinning back kicks, Judo throws, kung fu moves, philopino trapping,

I've seen all these things and more done within the Bujinkan, actually Nagato sensei demonstrated a spinning backkick just a few hours ago. Of course, we don't bend our backs while throwing people like they do in judo, but I think you get my point.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

And if you think that An Shu Hayes does'nt teach Ninjutsu i.e the schools of Takagi Yoshin Ryu, Gyokko Ryu etc anymore, then I suggest you visit his school and see for yourself.

Takagi Yoshin ryu is about as far removed from ninjutsu as you can get, and I highly doubt Hayes has been taught the ninjutsu aspects of Gyokko ryu.

[Kreth]

=============
Mod. Note.
Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-Jeff
-MT Moderator-

[Don Roley]

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Much of what is taught in the Bujinkan arts today is very traditional, like one was fighting on battlefield in armour in the sixteenth century. For example the Jodan Tsuki where the fist is delivered from the hip into the target. Now this method was used against men in armour, to knock them down and out.

I just can't read anymore.

I train in Japan and your description is waaaaaaay off the mark from my experience.

I really do not think you understand what goes on in Japan or the real reasons why certain things are done the way they are. I understand that you have loyalty to your teacher and think highly of your art. But I fear many Bujinkan members will take great offense at your misreprenting what Hatsumi does in your quest to make Hayes sound better.

In reply to Ninravus and Don Roley.

Firstly Mr Roley. I mean no offence to Bujinkan practitioners but am simply pointing out that the type of punch mentioned is
a/ An old method of punching against people in armour
b/ An excellent way to start training to develop power, alignment, distancing etc
c/ Is today limited in its use based on how people attack today.

I am in no way saying that this punch is the only form of Dakentaijutsu we have in ninjutsu. Certainly not. Ninjutsu has probably more ways of striking than any other martial art. Its just that from my experience of training with Bujinkan members, many seem to stop at this point instead of saying 'OK where do i go from here', 'How can I use this type of punch against a jab, cross etc.

How many times have I seen high level black belts still defending against this punch from the hip. Surely at their level of training they should be defending against punches that are inches from their face.

A few years ago i inherited a Bujinkan group that had a number of black belts training in it. I was amazed that these black belts had no idea how to use this punch in reality or how to defend themselves in todays world.

This is not to say of course that all Bujinkan instructors that train under Dr Hatsumi are like this, of course not, some take the techniques to the next level. Stephen K Hayes being one of them and of course there are others.

Now Nimravus, you have stated that ninjutsu will not be revealed until our taijutsu is perfected. Well you have been training since the 90s, An Shu Hayes has been training since the 70s. He is twenty years or more your senior. Not only that he lived in Japan and developed a very close friendship with Dr Hatsumi which exists to this day. Is it not possible then that Mr Hayes was taught Ninjutsu before you and I even knew it existed. Just because Dr Hatsumi now concentrates on the Budo side of the art, it does not really mean it was not taught in the past. even Hatsumi Sensei has stated that he is a Ninja and has taught Ninjutsu.

One quote you make is that Ninjutsu is not self defence.
If that is so what is it?
Ninjutsu developed as a means of self protection of the body, mind and spirit. Any Japanese instructor will tell you that.

Budo Taijutsu wrongly been labelled Ninjutsu?
I think you need to understand some of the reasons why Hatsumi Sensei is now calling Ninjutsu that.

In reading you posts Ninravus I can't quite work out if you are agreeing with me or not. You seem to be backing up what I say. Either that, or your not reading my posts.

For example when I mention
Originally Posted by Gary Arthur
Ok so in Toshindo we practice with air shields and bags, but then they did in Japan. Sometimes they even struck trees (see the Hatsumi Koto Ryu, and Shinden Fudo Ryu Videos)

When I read things like this I actually get a wee bit scared. Do you really think that these things do not exist within the Bujinkan???

My point exactly. We train with pads just like in the Bujinkan, so why when the TO-SHIN DO student does so people are heard to exclaim, "Oh TO-SHIN DO is not Bujinkan" or "not Ninjutsu".

you also put

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur
Well I can't comment on that, but what I do know is I saw no Karate spinning back kicks, Judo throws, kung fu moves, philopino trapping,

I've seen all these things and more done within the Bujinkan, actually Nagato sensei demonstrated a spinning backkick just a few hours ago. Of course, we don't bend our backs while throwing people like they do in judo, but I think you get my point.

Nagato demonstrated a spinning back kick. Was this a Karate kick? or a Ninjutsu style kick. I have done a kick where we turns as the attacker is coming and putting the hand to the fron kick backwards. Ushiro Muki Geri I think is the name. I know Nagato was a kick boxer, maybe he was demonstarting this.

I also mentioned that in Takamatsu Day there were not law suits. And there were not. There is a big difference here. Takamatsu was put on trial as a Japanese in a Chinese country for killing a number of Chinamen. This is a huge difference from being in a law suit because you got in a fight with some one a split their lip, or gave them a black eye.

And finally if you doubt that An Shu Hayes has not been taught the Ninjutsu aspects of Gyokko Ryu why dont you visit him and find out for yourself. You might find yourself surprised.

[Grey Eyed Bandit]

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

c/ Is today limited in its use based on how people attack today.

Then of course you have drunk people, tee hee...

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

I am in no way saying that this punch is the only form of Dakentaijutsu we have in ninjutsu. Certainly not. Ninjutsu has probably more ways of striking than any other martial art.

Less, I would say. None at all, actually.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Its just that from my experience of training with Bujinkan members, many seem to stop at this point instead of saying 'OK where do i go from here', 'How can I use this type of punch against a jab, cross etc.

Right, but wouldn't it be better to correct the problem itself, rather than to admit defeat?

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

How many times have I seen high level black belts still defending against this punch from the hip. Surely at their level of training they should be defending against punches that are inches from their face.

There are times for shinken gata and there are times for regular training.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

A few years ago i inherited a Bujinkan group that had a number of black belts training in it. I was amazed that these black belts had no idea how to use this punch in reality or how to defend themselves in todays world.

But in To Shin Do you have a guarantee of some sort that such practitioners will not appear at all, right? If so, I'm honestly interested in how you do this.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Now Nimravus, you have stated that ninjutsu will not be revealed until our taijutsu is perfected. Well you have been training since the 90s, An Shu Hayes has been training since the 70s. He is twenty years or more your senior. Not only that he lived in Japan and developed a very close friendship with Dr Hatsumi which exists to this day. Is it not possible then that Mr Hayes was taught Ninjutsu before you and I even knew it existed.

If that was the case, he wouldn't erroneously keep referring to ninjutsu as synonymous with taijutsu. The Japanese do indeed know the difference, that is why they can allow themselves to be careless with the use of the term in question.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Just because Dr Hatsumi now concentrates on the Budo side of the art, it does not really mean it was not taught in the past. even Hatsumi Sensei has stated that he is a Ninja and has taught Ninjutsu.

He has also stated the complete opposite.
One year Hatsumi sensei also stated something like "one should never drink alcohol, and it's unjustifiable and vulgar to use excessive force against an attacker". The next year he was all "oh, Guinness and Scotch all have very good effects on one's health, and to be kind to your enemy is to be cruel to yourself". All this without having mentioned the American guy Soke "allowed" to become the next Soke.
No one should have to be told that this is a very Japanese way of saying "think by yourself, goddamn idiot!!" Not referring to you here Gary, just an expression.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

One quote you make is that Ninjutsu is not self defence.
If that is so what is it?
Ninjutsu developed as a means of self protection of the body, mind and spirit. Any Japanese instructor will tell you that.

See above. As for ninjutsu, it is a small specialized science dealing with the usage and gathering of information, infiltration, espionage, biology, meteorology etc. and has nothing to do with taijutsu in itself. No, I'll never tire of saying this.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Budo Taijutsu wrongly been labelled Ninjutsu?
I think you need to understand some of the reasons why Hatsumi Sensei is now calling Ninjutsu that.

He is not, he is simply pointing out the fact that he hasn't taught very much at all of ninjutsu!

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Either that, or your not reading my posts.

Ditto. I'm feeling nicely today so I'm not going to quote a few things from a book I just read about confirmatory biases.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

My point exactly. We train with pads just like in the Bujinkan, so why when the TO-SHIN DO student does so people are heard to exclaim, "Oh TO-SHIN DO is not Bujinkan" or "not Ninjutsu".

For one thing, while wearing a Bujinkan uniform you don't have to worry about Nagato sensei getting "upset" when you come and train in Japan.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Nagato demonstrated a spinning back kick. Was this a Karate kick? or a Ninjutsu style kick.

There are no kicks in ninjutsu.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

I have done a kick where we turns as the attacker is coming and putting the hand to the fron kick backwards. Ushiro Muki Geri I think is the name. I know Nagato was a kick boxer, maybe he was demonstarting this.

Nothing of the sort, all taijutsu.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

I also mentioned that in Takamatsu Day there were not law suits. And there were not. There is a big difference here. Takamatsu was put on trial as a Japanese in a Chinese country for killing a number of Chinamen. This is a huge difference from being in a law suit because you got in a fight with some one a split their lip, or gave them a black eye.

Couldn't have been to big other than the slightly higher stakes, in that he as a Japanese was freed in a Chinese court.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

And finally if you doubt that An Shu Hayes has not been taught the Ninjutsu aspects of Gyokko Ryu why dont you visit him and find out for yourself. You might find yourself surprised.

If it's what you wrongly refer to as ninjutsu I have no doubt he has learnt it.

[Don Roley]

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

How many times have I seen high level black belts still defending against this punch from the hip.

Among everything else you have written that I have trouble with, this is probably the most easy to talk about.

The idea of throwing and reacting to punches from the hip is just outside of my experience. You sound like you are describing a totally different art other than what I have been training in all this time.

Does any of the Bujinkan members on this board have their ukes throw punches from the hip during class? Outside of the san shin- a SOLO form, I can't think of times when the punch does not come from about where a boxer would launch it from.

And throwing punches while in close, modified hooks, dealing with the same, etc- yeah I work on them under my Japanese teacher. I wonder how many Bujinkan members don't do this when the guys in Japan are.

[Bob Hubbard]

ok, I have to ask here. Are we talking about Hayes, or differences in the teachings/teaching styles? A thread split may be in order to help keep thigns straight.

[Dale Seago]

Originally Posted by Kaith Rustaz

ok, I have to ask here. Are we talking about Hayes, or differences in the teachings/teaching styles? A thread split may be in order to help keep thigns straight.

It appears to be both at this point, with Mr. Arthur asserting that Hayes needed to "modernize" Hatsumi's art for Western consumption because its allegedly archaic methods did not address the realities of modern Western situations/attacks/etc.

I have nothing to say about Toshindo, but Mr. Arthur appears not to have a clue about how Hatsumi sensei and the shihan teach.

[Kizaru]

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

Do the defences change?
well only in the sense that the distancing, timing etc might be different. Jodan Uke, Chudan Uke, Shikan Ken etc are still used as are more advanced techniques like Yokuto, Danshi etc...

Maybe we can compare and contrast this point.

In the Bujinkan, the technique "Yokuto" comes from the Shoden level of Koto ryu; a basic level scroll, ie this is a basic technique. The technique "Danshi" comes from the "Jo/Tenryaku no Maki" of Gyokko ryu; another basic level scroll, therefore, another basic level technique.

If we look at the "Ten Chi Jin Ryaku no Maki" as a guide for what needs to be known by Shodan (black belt), both Yokuto and Danshi are included in there. "Shodan" literally means "Begining Step", ie everything under that is basic.

So maybe we could say "What's advanced in Toshindo is basic in the Bujinkan". For what purpose? Do Toshindo practitioners feel that more time needs to be spent on learning the basics before going onto "advanced" techniques? Do Bujinkan practitioners feel that they can polish their "basics before the basics" while working on "basic" techniques? Are the techniques done differently, or is the approach done differently?

In my experience, after I got the movements down of the basic "Yokuto", I was shown some "variations", then my teacher pushed me to use the same principle against long distance punches, close punches, grabs followed by punches, kicks, and punching attacks from kumi uchi. I thought that was pretty comprehensive instruction.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur

And if you think that An Shu Hayes does'nt teach Ninjutsu i.e the schools of Takagi Yoshin Ryu, Gyokko Ryu etc anymore, then I suggest you visit his school and see for yourself.

From my perspective, Takagi Yoshin ryu does have a connection to ninjutsu, but I don't think that connection is as clearly defined as the above statement.

[Shogun]

The typical time spent in TSD before learning the Yokuto, Koyoku, and the rest of the Shoden kata is around two years. that doent seem like MORE time spent on the Bujinkan curriculum, but less. Doesnt the average person who trains several times a week usually reach Shodan in about 4 years? sorry to make a time frame....

[Michael Stinson]

Originally Posted by Kizaru

Maybe we can compare and contrast this point.

In the Bujinkan, the technique "Yokuto" comes from the Shoden level of Koto ryu; a basic level scroll, ie this is a basic technique. The technique "Danshi" comes from the "Jo/Tenryaku no Maki" of Gyokko ryu; another basic level scroll, therefore, another basic level technique.

If we look at the "Ten Chi Jin Ryaku no Maki" as a guide for what needs to be known by Shodan (black belt), both Yokuto and Danshi are included in there. "Shodan" literally means "Begining Step", ie everything under that is basic.

So maybe we could say "What's advanced in Toshindo is basic in the Bujinkan". For what purpose? Do Toshindo practitioners feel that more time needs to be spent on learning the basics before going onto "advanced" techniques? Do Bujinkan practitioners feel that they can polish their "basics before the basics" while working on "basic" techniques? Are the techniques done differently, or is the approach done differently?

In my experience, after I got the movements down of the basic "Yokuto", I was shown some "variations", then my teacher pushed me to use the same principle against long distance punches, close punches, grabs followed by punches, kicks, and punching attacks from kumi uchi. I thought that was pretty comprehensive instruction.

Heh,

Actually here is the funny thing in this statement...Yokuto is actually taught to white belts in To-Shin Do...however it is taught more as principal than the actual waza...and the students are not even really necessarily told it is yokuto until later. The same is true of koyoku, ketsumyaku and a few others. The principals of these techniques (along with rolling, striking, tai/taeodoki, etc) are all taught in TSD in the first 9 months of training. It is mentioned that these are 'basic' techniques...however my understanding of the differences between the 'basic' scrolls and the more 'advanced' scrolls is that the basic scrolls cover the most likely situations. It is not that they are truly more 'basic' than the later material...just more likely to occur...therefore more important to get earlier on. These 'basic' waza have a LOT in them as you hinted at above.

There is a major problem with this discussion as well as this forum...there are not really too many truly experienced To-Shin Do practitioners here that can readily answer questions...or compare contrast.

No disrespect to Dale but I hardly think a few videos and a solitary To-Shin Do student give one a very large insight. If someone were to come to him and say they had a good familiarity and understanding of the Bujinkan in the same manner I am sure he would say the same. I know I have heard it said often enough that if you want to learn the Bujinkan approach one must study with Soke (or one that is has gone far enough that continues to study with Soke).

Unless one has recently studied with Mr. Hayes or any of the other senior practitioners (John Poliquin, Mark Russo, James Norris, Brett Varnum, etc) I would tend to take what that person says about To-Shin Do with a very large grain of salt.

[Kizaru]

Originally Posted by Michael Stinson

...however my understanding of the differences between the 'basic' scrolls and the more 'advanced' scrolls is that the basic scrolls cover the most likely situations. It is not that they are truly more 'basic' than the later material...just more likely to occur...therefore more important to get earlier on. These 'basic' waza have a LOT in them as you hinted at above..

Interesting perspective. So then why, for example, are there responses to choke attacks in both the Shoden and Okuden levels of Koto ryu? I was under the impression that the first three scrolls form the foundation for the Okuden scroll. In Gyokko ryu, (excluding the Kihon and Taihenjutsu sections), the first section is "empty" hands vs empty hands, next "empty" hands vs short blade, last "empty" hands vs long blade. In a society where warriors carried weapons everywhere they went, (both inside the castle and out) does an empty handed attack seem more likely than an armed attack? I don't know. I wasn't taught to think one group of attacks would be more likely than another, just that "hey, in this part, all the attacks are first done unarmed, this next part they're first done against a short balde", and so on and so forth.

[Michael Stinson]

Originally Posted by Kizaru

In Gyokko ryu, (excluding the Kihon and Taihenjutsu sections), the first section is "empty" hands vs empty hands, next "empty" hands vs short blade, last "empty" hands vs long blade. In a society where warriors carried weapons everywhere they went, (both inside the castle and out) does an empty handed attack seem more likely than an armed attack? I don't know. I wasn't taught to think one group of attacks would be more likely than another, just that "hey, in this part, all the attacks are first done unarmed, this next part they're first done against a short balde", and so on and so forth.

Hmm...that is a good question...kind of makes you wonder why there are so many unarmed waza period if you look at it from that perspective. Of course all of the waza regardless of the 'basic form' can be done with weapons or without...standing...up against a wall...taken to the ground...etc. The way I have always been taught is that the first stuff you learn is the most likely methods...armed, unarmed, etc. The responses and principals contained within them are the most likely etc. Of course I do preface that with 'my understanding' based on what I have been taught to this point. I wouldn't be at all surprised if at some later point my understanding is expanded, reversed, rearranged, etc...certainly wouldn't be the first time

[Bob Hubbard]

As I read this, to me, it seems as if both schools have many of the same concepts, techniques, etc.

They just teach them in different orders, spend differing amounts of time on them, and have gone in different directions since they started.

By this I mean that Dr. Hatsumi's students who are with him now are seeing material that wasn't shown to Mr. Hayes in the 80's (due to it not being time for the material, or any other reason), and Mr. Hayes has continued to refine and improve his own system.

Maybe, as has been started, looking at what is in common, then comparing how each is taught or trained would be good? At some time, someone will have to do up a glossery, as I can't tell a waza from a wristwatch.