judo... the gelntle way....

[Cyriacus]

Yes, I have to say, I've never seen McDojo judo. I'm having a hard time envisioning such a thing. It seems that judo is about as screw-it-up proof as you could get, unless for some reason an instructor had a No Randori rule in their school, which I couldn't imagine.

In the instance I saw, the Instructor was actually pretty good. Its just that they were so damnably monotopical about it. The problem is, that they were Training Judo to VS Judo. Its kind of like Sport Karate/TKD/Kung Fu/Pure-Sport-Boxing. Theyre Training to Fight each other.
And Mcdojo Judo is basically a Judo VS Judo Mechanic. All of it works, against Judo. And You can apply that Logic to any other Sport System.

 

[lklawson]

In the instance I saw, the Instructor was actually pretty good. Its just that they were so damnably monotopical about it. The problem is, that they were Training Judo to VS Judo. Its kind of like Sport Karate/TKD/Kung Fu/Pure-Sport-Boxing. Theyre Training to Fight each other.
And Mcdojo Judo is basically a Judo VS Judo Mechanic. All of it works, against Judo. And You can apply that Logic to any other Sport System.

Training Judo vs. Judo has the happy advantage of working pretty well as Judo vs anything-else. Once you lay hands on, it's all the same. There are plenty of basic Judo throws, locks, and chokes which don't rely on a gi. Ipon Seoinage, Koshi Garuma, O Goshi, O Soto Gari are all stupid easy to do no-gi. There are plenty of others that have the same no-gi advantages and most of the rest can be modified with minimal fuss and muss to work no-gi. And that's just counting if the other fella ain't wearing heavy enough clothing to get a good hold on.

Sorry, I'm with SPX on this one. Unless there's simply NO randori then it's gonna be pretty applicable once the fight moves to grappling.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Cyriacus]

Training Judo vs. Judo has the happy advantage of working pretty well as Judo vs anything-else. Once you lay hands on, it's all the same. There are plenty of basic Judo throws, locks, and chokes which don't rely on a gi. Ipon Seoinage, Koshi Garuma, O Goshi, O Soto Gari are all stupid easy to do no-gi. There are plenty of others that have the same no-gi advantages and most of the rest can be modified with minimal fuss and muss to work no-gi. And that's just counting if the other fella ain't wearing heavy enough clothing to get a good hold on.

Sorry, I'm with SPX on this one. Unless there's simply NO randori then it's gonna be pretty applicable once the fight moves to grappling.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I didnt phrase that very well; At least, I didnt phrase it with discussing with other people in mind - I was addressing the Logical Cycles in question. If You say Judo VS Judo = Judo can work well against anything else because they can be easily done without one on in the event of a grappling phase of fighting, means that "This is not always the case in regard to, say, a karate or TKD or kung fu school" is one big Logical Contradiction, since He seems to be referring to McDojos, as ascertained afterward. So if Judo can do it, saying Striking Arts cannot have the same logic applied is a Logical Contradiction, since these Sport Systems can be spoken of to say, that Light Contact Karate isnt hard to change into Full Contact if someone decides to hit full force. Sport TKD Techniques work on someone who doesnt have Gear on. Sport Kungfu Methodologies work well on someone who isnt using Sport Kungfu. Which is all relatively, factual. Its like saying Judo works for being Judo, but those others dont because they dont. It doesnt make any sense, given the reasoning being used here.

To perhaps express My View better, no matter whether its a Mcdojo, Sport, Traditional, or whathaveyou, the Methods are designed to work. In Sport Systems, theyre adapted to work better for the Sport. One way to put this, is Boxing Gyms that Train in Outfighting, and practically ignore the various other aspects, and focus on being good Outfighters, which is more Sport. It still works though, irrefutably. In a Traditional context, that depends on the Art. In the Mcdojo context, theyre still learning the same functional, effective Methodologies. It just perhaps isnt being Trained in too well. Then theres subcategories again. What is the Sport? Is it Knockdown based? Tap Point based? Stop Point? Continuous Point? Etc, etc, etc.

But in the context of what We were discussing, saying all that didnt really amount to much. I just addressed the minor generalizations taking place, and smoothed them over a bit with some context. Judo can be poorly Trained, just like anything else. It still works. It just means that its User may not be *as* able to use it in a Self Defense Situation or Engagement. He may well be fit enough to give it a good shot though. Or perhaps He wont be.
Theres a lot of variables here. Enough to quantify balancing out the board, rather than setting Judo above other Systems for being Judo, and stating that it, Poorly Trained, is for being Judo more effectual, without applying the same logic to other Systems.

I could go on further, but Ill leave it at that for now.

 

[SPX]

I'll just put it this way. . .

Judo doesn't require much "thought" when it comes to how you would apply it on the street. Basically you would apply it the same way on the street as you would in training. With, say, TKD on the other hand, I feel that you have to work it out in your head more. You have to realize that striking a horse stance in a fight might not be the best idea, or that reverse punches with your hands cocked at your sides aren't practical, or that striking in a real confrontation bears only a vague resemblance to striking in a semi-contact point fighting competition with a boatload of rules.

Judo, on the other hand, translates quite well as is. Yes, in an explosive SD encounter you will have to deal with punches in order to get to grappling range, but like lklawson said above, once you have your hands on someone it's pretty much the same thing that you've been doing during randori.

 

[Cyriacus]

I'll just put it this way. . .

Judo doesn't require much "thought" when it comes to how you would apply it on the street. Basically you would apply it the same way on the street as you would in training. With, say, TKD on the other hand, I feel that you have to work it out in your head more. You have to realize that striking a horse stance in a fight might not be the best idea, or that reverse punches with your hands cocked at your sides aren't practical, or that striking in a real confrontation bears only a vague resemblance to striking in a semi-contact point fighting competition with a boatload of rules.

Judo, on the other hand, translates quite well as is. Yes, in an explosive SD encounter you will have to deal with punches in order to get to grappling range, but like lklawson said above, once you have your hands on someone it's pretty much the same thing that you've been doing during randori.

Wait, wait. Why the hell would You break out into Horse Riding Stance in a Fight? Striking from the Hip is a Finishing Strike, and also serves to improve the Body Mechanics for Punching from the Shoulder. And as for Your Hands being on someone, they could well keep hitting, instead of playing the Grappling game. And most folks will. Or maybe this Theoretical Person wont.
Horse Riding Stance is intended for Close Distance Striking in Confined Space. Some places exaggerated its width a whole lot, though. It is also a Transitional Stance, or a Side Facing Stance.

Traditional TKD is based on Basics and Application. Not... Horse Riding Stance and Reverse Hip Punches. Thats just weird. (weird as a focus.)

This makes Me wonder what Youve been looking at

 

[frank raud]

In the instance I saw, the Instructor was actually pretty good. Its just that they were so damnably monotopical about it. The problem is, that they were Training Judo to VS Judo. Its kind of like Sport Karate/TKD/Kung Fu/Pure-Sport-Boxing. Theyre Training to Fight each other.
And Mcdojo Judo is basically a Judo VS Judo Mechanic. All of it works, against Judo. And You can apply that Logic to any other Sport System.

Round these parts, most martial arts are taught how to defend against a similar attacker. TKD vs TKD, karate vs karate, judo vs judo. Partially becuase in competition that is what you are going up against, another practicioner of the same or similar art. Rare is any club that focuses on how to defend against an different style of fighting. Teaching kick defense against a grappler?

Is judo the be all and end all? No, but as an art that focuses on off balancing an opponent before throwing, locking or submitting them, it makes for pretty effective defense against other styles. Yes, the puncher can try to still punch at a judoka after he has been grabbed, but there wont be a lot of time before they hit the floor, and most strikes are not that effective if you dont have a solid base to strike from. The concept of kuzushi is a wonderful thing.

 

[lklawson]

With, say, TKD on the other hand, I feel that you have to work it out in your head more. You have to realize that striking a horse stance in a fight might not be the best idea, or that reverse punches with your hands cocked at your sides aren't practical, or that striking in a real confrontation bears only a vague resemblance to striking in a semi-contact point fighting competition with a boatload of rules.

I'm not exactly a fan of TKD but, that said, aware of any TKD schools that teach a horse stance for sparring or one-steps. However, I have seen TKD sparring which teaches the students to keep their hands way, way down, not guard the head at all, and focus on kicking. I assume this is the sort of thing you're thinking of.

Judo, on the other hand, translates quite well as is. Yes, in an explosive SD encounter you will have to deal with punches in order to get to grappling range, but like lklawson said above, once you have your hands on someone it's pretty much the same thing that you've been doing during randori.

Reminds me of the early "Striking vs. Grappling" debates. Unless the other guy is a really good puncher and the Judoka is either exceptionally bad or very unlucky, the one or two punches he's likely to absorb closing range are not likely going to stop him most of the time.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

Wait, wait. Why the hell would You break out into Horse Riding Stance in a Fight?

You wouldn't.

Horse Riding Stance is intended for Close Distance Striking in Confined Space. Some places exaggerated its width a whole lot, though. It is also a Transitional Stance, or a Side Facing Stance.

Huh? The commonly accepted conventional line of thought now has it that the Horse Stance is intended for training leg strength and endurance. Regardless, even in a confined space at close range, a Horse Stance is stupid. The only time it makes sense as a "Fighting Stance" is when you are turning your side to your opponent and moving linearly along the imaginary line connecting your feet. In the firearms world this is called "Blading the body" and in the Olympic Fencing community a modified version is used as the standard basic starting point. The goal is to minimize target area on the body and move central organs out of the opponents path but at the expense of forcing linear movement (front and back). Some old Kata have it as implied fighting "back against a wall" but I'm suspicious of that interpretation.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[SPX]

I'm not exactly a fan of TKD but, that said, aware of any TKD schools that teach a horse stance for sparring or one-steps. However, I have seen TKD sparring which teaches the students to keep their hands way, way down, not guard the head at all, and focus on kicking. I assume this is the sort of thing you're thinking of.

I think what I'm saying is that there's a general disconnect in TMAs between how people train and how they actually fight. In training, a TDKist might use things like a deep front stance or reverse punches, but in actual fighting (or sparring) these same practitioners will resort to boxing-style handwork and a kickboxing-style stance and movement. You don't see any of that in judo. So that's my point about a more direct translation into practical application.

 

[SPX]

Huh? The commonly accepted conventional line of thought now has it that the Horse Stance is intended for training leg strength and endurance.

You see, this is another issue. With the TMAs many practitioners tend to take problem techniques and interpret them in a personal way, rather than their being a universal interpretation. Like yourself, I've heard the "leg strengthening" interpretation, but this is the first I've heard of the "close distance striking in confined space" interpretation. And I've been through a fair number of TKD and Karate schools throughout my life.

Furthermore, I've also never heard of the reverse punch interpreted specifically as a finishing move. In all the TMA classes that I've been in, it was just the way you're taught to punch.

 

[dancingalone]

You wouldn't.

Huh? The commonly accepted conventional line of thought now has it that the Horse Stance is intended for training leg strength and endurance. Regardless, even in a confined space at close range, a Horse Stance is stupid. The only time it makes sense as a "Fighting Stance" is when you are turning your side to your opponent and moving linearly along the imaginary line connecting your feet. In the firearms world this is called "Blading the body" and in the Olympic Fencing community a modified version is used as the standard basic starting point. The goal is to minimize target area on the body and move central organs out of the opponents path but at the expense of forcing linear movement (front and back). Some old Kata have it as implied fighting "back against a wall" but I'm suspicious of that interpretation.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

One of the common applications to shiko dachi, a variation on the horse stance in Goju-ryu karate, is to gain entry into the opponent for a standing valley drop throw.

This isn't necessarily applicable to the people on this thread, but most of the time when I see people saying a certain traditional stance doesn't make sense, it's because they think one is supposed to assume it and then use it as a platform from which to spar. Stances are meant to be transitory movements to acquire a specific goal in relation to your opponent. Dropping into a horse stance can also give you momentary stability against force from the side, and also in karate, it can be use add power to a striking/pushing motion, particularly with a swinging or thrusting arm. Not sure what the term is in a grappling art off the top of my head, but think about the throw where you push with one hand against the opponent's hip/midsection while you pull out his same side leg out from under him with your other arm. This can work well employed from a modified horse stance.

 

[SPX]

Stances are meant to be transitory movements to acquire a specific goal in relation to your opponent.

I've heard this argument many times. Do we have it anywhere in writing that this is what the founders intended, though? I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just wondering if there's documentation.

 

[dancingalone]

I've heard this argument many times. Do we have it anywhere in writing that this is what the founders intended, though? I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just wondering if there's documentation.

Sorry, arts like karate or 'kung fu' just weren't documented that way. You learn (hopefully) from your teacher. Most karate in application looks like a high kicking fest precisely because information such as when you would employ a certain stance weren't transmitted properly.

 

[lklawson]

One of the common applications to shiko dachi, a variation on the horse stance in Goju-ryu karate, is to gain entry into the opponent for a standing valley drop throw.

Tani Otoshi? Huh? Unless you're talking about from an already engaged "tie up" position in which one or both drop their weight a bit (such as in frame 1 above - but that's just where it starts, not the kuzushi, tsukuri, to say nothing of kake). If that's the case than there are any number of throws from which to proceed from a "sunk weight" condition. And it certainly doesn't make any sense to punch from it in this application.

This isn't necessarily applicable to the people on this thread, but most of the time when I see people saying a certain traditional stance doesn't make sense, it's because they think one is supposed to assume it and then use it as a platform from which to spar. Stances are meant to be transitory movements to acquire a specific goal in relation to your opponent. Dropping into a horse stance can also give you momentary stability against force from the side, and also in karate, it can be use add power to a striking/pushing motion, particularly with a swinging or thrusting arm. Not sure what the term is in a grappling art off the top of my head, but think about the throw where you push with one hand against the opponent's hip/midsection while you pull out his same side leg out from under him with your other arm. This can work well employed from a modified horse stance.

Are you talking about a Single Leg or an Irish Pick?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

Sorry, arts like karate or 'kung fu' just weren't documented that way. You learn (hopefully) from your teacher. Most karate in application looks like a high kicking fest precisely because information such as when you would employ a certain stance weren't transmitted properly.

That's a fine position to take, but, you realize of course, that it means you're tacitly agreeing with SPX? In effect, you're saying, "the horse stance as it is taught almost everywhere is wrong and you're right that it doesn't work in the context that most instructors claim it does."

If that's what you're saying, then I don't see any conflict. Further, I should introduce you to my theory on why "traditional blocking" doesn't work as claimed and is not seen in sparring.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

I've heard this argument many times. Do we have it anywhere in writing that this is what the founders intended, though? I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just wondering if there's documentation.

I don't know about in Karate literature (there's a lot of it) but it's pretty well understood in certain European based sword systems. So there is precedent for the theory.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[dancingalone]

Tani Otoshi? Huh? Unless you're talking about from an already engaged "tie up" position in which one or both drop their weight a bit. If that's the case than there are any number of throws from which to proceed from a "sunk weight" condition. And it certainly doesn't make any sense to punch from it in this application.

Not the gif you posted. I learned it as a "Valley Drop" throw, so that is the name I use. The throw can be described as you and uke standing side by side so that you both face to the front, but you have a leg and part of your body behind him as you unbalance uke downwards and to the rear and throw him over your hip and lower section.

Are you talking about a Single Leg or an Irish Pick?

This video is pretty close, except the attack I am describing is NOT to the inside as he demonstrates at 1:27. Picture him scooping from the outside of uke's front leg instead from a reversed stance where his right leg is in front while uke's left leg is in front. What would you call that?

[yt]rBfWfDWAnc4[/yt]

 

[dancingalone]

That's a fine position to take, but, you realize of course, that it means you're tacitly agreeing with SPX? In effect, you're saying, "the horse stance as it is taught almost everywhere is wrong and you're right that it doesn't work in the context that most instructors claim it does."

I don't have a problem with that. Stances theory is nonexistent in the majority of American dojo. People do it just because they're told to. Most never learn the why behind it.

If that's what you're saying, then I don't see any conflict. Further, I should introduce you to my theory on why "traditional blocking" doesn't work as claimed and is not seen in sparring.

I stated in a post not too long ago on the TKD forum that I believe what is taught as traditional blocking to be inefficient at best. Try me, I'll probably share many of the same perspectives.

 

[jks9199]

View the stance as a positioning of the body to achieve a goal; there are lots of times where some variant of a horse stance might be useful. As a primary fighting stance -- it's probably only useful to a small number of very skilled practitioners. But... do you generally stand around in a front stance? a cat stance? or is it maybe a bit more like a higher horse stance? What advantages does stepping and dropping down into the horse stance give you for combat? Does it prepare certain weapons for use? Does it give you stability to receive an attack?

Stances serve a purpose. In my system, the equivalent of a horse stance, the H stance, is used initially for learning the basic movements because it provides a balanced starting point. But that doesn't mean it's not got combative uses... I might step in and deep, turning into an H stance to develop power for a punch. Or I might use it while evading and trapping an incoming strike, to have the stability to off-balance my opponent. Stances are points of stability; steps are transitions and movements between stances. Hell.. I've already said this before.

 

[lklawson]

Not the gif you posted. I learned it as a "Valley Drop" throw, so that is the name I use. The throw can be described as you and uke standing side by side so that you both face to the front, but you have a leg and part of your body behind him as you unbalance uke downwards and to the rear and throw him over your hip and lower section.

Tani Otoshi is the "Valley Drop" in Judo. I think you're referring to Obi Otoshi.

I teach a pre-MoQ boxing version called the "Side Fall" where the throwing arm goes either behind Uke's back and grasps his opposite shoulder or comes across in front at the collar or neck. [edit: I'll try to post up a pic tonight]

This video is pretty close, except the attack I am describing is NOT to the inside as he demonstrates at 1:27. Picture him scooping from the outside of uke's front leg instead from a reversed stance where his right leg is in front while uke's left leg is in front. What would you call that?

Sounds like Kibisu Gaeshi.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk