Purpose of naihanchi

[robertmrivers]

Smith Sensei,

While I appreciate your comment, I believe I said nobody would start a fight from that position. I didn't say anything about training. There are people in this world who start jiyu kumite (free sparring), not practicing ippon kumite (pre-arranged one-step sparring) in this position. I've been doing this for a while now... I have seen Korean stylists as well as Karate stylists break down into this forward stance/ down block positions (gedan no kamae) prior to defending themselves in a practical exercise or during sparring practice. This is not the intent of the technique. Your comment about what the down block "could" be in your training actually backs up my point. This gedan no kamae is NOT a static fighting stance. It is the complete defensive technique. Of course BEGINNERS use the format to practice their techniques in all styles. The problem is when a 3rd or 4th dan is still using a "down block" as a block... the transition to a higher understanding of the kata should have been started by then.

You offer some nice examples of the gedan barai tichiki (hogen for application)... condescending, but nice (I am sure you didn't mean it like that...). Of course I could go the tuite route and apply kansetsu waza at the elbow (maybe throw a little triple warmer pressure in there) as my application or any number of wrist locks, or I could go the kyusho route and apply the covering hand as a strike to the liver point at the ribs as I grab underneath to the large intestine point on the forearm, pull him off balance creating a sympathetic reaction exposing gall bladder 20 striking it with the inside of the forearm as the "block" comes up to the ear and then striking stomach 5 at the jawline as the "block" comes down. We haven't got time to discuss the implications of moving forward vs. turning 90 degrees vs. turning 180 degrees.

Perhaps we are training differently as you are still trying to introduce the chambering motion of the block as a rear elbow...I didn't know we had any orange belts in this discussion... just kidding. I have a 7th dan in Sarcasm.

Of course no disrespect is meant in any of these comments... I think we all enjoy a little debate and love to "toot our own horn" every now and then. Our experiences ARE different, we are in different regions of the country. But, I have a curriculum vitae a mile long...just as you do with names like Motobu Chosei, Bill Hayes, Angi Uezu, Ko Uehara, and others on it. I think a mistake people make is they try to assume one's training level based on a topic specific forum discussion. I respect you and your accomplishments. But, the things you describe and the material you teach in your ryu ha are not unique... they are foreign to people who have not had similar exposure to good instructors, but from a traditional karate point of view, these are all concepts that anyone practicing the forms should be exposed to early on in the training.

JT, bro, keep doing what you're doing...don't listen to any of us any more. Its got to be confusing. But...you will find yourself asking some pretty hard questions at some point in your training. You can just chalk it up to experience when the time comes.

Best

Rob

 

[Victor Smith]

Hi Rob and all,

Appreciate the dialogue. I wasn't trying to be condescending but to create further discussion. There is only so much you can do writing something that gets a point across. I find when I go into greater detail (such as the older analysis of what I use Sanchin kata for on the Karate forum) it normally does not generate response.

I tend not to deal in absolutes about anything, except what happens when your fist meets my nose, and how I can try to work to keep that from happpening.

I rarely use non-english terminology simply because all of my inctructors, regardless of country of origin, have always used as much English as possible and I feel it promotes stronger communications for my students into the future. If one is dealing on the international stage I'm sure there is a lot of validity using other terminology. So in my case I was just trying to suggest some of the low blocks possiblities.

I'm not a connect the points kind of guy. I knew of George Dillman (competing at his tournamnts) before he met Oyata Sensei. I was being trained in striking (where he hits and you go OWIEEEEE) by my Indonesian insructor before George came over to him at a tournament and describe his meeting Oyata Sensei and trying to invite him to attend a clinic. More of a vital points versus a kyusho approach.

One of my Isshinryu instructors made a better explaination. After his own personal decades of makiwara work he only used one pressure point, one that started at the top of the head and ended at the feet, and felt if you hit hard enough anywhere you should get the correct result if you train hard enough. For him we were always on the bruising end, and I do believe that point.

As far as technique study I'm neutral, if you can do it and pull it off, it's the correct application. Once I felt things like elbow strikes to the rear were trival too, after all I'm 6'1" and the chances I would have to fend off such an attack were trivial. But one of the women I've trained set me straight,what do you feel 'we' actually have to deal with. Guys grabbing us.

It made me think that simplicity that fits the student is the highest goal so I rarely discount much.

On the whole in most martial arts discussions or MA literature because I see there are often too many absolutes that really can't be proven.

In an earlier post the point was being made about Funakoshi Sensei's knowledge or abilities. I can't prove anything of course but having trained under a gentleman whose father trained under Funakoshi, and whose Shotokan is both Shotokan and totally different from all the other descriptions I see bandied about, I'm sure that its difficult to know the truth.

Yes one can quote Motobu Chokoi, but there is a case that he is hardly a neutral source either.

On the other hand Funakoshi, Motobu, Mabuni and Miyagi (among others) worked very hard to gain recognition in their day with their arts. They taught, created books, and worked for recognition in the Japanese martial arts establishment.

Funakoshi essentially created the University Karate training program as I see it. His students likely were all from backgrounds that they already were trained in Judo, for such reason and the fact you probably had them for what 4 years before they moved on in life, and the fact thay Funakoshi established multiple university programs so he must have regularily been on the move, how much you can fit into such a program is limited. It would be nice to say, yes he didn't know, or yes he consciously dropped material.

It would seem to me that instead he consciously considered what would make sense to teach to university and Naval War College students in the given time frame. Considering many had a judo background, no need to emphasize throws and locks, instead concentrate on striking and kicking.

I've been working at teaching for 30 years. Depending on the time the student can put at it, and the time you can spend with them, there is a limited amount you can accomplish.

And as one of his supporters was Dr. Kano, who wanted the MA as a way to develop young bodies, it's not impossible that he was influenced in that way what karate should be for his teachings too.

The students gradutated and went on to fun carrears as admnistrators in Korea, Mancuria and overseeing other fun Japanese military war activities. Some of them filtered back and saw the program was changing for various reasons such as Funakoshi's son and the other new instructors designs. He was getting older, then lost his son, then the war and he was the figurehead at the end.

His Karate-do Koyan contained a lot of material that hte JKA eventually edited out as their interests evolved, originally showing more applications for example. He did share some of the Bubishi material in the original Chinese (so much for hiding Chinese origins) as did Mabuni Sensei sharing even more in their 1920's and 1930's publications.

On the whole I consider he did OK, he crafted a karate tradition to fit the needs he saw and did a great deal to share with the world.

Students of his also contributed, and not just within the JKA. When Taria Shinken wanted to branch out into kobudo he directed his student to Mabuni Sensei and a great deal of Ryukyu Kobudo was saved in his efforts.

Others former students such as Mutsu traveled to Okinawa and in his own way published much of the later JKA kata curriculum before the Karate-do Koyan was published. Mutsu also saved a ton of karate application studies in that 1933 work.

There is little question the Okinawan arts are very different from their Japanese cousins, but true to the real karate traditions, who really knew what remains hidden.

I also have come to understand why any Korean is reluctant to talk about Japanese sources. It's simple after what the Japanese did to Korea during the 50 years of application they have no reason to have polite feelings in that direction. Such strong emotions will not allow much to be said.

Again full historical understanding will remain hidden.

All can be evaluated neutrally, and if you can do it that's all that matters in the end.

Just a few thoughts from an aging martial artist. I hope it inspires some further discussion.

pleasantly,