Bunkai discussion (no applications)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sensei Mike

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 15, 2002
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Location
Upstate New York
Chufeng stated: I don't study in another system...I train in YiLiQuan...

I use Naihanchi Shodan to emphasize to my students how even the simplest (on the surface) forms contain a wealth of information...I am quite frankly surprised at how many karateka don't know more about the layers of technique within kata, and even more surprised at those who would discard kata altogether.

By showing them a form from a different system, I hope to stimulate my students to start seriously examining the forms within our own system...I could just show them; but, when its spoon fed, it doesn't stick...

Like your "discoveries" in Naihanchi bunkai...if those were just given to you, if you didn't have to work for them, you would have a hard time remembering them, let alone executing them.

Chufeng:

I enjoy your perspective. I too show my students how basic kata, such as Naihanchi Shodan and Pinan Shodan have such a wealth of information. Do you know where some of my best ideas come from? My students. An example. I had taught a strike to the biceps to lower the head. Some months later, I was having real trouble making a particular big spin work well as a takedown for large opponents. (It worked against smaller opponents) A student tried the biceps strike and voila, magic, one of the best takedowns I use. Now this takedown is referred to by the student's name.

This has happened time and again. Just the other evening, a student was toying with a move I had used against a grab. He wanted to make it work against a left strike, right strike combo. (In my class, we are pretty much in agreement that this is an attack we have to deal with, and it is a big problem.) We both had a couple of good ideas, as did other students doing partner work next to this student. Together we crafted a great response to this attack. After effectively blocking both strikes, there is a left elbow to the head/neck coupled to a 180 degree rotation of the body for lots of power. The takedown was a new one, but worked really well. Like all the bunkai I practice, it came from the next movement in the kata.

For me, the key to success in motivating students, is to find techniques that they believe will work (whether mine, someone else's or their own). Then they often become determined to do the massive repetition (both kata and partner work) necessary to make them work.
 
OP
S

Sensei Mike

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 15, 2002
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Location
Upstate New York
"Ryu"ShiKan stated:

I agree with you (Chufeng) on the "spoon feeding" part. Something that is earned too easily is easily taken for granted or disregarded.

Your teachers in school didn't stand there and tell you the answers to all the questions.........you wouldn't learn anything if they did.

What they did do was teach you how to find the answer yourself thereby letting you learn more.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day........teach him how to fish and you feed him for life.

Fellow karateka (and other martial artists). Following is a long post. (Did someone expect a short one from me?) I started this new thread to take the non-application issues off the application thread, as I and several others have requested. I think our colleague "Ryu"ShiKan deserves a thorough rebuttal to his point above regarding the need to limit what you teach a student.

I imagine that from the perspective describe in the quote above, that all martial arts teachers must somehow limit what they show to their students. It seems it would be fine to show their students some techniques, but not others.(What these are, or how they are determined, I don't know). Perhaps it is appropriate if these techniques are limited to basic kicks, blocks and strikes, or body shifting, or other basic patterns. Perhaps if merely a simple kick is shown, then the teacher would not be "tell[ing] you (the student) the answers to all the questions."

But if an interpretation to a series of movements in a kata is shown, then it seems to appear, according to the above argument, that the student would then be denied the ability to learn for himself. Rather, it seems from the above perspective, that it would be optimal to leave kata as somewhat of a mystery to students.

This approach shouldn't be surprising. It pretty accurately describes much the way that kata has been handed down over the past 50 years. And the results are a dismal failure. System after system practices kata as a dance, as something to be done only for promotions and in tournaments. Countless hours of students' practice time are spent mindlessly going over repetitive movements they have no hope of making meaning out of. System after system has downplayed the practice of kata to where a given form may be practiced, in the dojo, perhaps a few times a month. And this is in the "kata oriented" systems.

Many systems have reacted by abandoning kata altogether. I fully support this. I think it is foolish to practice a movement that has no meaning for you. For those interested in self-defense, as do the vast majority of the students who have trained with me, the key to success is massive repetition of effective techniques. A technique will never be effective if you don't know how to apply it. For perhaps hundreds of thousands, if not millions of students in karate and Tae Kwon Do, there is blind repetition of movements that will never make sense to them.

This is a failed experiment on a grand scale.

I take a different approach. I train in, and teach a system that does nothing but kata, as well as partner work for the practice of applications from kata. Of course, we include makiwara and bag work to build power for these combinations, as well as other strengthening exercises. After two weeks, my beginning students practice Pinan Shodan 25 times per evening. After a semester, they will have practiced 1000 repetitions. This repetition only begins to approach the level of repetition practiced in Okinawa 100 years ago. Is this the only way to practice self-defense, or karate? Absolutely not, there are many, many ways. I just try to model my training as best I can on how karate might have been practiced 100 years ago. (This is not all that clear, as the historical record is spotty.) But there are many wonderful arts out there that do things a lot different.

I too agree with the "teach a man to fish" concept but before he can fish, he needs a pole, a line, and a hook (or in Okinawa, perhaps a net or a nunte sai). I don't think students have the luxury of not learning practical applications right away. When are they best taught? Should they wait a year? How about two? What happens to the two year students who are attacked and hurt seriously, if not killed? Do you then apologize and say that the time just wasn't right for you to teach them practical applications?

I start right away, with movements from kata. Like other teachers, I could teach any movements I want. I choose those that Itosu taught, the movements from his kata. Others choose other techniques and combinations. There is lots good out there. The key is that it is best if they are effective.

I have a couple of goals for my students. Like in Okinawa 100 years ago, the key is massive repetitions in the air, and then lower repetitions to the bag (improved substitute for makiwara) and with partners. My students take sequential movements from kata, and practice them with partners in self defense patterns, all the way to a takedown. The finish after the takedown is often added, but in many cases, (like my Naihanchi Shodan stomp), the finish can often come from the next step in the kata. This approach is not that common. It is but one. But it is effective. You leverage the muscle memory built by countless repetitions to execute, just as in the kata. No changes are necessary. You have power where you need it and relaxation where you need it.

It is all too unfortunate that so many, many karate systems have such simplistic approaches to bunkai. A block then a strike, or a block then a kick and a strike. How about this ridiculous interpretation. As you proceed forward with several steps (for example in Pinan Shodan where there are three sequential steps forward with a shuto (knife hand) movement, the opponent is stepping back, one step at a time and striking. I find it difficult to imagine that anybody could imagine a fight unfolding like this. But this bunkai is found in many systems. Students often blindly follow what their sensei teach, without the critical question, "would it work for me?"

In some of the kenpo (Japanese and Chinese) and other Chinese systems, an attack is often met with a response that can only be considered a barrage. Multiple strikes, kicks and locks. This multi-counter response seems to make such good sense. A single counter might not work. It might be blocked or miss. It might not hit hard enough, whatever.

But in many Japanese, as well as Okinawan systems today, there is often a significant emphasis on ikken hisatsu. (One strike kills or better, one strike, certain death). Often, the bunkai of many karate systems leans heavily on a single counterstrike to the solar plexus. In fact, jiyu kumite in general, and certainly most tournament jiyu kumite is built around this very principle.

Na簿ve students accept the teachings of their teachers that they can hit a large aggressive opponent with a single strike to his mid-section and end the fight. The notion that the solar plexus is the prime target in a real life fight, with the high stakes that are involved, is, in my view, a fantasy. It is very hard to hit, and even harder to kick. And surrounding it is perhaps the best protected part of the body.

For many who study other martial systems, the whole notion of ending the attack of a large aggressive attacker with a single strike is absurd. Are there masters out there that can do this? Sure. Oyata is a great example. Mas Oyama, probably even a better one. But it takes many, many years, perhaps decades, and countless hours at the makiwara, to get this power. Yet this technique is taught as if students who train once or twice a week will acquire this capability in perhaps a short period (two to three years perhaps).

Teaching ikken hitatsu to gullible beginners is to me, simply wrong. You are taking a dangerous situation (an attack) and compounding it by having a response that is likely to be completely ineffective. But if some poor student gets seriously hurt, perhaps even after years of training, the sensei has no skin in the game.

There are a growing number of systems and dojos that have transcended beyond this, and teach not just any old bunkai, but meaningful bunkai. But they are still well in the minority. We all can be thankful that Oyata has exposed much, especially regarding locking techniques and striking to vital zones.

There are many other contributors to the bunkai resurgence, especially those that have cross-trained in grappling arts. In order for people to look deeply inside the kata, they need glimpses of what is there. Let them see a variety of ideas for the movements, and maybe they too can find something that works for themselves.

In some cases, they can take non-sequential movements, say this block, coupled with that step two movements earlier, and add this counter from three moves later. They can patch it altogether and come up with a technique. That is one approach, and Oyata has done this with great brilliance in his technique. But then when the kata is practiced, that combination is not practiced. However, if combinations using sequential movements are studied, then they are practiced, as they are executed, when the kata is.

One of Itosu's 10 precepts urged students to study the meaning of the movements (kata) for themselves. But, and here is the key requirement, they FIRST need to learn the theory of torite (usage). Many systems today do not teach much in the way of torite. They do not teach the breadth of atemi waza (striking techniques). Many karate systems rarely teach the importance of obvious vital zones such as the neck and groin, rather than just the solar plexus. Many do not teach locks and joint manipulations. Many do not teach much in the way of takedowns, and they certainly don't teach all that many takedowns from within the movements of kata. Many systems teach no groundfighting despite the rather high probability that an attack can be more than a punch, kick or grab, and that you can easily wind up on the ground.

And many pay only lip service to the repetitions needed to make techniques useful, especially when it comes to the practice of kata. Perhaps a few each week, rather than the many dozens, or better yet hundreds, needed to really develop effectiveness.

But other "non-karate" systems are replete with some of these concepts. Many include great repetitions of movements. The Chi na of Taichi is a rich art of grappling or seizing, as are many of the Chinese systems. Judo, Ju Jitsu and Aikido, teach an abundance of locking and throwing techniques, as do many Phillipino systems. And ti, is it was practiced in Okinawa, 100 years ago, was full of these concepts. What has happened? Who knows? Many of us have our pet theories.

My posts are intended to provide some insight into the vast capability of kata, to those who have not considered such possibilities before, and to learn from others that have developed or learned other useful applications. What I have done in my interpretations is not all that difficult, and I want to encourage others to do the same. My ideas come from a simple series of "what-if" questions. What if it was a right strike. What if I wanted to effectively hit him on this next move. What if I tried to use the next direction to take him down.

My threads are somewhat lengthy because I am introducing some karateka to concepts they might not have considered before. I think of this as Itosu's notion of torite, or theory of usage. For example, in Aikido, as well as other arts, you treat your body as the weapon. It is used in virtually every move. That differs from some karate systems where many blocks, and sometimes the strikes as well are done with just arm movements with little or no gain from body rotation. Here is another example. In Aikido, Judo and Ju Jitsu, large turns are used to throw an opponent to the defender's rear. Great concept. You can't see what is behind you, so you take no chances. Just insert attacker A into the path of potential attacker B, whom you can't see.

Here's another. Movements have lots of meanings and should be looked upon with as a blank slate. Take any arm movement. It may look like a block in the kata, but what could be accomplished if it were viewed as a lock, or a strike. Here's another. Imagine your opponent is a lot bigger and is punching to your head with a right hook. Many view this as a high probability attack. The typical outside blocks, found everywhere in the kata, which one may think can only protect the solar plexus, can be raised up, every so slightly to protect your very vulnerable head. Here's another, your front kick to your own stomach or solar plexus level, is about the perfect height for a groin kick to a larger opponent, so just because you practice a kick to your own solar plexus height, doesn't mean you necessarily have to use it against an attacker's solar plexus. Think groin, and the neck becomes a great target.

This is all torite, or theory of usage and I include these concepts in my posts to help karateka understand perhaps a different way to think about the movements they practice every day. When I started the application thread, I was informed that text was not a useful way to pass along ideas. I disagree. As long as the detail is there, text can do accomplish a great deas.

I like to think that instead of showing people how to fight, I help them understand how they can look into their own repetitive movements (kata) such that they can teach themselves how to fight. I never claimed to have all the bunkai, not even a small percentage of it. I have effective bunkai out of the sequential movements of the kata. Anyone can find new applications, and they can found what I have found, if only they take the time to look.

Kind of like teaching a man to fish.
 

Matt Stone

Master of Arts
Joined
Dec 4, 2001
Messages
1,711
Reaction score
30
Location
Fort Lewis, Washington
Originally posted by Sensei Mike

I think our colleague "Ryu"ShiKan deserves a thorough rebuttal to his point above regarding the need to limit what you teach a student.

I think you misunderstood the idea of limiting what is taught... RyuShiKan and Chufeng both pointed out the value of earning your learning by not giving all the answers to the students, but instead giving them enough information to allow them to discover the answers for themselves... My teacher gave me certain breakdowns to many of our forms. I refer to them as the "orthodox" or "standard" breakdowns. Time, training, experience and practice allowed me (using the information my Sifu provided) to "discover" breakdowns that were "hidden" in the form. When I asked Sifu about their validity, his answer was along the lines of Chufeng's and RyuShiKan's comments - had I gotten them from him, I wouldn't remember them as well nor value them as much as having found them myself. I earned what learned.

I imagine that from the perspective describe in the quote above, that all martial arts teachers must somehow limit what they show to their students. It seems it would be fine to show their students some techniques, but not others.(What these are, or how they are determined, I don't know). Perhaps it is appropriate if these techniques are limited to basic kicks, blocks and strikes, or body shifting, or other basic patterns. Perhaps if merely a simple kick is shown, then the teacher would not be "tell[ing] you (the student) the answers to all the questions."

Again, misunderstood and misinterpreted. But I can see where you come from on this point...

But if an interpretation to a series of movements in a kata is shown, then it seems to appear, according to the above argument, that the student would then be denied the ability to learn for himself. Rather, it seems from the above perspective, that it would be optimal to leave kata as somewhat of a mystery to students.

See above comments...

This approach shouldn't be surprising. It pretty accurately describes much the way that kata has been handed down over the past 50 years. And the results are a dismal failure. System after system practices kata as a dance, as something to be done only for promotions and in tournaments. Countless hours of students' practice time are spent mindlessly going over repetitive movements they have no hope of making meaning out of. System after system has downplayed the practice of kata to where a given form may be practiced, in the dojo, perhaps a few times a month.

Not, I think, because of the motivation to make the student earn the knowledge, but possibly due to poor teaching ability on the part of the teacher (good fighter does not automatically equal good teacher) and poor learning on the part of the student. Too many low quality students and practitioners have left good schools only to pop up later with elevated self-promotions teaching what they claim is the newest, deadliest style ever... Their lack of understanding due to their lack of training has contributed more, I feel, to the "dismal failure" than the motivations of the original teachers.

I too agree with the "teach a man to fish" concept but before he can fish, he needs a pole, a line, and a hook (or in Okinawa, perhaps a net or a nunte sai).

The student has the tools. The techniques he/she has been taught, and the guidance of the teacher in teaching the form in the first place (to include the principles of that style's application of techniques).

I wish I had more time to reply to this... Public computer (still waiting for my household stuff to be delivered) with a 30 minute limit... I think I understand where Mike is coming from, and his motivations are well intentioned, but I would point to his understanding of bunkai - earned by his own practice - as the benchmark of the success of the original training methods. He knows because he earned it, not because it was given to him.

See you tomorrow.

Gambarimasu.
 
R

RyuShiKan

Guest
Originally posted by Sensei Mike


I imagine that from the perspective describe in the quote above, that all martial arts teachers must somehow limit what they show to their students.

Nope never said that.
What I said was they don't "spoon feed" the answers out all the time, but they help the student learn and discover how to learn more which actually expedites the whole process. I never said they "limit" what they teach. There is a big difference.
Another thing it does is help weed out the nut cases that have no patience and just wanna learn how to kick butt.
I would never hand someone I didn't know a loaded weapon just as I would never show that same person a potentially dangerous technique.
It's called responsibility.

Originally posted by Sensei Mike

But if an interpretation to a series of movements in a kata is shown, then it seems to appear, according to the above argument, that the student would then be denied the ability to learn for himself. Rather, it seems from the above perspective, that it would be optimal to leave kata as somewhat of a mystery to students.

Again, that is not what I said.
If you would have understood what I said originally you could have saved yourself a lot of writing time.


Originally posted by Sensei Mike

I too agree with the "teach a man to fish" concept but before he can fish, he needs a pole, a line, and a hook (or in Okinawa, perhaps a net or a nunte sai).

There is no such thing as a "nunte sai". There is Sai, Manji Sai (swastika shaped Sai), a Manji Sai stuck on the end of a Bo and it is called a Nunte Bo.......but there is no such thing as a Nunte Sai.


Originally posted by Sensei Mike

For many who study other martial systems, the whole notion of ending the attack of a large aggressive attacker with a single strike is absurd. Are there masters out there that can do this? Sure. Oyata is a great example.

I don't recall my teacher ever saying what he does is "ikken hisastu" or even similar to it.
 
C

chufeng

Guest
Mike,

I'm glad you used my post to expand on the concept of "teaching a man to fish," but, I never intended my post to spark a protest against RyuShiKan's posts...

We each know what we know...but the real key to learning is know what we don't know...

...what you know, I don't...what I know, you don't...but there is an overlap in our knowing and in that common ground we can exchange ideas. (Note: ideas, not techniques)...I try and keep an open mind (I know: "do or do not, there is no try.") and learn much from each encounter with the people I meet (electronically, or otherwise)...

Your call to loudly proclaim RyuShiKan a heretic (my term, not yours) seems a bit insecure...why call all karateka to speak out against one from whom a lot of you can learn?

I'm willing to exchange ideas, but let's check ego at the door.

:asian:
chufeng
 
R

RyuShiKan

Guest
Originally posted by chufeng


Your call to loudly proclaim RyuShiKan a heretic (my term, not yours) seems a bit insecure...


Is a malcontent higher or lower than a heretic?;)
 
C

chufeng

Guest
RyuShiKan,

A malcontent and heretic are the same; one yin, one yang...;)

:asian:
chufeng
 
R

RyuShiKan

Guest
Originally posted by chufeng

RyuShiKan,

A malcontent and heretic are the same; one yin, one yang...;)

:asian:
chufeng


So have I come full "circle"? ;)
 
R

RyuShiKan

Guest
Thinking techniques from the kata are sequential like the moves in the kata is not wrong.........in fact in some cases it is correct........but not in many cases. It depends on the kata and which move in the kata you are doing. I make this statement from an Okinawa karate kata point of view, Chinese kata seem to follow the sequential pattern more than Okinawan.
Something that also might be of interest is while in China I witnessed Bagua and was told it basically has no "kata" per say but relies more on "feel". Very interesting art.

Referring back to the Alphabet analogy from the other thread.
Doing movements/techniques in sequential order is OK........example. ABCDEFGHIJ. Those are the basic building blocks for words. But why limit yourself to the Dick & Jane books like "See spot run." when you can expand on it to more advanced levels of thought and learning like "Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain" - Nietzsche.
What happens is the more you advance in the kata the more, and better, you will understand and be able to reproduce the basics of what you "thought" you knew.
In language you are not limited to one pattern of grouping words and so too is kata technique. You can not have a "canned" reaction because nobody attacks in the "exact" manner all the time. So having a rigid sequential application series doesn't always work.

To give an example:

I had a friend that wanted to learn to sing a Japanese Karaoke song, he could neither read nor speak Japanese.
However, he managed to learn the song, several actually, and sang them rather well, they were kind of basic but still had no idea of what he was singing.
He had merely played the tape with his song on it back enough and mimicked what was on the tape, he learned to just sing the words in the order they were in by rote.
If he had taken the time to learn the basics of Japanese he could have sung any song in the karaoke book.
 
C

chufeng

Guest
RyuShiKan wrote:

"So have I come full "circle"?"

In the health care field, we say a perfect circle is one who has had a hemorrhoidectomy...do you still want an answer to your question? :D

...and our interpretation of form is really no different than yours. The sequential patterns are where we start...after that it is looking at things done backwards...it is looking at things that happen between obvious technique...it is looking at where on your own body you might be pointing with the "non-attacking" hand...it is looking at the potential attack with the same defensive movement from 360 degrees...and why a kick is not a kick and why a particular stepping action IS a kick, etc.

But you'll never get that from a cathode ray tube projecting words or images...you'll only get that one on one with another. So we are the same, just different...

:asian:
chufeng
 
R

RyuShiKan

Guest
Originally posted by chufeng

RyuShiKan wrote:

"So have I come full "circle"?"

In the health care field, we say a perfect circle is one who has had a hemorrhoidectomy...do you still want an answer to your question? :D


I think I'll pass. ;)
 
OP
S

Sensei Mike

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 15, 2002
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Location
Upstate New York
RyuShiKan stated:

Thinking techniques from the kata are sequential like the moves in the kata is not wrong.........in fact in some cases it is correct........but not in many cases.

Tough point to argue, since you don't say what kata you are referring to. How about the Pinans. Do you know of cases in the Pinans where the sequential moves are "not correct". (My interpretation is that "not correct" means the sequential movements do not provide a meaningful, useful application.)

btw, your statement above appears to me to be an ever-so-slight change from an earlier post you made.

RyuShiKan stated

kata too has no meaning if you think of the moves as merely ABCDEF

But I am sure that is just my imagination.
 
R

RyuShiKan

Guest
Some schools of thought think kata application is done A~Z just as it is done in the kata. This is not true.
There are short sections in kata like ABC that run sequential and can be applied as such but are not restricted to it.
Example:
first 3 moves of Pinan Shodan can be applied as a sequential application........but don't have to be.
The 3 upper blocks of Pinan Nidan...........the last 2 are connected the first one is not.
 

Kempojujutsu

Master Black Belt
Joined
Mar 24, 2002
Messages
1,058
Reaction score
14
Location
Effingham, Illinois
RyuShiKan, This how Tai Chi forms are put together are they not. You learn the form, then break it down to learn the application of the movements, then you could do the form tying different movements together?
Bob :asian:
 
R

RyuShiKan

Guest
Originally posted by Kempojujutsu

RyuShiKan, This how Tai Chi forms are put together are they not. You learn the form, then break it down to learn the application of the movements, then you could do the form tying different movements together?
Bob :asian:

I don't know really...........my TaiChi is pretty awfull.
This is how we do things in our dojo though.

Just like when you cook you don't put in equal amounts of everything.

You put in some of this a bit of that stir it up and out comes something you can eat. Same with kata, you take this evasive move put it with that strike ad some tuite and then a take down and you have a technique.

The reason why "canned" responses don't work is because there is no "canned" attack. Therefore you have to learn body movement and mechanics and incorporate them into your techniques naturally.
 

Kempojujutsu

Master Black Belt
Joined
Mar 24, 2002
Messages
1,058
Reaction score
14
Location
Effingham, Illinois
Hey RyuShiKan congrats on your Martial Talk Black Belt. Did you become some kind of Ninja. Didn't see your name at the bottom of the main page.:ninja:
Bob:D
 
R

RyuShiKan

Guest
Originally posted by Kempojujutsu

Hey RyuShiKan congrats on your Martial Talk Black Belt. Did you become some kind of Ninja. Didn't see your name at the bottom of the main page.:ninja:
Bob:D


You actually become an "all seeing and all knowing sentient being" ...................actually I hadn't even noticed until you said something.
Thanks.
 
OP
S

Sensei Mike

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 15, 2002
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Location
Upstate New York
RyuShiKan stated:
Thinking techniques from the kata are sequential like the moves in the kata is not wrong.........in fact in some cases it is correct........but not in many cases.

Sensei Mike requested clarification:
Do you know of cases in the Pinans where the sequential moves are "not correct".

RyuShiKan responded:
The 3 upper blocks of Pinan Nidan...........the last 2 are connected the first one is not.

RyuShiKan,

Okay. You seem pretty sure about this third direction in Pinan Nidan. The last two are connected, the first one is not. That seems definitive.

I want to make sure I am not misrepresenting the implication here. Please help me to be sure. First, to clarify, we are talking about the connection between the movements in the Pinan Nidan's third direction, specifically between the ability to connect the initial downward block and upper block, with the second and third upper blocks, and make a useful application out of that sequence.

Now, are you saying, the first block(s) are not connected to the following two, in your system? Or are you saying that these two parts of the third direction are unconnected, in every system? This would mean that there simply could be no useful application that can bring the entire directional sequence together as a cohesive whole? (Or as part of a perhaps larger cohesive whole.)

And just to make sure we are on the same page, there is to be no implication that if this entire directional sequence can work together as a complete (or part of a complete) combination, that this would be the only interpretation for this series of movements. There would be many more useful applications. Some might use the sequential movements, while other great, effective applications would make use of movements not part of the sequence (referred to in some systems as oyo bunkai).

Thank you for the clarification.
 

Kempojujutsu

Master Black Belt
Joined
Mar 24, 2002
Messages
1,058
Reaction score
14
Location
Effingham, Illinois
Does any one teach these kata's, and what order do you teach kata's (example Naihanchi kata's followed by Pinan kata's etc.)
Bob :asian:
 
OP
S

Sensei Mike

Yellow Belt
Joined
Sep 15, 2002
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Location
Upstate New York
Kempojujutsu,

You probably know some of the history on this. Prior to Itosu introducing the Pinan, it was common for beginners to practice Naihanchi Shodan.

In Karate-Do Kyohan, Funakoshi states: "In the past, it was expected that about three years were required to learn a single kata, and it was usual that even an expert of considerable skill would know three or at the most five kata. Thus in short, it was left that a superficial understanding of many kata was of little use. The aim of training reflected the precept expressed by the words "Although the doorway is small, go deeply inward. I, too, studied for ten years to really learn the three Tekki forms."

Funakoshi also divides his kata into two groups, Shorin Ryu and Shorei Ryu, and states that from the Shorin Ryu, a beginner should start with Taikyoku Shodan, Nidan and Sandan, (his kata) and follow these with the Heian (Pinan) ... From the Shorei Ryu he says to begin with the three Tekki (Naihanchi).

The order of the kata are mixed in the text.

In Nagamine's "Essence of Okinawan Karate-Do" the order of the kata presented in the book are Fukyugata 1 and 2 (beginner kata), then the Pinans, then Naihanchi.

Bishop's text, Okinawan Karate, lists kata that are taught at each of the many schools he surveyed, and the lists seemed to indicate the order in which they are generally taught, as Naihanchi and Pinans are at the beginning of many lists.

In the Matsubayashi, Kobayashi and Shobayashi dojos I have trained in, the Naihanchi are taught after the Pinans. In the several Shotokan systems I have been in, it is common to have other kata taught before all the Tekki (Naihanchi) are learned. (Jutte for example). It is my opinion. that some Shotokan dojos that are more tournament oriented, are more likely to introduce a kata like Bassai Dai, before introducing Tekki Sandan.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top