Did Karate rotate shoulder (not hip) for punch before Mas Oyama taught it to Karate's Tameshiwari?

[Steven Lee]

Did Karate rotate shoulder (not hip) for punch before Mas Oyama taught it to Karate's Tameshiwari? Mas Oyama's Classic Karate page 157.

Mas Oyama's Classic Karate

It shows that you have to rotate shoulder for hand strike. Mas Oyama taught that hand strike to Karate. I've been claiming that Mas Oyama got that idea from Korean frontal hand strikes (from Korean Charyuk/Kihapsul/Kiaijutsu as well as Subak, Sibak, Gwonbeop). Did Karate rotate shoulder before Mas Oyama's era which would be 1950's? Karate just has hip rotation, doesn't it? So, Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate's Tameshiwari/Breaking, didn't he?

 

[Xue Sheng]

Is the shoulder rotation you keep going on about in this clip and where is it located

 

[Steven Lee]

Video unavailable. It's in this book. Page 157. Shoulder rotation from Tameshiwari diagram 1 to 2. I think Japanese should give credits when credits are due instead of pulling distortions and denials against proofs. As far as I know, Karate has hip rotation but it doesn't have shoulder rotation. At least, not before Mas Oyama's teaching in 1950's. Even today, shoulder rotation sounds foreign to Karate.

Mas Oyama's Classic Karate

 

[Xue Sheng]

Video unavailable. It's in this book. Page 157. Shoulder rotation from Tameshiwari diagram 1 to 2. I think Japanese should give credits when credits are due instead of pulling distortions and denials against proofs. As far as I know, Karate has hip rotation but it doesn't have shoulder rotation. At least, not before Mas Oyama's teaching in 1950's. Even today, shoulder rotation sounds foreign to Karate.

Mas Oyama's Classic Karate

Are you posting in the USA or somewhere else, or do you need to update your PC because the video works perfectly for me.

And that appears to be a downward chop, that is all. I seriously doubt any one culture can lay claim to it.

 

[Steven Lee]

Mas Oyama's Classic Karate

Not talking about Knife Hand chopping. The shoulder is rotating forward from diagram 1 to 2. Karate has square stationary shoulders like this photo of 1933's Breaking. Mas Oyama's Tameshiwari/Breaking diagrams don't look like that photo. I'm a sports history nerd.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/Kamesuke_Higashioona_1933_Hand_Breaking_without_shoulder-push.jpg

In 1933, when Karate did Breaking/Tameshiwari, the shoulders were stationary & square. After Mas Oyama's era, the shoulder is rotating to front. I'm saying that this trait is from Korean frontal hand strike historically recorded. Whether Mas Oyama learned Korean arts or not, he must have seen them cause he was a Korean. I'm saying Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate's Tameshiwari/Breaking.

Kyokushin Karate is known as the strongest Karate, so I'm pretty sure the hand strike Mas Oyama taught Karate's Tameshiwari was new to Karate. If Karate also had shoulder rotation for frontal hand strike, I give up my claim that Karate stole Korea's frontal hand strike for Breaking/Tameshiwari. However, Karate didn't have shoulder-rotation unlike Korean arts.

When people say that body weight is important for hitting, it's taken out of context. What's important is mass in motion. Holding a heavy dumbbell with left hand isn't going to increase the punching power with right hand. It's the mass in motion that counts, not the mass in silence. That's why rotating shoulder makes hand strike far more powerful.

Karate didn't have shoulder-rotation for hand strikes. Korean had shoulder-rotation for hand strikes. Subak had frontal slap & punch. Korean had Sibak (Taekkyeon-Yetbub) which had punch. Charyuk/Kihapsul/Kiaijutsu also had powerful strikes created by trial & error (starting with common sense strikes) for Breaking. Korean also had Gwonbeop in the Korean military training center teaching it. Korean had shoulder-rotation in frontal hand strikes. (I showed pictures.) Also, explosion & implosion at the start of punch is weaker than stacking speed & power from slow to fast. This is Yongryuk. Korean strikes used Yong (stacking) historically.

 

[JowGaWolf]

And that appears to be a downward chop, that is all. I seriously doubt any one culture can lay claim to it.

He would have a different perspective if he actually trained martial arts. Because of how the human body is designed, there are very few unique ways to perform a strike before we get into variations. Someone who trains in martial arts will pic this knowledge faster than someone who doesn't train at all. Diagrams can't translate how punches feel when executing them and what other variations it feels similar to.

There are 2 motions for the human body. Linear and circular. That's it, everything else is a variation, based on what's the best way to use and exploit linear and circular movements. There 2 types of swords. Straight and curve, which follows the same 2 motions of the body, Linear and Circular. So if someone is actually going to break an object, they will do so using one of the 2 types of movements. Linear or Circular.

Power generation is segmented. Root > Legs > Hips /Waists > Chest > Shoulder > Arm. A person can either draw from the root or draw power by starting somewhere else in the Power generation chain. So when someone starts talking about "Who invented shoulder rotations" then they clearly don't understand the basic foundations of martial arts nor do they understand that There are only 2 main movements. Linear and Circular.

When people say that body weight is important for hitting, it's taken out of context. What's important is mass in motion.

Body weight is mass. Someone heavier than you hitting you is mass in motion and it makes a big difference.

Big truck vs small car. Both are mass in motion. If they both travel at the same speed and ram into each other then it will be the truck which is heavier than the car that will cause the most damage. You would know the difference if you spar where someone who is heavier than you lands a strike.

Holding a heavy dumbbell with left hand isn't going to increase the punching power with right hand. It's the mass in motion that counts, not the mass in silence. That's why rotating shoulder makes hand strike far more powerful.

Join a martial arts school, learn martial arts. No one who actually punches and learns how to generate power will ever explain punching like this. This is incorrect on so many levels.




.

 

[Dirty Dog]

In 1933, when Karate did Breaking/Tameshiwari, the shoulders were stationary & square. After Mas Oyama's era, the shoulder is rotating to front. I'm saying that this trait is from Korean frontal hand strike historically recorded. Whether Mas Oyama learned Korean arts or not, he must have seen them cause he was a Korean. I'm saying Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate's Tameshiwari/Breaking.

You say a lot of silly stuff. Here's a free clue. You cannot tell what the motion is from a still picture.

If Karate also had shoulder rotation for frontal hand strike, I give up my claim that Karate stole Korea's frontal hand strike for Breaking/Tameshiwari.

@Tony Dismukes, I believe that would be your cue to post that video we were talking about. I'm betting our delusional git will not honor his promise to retract his nonsense, but let's give him the chance.

However, Karate didn't have shoulder-rotation unlike Korean arts.

Yes, they did.

When people say that body weight is important for hitting, it's taken out of context. What's important is mass in motion. Holding a heavy dumbbell with left hand isn't going to increase the punching power with right hand. It's the mass in motion that counts, not the mass in silence. That's why rotating shoulder makes hand strike far more powerful.

So now, the goof with no training or experience wants to tell people with decades of experience how power is generated?

Karate didn't have shoulder-rotation for hand strikes. Korean had shoulder-rotation for hand strikes. Subak had frontal slap & punch. Korean had Sibak (Taekkyeon-Yetbub) which had punch. Charyuk/Kihapsul/Kiaijutsu also had powerful strikes created by trial & error (starting with common sense strikes) for Breaking. Korean also had Gwonbeop in the Korean military training center teaching it. Korean had shoulder-rotation in frontal hand strikes. (I showed pictures.) Also, explosion & implosion at the start of punch is weaker than stacking speed & power from slow to fast. This is Yongryuk. Korean strikes used Yong (stacking) historically.

Um, earth to Steven... EVERYBODY had frontal slaps and punches. Way back when you Japanese people were still in Tibet.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Did Karate rotate shoulder (not hip) for punch

The power generation comes from

1. Bottom and up.
2. Back and forward.

You have to achieve 1 before you can achieve 2. You have to

- bend your leg -> straight your leg, and
- rotate your hip,

before you can rotate your shoulder.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The power generation comes from

1. Bottom and up.
2. Back and forward.

You have to achieve 1 before you can achieve 2. You have to

- bend your leg -> straight your leg, and
- rotate your hip,

before you can rotate your shoulder.

The problem is that he doesn't train martial arts so all of this stuff we are talking about isn't going to make sense to him. A person has to have, at a minimum, the basic experience of trying to do some of these movements. If he's not able to do train because of physical limitations, then he needs to learn how to listen to what others say and be humble enough to accept that what they are saying is accurate. Especially when "99 out 100 martial artists" are saying the same thing.

He's literally talking to people who have decades of martial arts experience, some teach classes and others have their own school and students. There is probably more than 200 years of combined experience in martial arts in this forum at any given time. Many of us have done research within our own systems as we try to gain better understanding of what we do. We may not agree on "the best way" all the time but for the most part I don't think we think of each others a liars when it comes to martial arts. Most of our disagreements often come from misunderstanding and after 20 pages worth of posts we end up discovering we are basically talking about similar perspectives.

But he can't see this because he's got a lot of hate and anger getting in his way.

 

[jobo]

He would have a different perspective if he actually trained martial arts. Because of how the human body is designed, there are very few unique ways to perform a strike before we get into variations. Someone who trains in martial arts will pic this knowledge faster than someone who doesn't train at all. Diagrams can't translate how punches feel when executing them and what other variations it feels similar to.

There are 2 motions for the human body. Linear and circular. That's it, everything else is a variation, based on what's the best way to use and exploit linear and circular movements. There 2 types of swords. Straight and curve, which follows the same 2 motions of the body, Linear and Circular. So if someone is actually going to break an object, they will do so using one of the 2 types of movements. Linear or Circular.

Power generation is segmented. Root > Legs > Hips /Waists > Chest > Shoulder > Arm. A person can either draw from the root or draw power by starting somewhere else in the Power generation chain. So when someone starts talking about "Who invented shoulder rotations" then they clearly don't understand the basic foundations of martial arts nor do they understand that There are only 2 main movements. Linear and Circular.

Body weight is mass. Someone heavier than you hitting you is mass in motion and it makes a big difference.

Big truck vs small car. Both are mass in motion. If they both travel at the same speed and ram into each other then it will be the truck which is heavier than the car that will cause the most damage. You would know the difference if you spar where someone who is heavier than you lands a strike.

Join a martial arts school, learn martial arts. No one who actually punches and learns how to generate power will ever explain punching like this. This is incorrect on so many levels.




.

well , yes sort of, mass in motion is momentum, , if your truck and car hit straight on, the car will stop dead and the truck will keep going, , but both will experience the same force, the difference in damage will arise from the truc k being of stronger build and the fact that the truck may then just roll over it, . , if you replace the car with concrete block of the same mass, going at the same speed, then there a good chance that the truck will have more damage than the concrete

 

[Tez3]

well , yes sort of, mass in motion is momentum, , if your truck and car hit straight on, the car will stop dead and the truck will keep going, , but both will experience the same force, the difference in damage will arise from the truc k being of stronger build and the fact that the truck may then just roll over it, . , if you replace the car with concrete block of the same mass, going at the same speed, then there a good chance that the truck will have more damage than the concrete

What happen to Phil's Landrover though, his was the bigger car! the little car turned his lovely bulletproof vehicle over.

 

[jobo]

What happen to Phil's Landrover though, his was the bigger car! the little car turned his lovely bulletproof vehicle over.

it was a range rover, you can't make a Landover bullet proof, and yes that's likely to happen if you pull out on even a little car that doing 60 ,

 

[Steven Lee]

Pictures are clearly enough beyond reasonable doubts what kind of motions are taking a place. It's judged by the experiences, common sense & the range of possibilities in the given situation by norms.

Attacking my lack of martial art training is just another Ad Hominem fallacy. You are attacking me as a person rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. Also, it's an Appeal to False Authority fallacy. Expert in sports are not expert in sports history. History is a completely different field from sports themselves. Even if you are black belt in a martial art, that doesn't make you an expert in its history simply because you weren't trained in history when you trained in the sports.

So, Karate did not rotate torso & shoulder for hand strike, right? Karate only had hip rotation. So, when Oyama taught Karate's Tameshiwari/Breaking shoulder-rotation for hand strike just like traditional Korean hand strikes, Oyama taught Korean hand strikes to Karate. Is this conclusion acceptable?

 

[Dirty Dog]

well , yes sort of, mass in motion is momentum, , if your truck and car hit straight on, the car will stop dead and the truck will keep going, , but both will experience the same force, the difference in damage will arise from the truc k being of stronger build and the fact that the truck may then just roll over it, . , if you replace the car with concrete block of the same mass, going at the same speed, then there a good chance that the truck will have more damage than the concrete

Mmmmmm, not really. Two vehicles collide head on. If they're both the same mass, and traveling at the same speed, then they will expend the same amount of kinetic energy to go from speed X to zero. If they're not the same size, they will not experience the same forces. The less massive vehicle will expend the kinetic energy to go from speed X to zero plus the energy required to accelerate in the opposite direction to speed Y. The more massive vehicle will absorb the kinetic energy to go from speed X to whatever speed it still maintains when the less massive vehicle starts moving away. That is a lesser amount than required to come to a full stop.
If there is also a difference in speed between the two vehicles, then it's going to get much more complicated.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Pictures are clearly enough beyond reasonable doubts what kind of motions are taking a place. It's judged by the experiences, common sense & the range of possibilities in the given situation by norms.

No, they're not. They do not show the motion. At all.
You have no experience with which to judge those pictures.
You haven't shown any common sense either.
You reject all possibilities out of hand that do not agree with your racist bias.
So in other words, what you're posting is just a load of fetid dingos kidneys.

Attacking my lack of martial art training is just another Ad Hominem fallacy.

Nope. Your lack of training means that you have zero ability to evaluate what's being shown in pictures. Or video, for that matter.

 

[Steven Lee]

I'm not trained in sports nor work out, but I still know how power is generated. (& I showed Breaking in my following 2 videos.) Also, Appeal to False Authority fallacy. Being trained as an expert in a sport doesn't make you expert in physics, history, science. It's just Ad Hominem fallacy, attacking my credentials instead of the substance of the arguments itself. Expert in sport doesn't mean expert in its history; you were not trained in history.

 

[Steven Lee]

Pictures are clearly enough beyond reasonable doubts what kind of motions are taking a place. It's judged by the experiences, common sense & the range of possibilities in the given situation by norms. Pictures show motions clear beyond reasonable doubts. Historians commonly use pictures as proof. It's judged by experiences & common sense. There are only so many motions that can look like a given picture. If you deny it, then that's a bias.

No, attacking my lack of sports training is just Ad Hominem fallacy and Appeal to False Authority fallacy. Don't need sports training to know history, science, physics.

Appeal to False Authority

Also, the law of action and reaction. Upon collision, the shock experienced is always the same for both sides.

So, Karate didn't have shoulder rotation in punching, right? It only had the hip rotation. But Mas Oyama's Tameshiwari/Breaking pictures teach shoulder-rotation for hand strike. That means Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate's Tameshiwari/Breaking, right? Is this conclusion acceptable from the given references? Aside from some biased people whining how you can't tell motions from given pictures?

Can tell that Korean techniques pictures had shoulder-rotation because the shoulders are bent forward from the waist. It's uncommon to hit like that posture before the punch starts. It happens commonly after the punch is executed by moving shoulder to front.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I'm not trained in sports nor work out, but I still know how power is generated.

No, you clearly do not.

Also, Appeal to False Authority fallacy. Being trained as an expert in a sport doesn't make you expert in physics, history, science.

Actually, in this case it does. I have a graduate degree in human physiology as well as 50 years of martial arts training. I don't think anyone will think you know as much about how the body works than I do.

And of course, I don't have a racist bias to pollute my evaluations.

It's just Ad Hominem fallacy, attacking my credentials instead of the substance of the arguments itself. Expert in sport doesn't mean expert in its history; you were not trained in history.

You don't have any credentials to attack. And you don't know anything whatsoever about the training and education of the people who are laughing at your rubbish.

Pictures are clearly enough beyond reasonable doubts what kind of motions are taking a place. It's judged by the experiences, common sense & the range of possibilities in the given situation by norms. Pictures show motions clear beyond reasonable doubts. Historians commonly use pictures as proof. It's judged by experiences & common sense. There are only so many motions that can look like a given picture. If you deny it, then that's a bias.

No, attacking my lack of sports training is just Ad Hominem fallacy and Appeal to False Authority fallacy. Don't need sports training to know history, science, physics.

The false authority in question would be you, kid. You base your conclusions on racism, you have no training or understanding of how MA techniques work, you have no training or understanding of research methodology. I short, you know nothing. And yet you delude yourself into thinking you know more than people who DO count as what is called a subject matter expert.

It must be sad to be you.

 

[Steven Lee]

Yeah, mass in motion with speed. When shoving as much force as possible within as small time as possible, power is generated. Also, I can clearly break small pebbles (stone) & a bottle of ice. I know what I'm doing especially considering how I don't work out.

No. Studying how to do sports and studying the history of sports are two different things. Training in one doesn't mean being an expert in another. Also, racism is my right. My freedom & rights shouldn't be violated just because you don't like it.

I don't have credentials, but attacking such is Ad Hominem fallacy & Appeal to False Authority fallacy. My sources are reputable & authoritative. My conclusions come from my references.

I don't have authority; I'm an amateur historian. My sources & references have authority in Karate history, Korean martial art history, etc.

So, Korean had shoulder-rotation. Karate didn't have shoulder-rotation. Is there any proof that Karate rotated shoulder in punch before Mas Oyama? Standard Karate punch doesn't rotate shoulder. Its shoulders are square & stationary. There are Karate books published before Mas Oyama's time; they don't rotate shoulder. Shoulders are right on top of their waist in pictures including in Gichin Funakoshi's textbook. So, the natural conclusion is that Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Attacking my lack of martial art training is just another Ad Hominem fallacy.

Actually, no, it isn't. If someone who's never spoken or trained in the French language posts about the proper pronunciation of a word, I'm going to doubt that conclusion unless and until they provide very good sources for their conclusion. Of course, what they think is a solid source will likely not be the same as someone who actually understands French pronunciation.

The same goes for what you're doing. Your lack of training makes it unlikely you'll actually understand the issue with what you are saying about the pictures. Those who are trained in anything similar to what's shown will immediately see details and possibilities in the pictures that you will not.

It goes to research methods, which are not about you, but about the logic you're using.