Well, that's your opinion, I guess. I'm sure you think the world of your art, but applying the knowledge gained honestly depends on each individual, and certainly even more so on the instructor's skill level. Considering that my sensei is one of Sensei Neil Stolsmark's senior students, I have no need to consider your opinion and can be assured that I am in the right place. Thank you for your concern.
Does Your Martial Art Teach Self Defence?
- Thread starter K-man
- Start date
Well, that's your opinion, I guess. I'm sure you think the world of your art, but applying the knowledge gained honestly depends on each individual, and certainly even more so on the instructor's skill level. Considering that my sensei is one of Sensei Neil Stolsmark's senior students, I have no need to consider your opinion and can be assured that I am in the right place. Thank you for your concern.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #102
The 'unrealistic' attacks are either an attack that has been deliberately slowed to practise the technique or one that is not being done properly. Unfortunately in the videos you see and probably in many dojos it is the latter. All techniques rely on a 'realistic' attack. That means hitting with intent. Again it has to be done carefully because even a committed attack slowed can cause damage.
There are many factors in play. First, like in bullfighting, there is deception. You move off the line at the last moment when the attacker is committed to the attack. (There are means of extending the time you have but that's more advanced.) Secondly, you don't actually try to 'catch' a punch. There are ways you can do that and we train for that but if you are trying to watch a fist coming at you, you are already so far behind your opponent you will be reacting and that is way to slow. To catch a punch you are proactive and working off body language, not the fist itself. Thirdly, when you deflect a committed attack it changes your opponent's centre of balance. Even if this is a tiny loss of centre it affects the brain for a fraction of a second as 'survival' mode kicks in, like when you are falling. In that tiny moment the intent to withdraw the fist is forgotten and you can capture it. And finally, if you can blend with the arm as it is coming at you it is relatively easy against a committed attack to catch the wrist. The important thing to remember is, you don't start with the mindset that you are going to catch the punch. You start with an empty mind relying on your training. If you end up with a wrist in your hand, great, use it. If you don't, just keep doing what comes naturally. But, the more experienced you are it is surprising just how often you end up with the wrist.
:asian:
Kframe
Black Belt
But why do so many Videos feature wrist catching then? Here is another example of unrealistic attacks..
Notice how each time he just hangs his arm there to be captured? THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN IN A REAL ATTACK OR FIGHT. NO one, not even untrained do that. So why then, does BBT and Aikido train off of that kind of attack?
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #104
Not every technique finishes with a wrist lock and Ueshiba was a cagey old devil. The techniques that we normally take to the floor, he just whacked on a nikyo hold while standing up. Saves a lot of bouncing up and down.
Trying to catch a jab is pretty much a waste of time but even so you can end up with a hold if you move to the side and in as the jab is thrown. Two things. Firstly a jab is often followed by a punch with the other hand. Moving in on the jab negates the punch and being in close often can give you the jabbing wrist. Only problem with that is the arm is in the attacker's position of strength so to take advantage of it you have to use a turning technique to utilise your body mass. Secondly, as you say the jab is incredibly fast. When it is launched you really don't know that it is going to be a jab so your action is to just look at it as an ordinary punch. If you are in close and pressing on that arm, the very act of retracting the punch can upset the attacker's balance. Still, as I said before, if you end up capturing the wrist it is a bonus, not the primary aim.
:asian:
Kframe
Black Belt
I did not intend to use all caps.. I was very frustrated. Now to anticipate Chris Parker and the admonishment I am sure I deserve ill say this. I know these concepts work, but my mind is having a hard time letting go of the how. I'm getting the feeling that no amount of forum questioning will help me understand it. Only training and experience and time will help me understand it. I am just going to have to accept that ill be doing things I just don't understand, until one day I do. The words how and understanding are not the same. Only experience and a good instructor can unite the two.
I'm so used to training that was simple and direct, with few simple movements.(not including BJJ/no-gi) I have to find a way to stop asking questions, to turn my brain off and just accept the training and one day it will come. Are there any suggestions you guys have that can help me to put my mind at ease and stop with the incessant need to research and analyze everything I see and do(with regards to my new art) through the lenses of MMA?
I just wanna flow like water. Crash hard and destroy or flow around the obstruction. Simplicity, efficiency and directness are important to me.
I'm so used to training that was simple and direct, with few simple movements.(not including BJJ/no-gi) I have to find a way to stop asking questions, to turn my brain off and just accept the training and one day it will come. Are there any suggestions you guys have that can help me to put my mind at ease and stop with the incessant need to research and analyze everything I see and do(with regards to my new art) through the lenses of MMA?
I just wanna flow like water. Crash hard and destroy or flow around the obstruction. Simplicity, efficiency and directness are important to me.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #107
Kaitenage is great technique in the right situation. The secret of making it work is leading your attacker forward. It doesn't work if your attacker still has his balance. That is why IMHO the part in the video showing the attach to the eyes is wrong in the context of Kaitenage as it sends your attacker in the opposite direction to that required. As to the wrist grab, you can if you like take a grip on the wrist. The only time I would do that if it was my intention to dislocate the shoulder. Otherwise the arm is controlled by your arm without gripping and enables the take down. As is pointed out by Spinedoc, the roll only happens in training. In real life it is more like a nose dive.
The person doesn't have the choice. He has overbalanced forward, with a little assistance.
Exactly!
In the circumstances you would perform Kaitenage there is no way they can slam into you as it is performed at arms length and takes no strength whatsoever. It works best from a downward strike as with a knife or stick but can be from a punch.
To be honest, this is not a move I have ever used and there are a number of reasons why I wouldn't bother with it. I will try it when we get back to training in a couple of weeks. It isn't an unrealistic attack if the technique is valid. If the attack is only slowed to demonstrate to technique, I have no problem with it. If it requires an attack like the one shown to get it to work, I agree that it is unrealistic. Watch this space.
:asian:
Last edited by a moderator:
RTKDCMB
Senior Master
Who said anything about nicely? The thing about that kind of move is that if they don't roll they unwillingly end up on their back and with out nice soft mats to land on it hurts them.
Cirdan
Senior Master
Karate and Ju Jitsu certainly provides a path for mental physical and technical improvement which benefits my ablilty to defend myself.
Or said less eloquently I can handle a good bashin` and see one comin`
Or said less eloquently I can handle a good bashin` and see one comin`
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
Hmm. First things first, there is no "catching a punch" in any kata in any of the Ryu-ha that inform the methods of the Bujinkan. At all. None. Anyone who teaches/shows such a thing has not drawn it from the Ryu. A particular teacher might show something like it as an expression of an idealised response/principle, but it's not actually in any of the kata. Next, we might be talking about different things when we talk about "unrealistic attacks"... I'll cover that in a bit. As far as the stories... that can get incredibly subjective, honestly. To some people "I pulled off a Shuto Ken" is the art "working".... to others, it's just a lucky hit. Personally, I look deeper, beyond what the technique that "worked" is, and look to why things "worked"... which could minimise those stories quite a bit (not just in Bujinkan, but in all martial arts, honestly). I've had students have what I teach them "work" in real encounters... as have I... and each time I've broken down with them afterwards what actually happened, and what was from what they've been taught, as well as what was from other influences.
Oh, and got your PM... I'll hopefully get a reply together soon.
Depends on the fight, really... I've had people use jabs against me in real fights. But the thing they aren't is a cage fight with an MMA guy... on a large number of levels, completely removed from the physical reality.
Does it? Hmm...
I'll clarify. The techniques are nothing. Any mechanically sound technique can work. And lots and lots of arts have plenty of mechanically sound techniques, the Bujinkan being absolutely no exception to that. What makes it actually, genuinely "work", though, is the training methodology. A sword cuts... but just getting a sword to cut doesn't make you a swordsman, or mean you can fight with a sword. Training methodology, though, can.
Couple of things... is the attack actually a punch? Is it really being "caught"? And is it really a "lock"? You might find the answer is no to each of those...
Not the way it's done there, no. Of course, I'm just talking about the formal material... as with the "catch a punch" thing, if a particular instructor saw it, liked it, and decided to add it to his expression and teaching, that's one thing... but it's not formally part of anything in our arts. There are some similar things in Koto and Gyokko Ryu, in Koto as a variation on Kyogi, and in Gyokko in an expression of Un Jaku, but it's quite different. The similarities are that the Tori's hand trails after the attacking arm, but that's about it. It'd be referred to as Harai Uke (sweeping receive).
Ha, yeah.... Love it when they don't "nicely roll forward".... it usually means they end up crumpled, in our approach, typically after landing on their head... with broken wrists/elbows on the way down. Rolling is to safely take the technique. I don't want someone rolling out of the way nicely when I do it for real....
Maybe I was misunderstood.
I was saying that Shorin Ryu is a great system. It is strong, powerful, direct, no-nonsense, and a personal favourite of mine (along with Goju Ryu and Wado Ryu... who are probably my favourite due to their Jujutsu connection). However I was cautioning against swallowing rhetoric as fact, especially when it's overdone, ill-advised, and doesn't match the actual reality of what's being presented. There's nothing wrong with Shorin Ryu... quite the opposite... it's a fantastic Traditional Karate system!... and I'm thrilled that you've found a good school for it. But "brutal"? Nope. Solid? Yes. Strong? You bet. Brutal? No more than many other arts, and less than quite a few I could mention. It's also got very little in common with anything "street style", once you learn to look at it properly and objectively.
There was no concern over your school. I have no doubt that it's a great one, and you're certainly in the right place. Just remember to be objective and realistic about what it is... that's all.
Not quite what I was meaning when I said "unrealistic attacks". I meant that the actual structure of the attacks was not similar to a "real" attack... they are stylised representations of forms of violence and attack. A technique like Renyo, for instance, has an attack which is a right punch, followed by a right kick, then a right grab to the lapel. That's an unrealistic sequence, really. But that's fine... it's meant to be. It's teaching distancing concepts (changing and flowing between ranges) by moving from a striking range to a kicking distance, then closing in to a grappling one. There are, of course, other lessons involved (such as handling an opponent responding by trying to escape a joint lock and so on), but it's just not meant to be a realistic sequence. Many Kukishinden Ryu kata involve a long string of attacks (right punch, left punch, right kick, left kick, right punch... or right punch, left punch, right kick, right punch.... or right punch, left punch, right punch, left kick... and so on), which teach a method of moving evasively, handling a constant attack, disrupting rhythms, picking your timing, staying in control of your distance etc, but again, it just ain't what would ever be actually encountered. It's not a realistic attack.
That said, it doesn't mean that the attacks aren't done "realistically" (in terms of targeting, power, intent etc). They absolutely are. In fact, I don't think the techniques work properly unless it's a proper attack in that sense. Attacks are done tight, precise, guarded, balanced, and so forth (at least... they're meant to be...). It's only in demonstrations that show each "part" of the action, and in the very, very early stage of learning any particular kata that there should ever be an arm "just left out there", or the attacking side should be just waiting for the defender's movements. There is, of course, some variation, as well as some alternate reasons for some of what is seen (the punches aren't actually punches....), but that's taking us further away, and will only complicate things.
Gonna send that to you in your PM... to be frank, I'm not sure how many actually know what it's done the way it is... but, for now, I'm going to make a suggestion. What the AKBAN guys do isn't really what is done in Budo Taijutsu, nor is it what is seen in the Ryu-ha (when it comes to things like their "how to apply x in sparring" clips). That particular one has more of an Aikido influence in the footwork (there's no Aikido in what we do), as well as some boxing (in the attack), and really isn't that related to anything found in our systems. It's an attempt at what they feel is a modernisation... and shouldn't be taken as indicative of anything other than Yossi Sherrif's take on things. But why does it have the attacker leaving his arm out? Because it's a demonstration. Mind you, I feel (as you do) that this is a largely intellectual "technique"... the timing simply isn't there, due to the defender (Yossi) needing to take a number of extra steps in order to change direction from the second evasion to do a 180 and "catch" the second punch.
Ha, not a problem.
I seem to remember telling you that a little while back...
While I agree with K-Man that you shouldn't ever stop asking questions, I would suggest that you exercise a bit more patience and introspection before voicing them. There is a concept in traditional Japanese martial arts that, although I've had a number of Bujinkan members dismiss it as being "cultish" (hmm...), is actually quite vital if you want to learn properly. The concept is known as Nyunanshin (or Junanshin), and refers to "a mind with the flexibility to accept new ideas" (pretty literally, actually... "Nyu/Ju",柔 , means "flexible, or pliant", same as "Ju"jutsu, or "nyumon" [beginner]; "nan",軟 , means "accepting, open to"; and "shin",心 , means "mind"). It's often called the "beginners mind", and is related to concepts such as Nyumon (the initial stage).
At this point, it's the students responsibility to listen to the instructor, trust that they know the best method and correct procedure and structure for your development, that they know the art, knowing how what you're doing now fits into what you'll be doing in 5 years time. It's important that you simply follow their direction... even if you don't understand it, or it doesn't fit with what you've previously done. You're not doing what you've previously done... so don't expect it to be the same, or to necessarily fit in the same way. You've made a decision to learn a new approach... so learn it. And the way to do that is to learn from someone who already knows it... and to benefit from their experience and advice. All you need to do is take on board what is said... be able to accept it... and be flexible enough to realize that what you're doing is different... so expect different answers.
Oh, there's plenty of that in what we do... trust me....
Crash hard? Koto Ryu, or Kukishinden Ryu, as well as a fair bit of Shinden Fudo Ryu Jutaijutsu. Flow around? Togakure Ryu, Gyokko Ryu (pretty much a perfect description there, actually!), a lot of Takagi Yoshin Ryu and Shinden Fudo Ryu Dakentaijutsu. Simple, direct? Koto Ryu, Takagi Yoshin, Shinden Fudo.... with a fair smattering found in each of the other Ryu... it's just that that's pretty much the primary "flavour" of Koto etc.... but we don't stick with just one "elemental" approach.... (not Hayes' stuff here, but more an observation on an overall take....).
Last edited by a moderator:
Agreed. My point was that under pressure, it's going to be difficult, if not impossible, to recall the exact tech for that situation. Instead, the natural instincts are going to kick in, and you're just going to react. Like I've said, the techs are there as a base, but in the end, it's a compilation of the basics, that'll be the tools you use.
A woman who's being attacked, would be a fool to sit there and sift thru hundreds of techs to find the exact one to fit that situation. People get way to wrapped up in the preset techs, think that is their only option...it isn't.
Out of curiosity, what are you learning in your training...a martial art, SD, both, neither? IMHO, I would say that while everyone's personal reasons will differ, the vast majority of arts, will teach both...the art/history, as well as SD.
Firstly, there's nothing wrong with continually researching, analyzing, and asking questions. The thing that may help is to realize that the answers to those questions may take a while in coming and that's okay. Martial arts is a marathon, not a sprint. Much of the understanding you are seeking is going to come incrementally, one small insight at a time. Perhaps you can start a private martial arts diary where you record your questions and the answers you are finding. When you look back on what you've written a year or two or three later, you may be surprised to see how your perspective gradually changes.
For what it's worth, I spent almost a decade training in the Bujinkan before I moved on to other arts, and from my current perspective I have a lot of problems with their training methodology. Chris can do a good job of explaining the theory behind that methodology. Based on my own experiences (over 30 years in the martial arts, about 10 years in the Bujinkan) I disagree with that theory. You don't have to take my word or his - spend some time seriously training in your new art and draw your own conclusions.
That said, I don't think my time in the Bujinkan was a waste. I learned a lot of useful lessons that I have been able to apply to my life and to the other arts that I have studied since. Hopefully you will also get some useful benefits.
I feel the same way too. Onetime I saw a Karate demo. The guy throws a punch. His opponent did 6 moves on him while his arm was still frozen in the air. An realistic attack will be your opponent makes one move, you respod with one move. Your opponent changes. you then respond with another move.
IMO, Aikido depends too much on wrist control. It's like the Judo sleeve hold, it gives too much distance between you and your opponent. experienced Judo guy will know that holding under the elbow will reduce the distance between him and his opponent. That will give his opponent less freedom to react and move around. When wrestlers wrestle, they usually keep distance very close between each other.
In the following 2 clips, you can see that the "elbow control" will reduce the distance between you and your opponent than the "wrist control" will.
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #115
:asian:
This arm locking technique is central to ... but it has no real place in Aikido.
This is what I will call "style boundary". Why should we put restriction on ourselves such as "My style doesn't do this"? We are the masters. Style is just our slaves.
In the following clip, it's easy to see that "elbow distance clinch" can be established quickly. You may not like to use it, but you can't prevent your opponent from using it on you.
[video=youtube;Ng8_2N7yuEo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ng8_2N7yuEo[/video]
This is what I will call "style boundary". Why should we put restriction on ourselves such as "My style doesn't do this"? We are the masters. Style is just our slaves.
In the following clip, it's easy to see that "elbow distance clinch" can be established quickly. You may not like to use it, but you can't prevent your opponent from using it on you.
[video=youtube;Ng8_2N7yuEo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ng8_2N7yuEo[/video]
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #117
I don't think you read my post. I teach that arm lock that Bas Rutten performed in the clip you posted both in karate and Krav. It is central to a lot of the training I teach against weapons. So two of my styles use that type of clinch by intention. It both of those the intention is to restrain and restrict my opponent while I belt the crap out of him. I love to use it.
Aikido is different. It's not that "my style doesn't do this or that". Aikido is not primarily a striking art. The strikes we train are strategic, not finishes by them selves. Aikido is not about clinching unless the clinch is involved as a takedown. Of course opponents will try to clinch at times. This is where Aikido thrives as a clinch is a lot easier to avoid or reverse that a strike and for that matter Systema is similar to Aikido in the way it teaches avoidance of the clinch being applied to you. The difference here though is that Systema does utilise the same clinches and the arm lock we are discussing.
As as to your last clip, I'm not sure how you think that it applied to Aikido. Even so, there wasn't one clinch that I would call effective in it at all.
:asian:
Kframe
Black Belt
I don't wanna speak out of line, considering im a newbie, but I think I kinda get what CP is saying, at least with regard to what im doing in Taijutsu. It was said, earlier in this thread that, a sword can be a good tool for self defense in the right context. I didn't say anything but I disagree. Now sure, a few months ago I believed the same. Then I was allowed to sit in on the head instructor and the assistant instructor training during the advanced class. It was sword techniques that day. I didn't see any self defense there. What I saw, was how to kill someone very very violently if they try to attack you with a weapon. In one case, the bad guy would have had his hand amputated at the wrist,(or at least very badly cut) and his throat slashed and his kidneys carved in two. All in just a few movements. That was not self defense, that was how to counter murder your enemy. Sure were I am, if he breaks in, it is by law considered a forcible felony and the law says I can use lethal force then that would work. How ever that wont work every were, and honestly is only rarely appropriate.
Chris parker Thank you for your insights. There is a lot to digest there, im going to have to give it time. So some attacks are not just representative of unarmed attacks? That adds a interesting twist on everything. Your advice on being patient and introspective are well taken. I do have a issue with patience.
About the Akban, i was watching there videos because it was the most complete area on youtube to see many of the ryu kata. Did they really add in bits of aikido and boxing?
I personal don't like to train "If you do ..., I'll do ...". If my opponent never uses a certain move on me then I'll never have chance to use my counter move on him. It's a bit too conservative approach for my taste. I like to train "I'll do this on you no matter you like it or not." I like to put my opponent in "self-defense" mode. I don't like my opponent to put me in "self-defense" mode.
I assume I'm not training "self-defense" by some of your guy's definition.
I assume I'm not training "self-defense" by some of your guy's definition.
Last edited:
Thanks for your post.
So, in your opinion, do you feel that both SD and a martial art, can be learned at the same time? I may be wrong, but I got the impression from Chris' post, that you can only do one or the other. Again, maybe I'm just not understanding correctly. As for the sword techs...yeah, that's probably not SD. LOL! Of course, when I was doing Kenpo, there were quite a few techs, that were 'overkill' for lack of a better word. IMHO, I don't think that doing neck breaks, striking the back with knees, and jumping on a downed opponent, constitutes SD.
