New view on an old technique

[puunui]

When I use to fiddle around with it, it was very interesting to me, it was kind of like playing chess with your body parts. But after time, I lost interest.

Well, you are better than me because I never fiddled around with it, at least not the hidden pressure point stuff. As a practitioner of Hapkido, when I practice poomsae, applications do jump out at me, and some of my instructors have given examples of self defense movements contained in forms. But I do not practice poomsae for self defense purposes, so I am not really into all of the explanations of the applications. I have Hapkido for that, applications which we practice directly, against a live resisting partner, rather than solo, fighting an imaginary opponent. But if other people wish to delve into the hidden form applications, triple warmers and all of that, they more power to them.

 

[mastercole]

Well, you are better than me because I never fiddled around with it, at least not the hidden pressure point stuff. As a practitioner of Hapkido, when I practice poomsae, applications do jump out at me, and some of my instructors have given examples of self defense movements contained in forms. But I do not practice poomsae for self defense purposes, so I am not really into all of the explanations of the applications. I have Hapkido for that, applications which we practice directly, against a live resisting partner, rather than solo, fighting an imaginary opponent. But if other people wish to delve into the hidden form applications, triple warmers and all of that, they more power to them.

I didn't fiddle with it that much, just long enough to find out it was not for me

 

[lifespantkd]

Interesting discussion on bunkai/vital points. At this stage of my training, I find it interesting. I'm sure that that is partly because of my interest in physiology and partly because of my short height and light weight. I'm quite petite. I don't have a huge reach or lot of mass to throw around. So, I am forever thinking "How can I pit my strength against an attacker's weakness?" I need to make the most of any technique by any means possible. Are those of you who are not particularly interested in these topics at the other end of the height/weight spectrum?

Cynthia

 

[Earl Weiss]

In the first posted video with GM Cyrus I could not help but think that some of the applications shown would be difficultto pull off against an opponent of equal or larger size with a reasonable level of resistance.

 

[mastercole]

Interesting discussion on bunkai/vital points. At this stage of my training, I find it interesting. I'm sure that that is partly because of my interest in physiology and partly because of my short height and light weight. I'm quite petite. I don't have a huge reach or lot of mass to throw around. So, I am forever thinking "How can I pit my strength against an attacker's weakness?" I need to make the most of any technique by any means possible. Are those of you who are not particularly interested in these topics at the other end of the height/weight spectrum?

Cynthia

If we are thinking that size and strength matters, which in a fight, it does -- consider this. If bunkai could teach a smaller person to defeat a larger, stronger person, it would teach a larger person to be devastating and everyone one would be using it. But bunkai is not really about that today. I think when the Samurai school did bunkai, for what they did, way back in the Samurai days, it was effective, but that was lost a long time ago and applicable to sword fighting, which was also lost a long time ago. Some of it may still exist, in some form, in martial arts like Judo, Hapkido, Aikido and even BJJ.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

While I do enjoy learning, researching and practicing boonhae (bunkai), it does rub me the wrong way how many from the "application clique" dis those who do not practice it or have any interest in it. There are many roads that lead to the same place.. .

May I ask who these people are sir? I've followed proponents of 'Bunkai' for many years now, such as Master Iain Abernethy, Stuart Anslow and Simon O'Neill. I've never seen them, or any other disrespect those of the block-punch-kick clique. I've seen them present quite a bit of information to support their position. For example, Professor Anko Itosu (Shuri) developed the Pinan kata set (Shodan through Godan). He did alter the terminology and application for the consumption of Okinawan school children. The reason presented was simply that children didn't need to know the more deadly applications of Karate. I agree. What he altered the Pinan kata to was basically a b-p-k application to be learned by rote. But this also means that if the terminology and applications were changed, they were originally something else as taught to adults. It is not a secret that Karate contains elements beyond strikes and kicks. Throwing, locking, cavity pressing etc have been an part of Karate from the time it was developed (Te). Indeed, stories of Itosu Sensei joint locking an attacker abound. Funakoshi Sensei (Itosu Sensei's student) has written about the Pinan/Heian katas and the applications they contain beyond the b-p-k.

Kanbun Uechi Sensei developed his art outside of the other Ryu's in Okinawa (Shuri, Naha, Tomari and the subsequent Wado, Shoto, Shudo, Shito etc). Yet his art contained the same or similar applications in the Seisan and Sanseiryu katas. The point is that there is a common theme.

The advent of arts becoming more focused on sporting applications has in some ways moved away from these applications. I'm not indicating this is right or wrong, good or bad. But I do see a trend in the last few decades from some quarters to equate forms training = boring and useless. This is regrettable. Reading the writings of the different arts founders would strongly indicate that forms training, when properly understood, was the foundation upon which the art was built. Indeed, Kanbun Uechi Sensei stated that to know Karate, one had to intimately know Sanseiryu. Rather than learning a form in a couple of months (or a couple of classes), Uechi Sensei took 10 years to learn and develop just three kata that lasted him a lifetime. Myogi Sensei often taught only two katas to his students and felt a lifetime was not enough to truly know the two! The point is that the fathers and seniors of Karate felt very strongly about kata for a reason.

Translate this to Korean forms, many of which are Okinawan kata that have been renamed. Of the Korean developed forms, all of the elements can be traced back to what is in Okinawan forms. Again, this isn't stated to say anything against Korean forms, and should not be taken in that light. The point is that if applications beyond b-p-k exist within Okinawan kata, they will also exist within Korean forms. Whether it was knowingly place there or not isn't the question.

What this means is that an instructor or student can further their martial education, if they desire, into a new direction. TKD for example, is known for being a striking and kicking art. That's fine. But many proponents, including me, function with the stance that TKD can...and does have all the elements of arts such as Hapkido, Aikijujutsu, Chin Na etc. TKD can, and in my opinion does have locks, throws, balance displacement, cavity pressing, misplacing of the bone and tendon etc. That is the TKD that I have learned over these many years. Does this put down the TKD'ist that only wishes to train in a b-p-k venue? No. But if one wishes to train their TKD in a 'alternate or deeper' application venue then I think they should be encouraged.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Interesting, but I don't think it's an earth shattering revelation. I've always been taught that every block is a strike and every strike is a block, which seems to be what this boils down to. And I try to train that way. My poor B.O.B. gets struck with "blocks" on a regular basis, and I've done breaks with "blocks" as well. I do like his specific examples of how these techniques can be used.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Interesting discussion on bunkai/vital points. At this stage of my training, I find it interesting. I'm sure that that is partly because of my interest in physiology and partly because of my short height and light weight. I'm quite petite. I don't have a huge reach or lot of mass to throw around. So, I am forever thinking "How can I pit my strength against an attacker's weakness?" I need to make the most of any technique by any means possible. Are those of you who are not particularly interested in these topics at the other end of the height/weight spectrum?

Cynthia

I am not the main target of your question, but I'm answering anyway. I'm at the other end of the height/weight spectrum, being 6'1" and not particularly skinny. However, since the hospital frowns on strikes, I use these sort of grappling, joint lock, pressure point techniques on a far too frequent basis. At 50, my only interest is in dropping that 25 year old tweaker as quickly as possible, with the absolute minimum risk to me or the other people in the ER, not seeing who can take a punch. So I find discussions of boonhae very interesting.

 

[StudentCarl]

I think it's a strength of the art that Taekwondo can suit so many different interests, but do see where people change arts or cross-train. It's interesting to me that the more senior the contributor in this discussion, the more they seem to have chosen to focus most on one area of the art but recognize that other paths are available.

 

[mastercole]

Are you really David Schultz, who made tie-kee-doe, moo-shin-do or something like that?

 

[SahBumNimRush]

May I ask who these people are sir? I've followed proponents of 'Bunkai' for many years now, such as Master Iain Abernethy, Stuart Anslow and Simon O'Neill. I've never seen them, or any other disrespect those of the block-punch-kick clique. I've seen them present quite a bit of information to support their position. For example, Professor Anko Itosu (Shuri) developed the Pinan kata set (Shodan through Godan). He did alter the terminology and application for the consumption of Okinawan school children. The reason presented was simply that children didn't need to know the more deadly applications of Karate. I agree. What he altered the Pinan kata to was basically a b-p-k application to be learned by rote. But this also means that if the terminology and applications were changed, they were originally something else as taught to adults. It is not a secret that Karate contains elements beyond strikes and kicks. Throwing, locking, cavity pressing etc have been an part of Karate from the time it was developed (Te). Indeed, stories of Itosu Sensei joint locking an attacker abound. Funakoshi Sensei (Itosu Sensei's student) has written about the Pinan/Heian katas and the applications they contain beyond the b-p-k.

Kanbun Uechi Sensei developed his art outside of the other Ryu's in Okinawa (Shuri, Naha, Tomari and the subsequent Wado, Shoto, Shudo, Shito etc). Yet his art contained the same or similar applications in the Seisan and Sanseiryu katas. The point is that there is a common theme.

The advent of arts becoming more focused on sporting applications has in some ways moved away from these applications. I'm not indicating this is right or wrong, good or bad. But I do see a trend in the last few decades from some quarters to equate forms training = boring and useless. This is regrettable. Reading the writings of the different arts founders would strongly indicate that forms training, when properly understood, was the foundation upon which the art was built. Indeed, Kanbun Uechi Sensei stated that to know Karate, one had to intimately know Sanseiryu. Rather than learning a form in a couple of months (or a couple of classes), Uechi Sensei took 10 years to learn and develop just three kata that lasted him a lifetime. Myogi Sensei often taught only two katas to his students and felt a lifetime was not enough to truly know the two! The point is that the fathers and seniors of Karate felt very strongly about kata for a reason.

Translate this to Korean forms, many of which are Okinawan kata that have been renamed. Of the Korean developed forms, all of the elements can be traced back to what is in Okinawan forms. Again, this isn't stated to say anything against Korean forms, and should not be taken in that light. The point is that if applications beyond b-p-k exist within Okinawan kata, they will also exist within Korean forms. Whether it was knowingly place there or not isn't the question.

What this means is that an instructor or student can further their martial education, if they desire, into a new direction. TKD for example, is known for being a striking and kicking art. That's fine. But many proponents, including me, function with the stance that TKD can...and does have all the elements of arts such as Hapkido, Aikijujutsu, Chin Na etc. TKD can, and in my opinion does have locks, throws, balance displacement, cavity pressing, misplacing of the bone and tendon etc. That is the TKD that I have learned over these many years. Does this put down the TKD'ist that only wishes to train in a b-p-k venue? No. But if one wishes to train their TKD in a 'alternate or deeper' application venue then I think they should be encouraged.

I'm not attacking anyone's approach to training, nor am I suggesting that the "leaders" in modern bunkai practice and research are disrespecting other martial artists' practice. However, I've encountered people in the past who state that a block is not a block, or a strike is not a strike. While I openly admit that there are many applications to movements found in forms, who am I to argue with your (in a general sense, not you specifically Kong Soo Do) teachings? I find it insulting when someone says that I don't know what I'm doing, when IMO, it could be more appropriately stated that "this movement can be used as more than just a block." There are many reasons to practice forms, many applications of movements, and many benefits to practicing, and in many ways forms practice is a very personal one. I would not disrespect someone by saying the reason or the way that they practice their form is not right (unless maybe they were my student, and even then it would be a guidance issue, not a disrespecting one).

Because of the commonality of the traditional forms that I practice between KMA, JMA, and OMA, I keep an open mind in forms practice. Each MA, and it's sub-styles use various applications for the same movement, and when performed properly work in their own merit. If something works, why does it matter what the form's designer meant by the movement, when in reality that fact is most likely lost in the sands of time.

My only real criticism of bunkai practice is that in some cases, I've witnessed boonhae/bunkai that is overly complex and inefficient, making the success of performing such a move in real time extremely limited. IMO, boonhae should be efficient in movement, and I like to follow the K.I.S.S. principle when practicing boonhae. However, this should not be taken as an insult to its practice, rather I think a martial artist that is serious about their studies always tests their applications in a more free style manner, in order to have a better idea as to whether a particular application is going to help or hinder you in a self-defense situation. The same goes for one-step sparring.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I think it's a strength of the art that Taekwondo can suit so many different interests, but do see where people change arts or cross-train. It's interesting to me that the more senior the contributor in this discussion, the more they seem to have chosen to focus most on one area of the art but recognize that other paths are available.

This is actually an excellent way to view the art of TKD. TKD can be a constructive past time for the martial hobbiest wishing to get into shape, be a part of a social group, improve their health etc. TKD can be an athletic outlet for those wishing to pursue competition. TKD can be an effective, all-around method of self-defense for those needing it. Good observation.

 

[jks9199]

ATTENTION ALL USERS

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Jim Sheeran
jks9199
Asst. Administrator

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I'm not attacking anyone's approach to training, nor am I suggesting that the "leaders" in modern bunkai practice and research are disrespecting other martial artists' practice.

Thank you for the clarification. I didn't know if their was some circle out there that was disrespecting directly those with a view towards b-p-k applications.

I find it insulting when someone says that I don't know what I'm doing, when IMO, it could be more appropriately stated that "this movement can be used as more than just a block."

I completely agree that the way something is worded is important. The only thing I suggest is that some blocks have a very low % of working in a real-world, chaotic fight against a determined attacker. It is these times that I look for something that may make more sense.

My only real criticism of bunkai practice is that in some cases, I've witnessed boonhae/bunkai that is overly complex and inefficient, making the success of performing such a move in real time extremely limited. IMO, boonhae should be efficient in movement, and I like to follow the K.I.S.S. principle when practicing boonhae.

Agreed. I fully believe the originators of most of the forms fully understood refined vs. gross motor skills. In my professional opinion, if an interpretation indicates a refined motor skill, it is probably the wrong interpretation. At least as far as self-defense is concerned. And that should be taken in context of forms designed with self-defense in mind. Some forms are used for conditioning and some designed solely for competition and shouldn't be judged against refined vs. gross motor skills.

 

[Earl Weiss]

Curios that GM Cyrus in his video cites Occam's Razor "The principle is often summarized as "simpler explanations are, other things being equal, generally better than more complex ones." as being important yet what he considers the "Real ' application is far from simple when the basic block / strike application is considered.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

The first think to consider in any application of a form is 'how effective' is this interpretation going to be against an attacker (assuming it is a combative form). Master Abernethy often makes the statement, "a kata isn't something you do with someone, rather it is something you're doing TO someone". In this case, does the knife hand, as a block, do something to someone? The answer could be 'yes' if it used as a force-on-force against the incoming strike, and positioned in such a way as to cause muscular dis-function and fluid shock. But could everyone/anyone apply this as a force-on-force block/strike? Could subject factors cause the application to be tilted one way or another? Are there any interpretations that are more usable? Are both hands actively doing something? An example is the opening movement of Pinan Shodan where the arm is lifted up high over the head. As a 'block' this is a very ineffective movement. However, as a shoulder lock it is highly effective and usable in a close in altercation.

Just some things to consider.

 

[miguksaram]

While I do enjoy learning, researching and practicing boonhae (bunkai), it does rub me the wrong way how many from the "application clique" dis those who do not practice it or have any interest in it. There are many roads that lead to the same place.. .

I agree...not every shoe fits every foot and you must wear what is comfortable for you for the journey. (Yeah...pure Jeremyism right there for you. ha.ha.ha.) Again, my intent of this video was not to show that this was a better way of practicing. I just thought it was a nice view on a technique most of us practice. Use it, don't use it, it makes no difference and you are neither better or worse for which path you choose on the manner.

 

[miguksaram]

My only real criticism of bunkai practice is that in some cases, I've witnessed boonhae/bunkai that is overly complex and inefficient, making the success of performing such a move in real time extremely limited. IMO, boonhae should be efficient in movement, and I like to follow the K.I.S.S. principle when practicing boonhae. However, this should not be taken as an insult to its practice, rather I think a martial artist that is serious about their studies always tests their applications in a more free style manner, in order to have a better idea as to whether a particular application is going to help or hinder you in a self-defense situation. The same goes for one-step sparring.

I would agree. We practice bunkai at our school for each one of our forms. More times than not one of the students starts to over think and over complicate the technique. Sensei Sharkey just usually steps in and says the same thing "Quit making it so complicated. Just get in there and run the form. Block when you need to block and punch when you need to punch." When I showed him this particular video he watched it and said "Oh that's cool." Then he took a sip of his coffee and walked away.

 

[puunui]

Interesting discussion on bunkai/vital points. At this stage of my training, I find it interesting. I'm sure that that is partly because of my interest in physiology and partly because of my short height and light weight. I'm quite petite. I don't have a huge reach or lot of mass to throw around. So, I am forever thinking "How can I pit my strength against an attacker's weakness?" I need to make the most of any technique by any means possible. Are those of you who are not particularly interested in these topics at the other end of the height/weight spectrum? Cynthia

I don't think it has anything to do with height or weight. GM Cyrus, in the video is over six feet tall and over 200 pounds. I think it has more to do with the focus or interest of the individual practitioner as determined by their spot on the martial arts journey, and also in part with filling holes or perceived holes in one's training.

 

[puunui]

I didn't fiddle with it that much, just long enough to find out it was not for me

When I was coming up, applications from poomsae were never really discussed. We just sort of did the forms and that was it. Sometimes applications would come out when parts of forms were taken to create one step sparring routines. And sometimes someone would ask what a particular sequence meant. And at the Kukkiwon Instructor Course one of the testing committee members got really upset when some of the participants were grossly distorting the poomsae movements and the test committee member (who was a member of the committee that created the forms, and I think he created this particular form, Taeguek 7 Jang) got up from his chair and started demonstrating the movements and explained the application, in an upset, forceful manner. He was really angry about how some people would distort the poomsae beyond recognition.