# How about some Yudo talk?



## dosandojang (May 2, 2004)

Anyone else practice Yudo?


----------



## Kodanjaclay (May 3, 2004)

I did VERY little Judo. My only experience with Yudo was with Mr. Connolly at a seminar at that was extremely brief. I would enjoy hearing more about how Yudo and Judo vary or if they are exactly the same art just with transliterated names. mr. Connolly said they are not exactly the same, but to be honest, they looked it to me... but that being said, remember my Judo experience was limited to working out with a friend that was a Judo player for some extra mat time. Similarly, I got quite a bit of mat time with some NHB players and would like to know if it shares any relationship to it.


----------



## dosandojang (May 7, 2004)

Hello Frank. Well let me explain from MY experience. I started Yudo at age four, under Norris. Yes, he taught us MDKTSD, but he also mixed in TKD and Yudo (as he was a Brown Belt in Yudo, and later gained his Black). He told us that it was Judo, and that the Koreans just called it Yudo (that is the way they pronounce it). Along the way, I competed in many shiai (Judo matches). I can say, that Judo as it is today...is a Martial Sport (like WTF TKD), and that Yudo would be considered a Martial Art. ALL of the techs are the SAME, so you could say that Yudo and Judo are one in the same (as I do). It just depends on how and when you use them. The Koreans made a pledge in the 70's, to create and build a Judo/Yudo program that would enable them to beat Japan in comps. They did this by playing half and half...Half Japanese style (perfect tech) and Half European (power, speed and strength). Since the 80's, they have been a power house by combining these styles. I must admit though, the Gracies have kept Judo more in tact then the Japanese actually did. What Kano created, drifted away by the rest of the world. BJJ today would be closer to what Kano wanted, then what is being played today as Judo. I have trained with many Korean Judo Masters, and only a few have a style that is closer to BJJ...And they call it Yawara or Yoo Sool. Prof. Connolly has a Yudo group, and I am currently supplying them with my Judo Dan Certs. in hopes of joining. He wants to keep it as it was intended, a Martial Art...and I want to be a part of that. I am not happy with the way the Judo world is today. It is more geared towards sport, than art. And since I am getting older, I want to focus more on the art than the sport.


----------



## Kevin Walker (Jul 11, 2004)

dosandojang said:
			
		

> Hello Frank. Well let me explain from MY experience. I started Yudo at age four, under Norris. Yes, he taught us MDKTSD, but he also mixed in TKD and Yudo (as he was a Brown Belt in Yudo, and later gained his Black). He told us that it was Judo, and that the Koreans just called it Yudo (that is the way they pronounce it). Along the way, I competed in many shiai (Judo matches). I can say, that Judo as it is today...is a Martial Sport (like WTF TKD), and that Yudo would be considered a Martial Art. ALL of the techs are the SAME, so you could say that Yudo and Judo are one in the same (as I do). It just depends on how and when you use them. The Koreans made a pledge in the 70's, to create and build a Judo/Yudo program that would enable them to beat Japan in comps. They did this by playing half and half...Half Japanese style (perfect tech) and Half European (power, speed and strength). Since the 80's, they have been a power house by combining these styles. I must admit though, the Gracies have kept Judo more in tact then the Japanese actually did. What Kano created, drifted away by the rest of the world. BJJ today would be closer to what Kano wanted, then what is being played today as Judo. I have trained with many Korean Judo Masters, and only a few have a style that is closer to BJJ...And they call it Yawara or Yoo Sool. Prof. Connolly has a Yudo group, and I am currently supplying them with my Judo Dan Certs. in hopes of joining. He wants to keep it as it was intended, a Martial Art...and I want to be a part of that. I am not happy with the way the Judo world is today. It is more geared towards sport, than art. And since I am getting older, I want to focus more on the art than the sport.


Hi,

I liked what you wrote and I like your attitude, but there are a few minor things I need to quibble about.

If you haven't done so already, a very interesting book to peruse is: THE COMPLETE KANO JIU JITSU (1906, 1950, 1961 reprints) by Harry Irving Hancock and Katsukuma Higashi, available in some public libraries.  I read it again recently in the Boston Public Library.  It has some very revealing 1906 photographs of Dr. Kano's Jiu-Jitsu (Judo) being applied, particularly Judo's leglocks.

Brazillian Jiu Jitsu is Judo but with all the Jiu-jitsu techniques which Dr. Kano removed put back in again.  Dr. Jigoro Kano modified the more deadlier strangle holds and pinning techniques of Tenshin Shinyo Jiu Jitsu and removed the nastier throwing techniques from Kito Jiu Jitsu when he formulated his Judo.  Today, BJJ more resembles the professional wrestling of the 1960s than any classical form of Japanese Jiu Jitsu.

I have read and heard several times that the Koreans have claimed that Yudo is unique to Korea and has nothing to do with Judo.  The Chinese have done the same thing calling their version "Fast Wrestling".  Danzan-ryu jiu jitsu is also vertually identical to Judo, yet they too claim it originated seperately from Dr. Kano's influence.

Also, I agree with your observation that Judo is being purposely transmorgrified into a sport rather than a martial art.  Particularly by the Europeans and their influence on the Olympic Committee.  With the Koreans blending 'technique' with 'power' into their Yudo, they are more imitating the former Soviet style of sloppy Judo (win by koka).  Yet the organizers of both the World Championships and the All Japan Judo Championships are resisting this trend.

But Kodokan Judo is still a martial art in every sense of the word, as they still retain striking and kicking techniques in their upper kata and dan ranks, and several self-defense moves against the knife, stick, sword, and physical attacks.  Its just European and American Judo players seldom stick around long enough after their tournament days to learn this aspect of Judo.


----------



## glad2bhere (Jul 11, 2004)

Dear Dosandochang et al: 

The closest thing I have heard of to a Korean art named Yudo (other than the Japanese transliteration, Judo) was a group of folks who were seeking to re-engineer the Korean wrestling art of Sseirum back into a more combative form than that of its current national passtime. My best guess is that such a result would probably look not unlike traditional Mongolian wrestling (as opposed to the cleaner modern version) or perhaps something along the lines of San Shou. I won't pretend that this doesn't trigger my standing quibble with modern arts that most activities are "civil arts" rather than "martial arts" but I'll save that for another string. My sense is that most folks having once seen a martial application of such wrestling activities would probably find the a bit too demanding for average consumption. Its the same thing, I think, with NHB and K-1 events. There is a particular minset and demographic who are drawn to and averse to such events. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Kodanjaclay (Jul 12, 2004)

Bruce,

Define what you mean by martial versus civil. Any art can fall into either category in my mind. :mp5:


----------



## glad2bhere (Jul 12, 2004)

Dear Frank: 

Thats completely understandable. Your view is probably the same as that of most folks. Not very many people actually consider the philosophical and historic underpinnings of their practices to consider whether the moniker "martial arts" actually applies. A classic example is Japanese Kendo which derives from kenjutsu which is, in its own right, a martial art, replete with martial code, values, history and in many cases lineage. Kendo, in and of itself, is a form of training which became codified into a sport. To my way of thinking that would be like  developing the use of the speedbag that boxers use into some form of competition. Kendo is a fine activity, and a fine sport, and certainly derives FROM  a martial art, but IMVVHO is not a martial art in and of itself. Now I know I will get a lot of flack from Kendo practitioners who will argue that Kendo is a martial art. Thats fine. Repeatedly professing something does not change the facts. Having said all of that lets look at TKD. 

Derived from Shotokan (Funakoshi) and Shudokan (Toyama) and with kicking material stirred in to bespeak a Taek Kyon influence where, exactly, does the "martial" come in? Is it the fact that the modern Korean military uses it as part of their curriculum? Well, the Korean army also has cooks. Shall we call "cooking" a "martial art? They also have truck drivers. Shall we call truck driving a "martial art"? 

Lets take a look at the philosophy. Funakoshi repeatedly downplayed the role of combat in Shotokan and the Japanese military agreed that training in Karate other than for conditioning was relatively ineffectual on a modern battlefield owing to modern weaponry and tactics.

Lets take a look at the material itself. 

a.) General Choi was known to have encouraged TKD practitioners to learn alternate arts in order to bolster what he readily identified as deficits in TKD trechnique as a combat activity. 
b.) Even if TKD HAD combat effective material, where would it be used except on a battlefield? OK, so you learn to drive your fingers into a persons' eyes rupturing the eyeball within the orbit, spilling vitreous humor all over and blinding the person for life. Exactly who is going to use--- or has EVER used such a technique-- even if it were part of a TKD curriculum. 
c.) If TKD HAD the techniques, AND if a person WERE to use such techniques, how frequently would a person be called upon to use such deadly force in order to justify hours, days, weeks, months, and years of study? 

No, Frank. TKD is a "civil" art, not a "martial" art. It has few if any genuine martial applications, it has little if any relationship to the sorts of deadly skills one might find in a military environment, its typical training goals and methods are guided towards sport application rather than deadly force, and (mostly) it is the intent of the proprietors of the art that it hold a satisfying and respectable place in the community. To my way of thinking the only thing "martial" about TKD is the romantic image promoted by the folks who need to seel the art to keep the lights on in their dochang.   

In closing let me also say that a person who practices TKD can, of his own volition train in the art with a martial perspective, but then again so can a boxer, so can a dressmaker, so can a student, an engineer -- just about anyone. Its is always possible to bring a martial attitude and a martial code into ones value system. It does not automatically follow that what activity one does, then, to express that code automatically becomes martial. As long as the art remains "civilized" for use in the community it remains a "civil art". 
Hope this helps. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## TigerWoman (Jul 12, 2004)

Under that argument, Hapkido and everything else in this country is "civilized".  Taekwondo is still a martial art no matter how you disparage it.  It is not an art of peace. Taekwondo is not just for competitions either. There's very little focus on that in our organization and others as well. It just seems that people like to criticize TKD because we put our skills to the test in breaking and tournaments. And the reference that TKD does not employ deadly force sounds like you don't know much about our martial art. That is precisely where our focus is.   TW


----------



## Marginal (Jul 13, 2004)

Don Draeger defined Martial Art as an art that was designed for millitary use. A civillian or civil art was one that was developed by non millitary folks. (For example, Shaolin Kung Fu is a civil art.) Doesn't really diminish whether or not the art is useful in hand to hand encounters, it's just that in most cases, even ancient warriors tended to prefer to let their swords, armor, bows, and spears etc do the job first. 

If you look at the history, pretty much every striking and grappling art are considered civil arts. (People outside the millitary tend to worry about being accosted while unarmed far more.) Cross training's a given in the millitary. A soldier needs to be effective with the tools they have available, and they need to know how to mesh with other soldiers and so on. As Forrest E. Morgan put it, "What soldier would dedicate himself to hand grenade throwing to the exclusion of all else?" No art is really complete on its own. Every single one has gaps that can be filled in fairly quickly by studying another art in addition to the primary art you study.


----------



## glad2bhere (Jul 13, 2004)

Dear Tigerwoman: 

"....Under that argument, Hapkido and everything else in this country is "civilized". ...." 

I would pretty much agree with your assessment with one important difference. There continue to be certain arts which remain relatively unchanged both in philosophy and in practice that I think would still constitute "true martial arts". For instance, I mentioned Kenjutsu for the Japanese and would include Kum-bup (as opposed to Kumdo) for the Korean MA. Generally, some ju-jutsu traditions in Japan still retain very distinct martial applications as do some Hapkido arts in Korea, though many of the Hapkido arts have been "cleaned-up" for public consumption. The weaponry, practice and intent of the weapons found in the MYTBTJ all retain their martial applications even if their actual use on the battlefield was given-up long ago in deference to firearms. 

From a philosophical standpoint, however, I might have to concede even more. There are simply very few schools, kwans or organizations which make a genuine effort to promote a martial value system with their membership or leadership. I am NOT talking about running their classes like Boot Camp or copping an attitude or promoting some kind of stoic behavior in the face of injury. I am talking about promoting the O-Gae as an actual code of conduct, identifying Integrity above personal gain, and self-sacrifice for the community over self-promotion. People usually talk a good talk, but never quite get around to actually walking the walk. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## glad2bhere (Jul 13, 2004)

Dear Marginal: 

".....If you look at the history, pretty much every striking and grappling art are considered civil arts. (People outside the millitary tend to worry about being accosted while unarmed far more.) ...." 

NOT to put you on the spot, but your observation intrigued me. Are you familiar with the new h2h program that the US Marine Corps has been supposedly instituting---- replete with web belts of various colors? How would you relate that activity to your definition? Do you suppose that a couple hundred years down the road someone will be offering courses in this activity out of the local street-corner gym?  Thoughts? Comments? 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Marginal (Jul 13, 2004)

Couple of hundred years? I woudln't be surprised if an ex Marine or three opened up a school in the next few years if they haven't already. Take up a place in the MA's right alongside Krav Maga etc. As it's used by the millitary for millitary purposes, it's cleanly a MA, but how that translates into the civilian arena's another question entirely IMO.


----------



## glad2bhere (Jul 13, 2004)

".....As it's used by the millitary for millitary purposes, it's cleanly a MA, but how that translates into the civilian arena's another question entirely IMO...." 

Yep, thats why I think its an interesting path to follow-up on. We have already seen how a civilian art can be marketed as a "martial art", with or without documented bonafides. I would love to see how someone would translate an activity especially constructed for military use into something someone could build a "kids' class" around and not lose the essence of the art, yes?  :idunno: 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Marginal (Jul 14, 2004)

Well, that and the fact that the average citizen doesn't have the motivation or need to condition themselves like a Marine has to, and that liabilities and bruises will likely scare away the customer base regardless, you get that Play-Doh factor even without trying to work kid's classes into the mix at all. 

At that point, what use is the specific term MA vs CA? At most, it seems to be yet antoher way of claiming you're teaching a "killing art" or something with "street lethal" techniques.


----------



## glad2bhere (Jul 16, 2004)

As far as I can see the only true use for terms such as "martial arts" or "civil arts" would be as a kind of discriminator for folks seeking a particular view of a family of activities. In this sense it would be along the lines of how Westerners use terms like "sport TKD" or "Olympic TKD" or "Self-defense TKD". 

For me, using a terms such as "martial art" bespeaks deep study into both the way of doing something and the values that supprot that activity. In this way the study of, say, Korean sword is one of examining the hows and whys of using a sword as a weapon rather than pursuing a sport. Understanding how and why a weapon is used gives us insights into why Korean warriors held the values that they did. Learning to use a lethal weapon empowers the individual with skills for which he must now develop a character which will help him use his new-found skills for the benefit of his community rather than just cutting plastic bottles in two.  

As far as a "civil art" well any time a person starts moderating his activity in deference to the impositions of his society I think peoples' ears need to perk up. Had Michelangelo deferred to public opinion and standards he may well have not put nudes on a church ceiling but the World would have lost out on an artistic masterpiece. Somebody mentioned Judo earlier being modified for Olympic play and that has its place, I suppose. I, personally, lament to terrible loss of mat skills which have been ignored because they are no longer awarded the recognition throws and takedowns get.  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Marginal (Jul 16, 2004)

It is interesting that when you look at the histories closely, pretty much any "-do" art was a repackaging of a jutsu art for commercial consumption. Even in the older arts that can be traced back to warfare the elaborite codes and philosophies were largely developed after long periods of relative peace, leaving the warrior classes with nothing better to do but codify their beliefs.


----------



## glad2bhere (Jul 17, 2004)

I agree that the history in teh Japanese culture certainly followed this pattern. Then again, if we are talking about the Japanese culture we are discussing an entire strata of of society that found itself compromised with the Tokugawa period and later with the Meiji Restoration. These folks had little else to do but sit around and talk about the "good ol' days". Thats how we get some of the books we have today like the one by Harrison and another by Nitobe. But what about the individual warriors who still wanted to abide by the codes transmitted to them by their seniors, generation to generation. What about the ideal that supported the warrior monks to become the single most respected element in the Korean forces during the Imjin War?  FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Marginal (Jul 17, 2004)

To be honest, I think that the ideals were in large part, just that. Ideals. You can find that warrior ideal in pretty much any culture the world over. I don't think it makes them inherently less fallable than any other caste or class however. The goals are admirable, but I can't say that someone reciting the code of the Hwoarang is more noble if they're practicing a certain art NOW than if they're reciting it in a different art for example.


----------



## glad2bhere (Jul 17, 2004)

Gotta tell ya that yer preachin' to the Choir.  There are plenty of people out there who can recite the O-Gae but have absolutely no idea of how to incoporate those belief into their daily life. The Warriors' Path is not in the reciting but the living but there is simply too little emphasis placed on studying the manner in which a code can be incoporated into ones' life so as to provide direction towards living a respectable life and serving as a true asset to the community. FWIW. 

Best Wishes, 

Bruce


----------



## Marginal (Jul 17, 2004)

Along those lines, my first instructor taught Shutokan Karate. She was fond of telling the class the following:



> Practice your karate. If you're doing it poorly, and you get in a fight and you get beaten, don't come running to me saying,
> 
> "Your karate doesn't work!"
> 
> I'll tell you, "No, *your* karate didn't work."



Somewhat simplistic, but given she was mainly teaching elementry schoolers and middle schoolers, it's understandable. Either way, it's a fairly succinct summation of Musashi's rules for learning his art. 

1. Think of what is right and true.

2. Practice and cultivate the science.

3. Become aquainted with the arts.

4. Know the principles of the crafts.

5. Understand the harm and benefit in everything.

6. Learn to see everything accurately.

7. Become aware of what is not obvious.

8. Be careful even in small matters.

9. Do not do anything that is useless. 

Doesn't directly contribute to someone living a respectable life depending how they skew #1 and #5, but it can open the door for those who are willing to step through as I see it.


----------

