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



## Steven Lee (Jan 31, 2019)

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 (Jan 31, 2019)

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


----------



## Steven Lee (Jan 31, 2019)

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 (Jan 31, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> 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 (Jan 31, 2019)

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 (Jan 31, 2019)

Xue Sheng said:


> 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.



Steven Lee said:


> 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.



Steven Lee said:


> 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 (Jan 31, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> 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 (Jan 31, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> 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 (Feb 1, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The power generation comes from
> 
> 1. Bottom and up.
> 2. Back and forward.
> ...


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 (Feb 1, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> 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.
> 
> ...


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 (Feb 1, 2019)

jobo said:


> 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 (Feb 1, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> 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 (Feb 1, 2019)

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 (Feb 1, 2019)

jobo said:


> 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 (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> 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 (Feb 1, 2019)

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 (Feb 1, 2019)

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 (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> 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.



Steven Lee said:


> 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 (Feb 1, 2019)

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 (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> 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.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> 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.



LOL.
I've got 8 year old students who could do those breaks. And they have a better grasp of both power generation and reality than you.



> 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.



Training in either gives you more knowledge than someone with no training in either.



> Also, racism is my right. My freedom & rights shouldn't be violated just because you don't like it.



I get that you don't like the fact that you're Japanese. Such self-loathing is unhealthy.



> 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.



Your sources range from sketchy to ridiculous. Your conclusions come from a racist pre-conceived bias.



> I don't have authority



No, you do not. Nor any credibility. Nor any basis from which to build credibility.



> I'm an amateur historian.



That's not the phrase I would use to describe you...

[Remainder of incoherent babbling deleted]


----------



## jobo (Feb 1, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> 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.


you seem to be forgetting that forces  experienced by two objects in collision are EQUAL. and opposite


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

jobo said:


> you seem to be forgetting that forces  experienced by two objects in collision are EQUAL. and opposite



Sure, but there's also TIME. And that's the factor affected by differences in mass and velocity. When you step on the brakes, you experience the same force as if you hit a brick wall. But slowly. And you survive.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 1, 2019)

jobo said:


> you seem to be forgetting that forces  experienced by two objects in collision are EQUAL. and opposite


I'm working this through in my head, so correct me where you see my error. The force *at impact* (the momentary exchange that creates deformation, rebound, etc.) would be the same, I think. But if one mass is much larger (the truck-car scenario), then the larger mass continues forward, exerting an accelerating force against the smaller. Basically, they expend equal energy into the collision, but one has more energy than that.


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

Yes it is Ad Hominem fallacy & Appeal to False Authority fallacy. Being trained in sports has nothing to do with being trained in sports history. They are 2 different fields, completely unrelated. As for me, I don't have authority cause I'm an amateur historian. However, my sources & references have complete authorities in sports history by being scholarly sources & news organization sources that haven't been damaged in reputation. They are reputable sources. Even though I don't have credentials, my references have credentials.

Being an expert in sports history has nothing to do with being an expert in how to do sports. Ad Hominem fallacy & Appeal to False Authority fallacy. You are just attacking me as a person rather than attacking the substance of argument. That's what those fallacies mean.

My conclusions follow directly from the given referenced facts. If Korean had such hand strike & Karate didn't have such hand strike, Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strikes to Karate.


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

Pulling punch (brake) doesn't make the force bigger. When mass in motion collides with an object, it can transfer big forces within a short amount of time even if it doesn't stop right there. Whether it stops right there or keeps on going doesn't change how it delivered a big force within that time frame already anyway. So, if a car hits someone, even if the car keeps on going, it doesn't make the impact which already happened any weaker. Some people don't understand physics. How much time you spend on decelerating is irrelevant in that time unit in equation. Even if it takes 2 seconds to decelerate, you look at the force delivered within the first 1 second. That's how it works. It's about how fast you ram the forces in. Not about when you decelerate.

When doing Breaking/Tameshiwari with hand strike, hand experiences the same shock and damage as the object. The law of action & reaction. It is just that, muscle fibers (like the heel or side of hand) are used to strike hard objects cause muscle fibers are hard yet bendy. It's like hitting with a thick glove on. That's why bones are not damaged in Breaking.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I'm working this through in my head, so correct me where you see my error. The force *at impact* (the momentary exchange that creates deformation, rebound, etc.) would be the same, I think. But if one mass is much larger (the truck-car scenario), then the larger mass continues forward, exerting an accelerating force against the smaller. Basically, they expend equal energy into the collision, but one has more energy than that.



Basically, it's the time factor. In that scenario, the less massive vehicle experiences the X to zero deceleration in a much shorter time.


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

Breaking pebble is not very easy due to short fulcrum issue. Also, as you can see from my body, I don't work out. Muscles make powerful strikes.

"Training in either gives you more knowledge than someone with no training in either."

No idea what you are talking about. If you trained in sports but you didn't research nor study its history, you don't know anything about its history. On the other hand, I have reputable references & sources talking about sports histories. Also, not being trained in sports like me doesn't change how much I know about their histories by reading a lot. And my sources & references are reputable.

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. Attacking my lack of credentials is Ad Hominem fallacy and Appeal to False Authority fallacy. You should attack the substance of argument itself, not me as in person. Also, even though I have no authority, my sources & references have authority in sports histories; they are reputable. Also, being trained in sports doesn't make you expert in sports histories. Studying how to do sports doesn't automatically make you studied and researched in sports histories.

So, Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strikes to Karate. I provided references including Black Belt magazine and Kyokushin Karate website how it was him who did in-depth research in Tameshiwari for Karate. Shoulder-rotation in hand strike happens to be one of Mas Oyama's contribution. Since Korean already had such kind of hand strike, Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate's Tameshiwari/Breaking.


----------



## jobo (Feb 1, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I'm working this through in my head, so correct me where you see my error. The force *at impact* (the momentary exchange that creates deformation, rebound, etc.) would be the same, I think. But if one mass is much larger (the truck-car scenario), then the larger mass continues forward, exerting an accelerating force against the smaller. Basically, they expend equal energy into the collision, but one has more energy than that.


yea, fly crashes into n to your wind screen, both fly and car experience the same force,one stops dead the other hardly notices, then try it with a elk


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> Breaking pebble is not very easy due to short fulcrum issue. Also, as you can see from my body, I don't work out. Muscles make powerful strikes.



Thank you for proving you do not understand power generation.



> "Training in either gives you more knowledge than someone with no training in either."
> 
> No idea what you are talking about. If you trained in sports but you didn't research nor study its history, you don't know anything about its history. On the other hand, I have reputable references & sources talking about sports histories. Also, not being trained in sports like me doesn't change how much I know about their histories by reading a lot. And my sources & references are reputable.



You have no martial arts training. You have no training as a historian. You have no training as a researcher. You have no training in logic. You have no training in, apparently, anything, that might conceivably allow you to reach rational conclusions.

The only thing you have is a pre-conceived bias based on your racism.

[Remaining nonsense deleted. It's been disproven repeatedly.]


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> Yes it is Ad Hominem fallacy & Appeal to False Authority fallacy. Being trained in sports has nothing to do with being trained in sports history. They are 2 different fields, completely unrelated. As for me, I don't have authority cause I'm an amateur historian. However, my sources & references have complete authorities in sports history by being scholarly sources & news organization sources that haven't been damaged in reputation. They are reputable sources. Even though I don't have credentials, my references have credentials.
> 
> Being an expert in sports history has nothing to do with being an expert in how to do sports. Ad Hominem fallacy & Appeal to False Authority fallacy. You are just attacking me as a person rather than attacking the substance of argument. That's what those fallacies mean.
> 
> My conclusions follow directly from the given referenced facts. If Korean had such hand strike & Karate didn't have such hand strike, Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strikes to Karate.


Wrong. Just wrong, in so many ways.


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

You are not very smart, aside from the issues with your goals, beliefs, agenda, bias. Whether I commit to "racism" or not, leave me be. None of your business whether someone is a racist or not. It's a rightful racism and not even racism anyway. But it's a rightful racism within my rights even if we call it that.

My research method is fine. I collect evidences, I present evidences, I draw conclusions. That's the typical research method used by all Academia of any field including history. Even though I don't have an authority as neither sports athlete nor historian, the sources I use have authority in history. As for my conclusions drawing from those reputable sources, they are natural.

If it's a fact that Karate didn't rotate shoulder for punching before Mas Oyama, if Mas Oyama taught that hand strike (the same as Korean hand strike) to Karate, then Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate. What other conclusions are possible & legitimate? It's a simple matter of drawing the only possible conclusion from given referenced facts which have authority as reputable sources on history. This includes Kyokushin Karate official website & Black Belt magazine 30 years ago.

Just because you say something is wrong doesn't make it wrong. Be specific. I'm just going to keep spreading these information anyway, with my references and my conclusions.

 "Among Mas Oyama’s many accomplishments, he is perhaps best known for introducing tameshiwari or “stone breaking” into the practice of modern karate."

Sosai Masutatsu Oyama, The Founder of Kyokushin Karate - Kyokushin-kan International Honbu

"it was the kyokushinkai school under the direction of Masutatsu (Mas) Oyama which did an in-depth study into tameshiwari (the technique in which hard substances are broken with the bare hands)."

https://i.imgur.com/sFqQGhB.jpg


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 1, 2019)

jobo said:


> yea, fly crashes into n to your wind screen, both fly and car experience the same force,one stops dead the other hardly notices, then try it with a elk


Yeah, I think I'm also considering the effect on the occupants, which goes beyond that. Truck and car experience the same force, but truck driver and car driver do not.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> You are not very smart, aside from the issues with your goals, beliefs, agenda, bias.



I'm not? Oh my. The universities I attended will be so upset to hear this. 



> Whether I commit to "racism" or not, leave me be. None of your business whether someone is a racist or not. It's a rightful racism and not even racism anyway. But it's a rightful racism within my rights even if we call it that.



Racism is a vile stain on the fabric of human society. So, no, I do not think I will leave you be.



> My research method is fine. I collect evidences, I present evidences, I draw conclusions. That's the typical research method used by all Academia of any field including history. Even though I don't have an authority as neither sports athlete nor historian, the sources I use have authority in history. As for my conclusions drawing from those reputable sources, they are *rubbish*.



You made a spelling error in your post. I've highlighted the correction. Hope this helps.



> If it's a fact that Karate didn't rotate shoulder for punching before Mas Oyama,



But it isn't, and you know it isn't. But your view is so clouded by your racism and self-hatred that you refuse to see reality.



> Just because you say something is wrong doesn't make it wrong. Be specific. I'm just going to keep spreading these *fetid dingos kidneys* anyway, with my references and my conclusions.



I've corrected your spelling again. Hope this helps.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

Hey kid... here's some video of Funakoshi, prior to Oyama. And you'll note that his shoulders are rotating. With forward strikes. And breaking. And all the things you claim Karate didn't have.

Well, actually I suspect others will notice. You're got your head buried so far up your racist delusions that you'll remain oblivious to reality.






Note that conclusively proving you wrong took all of 12 seconds on YouTube. Not even anything that I would consider research. I do research. It's much more difficult than proving you're full of it.


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

That video is what I mean by counter-evidence. Debates on arguments are supposed to work by providing counter-evidences, not fallacies including Ad Hominem fallacy. If that video of Gichin Funakoshi was taken before the time of Mas Oyama, and if he really showed shoulder-rotation, then I cancel my previous claim that Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate. However, it makes me wonder what Mas Oyama actually contributed to Tameshiwari/Breaking then. Also, Korean has had all those hand strikes & game concepts anyway in Gwonbeop, Sibak (different Taekkyeon which includes punching) & Charyuk/Kihapsul/Kiaijutsu (Korean had powerful Hand Breaking regardless of Karate).

Mas Oyama devised his own Breaking method when he introduced Tameshiawri/Breaking to the modern practice of Karate. Mas Oyama's book "This is Karate" talks about devising his own Breaking method. "After we had devised our own breaking methods we showed them to a very famous Chinese kempo master, who was awe-struck with admiration."

http://seinenkai.com/articles/noble/noble-oyama.html

"Among Mas Oyama’s many accomplishments, he is perhaps best known for introducing tameshiwari or “stone breaking” into the practice of modern karate."

https://www.kyokushinkan.org/en/?page_id=2122

It is also corroborated by other sources, "it was the kyokushinkai school under the direction of Masutatsu (Mas) Oyama which did an in-depth study into tameshiwari (the technique in which hard substances are broken with the bare hands)."

https://i.imgur.com/sFqQGhB.jpg

What did Mas Oyama contribute to Karate then? What did he do differently?


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

Rightful "racism" is my moral & legal right. In real life, you are supposed to get a restraining order instead of bothering me about my racism.

Regular Karate strikes don't rotate shoulder. That's a fact. However, if that video was published before Mas Oyama's time, then Karate has done irregular moves, rotating shoulder for punching. With this new evidence, my contents get upgraded.

Also, Korean has had all those hand strikes & game concepts anyway in Gwonbeop, Sibak (different Taekkyeon which includes punching like Nalparam, Prize Fight) & Charyuk/Kihapsul/Kiaijutsu (Korean had powerful Hand Breaking regardless of Karate).


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> That video is what I mean by counter-evidence. Debates on arguments are supposed to work by providing counter-evidences, not fallacies including Ad Hominem fallacy. If that video of Gichin Funakoshi was taken before the time of Mas Oyama, and if he really showed shoulder-rotation, then I cancel my previous claim that Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate.



Go watch the video, and then just post "I was wrong" and this will be over. There is no "if" in this conversation. 
And stop whining.


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

I was wrong that Karate didn't rotate shoulder in punch. I assumed Karate didn't rotate shoulder in punch cause regular Karate doesn't rotate shoulder in punching practice. (That's a good reason to assume so. Karate's practical extension being different from regular Karate is hard to imagine.)

As for the practice of Tameshiwari, Gichin Funakoshi's Tameshiwari could be from Kiaijutsu which Japan also had, or from Iron Palm's Breaking culture.

What did Mas Oyama add to Karate then? Breaking harder objects?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> Rightful "racism" is my moral & legal right.



Moral racism is a contradiction in terms, and something only a sick and twisted mind would claim.



> In real life, you are supposed to get a restraining order instead of bothering me about my racism.



So, basically, you have no more of a clue about this than you do about Japanese martial arts, and those arts derived from them.



> Regular Karate strikes don't rotate shoulder.



That statement has been proven wrong.



> That's a fact.



No, it's a delusion, founded in your self-hatred.



> However, if that video was published before Mas Oyama's time, then Karate has done irregular moves, rotating shoulder for punching. With this new evidence, my contents get upgraded.



The phrase you're looking for is "I was wrong." Just say it, accept it and move on. Accept your own Japanese DNA and move on.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Feb 1, 2019)

Interpreting the body dynamics behind moments in time captured by still pictures is tricky even for those who have background in what is being depicted. For those who lack that background, misinterpretation is common. You're providing a prime example of that.

From what you've said in this thread and in private messages, I'm understanding that by "shoulder rotation" you mean punching (or otherwise striking with the hand) in such a way that the shoulder on the side of the punching arm moves from behind the other shoulder to ahead of it. (For example, starting a right hand punch with the left shoulder in front and ending with the right shoulder in front.)

This is literally the default way of punching everywhere in the world. Martial arts from every country do this and completely untrained fighters do it by instinct. The small minority of martial arts that keep the shoulders completely square while punching have to train their students out of the natural tendency to turn the shoulders.

"Shoulder rotation" is not the most common way to refer to this phenomenon because the motion does not originate in the muscles of the shoulders. It originates lower in the body. The possibilities are:
1) Stepping with the feet (i.e. a lunge punch, moving from a left side lead to a right side lead while throwing a right punch).
2) Rotating the hips, which carry the entire torso (including the shoulders) along for the ride.
3) Twisting the waist, so that the shoulders move further than the hips.
4) Some combination of 1-3.

In the video below, which features Gichin Funakoshi (Oyama's first karate instructor) you can see all the options listed above. (I think some or all of this is contained in DD's video above.)





But ... you ask ... what about all those pictures of karateka with squared shoulders?

Traditional Okinawan karate was largely derived from a southern CMA (possibly Fujian White Crane or something similar) which does tend to work to an unusual extent with squared shoulders. That doesn't mean shoulder rotation is entirely absent, just that it's more subtle. Often the rotation just doesn't go as far as it would in (for example) western boxing. Sometimes the punching shoulder might go from the rear to a squared position - still rotating, just not as far. (Hey - this is why video is more helpful than still pictures. If you see a still picture of someone with squared shoulders, you don't know where their shoulders might have been a moment before or a moment later.) This might be because the older Okinawan styles were close range arts with less room for rotation Not rotating too far might also be emphasized in forms to counterbalance the fact that in the heat of a fight a fighter might naturally tend to overextend.

When Karate travelled from Okinawa to Japan, it transformed significantly based on the pre-existing martial culture. The range become longer and stances became wider. As you can see in the video above, that also led to more pronounced shoulder rotation.

Of course, even if the Okinawan and Japanese karateka were somehow the only people in the world who had never discovered shoulder rotation on their own, (they weren't) that wouldn't mean they learned it from Korea. They could have picked up the idea from countless other sources - Chinese, American, or even older (koryu) Japanese jujutsu systems.


----------



## Yokozuna514 (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> What did Mas Oyama contribute to Karate then? What did he do differently?



I train in Kyokushin.   A few days ago I was teaching a kids class and had a little boy who was trying it out for the first time.  He did ok for his first class but he was young and I could see his attention was wandering a little so I flipped the page and decided to play a little game based on the kihon we were doing in class.  Everyone had to close their eyes and punch to the level I would call out.  Half way through the game, the little boy punched at the wrong level and I asked him to do the plank wth the other kids that were not playing.   The little boy flipped out, yelled at me and turned around to face the other way.  His mother was horrified that he acted this way but I assured her it was fine and that there wasn't much time left.  I spoke with him a little but it was clear he was not ready to rejoin the class.  We continued on and finished the game and eventually the class.  When everyone was dismissed, his mother made the little boy come back to apologize and I let him know that it was fine this time but he needed to know that is not the way we act in class.   One of the adult brown belts also came up to me and said, "Boy you have a lot of patience".  My response was, "Regardless of how tough a situation is, it is bound to end sometime.  I also know that at the end of the class, I can give him back to his mother and I can go on with my night ."  

I suppose I can answer your question but like the little boy in the story, you are probably not ready to listen.  When you are, I suggest you walk into any Kyokushin dojo anywhere in the world and try a class.   If you are lucky, you will get the answer to your question in short order.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 1, 2019)

Before I take a hiatus

Since we seem to be in a mood to enforce the rules..... why not enforce them on this self appointed marital arts historian and admitted racist...who is PROUD of bein a racist

Might want to take a look at MY rule 4.2.5 if your in a rule enforcing mood...might want to enforce them on Mr Lee

*4.2.5 Hate Speech

Hate speech is not allowed*. Posts that contain material that is racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted, or otherwise offensive, are not allowed. While discussion of certain social and political issues may require the use of sensitive or potentially offensive terms, outside of those limited contexts the use of such terms is not allowed on this board.

Later...I'm done and taking a break


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

Not really. Moral racism is a thing. It's not even a "racism", but it's a moral racism that I'm entitled to with my freedom & rights.

Sibak existed before Karate ever entering South Korea. Murayama Jijun recorded Baksi (Sibak) & its Nanjangbaksi street fighting. Also, Gwonbeop existed. Also, Charyuk/Kihapsul/Kiaijutsu Breaking existed independently of Karate. Even Masato Tamura corroborated its existence. Karate doing Breaking before Mas Oyama was probably from imitating Kiaijutsu or Iron Palm's Breaking culture. These traditional Korean "martial arts" are not a derivation of Karate. In fact, you probably didn't even hear of Sibak. Also, there are older pictures and writings describing traditional Korean techniques & motions.

No, regular Karate really doesn't rotate shoulder. That's a fact. As in, when Dojo teaches a basic Karate punch, the shoulder doesn't rotate. Karate textbooks showing basic Karate punch has square stationary shoulder.

Mas Oyama's Classic Karate Page 128.

I haven't seen Karate teaching basic punch by rotating shoulder.

What Japanese DNA? I don't look Japanese not even slightly; I don't have Japanese DNA mixed. You whining "self-loathing" or whatever doesn't do **** in the reality. And all rejections & punishments are supposed to happen immediately. I am supposed to move on with my life while your kind of people talk to yourselves and whine about this rightful "racism" I have. Just because you cry "self-loathing" doesn't change what I do or what I am actually doing. Also, I look Turkic Siberian, just like both my grandfathers, including big eyes with double-eyelids.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> Rightful "racism" is my moral & legal right. In real life, you are supposed to get a restraining order instead of bothering me about my racism.


Whether or not you feel your racism is justified, the MartialTalk terms and conditions you agreed to when you signed up for an account here forbid expressing that racism on this forum.
MartialTalk.com Forum Rules and Procedures

Violating those rules which you have agreed to can lead to being banned from the website.


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

Yeah, so Karateka punching has square stationary shoulder in basic. Shoulder rotation is like an extension of Karate, not regular Karate. I was wrong about Karate not rotating shoulder in punch, but my assumption had good reasons. Karate has squared shoulders in basic punch.

I don't express racism. That guy is keep talking to me about it, I'm just responding to it within boundaries. And that guy is keep annoying me with "self-loathing" nonsense and pretending I'm "Japanese", which is disgusting, offensive and annoying. I don't want to be Japanese. That guy crying "self-loathing" doesn't change what I am doing, which is just rejecting the people I hate without any "self-loathing".

For example, my wife should value what I want over having agreed to any terms and conditions. When my wife doesn't do it, it pisses me off. It's about priority. What's more important. Me? Or violating agreed terms and conditions? It's supposed to be me. She should value me over that.

I don't have to attend a Karate gym, whether Kyokushin or not. I'm a history nerd, not a martial artist (don't want to be one). I'm not interested in learning those sports. If I have to learn a sport, I will learn a traditional Korean sport like Sibak (Taekkyeon-Yetbeob, Nalparam) and Charyuk (power circus), which have the same techniques as Karate's Tameshiwari/Breaking without having anything to do with Karate. (There are historical pictures & writings proving traditional Korean techniques & motions.) There's a sentimental value in learning traditional sport from my own country.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> Yeah, so Karateka punching has square stationary shoulder in basic.


If you don't rotate and extend your shoulder, you won't obtain the maximum reach.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> Not really. Moral racism is a thing. It's not even a "racism", but it's a moral racism that I'm entitled to with my freedom & rights.



No such thing as moral racism. There just isn't.

[Rubbish tossed in the bin]



> I haven't seen Karate teaching basic punch by rotating shoulder.



I believe this to be true. Not because Karate doesn't teach this, but because you have no training, and hence, no clue.



> What Japanese DNA? I don't look Japanese not even slightly; I don't have Japanese DNA mixed.



Japanese, Korean and Chinese are genetically the same group. There is (as I pointed out before) less than a 1% difference as compared to about a 10% difference between various European genetic groups.
Same DNA. You're Japanese.


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

Shoulder rotation is more of a mass in motion matter rather than reach. Mass in silence doesn't add to power.

See? It is this guy that lingers on racism nonsense topic. I'm just responding within boundaries. And yes there is moral racism. It is not even racism, but it's a moral racism because I (or we in such case) shouldn't have to give up any right that makes us happy for someone else. There is moral racism. Regardless of how many times you push your nonsense, I obviously keep saying there is moral racism; I still keep doing it anyway. My actions & decisions & preferences shouldn't be imposed by someone else's interests. That's why there's moral racism. It's a happy coincidence.

I took 1 years of lesson in Karate & Taekwondo at a college club among many other things. (& they never taught shoulder rotation for punching. They emphasized squared stationary shoulders in punching.. I didn't learn anything important from my college club experiences. I taught myself Breaking on my own, including hard hand strike.) Such college club experience (before I dropped out of college) is pretty meaningless, that's why I didn't talk about it. Also, even if I didn't learn any such sport, there are plenty of visual data online with videos & pictures, including Oyama's Karate textbook page 128. It's false to claim a historian not trained in sports couldn't have seen how those sports look like. Videos and pictures suffice. Don't have to be trained in those sports to research, study, publish about their histories.

You have no logic. If Korean, Japanese, Chinese have the same DNA, having the same DNA doesn't make me Japanese. Cause DNA is not what distinguishes us. It's the history & culture of our bloods that distinguish us. So, I cannot be Japanese because having the same DNA is not enough to distinguish an Asian into Japanese. I don't want to be Japanese; I'm not Japanese; I'm plain Korean. There is no self-loathing when I reject Japanese because I'm not Japanese, cause having the same DNA is not enough to make me a Japanese in traditional perception nor in definition.


----------



## Gweilo (Feb 1, 2019)

You make a lot of references to Oyamas karate, was he not zainichii korean, a Korean that lives in Japan?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 1, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> You make a lot if references to Oyamas karate, was he not zainichii korean, a Korean that lives in Japan?



He was Korean born, but a naturalized citizen of Japan.


----------



## Gweilo (Feb 1, 2019)

Like Yong sul choi,  th founder of Hapkido, whom returned to Korea


----------



## Steven Lee (Feb 1, 2019)

Yeah, I have a lot of references on Oyama.

Taekkyeon-Yetbub (Sibak, Nalparam, street fighting game including punching, this sport was included in Taekkyeon, Taekkyeon has 2 sports in it). Not a derivation of Karate.

Taekkyeon-Yetbub is not a fake invention but a real Sibak culture

Hapkido and Taekwondo are irrelevant to Sibak (Taekkyeon-Yetbub, Nalparam, Gyuksul). Not to mention Subak (Gyuksul's rule at the beginning). Also, Korean had powerful Breaking Game independently of Karate. It was done by Charyuk/Kihapsul/Kiaijutsu. Also, there are Kooksundo, Sibak, Subak, Taekkyeon (Taekkyeon has 2 sports in it, Sibak is one of them which uses headbutt, punches, etc). All these traditional Korean sports have historical references independent of Karate.

Charyuk/Kihapsul/Kiaijutsu Breaking independent of Karate. Not a derivation of Karate.
History of Korean Breaking before Karate started Breaking


----------



## Gweilo (Feb 1, 2019)

Ya da ya da ya da,  Hapkido and taekondo have kicks that originate from Taekkyon


----------



## Gweilo (Feb 1, 2019)

Taekkyeon originates from Subak,  that has chinese influences, after korean monks that trained in the mountains, who developed very strong legs, then developed kicking techniques,  that we find in more modern korean arts, they named their art, su bak gi, which became Taekkyeon


----------



## Gweilo (Feb 1, 2019)

You also talk about gyuksul, as used by the north korean military, if gyuksul is so great, why has Kim Jong Un recently employed isreali mossad,  to teach North korean military krav maga?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> I haven't seen Karate teaching basic punch by rotating shoulder.


Most likely (because you don't understand the mechanics or the training methods) you've misunderstood a drill. Many Japanese arts teach a restricted shoulder movement to contain structure within the stance. With beginners, this often means exaggerating how small the movement should be (having them practice smaller movement early, then relaxing the restrictions as they become skilled). So your conclusions were off because you didn't understand the subject you were examining.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 1, 2019)

jobo said:


> if your truck and car hit straight on, the car will stop dead and the truck will keep going,


 What kind of truck are you thinking about?
Not this truck





*This Truck





*
Go head to head with this one and your car isn't just going to stop.  It will stop and go backwards as the truck continues to drive through it. I've seen the videos.. I've seen the videos. lol


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> 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.


 I'm not attacking you.  I'm stating a fact. One that you have already admitted to.  

You could have easily added substance where you lack experience by simply asking martial artists if they do shoulder rotations with their striking.  Had you asked that question then you would have discovered that shoulder rotation in martial arts is common and not unique to just one system.  




Steven Lee said:


> 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.


 Again proof that you don't know what you are talking about.  There is no way anyone can look at this and assume they know what body mechanic are involved.





Kung Fu Wang posted a picture where he asked everyone if what was in the picture possible.  Everyone looked at it. No one understood it.  Not because we are clueless, but because it's nearly impossible to look at a martial arts picture and know what body mechanics are going on, unless you know how to do it.  And I'm not even talking about how to actually apply a technique.




Steven Lee said:


> 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.


Most people who are black belts or upper rank students in a martial art can tell you a great deal of history and about the history of the system that they  train.  Who do you think the historians sources are?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 1, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> Thank you for proving you do not understand power generation.


lol  I've literally sat here and typed 10 paragraphs and then decided that it's no longer worth it.  lol.  He's to bias to even listen to what people are saying.



Steven Lee said:


> None of your business whether someone is a racist or not. It's a rightful racism and not even racism anyway. But it's a rightful racism within my rights even if we call it that.


See the thing about racism is, if you have a right to be a racist then people have a right to comment about it and be against it.  Rights aren't just for you and your benefit alone.

If this is the way that you are with everyone, then I can understand why people treat you unfavorably.  It's not them, it's you.  Anyone who has experienced racism will tell you, that's there's nothing right about it.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> Debates on arguments are supposed to work by providing counter-evidences, not fallacies including Ad Hominem fallacy. If that video of Gichin Funakoshi was taken before the time of Mas Oyama, and if he really showed shoulder-rotation, then I cancel my previous claim that Mas Oyama taught Korean hand strike to Karate.


  Wait for it..... Wait for it...


There it is.. "still singing that same song."


Steven Lee said:


> Regular Karate strikes don't rotate shoulder. That's a fact.


  You don't know what regular karate is.



Steven Lee said:


> However, if that video was published before Mas Oyama's time, then Karate has done irregular moves, rotating shoulder for punching.


How is this irregular?  It's irregular in the context of your biased beliefs.  From what I can tell people here kept telling that there was shoulder rotation.  It's difficult to fight someone without rotating the shoulder every now and then.



Steven Lee said:


> Rightful "racism"


No such thing.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> I haven't seen Karate teaching basic punch by rotating shoulder.


 Says the guy who probably has never taken a karate class.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 1, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> See? It is this guy that lingers on racism nonsense topic.


Only because you spew it.




Steven Lee said:


> And yes there is moral racism. It is not even racism, but it's a moral racism because I (or we in such case) shouldn't have to give up any right that makes us happy for someone else. There is moral racism.





Steven Lee said:


> I don't express racism. That guy is keep talking to me about it,


Yep that's my right and happiness.  I'm not even mad or angry at you.  like you said no one has the right to take away my happiness so you'll just have to deal with it .



gpseymour said:


> Most likely (because you don't understand the mechanics or the training methods) you've misunderstood a drill. Many Japanese arts teach a restricted shoulder movement to contain structure within the stance. With beginners, this often means exaggerating how small the movement should be (having them practice smaller movement early, then relaxing the restrictions as they become skilled). So your conclusions were off because you didn't understand the subject you were examining.


He was there for only 1 year.  There isn't much that students are going to understand with just 1 year of training.  For those who have actually taught martial arts classes.  One year is not even a drop in the bucket.  At year one instructors are still trying to get students to get into proper stances.


----------



## jobo (Feb 2, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> What kind of truck are you thinking about?
> Not this truck
> 
> 
> ...


Either, you can't go from having velocity in the forward direction to having Velocity in the other direction, with out going through an instant were you have zero velocity, or as it's other wise called, being stopped


----------



## Never_A_Reflection (Feb 26, 2019)

Steven Lee said:


> 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?



Throughout this thread, we see you essentially attempting argumentum ad nauseum, while using a lot of false equivalence, appeals to ignorance, and circular reasoning to support a mind projection fallacy, of sorts, which I find odd, given that you don't train in martial arts--which is merely an observation, not an attack, for the record, as it is unusual for people who do not practice martial arts to become so invested in arguing the history and development of martial arts. That aside, I will just throw out there that, yes, karate absolutely utilized shoulder rotation prior to Mas Oyama even beginning training in karate, so the entire premise of this post is defunct from the start. Move along.


----------

