# Soft parrying type of karate



## repz (Jan 25, 2010)

What karate styles parry and deflect as opposed to forcefully blocking an incoming attack?

I tried looking for what each karate style offers, but all I found was a wikepedia link with only a little bit of info.

I have seen Goju Ryu parrying in circular motions, as well as Shorin Ryu and Uechi Ryu, but how much of their defense is made of of soft parries?

I take shotokan, but I was always a parrying kind of guy, especially since I enjoyed Wing Chun's defense when I trained in it.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 25, 2010)

repz said:


> What karate styles parry and deflect as opposed to forcefully blocking an incoming attack?
> 
> I tried looking for what each karate style offers, but all I found was a wikepedia link with only a little bit of info.
> 
> ...



Isshin-Ryu is based on Goju-Ryu and Shorin-Ryu and uses both hard and soft techniques.  Goju-Ryu means, as I understand it, 'hard soft'.

I think both hard and soft techniques have their place and time.


----------



## Gary Crawford (Jan 25, 2010)

I think most styles do it,especially the more experienced practitioners.


----------



## harlan (Jan 25, 2010)

Might even depend on the school's training paradigm. I've heard that some Goju basically teach mostly 'hard', and beginners are taught to 'block hard'. On the other hand, some Goju lines teach 'soft parrying', slipping and following the attack.


----------



## seasoned (Jan 25, 2010)

harlan said:


> Might even depend on the school's training paradigm. I've heard that some Goju basically teach mostly 'hard', and beginners are taught to 'block hard'. On the other hand, some Goju lines teach 'soft parrying', slipping and following the attack.


What you are describing is GoJu as it was meant to be. GoJu, hard/soft starts out very hard and progressively blends the two concepts together. In order to achieve the two concepts together, hard/soft, takes much dedication. The end result is a truly unique art that blends the best of both worlds. Most blocks in the higher ranks are redirects and parries.:asian:


----------



## 72ronin (Jan 25, 2010)

Its there in Shotokan aswell, just not taught that way for some time.
             Emphasis is on hard blocks initialy in 5 step then 3 step sparring, 

             Later on we get to use the chambering of the blocks as parries in one step and free sparring etc

             Like the upper block, that hand that shoots out first can be a parry or even capture, then the block itself can be a strike, or break at captured arm.

             Same with knifehand gaurding block, outer, inner etc.

             A freestyle Karate i did when i was younger only had open hand parries and no hard blocks, only used boxing stance etc.   I prefer trad arts much more, its ALL there even something like Shotokan.


----------



## K-man (Jan 25, 2010)

repz said:


> What karate styles parry and deflect as opposed to forcefully blocking an incoming attack?
> 
> I take shotokan, but I was always a parrying kind of guy, especially since I enjoyed Wing Chun's defense when I trained in it.


There are some of us who would maintain that there are no 'blocks' in karate and that even the parries can be aimed at particular targets.  
You have mentioned Wong Chun as if it is 'soft'.  When we look at the origin of karate it too has its roots back in China.  Why would things have changed so radically?  Hard blocks make no sense to me at all.  :asian:


----------



## Grenadier (Jan 26, 2010)

Even the "hard" styles, such as Shotokan, teach deflection, rather than absorption. 

For example, if you look at the standard high block that everyone should have already practiced to death, there's a subtle rotation of the forearm, inside to out, that is performed as the forearm is being elevated. As a result, the goal is to knock the attacker's limb away, rather than to absorb all of the kinetic energy of the attack. 

The same can be said about any other block performed in Shotokan, be it open handed or closed handed, that the goal should be to deflect it away, with minimal impact to one's own arms. Thus, you're already doing "soft" blocks as it is.  As you become more advanced, you'll be relying more on the body's shifting to position the arm in the most ideal position (more of avoidance), and less of using the arm itself.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 26, 2010)

K-man said:


> Hard blocks make no sense to me at all.  :asian:



Hard blocks have their place too, in my opinion.  When properly applied, a hard block can damage an attacker's limb to the point where they cannot use it again in the fight.  My sensei teaches us that we should generally respond to hard with soft, and to soft with hard.  If an attacker throws a weak punch, a hard block into it will devastate the limb, done correctly.  A parry would work as well, but then the attacker could continue to use it, and perhaps more effectively.


----------



## repz (Jan 26, 2010)

Yes, I am aware that shotokan does have some softiness at some level. I have learned palm strike parries for example. I just wanted a side by side comparison of karate styles. I have seen videos of a heavy influence of chinese kung fu like parries, and even some training that seem similar to kung fu and then another clip where I see no such thing from the same style (and yes, I am well aware of chinese origins in karate) and there doesnt seem to be much of a comparison between styles.


----------



## TimoS (Jan 26, 2010)

repz said:


> there doesnt seem to be much of a comparison between styles.


That's because there are so many styles and even within any particular style, one instructor may emphasize something totally different than another, making such comparisons waste of time and effort.


----------



## MilkManX (Jan 27, 2010)

Both Enshin and Ashihara Karate use more of a soft parry since you move to your opponents "blind" spot while countering.

See examples of it here.


----------



## K-man (Jan 27, 2010)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Hard blocks have their place too, in my opinion.  When properly applied, a hard block can damage an attacker's limb to the point where they cannot use it again in the fight.  My sensei teaches us that we should generally respond to hard with soft, and to soft with hard.  If an attacker throws a weak punch, a hard block into it will devastate the limb, done correctly.  A parry would work as well, but then the attacker could continue to use it, and perhaps more effectively.


Agreed. But, I would call it a forearm strike rather than a block.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 28, 2010)

K-man said:


> Agreed. But, I would call it a forearm strike rather than a block.



We're taught that a block is a strike and a strike is a block, so I certainly take your point.  However, when we engage in that sort of thing, we do call it a 'bang block' or a 'hard block', so I guess it's all down to whatever your tradition calls it.  It's certainly a 'counter' since it would be of no use if launched against empty air.  The opponent has to strike first to use it.


----------



## repz (Jan 28, 2010)

In that case I would refer to organisations. Usually organizations have a syllabus, for example the SKIF, JKA, and have testing procedures for ranking. Yes, I do know many sensei's add some new material regardless of associations, but they are usually told to follow the outline of the organisation if they are to continue membership and get their students promoted under their org., so I dont see how it would be impossible to chart the differences in styles when it comes to the main ones under their respective orgs.

With the whole block is a strike deal, I can only say a typical block can be a elbow/shoulder lock. The outside and inside forearm block can break a two lapel hold and set up an arm lock on the way coming inside easily without much modification. Others have said they can be arm breaks, imagine grabbing a hand and performing a low block (strike) to the elbow.


----------



## seasoned (Jan 28, 2010)

repz said:


> In that case I would refer to organizations. Usually organizations have a syllabus, for example the SKIF, JKA, and have testing procedures for ranking. Yes, I do know many sense's add some new material regardless of associations, but they are usually told to follow the outline of the organization if they are to continue membership and get their students promoted under their org., so I dont see how it would be impossible to chart the differences in styles when it comes to the main ones under their respective orgs.
> 
> With the whole block is a strike deal, I can only say a typical block can be a elbow/shoulder lock. The outside and inside forearm block can break a two lapel hold and set up an arm lock on the way coming inside easily without much modification. Others have said they can be arm breaks, imagine grabbing a hand and performing a low block (strike) to the elbow.


Yes, I could agree that with the absents of a grab that soft parrying is a good option. In doing this it leads to soft parry hard strike. Once you have been grabbed it is a little different in that the closed block are now strikes.


----------



## matrixman (Jan 29, 2010)

Actually, not to stir the pot, but there are no soft blocks in karate, and if there are, then it is not karate. Karate is based upon movements outward from the tan tien, once the blocks come back towards the person they are no longer karate. Orig poster is very astute, the differences between karate and wing chun define the differences between arts, and once you mix things up, you get much, or unresolved training methods. I know there will be people who hold other opinion, but if you define the arts in such simple manner as I have done here, they become incredibly easy and quick to learn. It is only when they are mushed that they become difficult. Have a great work out. Al


----------



## TimoS (Jan 29, 2010)

matrixman said:


> Actually, not to stir the pot, but there are no soft blocks in karate, and if there are, then it is not karate. Karate is based upon movements outward from the tan tien, once the blocks come back towards the person they are no longer karate


Not quite sure what you're saying. IF I understood you correctly, what you're saying is that in karate all the moves should be directed away from you and not towards yourself? If so, then I guess I can agree with that up to a point.


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 29, 2010)

K-man said:


> There are some of us who would maintain that there are no 'blocks' in karate and that even the parries can be aimed at particular targets.
> You have mentioned Wong Chun as if it is 'soft'. When we look at the origin of karate it too has its roots back in China. Why would things have changed so radically? Hard blocks make no sense to me at all. :asian:


 
There are some softer styles of gung fu, and there are harder styles of kung fu.  There are MANY kung fu styles that do forearm conditioning drills with a partner to harden them for blocking and striking.  The arts after they went to Okinawa continued this tradition.

Saying there are "no blocks" in karate is a semantics game.  It implies that EVERY time you see a block in a form, it is a joint lock etc.  That can be a use, but many times you are also striking into the person's arm to inflict damage and by some definitions that would be a "block".  So you could say that while there are no blocks, there are still blocking concepts using the same movements.


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 29, 2010)

matrixman said:


> Actually, not to stir the pot, but there are no soft blocks in karate, and if there are, then it is not karate. Karate is based upon movements outward from the tan tien, once the blocks come back towards the person they are no longer karate. Orig poster is very astute, the differences between karate and wing chun define the differences between arts, and once you mix things up, you get much, or unresolved training methods. I know there will be people who hold other opinion, but if you define the arts in such simple manner as I have done here, they become incredibly easy and quick to learn. It is only when they are mushed that they become difficult. Have a great work out. Al


 

Need you to further define what you mean by no "soft blocks" in karate.  If you mean that all blocking motions are done as a strike, and that all softer motions when done are parries and not blocks.  Than you might make that case by how you define your terms.  BUT, if you mean that there are no soft redirectional movements at all in karate, I would disagree.  There are MANY found in a traditional Goju-Ryu curriculum that hasn't changed to a "modern approach".  

I would also agree that if you are trying to apply WC's centerline concept for attacking and defending and not moving your arms off of that line, and you try to apply it to karate styles and how they attack/defend, than you are going to cause confusion because they are different methods that are not wholly interchangeable.


----------



## TimoS (Jan 29, 2010)

punisher73 said:


> There are MANY kung fu styles that do forearm conditioning drills with a partner to harden them for blocking and striking.  The arts after they went to Okinawa continued this tradition.


True. Just look for Kote kitae on e.g. Youtube


----------



## K-man (Jan 29, 2010)

punisher73 said:


> There are some softer styles of gung fu, and there are harder styles of kung fu.  There are MANY kung fu styles that do forearm conditioning drills with a partner to harden them for blocking and striking.  The arts after they went to Okinawa continued this tradition.
> 
> Saying there are "no blocks" in karate is a semantics game.  It implies that EVERY time you see a block in a form, it is a joint lock etc.  That can be a use, but many times you are also striking into the person's arm to inflict damage and by some definitions that would be a "block".  So you could say that while there are no blocks, there are still blocking concepts using the same movements.


Yes, but! Conditioning the arm is to toughen it as a weapon, not necessarily to stop (ie 'block') an attack.  I will always maintain that to 'block' is to stop, and I don't believe you should ever stop an attack. The 'stop' signals that the attack has failed, move on to the next. It's a subtle difference.  :asian:


----------



## matrixman (Jan 29, 2010)

Hi guys. I define soft blocks as those that come back towards the body and guide, and hard blocks as those that go away from the body and collide. If you take a look at the heians (pinans), there are virtually no blocks which come back towards the body, except for one parry you see in four and five. 
Thus, the percent of blocks is virtually always going away from the tan tien. This is because the art was designed for bodyguards who weren't allowed to carry weapons to close the distance on men who were carrying weapons. Goju is another cat. Haven't looked at it much, but the argument could be made that if there are a  lot of actual soft blocks, goju is 'tainted' by Chinese influences. Let me know if my thought holds water on that. Uechi is a grabbing art. Wa-uke is always a slap and grab and strike. And so on. Have a great work out. Al


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 29, 2010)

K-man said:


> I will always maintain that to 'block' is to stop, and I don't believe you should ever stop an attack. The 'stop' signals that the attack has failed, move on to the next. It's a subtle difference.  :asian:



My sensei teaches the same thing - a hard block in many circumstances signals the attacker to fire the next attack - you hard block a thrown right, and the attacker's nerve feedback tells him to automatically fire the left.  As my sensei says, _"then it's off to the races."_

But that doesn't mean that hard blocks don't have a place.  If you know that your hard block will cause the other fist to fire, for example, you can take advantage of that knowledge.  You can also end the fight before the other hand can be thrown, for example, if you bang-block off the first attacking hand and use their power to speed your rebounding backfist into their face.  They can throw the left all they like - at empty air.  Same if you have already slipped the punch and gotten off line - his second punch may well fire, but you're just not there.

I am learning all the time, and bear in mind I'm a total newbie still.  But I am coming to appreciate the value of both hard and soft blocks - they each have their place, I think.


----------



## K-man (Jan 30, 2010)

matrixman said:


> Goju is another cat. Haven't looked at it much, but the argument could be made that if there are a  lot of actual soft blocks, goju is 'tainted' by Chinese influences. Let me know if my thought holds water on that. Uechi is a grabbing art. Wa-uke is always a slap and grab and strike. And so on. Have a great work out. Al


Of course all karate was heavily influenced by the Chinese as the original guys went there to learn. In Goju all the older kata were brought back from China and the newer Gekisei kata developed by Myagi Sensei


----------



## K-man (Jan 30, 2010)

(Sorry, pushed the wrong button 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





)


> Goju is another cat. Haven't looked at it much, but the argument could be made that if there are a lot of actual soft blocks, goju is 'tainted' by Chinese influences.


 Of course all karate was heavily influenced by the Chinese as the original guys went there to learn. In Goju all the older kata were brought back from China and the newer Gekisei kata developed by Miyagi Sensei had a distinct Shotokan influence. :asian:


----------



## seasoned (Jan 30, 2010)

matrixman said:


> *Goju is another cat. Haven't looked at it much, but the argument could be made that if there are a lot of actual soft blocks, goju is 'tainted' by Chinese influences. Let me know if my thought holds water on that*.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## matrixman (Jan 30, 2010)

Hi Seasoned. I find this quite interesting. I always wrote off Tensho, and even after reviewing it, I'm not a fan. No offense. The viewpoint I've got is that the soft blocks I see are not soft enough, and not appropriate as soft blocks when you put them on a sanchin stance. Of course I have a lot of disagreement with the way most people breath and put dynamic tension into the Sanchin form itself, which should be dedicated to power and not strength or breathing. But that aside, I am much more interested in the push hands concept. Never seen the Goju push hands, is it similar to the tai chi push hands? Thanks, and have a great work out. Al


----------



## matrixman (Jan 30, 2010)

Ah, here is a link which shows a type of goju push hands.




I used to do a variation of this by the hour. Great stuff. If the forms looked like this I would jump ship in a minute.
Have a great work out. Al


----------



## seasoned (Jan 30, 2010)

Or here also Al.


----------



## seasoned (Jan 31, 2010)

matrixman said:


> Hi Seasoned. I find this quite interesting. I always wrote off Tensho, and even after reviewing it, I'm not a fan. No offense. *The viewpoint I've got is that the soft blocks I see are not soft enough, and not appropriate as soft blocks when you put them on a sanchin stance.* Of course I have a lot of disagreement with the way most people breath and put dynamic tension into the Sanchin form itself, which should be dedicated to power and not strength or breathing. But that aside, I am much more interested in the push hands concept. Never seen the Goju push hands, is it similar to the tai chi push hands? Thanks, and have a great work out. Al


With the absents of Taisabaki in this drill, it becomes a little bit forced, but the concept of redirect is still there. I will admit that the Okinawans, because of body structure, have a tendency to take the Chinese influence and add to it a little more "Go" then the "Ju" part would require. Although I can't speak for the way all GoJu is taught, I will say that kata Tensho, when done properly, will off set the Go with the Ju. With the right combination of all elements, a proper out come will emerge. Thanks for your input Al. Wes


----------



## matrixman (Jan 31, 2010)

From what has been said on this thread, advanced forms from China, beginning forms from Okinawa, and the study of redirects, one could make a good argument for calling Goju Japanese Kung Fu, and not Karate. I know that the concepts we've discussed will help muy tai chi more than my karate. Thanks. Al


----------



## seasoned (Jan 31, 2010)

Except, some of the long passed Okinawan GoJu masters may turn over in their graves, at that thought.


----------



## TimoS (Jan 31, 2010)

matrixman said:


> one could make a good argument for calling Goju Japanese Kung Fu, and not Karate


Not really, IMO. Goju is karate, but e.g. Uechi ryu could easily be said to be okinawan kung-fu (not japanese, BTW).


----------



## Stonecold (Jan 31, 2010)

I'm a Kickboxer & have trained in kempo & chito ryu karate.
In the kempo style we had many soft parries , as well as the chito ryu in higher ranks
Kickboxing use's parries the same as boxing. they allow you to redirect the punch or kick and counter very quickly.
They can be taught with out having to build up the blocking areas on the arms & legs, so they can be effectively used in a short period on time.
That's my 2 cents.   
Keep Kicking!!!!


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 31, 2010)

K-man said:


> Yes, but! Conditioning the arm is to toughen it as a weapon, not necessarily to stop (ie 'block') an attack. I will always maintain that to 'block' is to stop, and I don't believe you should ever stop an attack. The 'stop' signals that the attack has failed, move on to the next. It's a subtle difference. :asian:


 
That's why I said it was a semantics game.  Even if I strike the attacking limb, I don't want to add "and then" to continue the attack.  Most understand that "uke" means "recieve" and not "block".  A correct strike to the blocking arm will change his position enough that it buys time before he CAN initiate another strike.  That is the purpose of ippon kumite, you are stopping the opponent from being able to do a continuous attack.


----------



## K-man (Feb 1, 2010)

punisher73 said:


> That's why I said it was a semantics game.  Even if I strike the attacking limb, I don't want to add "and then" to continue the attack.  Most understand that "uke" means "recieve" and not "block".  A correct strike to the blocking arm will change his position enough that it buys time before he CAN initiate another strike.  That is the purpose of ippon kumite, you are stopping the opponent from being able to do a continuous attack.


Once again, I agree totally.  My slant would be that the absorption or deflection of the initial attack moves your attacker's centre and gives you the advantage. If we use the arm to strike we are actually still moving the attacker off the line and still have the same advantage with the additional benefit that we may have caused some degree of incapacity as well. Either way we are not 'blocking' and although the strike may cause damage or distress, we still haven't 'stopped' that stage of the attack.


----------



## repz (Feb 2, 2010)

Someone earlier in the post mentioned how shorin ryu is soft or that they perform parries and such.

Whenever I see videos of Shorin Ryu Karate (Matsubayashi mostly) it looks similar to shotokan. I know Shorin (with other influences) is the father of shotokan, so I can see why they would look similar, but I didnt see anything "circular" or soft from the style. I looked back a few pages back, about 8, and people mention how shorin ryu has a deep chinese kempo influence, but I dont see it, it looks like shotokan with narrower stances. Am I missing something?

I been looking into Shorin Ryu, mostly because I want to learn weaponary, and I tend to what to train in something that is less popular (not say that shorin ryu is unpopular, but its not as abundant as shotokan here in nyc), and I been in two different shotokan schools and it just doesnt seem fresh to me anymore.

Any light to the differences, or shorin ryu being softer (be it through technique or parries and such) as advancements grow?

And yes, I am aware that karate tends to throw in softiness at some point, and that its all based on the instructor, but I am looking for general answers based on the typical (or consensus in Matsubyashi shorin ryu).


----------



## Guliufa (Apr 19, 2010)

In Okinawan Karate you will notice that the hands cross at the wrists in many of the movements.

You cannot really say that any technique is specifically for any particular attack, ultimately, whenever hands cross - as in Jodan/Chudan/Gedan Uke, they can be a parry... although they can be something else. 

The term "kara" is interpreted by many as "empty", but if you look at the root it has a more profound meaning of "vastness"... takes it to a whole different level..


----------



## Cirdan (Apr 23, 2010)

To awnser the original post, Wado (at least the way we do it) is amost only soft blocks. Move out of the way, deflect, guide the opponent out of balance etc. There are some hard ones, but these are more like strikes that breaks the structure of the opponent before power can be put behind the attack.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Apr 23, 2010)

K-man said:


> There are some of us who would maintain that there are no 'blocks' in karate and that even the parries can be aimed at particular targets.
> You have mentioned Wong Chun as if it is 'soft'. When we look at the origin of karate it too has its roots back in China. Why would things have changed so radically? Hard blocks make no sense to me at all. :asian:


Wait a second; any strike toward any direction is a hard block on the way; so, how is it you don't understand the use of a hard block.
Sean


----------



## 5rings (Apr 24, 2010)

I remember years ago training in Tang Soo Do,........ that at least in the beginning stages lots of soft outside parries were used along with an outside step.  I guess these could be considered soft blocks, as the instructor at the time specified direction and coordination of hand and foot work rather than hard striking.  Though I did later see a demonstration of this technique which the hand was used to turn and snap,......"Shoto" breaking 3 pine boards a few inches away from his face.  Pretty impressive, just wondering whether this falls under the same category as a parry, just neglected to ask at the time, but remember it was based more on technique and angle than anything else.  I believe that most blocks start off at just that, they are blocks.  Later on with coordinated footwork they seem to be more reliant apon angle & direction as to weather they hard or soft in principle. I think it's more mindset & most of old Masters knew that...._If an attack was eminent & given the range and opportunity, "strike that which is going to strike you"....thus hard block .....or if still eminent & given the range and opportunity.... divert  that which is going to strike you.....soft block._ *I think as we get better at knowing when an attack is eminent...we become better at diverting the attack altogether!*
"Alway try to think outside the Traditional Box"


----------



## dancingalone (May 20, 2010)

Can't believe I missed this discussion, but many Okinawan karate styles can be regarded as soft parry styles, depending on the emphasis of application the teacher chooses to make.  Take a look at the advanced kata of the style.  If you see a lot of crane wrist blocks and the like, it's a good bet that the style teaches softness at the advanced levels.

Don't be misled by the beginner level training.  Most karate styles start off with hard applications, since it is thought that one should build the body first to be strong and forceful before learning the yielding energy redirection methods later.


----------



## K-man (May 22, 2010)

Touch Of Death said:


> Wait a second; any strike toward any direction is a hard block on the way; so, how is it you don't understand the use of a hard block.
> Sean


Sorry, I've been away and missed this post. I'm not exactly sure what your question is here. What exactly are you asking when you say "How is it you don't understand the use of a hard block?"  
If, for example, we are talking of chudan uke in defending against a mid section strike.  I was taught, and I teach, that almost all 'blocks' are two handed affairs. The first hand parries and the second strikes to a specific point on the arm or body depending on relative positions. So, in this instance, the first hand would intercept the striking arm well in front of the body and deflect the strike. The second hand, or forearm, would strike probably to a point just above the elbow, or perhaps cutting along the forearm. That is a hard strike but it is in no way a 'block'. The punch has already missed the target. Meeting a strong attack head on with force is a good recipe for injury. Apart from that, meeting force with force against a bigger stronger opponent makes no sense to me. The stronger will generally prevail. Also if you consider that many women practise karate.  Do you think that strong 'blocks' are going to stop a bigger stronger attacker who may be high on drugs or just plain psycho?  To my mind the smart thing is to be off the line and redirecting, then you have the chance to counter.
Sorry if I have misinterpreted your question.


----------

