# Uke = block, the misinterpretation



## Brian S (Nov 8, 2007)

From what I was taught, there are no blocks in kata,at all.

 I don't know where this started exactly,but my research has led me to believe it's about the time Funakoshi introduced karate to the mainstream public.

 All that's needed to block is for someone to feed the attack. There is no need to conform to many sets of different "techniques" just to block. 

 In my teachings I have found that a block is a lock, a strike, a throw, or a break, but never a block.

 So many times I have read about kata being block -strike, block-kick, block ,block,block-strike,block.  Kata is not about that at all,it is realistic self defense.

 How do you practice? What is your understanding of this?


----------



## exile (Nov 8, 2007)

Brian S said:


> From what I was taught, there are no blocks in &#8230;,at all.
> 
> I don't know where this started exactly,but my research has led me to believe it's about the time Funakoshi introduced karate to the mainstream public.
> 
> ...



Brian, there is a whole movement in karate&#8212;and I think the word `movement' is the right one, meaning a concerted effort on a mass scale to bring about some change&#8212;to recover the realistic applications of kata that the Okinawan masters built into the forms they created, or re-created based on syntheses of Chinese, Satsuma and indigenous tuite elements. Iain Abernethy, in his masterpiece _Bunkai Jutsu: the Practical applications of Karate Kata_, observes that 

_In sport-based sparring, blocks work fairly well. This is because the combatants use complementary techniques at an exaggerated distance. You will have a good idea of what techniques are coming, and you will have the space and time to react accordingly. Real fighting is much closer and much more chaotic. In a real situation, blocks are rarely of any use, and hence the kata rarely contain them. However, they do contain many techniques that are misleadingly labelled as blocks...

The modern interpretation of thekata often has every other move explained as a block.... this is predominantly due to Itosu's alterations and the modern karateka's failure to study the katas sufficiently. The work 'uke' is commonly taken to mean block, but 'uke' can also mean 'counterattack' or 'response technique'. 
_​
And in his chapter, `The true uses of "blocks"'&#8212;note the scare quotes around _block_!&#8212;IA shows in detail how Age-uke, Gedan-barai and numerous other basic blocking techniques constitute not actual blocks, but redirections and entrapments of the attacker's limb, rendering them vulnerable to severe counterattacks while trapped in vulnerable positions. For a true orgy of combat-realistic treatments of allegedly blocking movements, reanalyzing them as effective attacking moves, see Rick Clark's great book, _Seventy-five Down Blocks_. It's an encyclopædia of fighting applications the gedan-barai movement. And so on.

The major innovation in karate and related arts in the past decade has been the realistic bunkai movement, with kata reinterpreted in terms of the maximally effective combat applications they originally encoded, as acknowledged by Itosu himself. There is at this point a huge detailed literature on this; Abernethy's DVDs on the Pinan kata set, Naihanchi, Bassai and certain other classics contain extremely persuasive interpretations of these major kata and their component elements, including the so-called blocks that show up all over the place in them. It's a new world, Brian...


----------



## Brian S (Nov 8, 2007)

Thanks exile! I'll look into those books you mentioned.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Nov 8, 2007)

exile said:


> And in his chapter, `The true uses of "blocks"'note the scare quotes around _block_!*IA shows in detail how Age-uke, Gedan-barai and numerous other basic blocking techniques constitute not actual blocks, but redirections and entrapments of the attacker's limb, rendering them vulnerable to severe counterattacks while trapped in vulnerable positions.* For a true orgy of combat-realistic treatments of allegedly blocking movements, reanalyzing them as effective attacking moves, see Rick Clark's great book, _Seventy-five Down Blocks_. It's an encyclopædia of fighting applications the gedan-barai movement. And so on.


 
Now my perspective on this appears quite different (which should not be surprising as I don't do Karate) and makes me think about a question Exile asked about the similarities and differences between CMAs and the Okinawan arts.

The system I have learned and teach has five fundamental defences.  Of these only one could be construed as wholly defensive, and even that is not actually true.  All involve harming or capturing the opponent in some way.

I find it interesting to see this transition of understanding as the art moved from China to Okinawa and then to Japan.  It is a classic example of information loss through generational transmission.


----------



## exile (Nov 8, 2007)

Brian S said:


> Thanks exile! I'll look into those books you mentioned.



Given what you've said about your view of blocking, Brian, I think you'll find the general treatment of technical elements in these sources very much in line with your thinking. Increasingly, people are beginning to rethink the standard bunkai for the great classic kata, and are finding very effective uses for these bunkai elements that finally stop taking literally Itosu's block/punch/kick packaging of karate techs for children's usewhich was how he managed to get karate into the Okinawan school curriculum in 1901.

The following articles are free downloadable from IA's website, btw:

http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/Karate_A_Complete_Fighting_System.asp
http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/article_14.asp
http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/article_21.asp
http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/article_3.asp
http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/article_4.asp
http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/article_19.asp

My suggestion is, read them in the order I've given them. If you're interested in more of these free downloadable articles, and the equally free e-books that IA has available at his website, on bunkai for the Pinan katas and the practical SD application of karate, it's all there at 

http://www.iainabernethy.com/default.htm

Once you're there, look at the line of subaddresses (Books|DVDS|Articles...etc) under the header at the top, and away you go!


----------



## Brian S (Nov 8, 2007)

exile,

 I have read Abernethy's articles and downloaded his free e-books.

 He is on the flip side of what I mentioned in my opinion. A kata extremist!! Claiming that EVERYTHING is contained within kata is a far stretch. Kata does not contain groundfighting(I've never seen a ground kata),nor does it contain farmer burns wrestling, nor does it contain ufc style submission holds,lol. He has some good applications,but no doubt that a majority of them can be thrown out with the bathwater and have no relation to the kata he claims.

 I don't know which side is worse. The kata blocking multi-opponents, or the kata-groundfighters,lol.

 Kata is what it is, it has good fighting applications, it doesn't need anything added to it to make it seem more legit, or deadly, or complete.

 Just my opinion.

 BTW, funny how kata never contained groundfighting before 1991.


----------



## TimoS (Nov 9, 2007)

Brian S said:


> From what I was taught, there are no blocks in kata,at all



I have to disagree with you here. There are blocks in kata, although these blocks can and often are used to open your opponent for counter-attack. Take a look at e.g. this 
[yt]LFSnV7s_5i0[/yt]

That's Zenpo Shimabukuro sensei, head of Shorin ryu Seibukan karate, doing Seisan. The bunkai for the first move in the kata is a block. There are other blockings in the kata also, but since that's the first move, I thought it would be easiest to go with that

Also, in a recent interview Shimabukuro sensei said that in his opinion, karate consists of three major elements: kicking, punching and blocking. There are other elements also, but those are the major building blocks


----------



## TimoS (Nov 9, 2007)

Brian S said:


> Kata does not contain groundfighting



That's true, they don't! I've read that some think that e.g. Naifanchi shodan is a good ground fighting kata, but I think that is over-analysis. In my opinion there's a reason why kata do not teach groundfighting: the idea of self-defence is to "take care" of your opponent as quickly and efficiently as you can. In that situation you don't go to ground and start wrestling with him, especially since he might have some friends nearby.



> Kata is what it is, it has good fighting applications, it doesn't need anything added to it to make it seem more legit, or deadly, or complete.



Exactly


----------



## Brian S (Nov 9, 2007)

TimoS said:


> I have to disagree with you here. There are blocks in kata, although these blocks can and often are used to open your opponent for counter-attack. Take a look at e.g. this
> [yt]LFSnV7s_5i0[/yt]
> 
> That's Zenpo Shimabukuro sensei, head of Shorin ryu Seibukan karate, doing Seisan. The bunkai for the first move in the kata is a block. There are other blockings in the kata also, but since that's the first move, I thought it would be easiest to go with that
> ...


 
 I can't see the pic on my work computer. I'll take a look at it tomorrow when I get home and comment from there.

 Thanks!


----------



## TimoS (Nov 9, 2007)

Brian S said:


> I can't see the pic on my work computer



It's actually a video on Youtube. Here's the link


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 9, 2007)

Brian S said:


> exile,
> 
> I have read Abernethy's articles and downloaded his free e-books.
> 
> ...


 

In Wado Ryu karate there are many takedowns and there are moves in it's kata for groundfighting because the founder Ohtsuka Sensei was also a Juijitsu Master who put that styles moves in his karate. I was doing arm bars etc, takedowns and ground fighting moves in karate long before 1991.


----------



## seasoned (Nov 9, 2007)

To read the minds of past deceased masters is not possible, and while they were living, their art was very secretive in many cases. The legacy of their knowledge as we know it was passed down to a few loyal disciples as a means of preserving their most treasured asset, life preservation. It only seems apparent that they would not "spill the beans" in kata for all to see. Granted we can become quite proficient in blocking punching and kicking with the rudimentary knowledge of kata and drills, but to truly see what they were hiding from prying eyes will take work. It has been said that kata is like a book, a book that the masters used to preserve their art, a living book if I may use that term. As a living book it is subject to change, but the change does not take place within this living book but within us as we partake of it. Any good book needs to be read many times before we begin to see the true meaning of its content. If kata is the end all as many have alluded to over many years, then logic would prevail. Within kata is all that is needed for life preservation. If it was not so then where did the masters of old save it at, under there sleeping mat. J 
It has been said that there are no ground techniques in karate, but that is like reading the book once and putting it down. If I can read a paper book standing, sitting and lying down then why cant I as a metaphor do the same with this book called kata. The answer is we can. There are just so many ways to apply techniques, so it makes no difference if we are standing, sitting or on the ground. In boxing you have what you see and we all know that we need to take a boxer to the ground. In wrestling we know that we would need to stay with punching. They are limited by there sport but the game of life preservation is only limited by our own minds. In the end result we will only see what we want to see, or are able to see. The next time you practice that limited kata, take it to the ground, and with an open mind a whole new perspective will open up to you.


----------



## exile (Nov 9, 2007)

TimoS said:


> That's true, they don't! I've read that some think that e.g. Naifanchi shodan is a good ground fighting kata, but I think that is over-analysis. In my opinion there's a reason why kata do not teach groundfighting: the idea of self-defence is to "take care" of your opponent as quickly and efficiently as you can. In that situation you don't go to ground and start wrestling with him, especially since he might have some friends nearby.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly





Brian S said:


> exile,
> 
> I have read Abernethy's articles and downloaded his free e-books.
> 
> ...



Guysdon't jump to conclusions about what IA is saying. His chapter `Karate on the ground' in _Bunkai Jutsu_ makes it clear that the groundfighting techs he's extracting from the katas are not  submission moves as in BJJ or judo; they are destruction moves designed to allow the karateka to get _off_ the ground before his attacker, and what they typically consist of is the same kind of locks, pins and hyperextensions, along with strikes, that are taught in the kata, just rotated 90º so that you apply them horizontally rather than vertically. Biomechanically, they work the same way. As he says,

_That is not to say that there are not groundfighting techniques in the kata. Pinan Godan executes a cross strangle to a thrown opponent who is now on the floor. Kushanku coontains a takedown into a floor-fighting neck crank, etc. but these are exceptions rather than the rule. The katas perfer to demonstrate their grappling principles from a vertical position. This is because being vertical is the preferred option and the katas always encourage the correct strategy._​
In IA's DVD on the Pinan katas, he demonstrates particularaly clearly how joint-breaking techniques that follow directly from the kata, applied vertically, can be applied with little modification on the ground. He has a whole book, _Karate's Grappling Methods_ which shows how familiar kata control+strike scenarios can be applies either vertically or horizontally, and he offers citations from some of the early karate masters, such as Egami and Motobu, making it clear that throws and unbalancig movements designed to take the attacker to the ground, and then finishing him off there, were considered part of karate from the very beginning.

The problem I think is that `groundfighting' has come to mean, techniques for perpetuating a fight on the ground. But the kind of applications of kata that IA has in mind are not about continuing the fight on the ground, but about damaging the opponent while he is on the ground and you are in close contact with him, so that you can regain your feet as early as possible. The groundfighting strategy here is not that of judo, wrestling, or other martial arts/sports in which the ground is the agreed-upon venue for the combat, but rather the same one-strike/one kill (or incapacitation, anyway) approachbasically, seek to disable the attacker with a terminal strike at the very earliest chance, with every move either constituting that strike or setting it upthat the kata contain and exhibit in the vertical dimension. IA hardly thinks, as his writing makes clear, that BJJ is part of kata; the two systems have fundamentally different strategic plans, so it would be surprising if their tactics looked anything like each other. But what he's saying is, kata strategy and tactics can be applied with little modification in either plane, and he demonstrates this at length in his work.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 9, 2007)

Brian S said:


> From what I was taught, there are no blocks in kata,at all.
> 
> I don't know where this started exactly,but my research has led me to believe *it's about the time Funakoshi introduced karate to the mainstream public.*
> 
> ...


 

I don't do Shotokan so this bit has me puzzled, is there still a Funakoshi alive and in charge of Shotokan? 

What I know as a high rise block (Jodan Uke) is also useful for other things, my instructor was putting up our 20ft boxing ring for a fight night, there are very heavy poles at the corners which someone was holding for him while he bolted the side bits on, the person got distracted and let go of the pole, my instructor on reflex put his arm up in Jodan Uke and saved himself from being brained, because it was a well executed block all he had was a bruise instead of a broken arm. The guy who let go got a Gibbs style (NCIS) smack around the head lol!


----------



## Ray B (Nov 9, 2007)

If Itosu removed all of the "dangerous techniques" to teach
the Okinawan school children, then why would there be
okuden waza (hidden techniques) in the Pinans? If what people are
saying about Itosu is true, then all of the Pinans would be block,
punch waza only.

Just playing devil's advocate...


----------



## exile (Nov 9, 2007)

Ray B said:


> If Itosu removed all of the "dangerous techniques" to teach
> the Okinawan school children, then why would there be
> okuden waza (hidden techniques) in the Pinans? If what people are
> saying about Itosu is true, then all of the Pinans would be block,
> ...



The answer is that Itosu didn't remove the dangerous techniques themselves. What he did was remove the accurate description of those techniques. It was Itosu who told us to _think_ of gedan-barai as a simple 'down block', probably against a kick, when even a little bit of practical experimentation would show how _im_practical that would be. But as an elbow spear/hammerfist against an assailant's forcibly lowered head (via a an arm pin), or any of the multitude of other uses that Rick Clark exhibits in _75 Down Blocks_, it's brilliant.

Itosu was completely up front about what he was doing; he wrote letters to colleagues explaining why was doing that. And remember too, Itosu did not just teach the Pinans to children. His adult students learned them as well. That's the crucial point about Itosu: he didn't change karate technically, but he changed the _description_ of kata movements so the dangerous applications of the movements were obscured. And these moves were not supposed to be taught to the Japanese at _all_, children or adult, by the Okinawan expats, either, as Higaki discusses as length in his book on bunkai for the Pinans. They were there, but they were intended to go... 'undiscussed', for reasons Higaki makes very clear.


----------



## Brian S (Nov 9, 2007)

TimoS said:


> I have to disagree with you here. There are blocks in kata, although these blocks can and often are used to open your opponent for counter-attack. Take a look at e.g. this
> 
> That's Zenpo Shimabukuro sensei, head of Shorin ryu Seibukan karate, doing Seisan. The bunkai for the first move in the kata is a block.


 
 I disagree and I'll tell you why. His hand is chambered. why chamber the non-"blocking" hand? It does have a purpose, a grappling purpose. People think that karate is supposed to be used at a punching range, this just isn't true. The move is actually a joint dislocation or break. There are other applications,but none of them are a block.




> There are other blockings in the kata also, but since that's the first move, I thought it would be easiest to go with that
> 
> Also, in a recent interview Shimabukuro sensei said that in his opinion, karate consists of three major elements: kicking, punching and blocking. There are other elements also, but those are the major building blocks


 
 Oh man! If those are the major building blocks I was taught all wrong and it's no different than a point sparring TKD school!

 Rank does not mean right. I learned more from a fourth dan than any one of higher rank.


----------



## Brian S (Nov 9, 2007)

exile said:


> The answer is that Itosu didn't remove the dangerous techniques themselves. What he did was remove the accurate description of those techniques. It was Itosu who told us to _think_ of gedan-barai as a simple 'down block', probably against a kick, when even a little bit of practical experimentation would show how _im_practical that would be. But as an elbow spear/hammerfist against an assailant's forcibly lowered head (via a an arm pin), or any of the multitude of other uses that Rick Clark exhibits in _75 Down Blocks_, it's brilliant.
> 
> Itosu was completely up front about what he was doing; he wrote letters to colleagues explaining why was doing that. And remember too, Itosu did not just teach the Pinans to children. His adult students learned them as well. That's the crucial point about Itosu: he didn't change karate technically, but he changed the _description_ of kata movements so the dangerous applications of the movements were obscured. And these moves were not supposed to be taught to the Japanese at _all_, children or adult, by the Okinawan expats, either, as Higaki discusses as length in his book on bunkai for the Pinans. They were there, but they were intended to go... 'undiscussed', for reasons Higaki makes very clear.


 
 That is exactly right.

 No matter what bunkai you teach,make sure it is useable and that it makes sense. Ask a lot of questions. What is each hand doing? Why? What position is my opponent in? Is he to the side? Behind me? Etc..

 If you can use it for real it's good bunkai. If you can't then it's just bunk.


----------



## seasoned (Nov 9, 2007)

Brian S said:


> I disagree and I'll tell you why. His hand is chambered. why chamber the non-"blocking" hand? It does have a purpose, a grappling purpose. People think that karate is supposed to be used at a punching range, this just isn't true. The move is actually a joint dislocation or break. There are other applications,but none of them are a block.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
You are very correct about fighting range. In Okinawan GoJu for example all indications point to a very close in fighting style. The Okinawans were all about grabbing an opponent. That is why a lot of their training implements were geared toward gripping power. The kicks are all very low which is our first indication of a very close in fighting art. The hand chamber is indeed not a means of cocking your fist for a punch, this is a very big misconception. The hand is pulling something in for a grappling defense, remember the Okinawans felt gripping power was very important. Block, punch, and kick are the first stages of the art. We must look for the art within the art. To many of us get stuck on a phrase such as a single block can end a fight. It can, when that so called block has many different meanings. Sparring has its age limatations and you don't see many older karate ka participating in it. But kata is limitless and it allows everyone at any age to continue their training way into advanved years. Amen for kata.


----------



## Brian S (Nov 9, 2007)

seasoned said:


> You are very correct about fighting range. In Okinawan GoJu for example all indications point to a very close in fighting style. The Okinawans were all about grabbing an opponent. That is why a lot of their training implements were geared toward gripping power. The kicks are all very low which is our first indication of a very close in fighting art. The hand chamber is indeed not a means of cocking your fist for a punch, this is a very big misconception. The hand is pulling something in for a grappling defense, remember the Okinawans felt gripping power was very important. Block, punch, and kick are the first stages of the art.* We must look for the art within the art.* To many of us get stuck on a phrase such as a single block can end a fight. It can, when that so called block has many different meanings. Sparring has its age limatations and you don't see many older karate ka participating in it.* But kata is limitless and it allows everyone at any age to continue their training way into advanved years. Amen for kata. *


 
 Thankyou sir for your experienced opinion. 

 The "chamber" hand pulling is exactly the way I was taught by my instructor. Drawing back to gain power or cocking doesn't make much sense for the use of a chamber. The two way action created by the pull or drawing in makes good self defense sense.

 I wish more people taught and learned the way you obviously do. :karate:


----------



## exile (Nov 9, 2007)

seasoned said:


> You are very correct about fighting range. In Okinawan GoJu for example all indications point to a very close in fighting style. The Okinawans were all about grabbing an opponent. That is why a lot of their training implements were geared toward gripping power. The kicks are all very low which is our first indication of a very close in fighting art. The hand chamber is indeed not a means of cocking your fist for a punch, this is a very big misconception. The hand is pulling something in for a grappling defense, remember the Okinawans felt gripping power was very important. Block, punch, and kick are the first stages of the art. We must look for the art within the art. To many of us get stuck on a phrase such as a single block can end a fight. It can, when that so called block has many different meanings. Sparring has its age limatations and you don't see many older karate ka participating in it. But kata is limitless and it allows everyone at any age to continue their training way into advanved years. Amen for kata.





Brian S said:


> Thankyou sir for your experienced opinion.
> 
> The "chamber" hand pulling is exactly the way I was taught by my instructor. Drawing back to gain power or cocking doesn't make much sense for the use of a chamber. The two way action created by the pull or drawing in makes good self defense sense.
> 
> I wish more people taught and learned the way you obviously do. :karate:



A very good source on realistic kata bunkai is Lawrence Kane & Kris Wilder's book _The Way of Kata._ Like a lot of the more recent generation of guides to kata application, they give a set of guidelines for decoding the combative use of kata subsequences hidden with the camouflage of block-kick-punch terminology, and this is their guideline #5:_a hand returning to chamber usually has something in it_, and observe that 

_... both hands are utilized in almost all kata applications. Frequently the hand returning to chamber at the practitioner's side has something captured in it, particularly if it shown closed when performing the kata. Applications that include trapping an opponent's hand or foot consist of grabs, locks, joint dislocations, takedowns and throws.

When analyzing kata, it is important to pay attention to the offhand, the one not executing an obvious technique. As it returns to chamber it will frequently grab, pull, or trap an opponent's limb. Though often underrated and underutilized in the striking arts, grabs are an essential component of karate. *They facilitate posting an opponent's weight over his or her leg so that a practitioner can effectively apply a joint kick, levering an arm for a lock or takedown, and whipping an arm to snap the head up and back, exposing the throat.*​_​
(my emphasis). As you mention, seasoned, Gojo-ryu emphasizes grabs for these kinds of purposes, and both authors are Gojo practitioners. But it's not just Goju; Abernethy is a Wado-ryu practitioner, and as he says, 

_Any successful strike, throw, lock, etc. at [close] range is dependent upon your ability to grip, and hence control, your opponent... one grip that needs special attention is the hikite (pulling hand). *Throughout the various kata movements it is very common to see one hand pulled back to the hip. This hand is referred to as the 'hikite'. If you ask most of today's karateka they will tell you that the hand is being held in a `ready position' or that it is there for aesthetic purposes... [but] it would seem that the true meaning of hikite is to control and twist the opponent's limbs so that they become unbalanced.*​_​.

(my emphasis). And in support of this interpretation, Abernethy quotes none other than Gichin Funakoshi himself, who writes of hikite in his 1925 book that 'the true meaning of the hikite, or pulling hand, is to grab the opponent's attacking hand and pull it in whilst twisting it as much as possible so that his body if forced to lean against the defender'. So you've go Goju, Wado and Shotokan all originally treating the chamber retraction as a grip pulling the attacker into the strike, extending the arm to set up a pin, or at least trapping it to immobilize the attacker while the defender moves in for the kill with elbow strikes to the the head and so on. 

This emphasis on the trapping/controlling use of the so-called `retraction chamber' movement is one of the most frequently emphasized points in the new literature on realistic kata applications.


----------



## TimoS (Nov 10, 2007)

Brian S said:


> I disagree and I'll tell you why



Disagree all you like, doesn't change the fact that the bunkai for the move is a block  Trust me on that one

Sure there can be other uses for it, but the basic bunkai is still a block


----------



## seasoned (Nov 10, 2007)

exile said:


> A very good source on realistic kata bunkai is Lawrence Kane & Kris Wilder's book _The Way of Kata._ Like a lot of the more recent generation of guides to kata application, they give a set of guidelines for decoding the combative use of kata subsequences hidden with the camouflage of block-kick-punch terminology, and this is their guideline #5:_a hand returning to chamber usually has something in it_, and observe that
> 
> 
> _... both hands are utilized in almost all kata applications. Frequently the hand returning to chamber at the practitioner's side has something captured in it, particularly if it shown closed when performing the kata. Applications that include trapping an opponent's hand or foot consist of grabs, locks, joint dislocations, takedowns and throws.​_
> ...


 
Very excellent post exile, most informative, thank you for the input.


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 10, 2007)

I'm curious as to how you all practice basics.  If you are saying that techniques are more then they seem, do you practice techniques like gedan barai etc by themselves?  Or do you practice the components that make up the real applications for moves in the kata?


----------



## exile (Nov 10, 2007)

upnorthkyosa said:


> I'm curious as to how you all practice basics.  If you are saying that techniques are more then they seem, do you practice techniques like gedan barai etc by themselves?  Or do you practice the components that make up the real applications for moves in the kata?



I don't actually practice basic techs by themselves. I practice hyungs and kata, as per our school curriculum, and I practice these forms both whole and in separate subsequences which correspond (on my own analysis, or on the bunkai of people who clearly know how find realistic applications in these forms) to complete combat scenarios (taking you, that is, from the initiation of the attack to the incapacitation of the attacker). I try to visual the particular subsequence I'm performing, whether as part of the whole form or in stand-alone mode, as a response to an actual physical attack. So the hadan makli/gedan barai movements are practiced as part of the combat sequence and visualized as, well, whatever move it is that they correspond to in the oyo I'm picturing for that particular subsequence. The gedan barai is typically a strike to a lowered head, but it is also part of a throw hingeing (so to speak) on the 180º pivot that is usually seen as nothing more than part of of the `mirror image' reversal of the performance direction so characteristic of the KMA forms, particularly at the colored belt ranks... and various other applications as well.

But since I see these simple kihon techs as just being components of whole combat training sequences, I don't see much value in doing them on their own....


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 10, 2007)

For myself, I practice the brick and morter type of techniques that make up the applications for the kata.  We practice real strikes, locks, throws and blocks on pads, makiwara, and in partner drills.  Rarely do we isolate individual movements from the kata unless we are learning the kata.  This is different then most TSD schools and I was wondering if other karate schools had a similar approach.


----------



## seasoned (Nov 10, 2007)

upnorthkyosa said:


> I'm curious as to how you all practice basics. If you are saying that techniques are more then they seem, do you practice techniques like gedan barai etc by themselves? Or do you practice the components that make up the real applications for moves in the kata?


 

Basics always first and daily because they contain the principles of the art. Off of those basics and principles will manifest the true intent of the technique. Case in point is the chamber talked about in earlier posts. A simple punch and chamber was done in our dojo over and over until that push pull motion was so ingrained in us that when we grappled it felt natural to grab and pull with one hand and push with the other to unbalance the opponent. If we were fortune to come up with their arm then it was pulled to our chamber because it felt natural. The next time you grab an arm pull it to your chamber and watch their elbow turn up if you are to their outside. As you pull back to chamber you go to a very comfortable position while in turn you put them in a very unnatural one. Basics teach principles, not just a technique. With the principle we can apply them in many situations. Dont teach me one thousand technique, but teach me a principle I can use in a thousand different techniques. The Sanchin of Okinawan GoJu needs to be looked into by everyone. This kata holds the principles of this art J .


----------



## seasoned (Nov 10, 2007)

upnorthkyosa said:


> For myself, I practice the brick and morter type of techniques that make up the applications for the kata. We practice real strikes, locks, throws and blocks on pads, makiwara, and in partner drills. Rarely do we isolate individual movements from the kata unless we are learning the kata. This is different then most TSD schools and I was wondering if other karate schools had a similar approach.


 

The brick and morter approach is interesting but even the morter needs to be mixed just right. Once you have mixed it a thousands times you dont have to think about it any more. J


----------



## TheOriginalName (Nov 11, 2007)

In my humble opinion i think it all comes down to the definition of "Uke". 

To me Uke is the redirection of an attackers energy and momentum away from my body. 

To many - and even to me when i first started learning (only 6 months ago...so please take that into account when reading this) - Uke may sound like only a bloke.

However if you drill the "blocks" you'll quickly learn that they can cause pain.....because not only are you redirecting their energy but you are also striking them, as well as opening them up to a counter attack. 

So in my humble opinion "Uke" should be interpriated as not a "block" but a "striking block".

Again, this is just my opinion based upon what i have learnt and experienced so far in my journey....


----------



## TimoS (Nov 11, 2007)

TheOriginalName said:


> To me Uke is the redirection of an attackers energy and momentum away from my body


That's actually quite good definition


----------



## Brian S (Nov 11, 2007)

TheOriginalName said:


> In my humble opinion i think it all comes down to the definition of "Uke".
> 
> To me Uke is the redirection of an attackers energy and momentum away from my body.
> 
> ...


 
 There is a problem with this type of practice. If I am bigger or stronger than my attacker then it works, if my attacker is the big and tough one, not so much.


----------



## Brandon Fisher (Nov 12, 2007)

There are blocks within kata however are they just blocking techniques.  Sometimes yes and sometimes no but they are there.


----------



## TheOriginalName (Nov 12, 2007)

Brian S said:


> There is a problem with this type of practice. If I am bigger or stronger than my attacker then it works, if my attacker is the big and tough one, not so much.


 
In my opinion i do not believe this is a problem. 
I am a small guy both in terms of height and weight but i do no see this as a problem when it comes to deflecting energy and momentum. 
If i were to attempt to absorb the energy of an attack i would agree - being bigger and stronger is an advantage however it only takes a very small amount of energy to cause an attackers punch\kick to be redirected.


----------



## TimoS (Nov 12, 2007)

TheOriginalName said:


> however it only takes a very small amount of energy to cause an attackers punch\kick to be redirected.



Yes and if you are able to use taisabaki, all the better. Why meet force with force, if you can just get out of the way of the incoming punch/kick and then block/redirect it


----------



## exile (Nov 12, 2007)

TimoS said:


> Yes and if you are able to use taisabaki, all the better. Why meet force with force, if you can just get out of the way of the incoming punch/kick and then block/redirect it



I've seen this idea very dramatically illustrated at a Combat Hapkido seminar with  Gm. John Pelligrini. He can't weigh more than around 160 lbs., but the effortless way he was able to deflect full force punches thrown by some of the massively powerful young Marine guys who were training with us&#8212;they were pretty bloody intimidating-looking!&#8212;was astonishing. And he was able to follow up these deflections with traps, pins and throws that had these guys going down to the floor _hard_&#8212;and he wasn't really exerting himself too much. They weren't being in the least compliant, either. 

The trick, of course, is knowing how to do it. When you've been in the business as long as he has, it shows. But I also think it's possible to learn, and train, this same approach in any of the MAs; I think it's actually a kind of common heritage the TMAs share. What could be more reasonable than not getting hit, but instead redirecting the attacker's energy so you control him?


----------



## chinto (Nov 12, 2007)

Brian S said:


> There is a problem with this type of practice. If I am bigger or stronger than my attacker then it works, if my attacker is the big and tough one, not so much.


 

i must disagree with that statement.  take a seisan block, it is a block with both soft and hard element in it, but more then that it is designed when used optimaly to damage the elbow joint. it has the ability to be used as a brake agenst the attacking punch as well as redirecting and cousing pain. there is not really an element of strenth to it.  infact the harder you punch at me the more efficent the block will be at injuring you by hyperextending your elbow.  most systems of combat rather quickly look to use the strenth and speed and power of an attack agenst its self.


----------



## seasoned (Nov 13, 2007)

Each style or art of self defense has at its root, theory and principles. This is the part of anyones art that can not be taught. You can learn techniques, but to learn the essence of ones art you must feel it. You can not teach feeling you must experience it for yourself. This feeling is where your art begins to separate the beginner from the master. An art in time and hard work should produce an artist. When I first learned Karate my kata was filled with blocks. In time when I began to spar I would use these blocks and at times they would work. What became very apparent to me after a while was the fact that these blocks did not work well with the more experienced students and almost never when sparring my Sensei. Some how when we sparred Sensei, he was never where he was suppose to be when we attacked him but always showed up to cream us. So I guess the question we are all asking and defining here is, are there blocks or not? I would have to say yes, but not the same as when I learned them. As a novice a block was a block, but as I advanced and started to practice the more higher kata I discovered proper foot work along with proper body shifting would transfer my blocks into a whole new realm. With the opening of the hand when blocking and a more circular approach derived from the advanced kata my blocks started to blend with strikes. When doing drills the blocks turned into traps and deflections. Once we incorporated Tensho kata which is the pushing hands kata of Okinawan GoJu did we truly start to feel our opponent , and with this feeling came a sense of moving with them and to help them move toward their destruction. Because Tensho was derived from White Crane, and White Crane theory and principles were brought back from China by Chojun Miyagi it stands to reason that there is more then meets the eye here. White Crane and Karate did not seem to mix well, or did it? What part of White Crane was being blended with karate? If you were to go to art school to learn to paint you would be given techniques on how to hold the brush along with proper brush strokes and the blending of colors. With this knowledge alone would you become an artist? I think any serious student of martial arts in time needs to move past what he has learned and begin to feel within himself what the art is saying. In my art of GoJu which means Hard/soft I have spent a life time trying to understand where my art would take me in my older years. Well now, by some standards, I have arrived. I can tell you that from this vantage point my mental outlook pertaining to martial arts looks and feels nothing like it did when I was banging with the best of them. Everything in life is subject to change and our chosen art is no different. I feel that with an open mind and a yearning to understand we can take this art into old age with the confidence that we will not be side lined but will continue to learn and if need be kick some butt. Where are your blocks taking you?


----------



## punisher73 (Nov 13, 2007)

"Uke" as a term means "receiving", so when we do a drill there is tori and uke.  One person gives and the other receives the technique.

To use the example of Shrek.  Kata is like an onion, it has a lot of layers the more you peel off to get to the core of it where the seeds are at.

I think kata is designed like this.  You have the most "basic" layer that can be used by a beginning student.  In this case, block/punch/kick method and that is the most obvious layer.  Then there are parts where the basic layer doesn't always make the most sense and you have to look at a deeper level of the movement and discover the "okuden" or hidden meanings of the kata/movement.  Okuden also means "inner teaching" as well, so it doesn't mean that it is hidden from site completely, but it is a deeper level of learning.  

The okuden are hidden in plain site.  I don't believe the analysis of kata wherein practicioners add in sets of movements between transistions in kata that are not there and say that it was the "okuden" that was taken out and hidden.  You might be able to do certain moves and graft other things in there for a different idea or concept, but it is not the strategy that lies in that particular kata nor an analysis of it's deeper meanings.

So to make my long answer short...I think that sometimes a block is just a block at it's basic level and then with experience and training, it can be so much more.


----------



## chinto (Nov 13, 2007)

seasoned said:


> Each style or art of self defense has at its root, theory and principles. This is the part of anyones art that can not be taught. You can learn techniques, but to learn the essence of ones art you must feel it. You can not teach feeling you must experience it for yourself. This feeling is where your art begins to separate the beginner from the master. An art in time and hard work should produce an artist. When I first learned Karate my kata was filled with blocks. In time when I began to spar I would use these blocks and at times they would work. What became very apparent to me after a while was the fact that these blocks did not work well with the more experienced students and almost never when sparring my Sensei. Some how when we sparred Sensei, he was never where he was suppose to be when we attacked him but always showed up to cream us. So I guess the question we are all asking and defining here is, are there blocks or not? I would have to say yes, but not the same as when I learned them. As a novice a block was a block, but as I advanced and started to practice the more higher kata I discovered proper foot work along with proper body shifting would transfer my blocks into a whole new realm. With the opening of the hand when blocking and a more circular approach derived from the advanced kata my blocks started to blend with strikes. When doing drills the blocks turned into traps and deflections. Once we incorporated Tensho kata which is the pushing hands kata of Okinawan GoJu did we truly start to feel our opponent , and with this feeling came a sense of moving with them and to help them move toward their destruction. Because Tensho was derived from White Crane, and White Crane theory and principles were brought back from China by Chojun Miyagi it stands to reason that there is more then meets the eye here. White Crane and Karate did not seem to mix well, or did it? What part of White Crane was being blended with karate? If you were to go to art school to learn to paint you would be given techniques on how to hold the brush along with proper brush strokes and the blending of colors. With this knowledge alone would you become an artist? I think any serious student of martial arts in time needs to move past what he has learned and begin to feel within himself what the art is saying. In my art of GoJu which means Hard/soft I have spent a life time trying to understand where my art would take me in my older years. Well now, by some standards, I have arrived. I can tell you that from this vantage point my mental outlook pertaining to martial arts looks and feels nothing like it did when I was banging with the best of them. Everything in life is subject to change and our chosen art is no different. I feel that with an open mind and a yearning to understand we can take this art into old age with the confidence that we will not be side lined but will continue to learn and if need be kick some butt. Where are your blocks taking you?


 

ohh ya,I agree with you!  Things do change as you learn more. that just a block becomes more as you proceed to learn more. however, it still is a block when it needs to be...( the last is more a coment on the tread)


----------



## chinto (Nov 13, 2007)

punisher73 said:


> "Uke" as a term means "receiving", so when we do a drill there is tori and uke. One person gives and the other receives the technique.
> 
> To use the example of Shrek. Kata is like an onion, it has a lot of layers the more you peel off to get to the core of it where the seeds are at.
> 
> ...


 

yes you always will find more as you dig deeper.  the old way to tell if some one was a master was to see if they could show you 5 or more bunkai for every movement in the old traditional kata. ( and for you who don't beleave in hiden meanings try it some time.. there are a minumum of 5 techniques for every MOVEMENT and not every series in kata..some are not exactly the same movement, but its there beleave me!)


----------



## Brian S (Nov 14, 2007)

> yes you always will find more as you dig deeper. the old way to tell if some one was a master was to see if they could show you 5 or more bunkai for every movement in the old traditional kata. ( and for you who don't beleave in hiden meanings try it some time.. there are a minumum of 5 techniques for every MOVEMENT and not every series in kata..some are not exactly the same movement, but its there beleave me!)


 
 There are even interpretations for the opening sequence. However, everyone's bunkai seem to differ. I guess what matters is what you can actually put to use.


----------



## TimoS (Nov 15, 2007)

Brian S said:


> There are other applications,but none of them are a block



[yt]oF480c4JKXo[/yt]

That's from Shito ryu Seisan, which is basically the same as Goju ryu Seisan. Shorin ryu Seisan looks different, but the bunkai for this part is the same in both. I was also told by my instructor that he has on video Higaonna doing Seisan and applications for it and, no surprise, the bunkai is still the same


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 15, 2007)

Brian S said:


> There are even interpretations for the opening sequence. However, everyone's bunkai seem to differ. I guess what matters is what you can actually put to use.


 
I was taught there is a Bunkai for the 'ready' stance move (Joon Bee Jase/Yoi)


----------



## TimoS (Nov 15, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> I was taught there is a Bunkai for the 'ready' stance move (Joon Bee Jase/Yoi)



When Shimabukuro sensei was visiting us couple of months ago, he said that sometimes a stance is just a stance. On the other hand, my previous instructor, when he taught any real applications at all, sometimes would show an application e.g. for a ready stance that in the middle of kata Ananku. In my opinion, yes, you can find all sorts of applications via "reverse engineering", but the big question really is that are you able to use them under stress? If your applications depend on "fine mechanics", then (again IMO) they're much harder to put into use in a real situation than say, a combination of block/deflect, control and counterattack


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 15, 2007)

TimoS said:


> When Shimabukuro sensei was visiting us couple of months ago, he said that sometimes a stance is just a stance. On the other hand, my previous instructor, when he taught any real applications at all, sometimes would show an application e.g. for a ready stance that in the middle of kata Ananku. In my opinion, yes, you can find all sorts of applications via "reverse engineering", but the big question really is that are you able to use them under stress? If your applications depend on "fine mechanics", then (again IMO) they're much harder to put into use in a real situation than say, a combination of block/deflect, control and counterattack


 
Can I do the Yoi stance Bunkai under pressure, yes, very easily. It's a  simple strike but very effective. My instructor comes from the K.I.S.S school of martial arts and uses his experience as a close protection officer and doorman as well as bing a martial artist and soldier to good effect. This man ( and here I'm very jealous though I get the benefits of it) has trained with Geoff Thompson, Mo Teague, Peter Consterdine and of course Iain Abernethy among others.


----------



## exile (Nov 15, 2007)

TimoS said:


> In my opinion, yes, you can find all sorts of applications via "reverse engineering", but the big question really is that are you able to use them under stress? *If your applications depend on "fine mechanics", then (again IMO) they're much harder to put into use in a real situation than say, a combination of block/deflect, control and counterattack*



The part in bold is certainly true. We know that corresponding to the arc of the adrenaline rush in fight-or-flight reactions, there is very dramatic loss of fine motor skills. But given the history of kata, and MA forms in general, it's most unlikely that the intended applications depended on small muscle control. If you look at the kinds of bunkai proposed by people like Iain Abernethy and Rick Clark, it's clear that only large-muscle movements and coordination is required. In that sense, part of being a good application is being robust in the fact of this programmed loss of small-muscle abilities.

But beyond this, it's also true that any applications you come up with need to be tested under as realistic conditions as possible. That pre-testing will, if you do it right, sort out the effective applications from the ones which don't hold up. Since part of `holding up' is just this matter of being able work even when fine-motor abilities are lost, it more or less follows necessarily that really useful training will have to include enough potential violence to induce an adrenaline response that mimics to some degree what happens to the defender in a real, violent encounter. Otherwise, you won't really see whether the techs work in the crunch. The people who think about realistic scenario training take this aspect of things very seriously.



Tez3 said:


> Can I do the Yoi stance Bunkai under pressure, yes, very easily. It's a  simple strike but very effective. My instructor comes from the K.I.S.S school of martial arts and uses his experience as a close protection officer and doorman as well as bing a martial artist and soldier to good effect. This man  has trained with Geoff Thompson, Mo Teague, Peter Consterdine and of course Iain Abernethy among others.



The K.I.S.S. approach is exactly what's needed to yield applications which hold up under the horrible stress of actual combat, with its loss of fine-motor skills, tunnel vision, tachycardia and all the other conditions that are biologically programmed into us in response to attacks. So far as I can see, the BCA guys that Tez mentions, and the whole BCA orientation, is probably the leading edge for this sort of kata analysis and training in the world....



Tez3 said:


> ...( and here I'm very jealous though I get the benefits of it)...


... but aren't you going to be going to one of Abernethy's seminars, Tez? When is that?


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 15, 2007)

exile said:


> The part in bold is certainly true. We know that corresponding to the arc of the adrenaline rush in fight-or-flight reactions, there is very dramatic loss of fine motor skills. But given the history of kata, and MA forms in general, it's most unlikely that the intended applications depended on small muscle control. If you look at the kinds of bunkai proposed by people like Iain Abernethy and Rick Clark, it's clear that only large-muscle movements and coordination is required. In that sense, part of being a good application is being robust in the fact of this programmed loss of small-muscle abilities.
> 
> But beyond this, it's also true that any applications you come up with need to be tested under as realistic conditions as possible. That pre-testing will, if you do it right, sort out the effective applications from the ones which don't hold up. Since part of `holding up' is just this matter of being able work even when fine-motor abilities are lost, it more or less follows necessarily that really useful training will have to include enough potential violence to induce an adrenaline response that mimics to some degree what happens to the defender in a real, violent encounter. Otherwise, you won't really see whether the techs work in the crunch. The people who think about realistic scenario training take this aspect of things very seriously.
> 
> ...





Ah yes that. Due to my usual lack of martial arts confidence I have to tell you I chickened out of going. I thought that I would be way behind everyone and be too slow to pick stuff up so I thought oh well next time. I asked my instructor about it and well due to things going on as usual I never got an answer of whether he thought I should go or not. I know it would have been good and I know I should have but I'm the only one who does TMA in the club ( apart from the kids and I teach them lol)so I have no way of judging what my TMA is like, I've been a 1st Dan for four years now and no prospect of learning anything in TSD other than from you lot here! I know ...it's pathetic of me isn't it!  :waah:


----------



## exile (Nov 15, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> Ah yes that. Due to my usual lack of martial arts confidence I have to tell you I chickened out of going.


*NO!!* You didn't!!! Tez, that won't do at all....




Tez3 said:


> I thought that I would be way behind everyone and be too slow to pick stuff up so I thought oh well next time. I asked my instructor about it and well due to things going on as usual I never got an answer of whether he thought I should go or not. I know it would have been good and I know I should have but I'm the only one who does TMA in the club ( apart from the kids and I teach them lol)so I have no way of judging what my TMA is like, I've been a 1st Dan for four years now and no prospect of learning anything in TSD other than from you lot here! I know ...it's pathetic of me isn't it!  :waah:



Well,no use crying over spilled chances to train with Iain Abernethy. But really, you ought to try to go to the next one you can. Look at it this way: Abernethy does specialized seminars with very advanced practitioners. And those are basically vetted, or invited,so far as participation goes. But he also does this kind of seminar you were talking about, which would be open to experienced MAists who aren't necessarily specialists in advanced close personal protection or the like... if you apply, pay the fee, and can get in, it means that you don't already have to be an expert (or a proto-expert) in realistic kata-based CQ self-defense, because _that_ kind of seminar will be closed to the public,so to speak.

In other words, you need to sign up for the next one you can... not just to learn what he can teach, but also to get past this reluctance to get stuck in at the `front line'you know what I mean? _Please_ tell me you'll try to make the next one....


----------



## Brian S (Nov 15, 2007)

TheOriginalName said:


> In my opinion i do not believe this is a problem.
> I am a small guy both in terms of height and weight but i do no see this as a problem when it comes to deflecting energy and momentum.
> If i were to attempt to absorb the energy of an attack i would agree - being bigger and stronger is an advantage however it only takes a very small amount of energy to cause an attackers punch\kick to be redirected.


 

 In that case, it's not a block afterall.


----------



## TheOriginalName (Nov 15, 2007)

Brian S said:


> In that case, it's not a block afterall.


 
I still believe that a redirection is a type of block. It is a defensive strike to the attacker that causes damage to them whilst avoiding damage. 

To attempt to absorb the energy of an attack is very inefficient and will cause a significant amount of pain....
To redirect energy is almost effortless. This conserves your energy whilst setting yourself up for a counterstrike.

It has taken me several months to get my head around this concept that a block is not just a block but a "striking block". It wasn't until i was doing a Jodan Uke drill (i hope i got that spelling right...) where i was blocking anothers punches that it sunk in....mainly because he walked away with massive bruises on his arms whilst i was "relatively" bruise free.....

But then again i've only been training since april and it seems that every time my Sempai goes through Kata with me i pick up some other little piece of knowledge that makes me rethink everything. 

This is why i strongly believe that to everyone the "art" is different - as it's how we each interprite what we do.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 16, 2007)

I think we have been given a number of tools to use within kata and how we use them depends on us, I know that's simplistic though. Within your house you have a whole load of tools, gadgets and whatnot which we all use differently, I'm sure I'm not the only one who uses a knife from the dining table to undo a screw? The knife is to use for eating but it can do other things that at first, until you need it you don't always think of! I've seen a Jodan Uke being used as a forearm smash to use wrestling terms. Long time ago I was shown a Bunkai in a kata that the instructor swears is a headbutt. It was simple enough that it could have been!

Exile, my instructor is away working again leaving me with club, show etc, I've emailed him which is the only way we talk that things really can't go on like this. His usual response is that he'll leave the club and he's only trying to make everyone happy but once he's over that he will need to see that I have to be a student as well as instructor, for one thing I have older children coming up to blue and red belts and I will run out of things to teach them soon lol! New Year is as good a time as any to make a fresh start.


----------

