# judo... the gelntle way....



## Manny

I am doing arrangements to do some crosstraining again on june, I am going to change my TKD schedulle with my students so I can be free the days I want to crostrain. There is not clear yet, maybe I will return to kenpo karate lessons or to start in judo.

I think judo can teach me new things like some grapling and it's always good to know how to fight in a clinch or when lying on the ground with a BG trying to beat me.

Today a client of mine came to my offcie for a chat, I know this mister is a black belt in judo so the chat was about martial arts and he recomend me a good judo sensei that we are gpoing to visit soon, my client told me judo is a very nice self defense method and a nice martial art too.

So well... the coin is in the air but I think it would be nice to get inside judo and see.


Manny


----------



## LuckyKBoxer

I absolutely love the clinch range, and throws and takedowns.
I am 39 and train, and have trained almost religiously for the last 18 years.
I have never trained with a Judo guy specifically on Judo, although I have invitations. I am a big guy about 6'3" and 260 pounds atm. The thing that has been holding me back is putting my safety in another persons hands to throw me. I think at some point I am going to have to bite the bullet and go give it a shot, because I am so intrigued.. I am just having troubles putting my safety in anothers hands.

I dont know what your expectations are, but if you are looking for alot of clinch and ground work I would also recommend trying to find a Grecco Roman wrestling type to work with, and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu guy as well. I have a few Judo Black Belts that I train with in Jiu Jitsu classes, and other then the scarf hold(Kesa Gatame) their ground work was fairly basic or non existant from what I saw, I am not sure if this is standard for Judo guys, but talking to them I know that these guys anyways train very very little ground in their school, hence the reason they are training with us on the ground.

If you do go train I would be interested in your experience, I think you are also a big guy, so I think it could be good to hear how it went
Good luck and have fun with it.


----------



## Manny

LuckyKBoxer said:


> I absolutely love the clinch range, and throws and takedowns.
> I am 39 and train, and have trained almost religiously for the last 18 years.
> I have never trained with a Judo guy specifically on Judo, although I have invitations. I am a big guy about 6'3" and 260 pounds atm. The thing that has been holding me back is putting my safety in another persons hands to throw me. I think at some point I am going to have to bite the bullet and go give it a shot, because I am so intrigued.. I am just having troubles putting my safety in anothers hands.
> 
> I dont know what your expectations are, but if you are looking for alot of clinch and ground work I would also recommend trying to find a Grecco Roman wrestling type to work with, and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu guy as well. I have a few Judo Black Belts that I train with in Jiu Jitsu classes, and other then the scarf hold(Kesa Gatame) their ground work was fairly basic or non existant from what I saw, I am not sure if this is standard for Judo guys, but talking to them I know that these guys anyways train very very little ground in their school, hence the reason they are training with us on the ground.
> 
> If you do go train I would be interested in your experience, I think you are also a big guy, so I think it could be good to hear how it went
> Good luck and have fun with it.



Yeah I am big from mexican stadards, I am 6 feet tall and 255 lbs, I am not really sure right now I did kenpo karate for one year and obtained a orange belt and I like kenpo so it could be nice to keep on it and learn some more and advance in the kup/gup grades and who knows maybe earn a BB in a couple of yeras. However judo can be nice too, learn how to deal with a BG in a short range using sweeps and throws must be efective to, so I cab't do 3 martial arts at once jejeje.

So lets see how judo can be.

Manny


----------



## WC_lun

A couple of my kung fu class mates hold black belts in Judo.  It isn't very gentle 

I am of mixed feeling when it comes to Judo as a self defense art.  It is certainly true that the grappling skills are helpful, and judo is very good at teaching those.  However, Judo was designed as a sporting art and as such sometimes leaves holes because the focus is NOT self defense bit rather sport.  Where I see this the most is bidging the cap between striking and grappling.  I am not saying Judo cannot be helpful for self defense, but just be aware.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer

WC_lun said:


> A couple of my kung fu class mates hold black belts in Judo. It isn't very gentle
> 
> I am of mixed feeling when it comes to Judo as a self defense art. It is certainly true that the grappling skills are helpful, and judo is very good at teaching those. However, Judo was designed as a sporting art and as such sometimes leaves holes because the focus is NOT self defense bit rather sport. Where I see this the most is bidging the cap between striking and grappling. I am not saying Judo cannot be helpful for self defense, but just be aware.


 
I disagree on Judo. Kodokan Judo was designed to give the practitioners the most bang for the buck. It had the high risk techniques removed and allowed the techniques that could be practiced full speed, and power to remain so that practitioenrs could train under the most realistic conditions possible and develop a feel for a completely non compliant partner. One of my biggest knocks on many of the arts that focus a majority of time to purely deadly tactics, but never allow their practitioners a way to practice them in a realistic manner is that they will most likely not be able to make it work when the trouble starts. Judo became a sport, but it was not designed as a sport.


----------



## WC_lun

I am not a judoka, so I'll defer to your expertise in how it was designed.  I also agree with you when it comes to training with fully resisting opponents.  If you aren't doing it, you aren't going to be prepared.  I still believe that 99.9% of judoka today are training for a sporting enviroment.  Nothing wrong with this, as long as you know the difference between sporting and self-defense.  Because of the sporting training, and competing against people trained in similiar ways, there are some bad tendencies that get trained into the body.  I have yet to see a judo guy bridge the gap in what I would view as a safe manner, unless trained extensively to do so.  Not because they are bad martial artist, but they are just used to something different, and have trained for that.

Having said the above, I don't believe Judo is alone in this by any means.  You've got boxers that fight as if they have gloves on, point fighters that stop with contact, continious tournament fighters that stop when they get the advantage, TKD experts that don't use thier hands to strike the face, etc.  These sports definitely have great value, but you will fight the way you train.  You will fall back upon established patterns and things proven to work for you.  If you are doing things that work in a sporting enviroment and your attacker is using things that have worked in a street fighting enviroment, you might be at a large disadvantage.


----------



## Chat Noir

WC_lun said:


> A couple of my kung fu class mates hold black belts in Judo.  It isn't very gentle
> 
> I am of mixed feeling when it comes to Judo as a self defense art.  It is certainly true that the grappling skills are helpful, and judo is very good at teaching those.  However, Judo was designed as a sporting art and as such sometimes leaves holes because the focus is NOT self defense bit rather sport.  Where I see this the most is bidging the cap between striking and grappling.  I am not saying Judo cannot be helpful for self defense, but just be aware.



I disagree.  However, before you join any school, you should be clear about what you want out of the style.  Before I joined, I looked at whether schools in my area put more emphasis on competition or self defense.  My school focuses on self defense and practical techniques - not the sport. Although my teacher can show me moves that are used in competition, I always steer him toward the combat aspect, which is what he does 90% of the time. 

Laura


----------



## WC_lun

Chat Noir said:


> I disagree. However, before you join any school, you should be clear about what you want out of the style. Before I joined, I looked at whether schools in my area put more emphasis on competition or self defense. My school focuses on self defense and practical techniques - not the sport. Although my teacher can show me moves that are used in competition, I always steer him toward the combat aspect, which is what he does 90% of the time.
> 
> Laura


 

Definitley know what a school is about before you join.  Agree with this %100. If it is competition based and you want more of a self defense base, you probably aren't gonna be happy.  I can't stress this phrase enough, "You WILL Fight How You Train."  So make sure your training matches the venue most closely in which you would expect to use your skills.


----------



## ETinCYQX

Its an excellent compliment to TaeKwonDo, Manny. 

Few quick points from the top of my head, I have a class shortly. 
-Judo was not developed as a sport, Judo is essentially modern JuJutsu. 

-If you compete, watch your stances. I can't break the habit to fight with my right foot back when I'm at distance and vying for grips. 

-Try and find a club that does groundwork for the sake of groundwork rather than groundwork to win at Judo. The rules don't favor ground fighters so many schools don't work the ground. Mine does. 

I should also point out that self-defense has never been a priority in my training in TKD or Judo. Or any of the other styles I like to play with. 

Ethan


----------



## lklawson

LuckyKBoxer said:


> I have a few Judo Black Belts that I train with in Jiu Jitsu classes, and other then the scarf hold(Kesa Gatame) their ground work was fairly basic or non existant from what I saw, I am not sure if this is standard for Judo guys, but talking to them I know that these guys anyways train very very little ground in their school, hence the reason they are training with us on the ground.


Depends on the Dojo and the instructor.  Some do a lot more than others.

Last dojo I was at one of the instructors loved ground so we did a lot of that.  I really enjoyed it.

Current dojo I'm at the instructor is really into the "Life-long Health and Exercise Method" a so that's what he emphasizes.  I like that too though I admit my ground-work is suffering.  However I do get injured a lot less frequently.

<shrug>

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Champ-Pain

Manny said:


> I am doing arrangements to do some crosstraining again on june, I am going to change my TKD schedulle with my students so I can be free the days I want to crostrain. There is not clear yet, maybe I will return to kenpo karate lessons or to start in judo.
> 
> I think judo can teach me new things like some grapling and it's always good to know how to fight in a clinch or when lying on the ground with a BG trying to beat me.
> 
> Today a client of mine came to my offcie for a chat, I know this mister is a black belt in judo so the chat was about martial arts and he recomend me a good judo sensei that we are gpoing to visit soon, my client told me judo is a very nice self defense method and a nice martial art too.
> 
> So well... the coin is in the air but I think it would be nice to get inside judo and see.
> 
> 
> Manny


 Just out of curiousity - the "good Sensei" that they recommended - is he Cuban? I've been told that many of the Sensei teaching Judo in Mexico are from Cuba. Is that true? These darn Cubans are all over the place. LOL


----------



## Manny

JudoChampion said:


> Just out of curiousity - the "good Sensei" that they recommended - is he Cuban? I've been told that many of the Sensei teaching Judo in Mexico are from Cuba. Is that true? These darn Cubans are all over the place. LOL



No he' not a Cuban he's mexican, it's an old sensei with years of teaching in his back, he even taught self defense at police station.

Manny


----------



## Judokarl

LuckyKBoxer said:


> I absolutely love the clinch range, and throws and takedowns.
> I am 39 and train, and have trained almost religiously for the last 18 years.
> I have never trained with a Judo guy specifically on Judo, although I have invitations. I am a big guy about 6'3" and 260 pounds atm. The thing that has been holding me back is putting my safety in another persons hands to throw me. I think at some point I am going to have to bite the bullet and go give it a shot, because I am so intrigued.. I am just having troubles putting my safety in anothers hands.
> 
> I dont know what your expectations are, but if you are looking for alot of clinch and ground work I would also recommend trying to find a Grecco Roman wrestling type to work with, and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu guy as well. I have a few Judo Black Belts that I train with in Jiu Jitsu classes, and other then the scarf hold(Kesa Gatame) their ground work was fairly basic or non existant from what I saw, I am not sure if this is standard for Judo guys, but talking to them I know that these guys anyways train very very little ground in their school, hence the reason they are training with us on the ground.
> 
> If you do go train I would be interested in your experience, I think you are also a big guy, so I think it could be good to hear how it went
> Good luck and have fun with it.


 It depends on the school Ours has groundwork almost every class and I pratice out of class with fellow judoka and wrestlers on my groundwork. Sadly About 80% of my wins are from chokes and pins at judo tornoments (not nearly as flashy as a nice ippon). If you do judo or bjj and can do the other I see no reason not to because of how well they agument eachother.
Judo would be a great addon for self defense as long as you make sure to pratice some of the throws gi-less to get a feel for it. I have had a dudes shirt rip of during a fight and I had to nail him wth Morote gari.


----------



## gatorgrasshoppeer

ETinCYQX said:


> Its an excellent compliment to TaeKwonDo, Manny.
> 
> Few quick points from the top of my head, I have a class shortly.
> -Judo was not developed as a sport, Judo is essentially modern JuJutsu.
> 
> -If you compete, watch your stances. I can't break the habit to fight with my right foot back when I'm at distance and vying for grips.
> 
> -Try and find a club that does groundwork for the sake of groundwork rather than groundwork to win at Judo. The rules don't favor ground fighters so many schools don't work the ground. Mine does.
> 
> I should also point out that self-defense has never been a priority in my training in TKD or Judo. Or any of the other styles I like to play with.
> 
> Ethan



+1  

My dojo teaches judo throws as one method of defense.  Outstanding knowledge to have IMHO.  We also practice groundwork in case we get pulled to the ground after a throw.  

- Make sure you learn how to break fall....it is critical to not getting hurt in practice (and in reality)
- For me (in my 40's), it can be pretty brutal on the legs/back during training, so know your limits and work into it

Good luck in your training.  I am certain if you go for it, 2-3 lessons and grappling sessions and you will be sold on Judo's value in the scheme of your defense training.  Trust me, it is not only for sport .


----------



## SPX

LuckyKBoxer said:


> I have a few Judo Black Belts that I train with in Jiu Jitsu classes, and other then the scarf hold(Kesa Gatame) their ground work was fairly basic or non existant from what I saw, I am not sure if this is standard for Judo guys, but talking to them I know that these guys anyways train very very little ground in their school, hence the reason they are training with us on the ground.



It really depends on the school.

The bottom line is that the Olympics ruin everything.  Judo . . . boxing . . . TKD . . .  The Olympics has had detrimental effects in all three cases.

Any good Judo school will train about 30% groundwork.  While that may not sound like much, it's a lot more than many schools train, and it's more than enough to build a solid foundation for ground work.  Basically if the school is overly-concerned about competitions or the Olympics then they focus too much on the standing portion of Judo.  If they train the art as it should be trained then there's a balance.


----------



## SPX

WC_lun said:


> A couple of my kung fu class mates hold black belts in Judo.  It isn't very gentle
> 
> I am of mixed feeling when it comes to Judo as a self defense art.  It is certainly true that the grappling skills are helpful, and judo is very good at teaching those.  However, Judo was designed as a sporting art and as such sometimes leaves holes because the focus is NOT self defense bit rather sport.  Where I see this the most is bidging the cap between striking and grappling.  I am not saying Judo cannot be helpful for self defense, but just be aware.



Yes, it's ironic that Judo was designed to have the deadliest techniques removed and yet it is imminently capable as a self-defense style.  I personally feel that it is best trained in conjunction with a striking art, but as soon as any fight comes into the clinch range judo gives one the ability to throw/trip/slam their opponent.  If anything, on the street or a bar room floor it is actually TOO devastating . . . a person getting thrown onto their back will probably be okay, but if they get dumped on their head it could potentially lead to paralysis or death.

Judo is scary.


----------



## Cyriacus

SPX said:


> Yes, it's ironic that Judo was designed to have the deadliest techniques removed and yet it is imminently capable as a self-defense style.  I personally feel that it is best trained in conjunction with a striking art, but as soon as any fight comes into the clinch range judo gives one the ability to throw/trip/slam their opponent.  If anything, on the street or a bar room floor it is actually TOO devastating . . . a person getting thrown onto their back will probably be okay, but if they get dumped on their head it could potentially lead to paralysis or death.
> 
> Judo is scary.


Striking does that as well 
Since We can adjust Judo to involving Head Dumps, We can adjust most Striking Arts to hitting certain Vulnerable Areas of the Human Body.

EDIT: Adjust is just the word im using for "limit our current reference to a particular item of" or somesuch. Twas tricky to word.


----------



## SPX

Cyriacus said:


> Striking does that as well
> Since We can adjust Judo to involving Head Dumps, We can adjust most Striking Arts to hitting certain Vulnerable Areas of the Human Body.
> 
> EDIT: Adjust is just the word im using for "limit our current reference to a particular item of" or somesuch. Twas tricky to word.




Sure, well I certainly agree that any "complete fighter" will have some minimum level of proficiency in both areas.

I do feel that Judo, as it is taught in just about ANY judo school, is directly applicable to self-defense.  This is not always the case in regard to, say, a karate or TKD or kung fu school (though sometimes it is).


----------



## Cyriacus

SPX said:


> Sure, well I certainly agree that any "complete fighter" will have some minimum level of proficiency in both areas.
> 
> I do feel that Judo, as it is taught in just about ANY judo school, is directly applicable to self-defense.  This is not always the case in regard to, say, a karate or TKD or kung fu school (though sometimes it is).


Hehe - You havent seen Mcdojo Judo then. I have, and its exponentially overdependent on Heavy Gis. Im sure others can substantiate that.

And then You put it that only sometimes, do Three different MA's have more than a Mcdojo or Sport form. How bemusing  But lets nevermind that, and remain on topic.


----------



## SPX

Yes, I have to say, I've never seen McDojo judo.  I'm having a hard time envisioning such a thing.  It seems that judo is about as screw-it-up proof as you could get, unless for some reason an instructor had a No Randori rule in their school, which I couldn't imagine.


----------



## Cyriacus

SPX said:


> Yes, I have to say, I've never seen McDojo judo.  I'm having a hard time envisioning such a thing.  It seems that judo is about as screw-it-up proof as you could get, unless for some reason an instructor had a No Randori rule in their school, which I couldn't imagine.


In the instance I saw, the Instructor was actually pretty good. Its just that they were so damnably monotopical about it. The problem is, that they were Training Judo to VS Judo. Its kind of like Sport Karate/TKD/Kung Fu/Pure-Sport-Boxing. Theyre Training to Fight each other.
And Mcdojo Judo is basically a Judo VS Judo Mechanic. All of it works, against Judo. And You can apply that Logic to any other Sport System.


----------



## lklawson

Cyriacus said:


> In the instance I saw, the Instructor was actually pretty good. Its just that they were so damnably monotopical about it. The problem is, that they were Training Judo to VS Judo. Its kind of like Sport Karate/TKD/Kung Fu/Pure-Sport-Boxing. Theyre Training to Fight each other.
> And Mcdojo Judo is basically a Judo VS Judo Mechanic. All of it works, against Judo. And You can apply that Logic to any other Sport System.


Training Judo vs. Judo has the happy advantage of working pretty well as Judo vs anything-else.  Once you lay hands on, it's all the same.  There are plenty of basic Judo throws, locks, and chokes which don't rely on a gi.  Ipon Seoinage, Koshi Garuma, O Goshi, O Soto Gari are all stupid easy to do no-gi.  There are plenty of others that have the same no-gi advantages and most of the rest can be modified with minimal fuss and muss to work no-gi.  And that's just counting if the other fella ain't wearing heavy enough clothing to get a good hold on. 

Sorry, I'm with SPX on this one.  Unless there's simply NO randori then it's gonna be pretty applicable once the fight moves to grappling.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Cyriacus

lklawson said:


> Training Judo vs. Judo has the happy advantage of working pretty well as Judo vs anything-else.  Once you lay hands on, it's all the same.  There are plenty of basic Judo throws, locks, and chokes which don't rely on a gi.  Ipon Seoinage, Koshi Garuma, O Goshi, O Soto Gari are all stupid easy to do no-gi.  There are plenty of others that have the same no-gi advantages and most of the rest can be modified with minimal fuss and muss to work no-gi.  And that's just counting if the other fella ain't wearing heavy enough clothing to get a good hold on.
> 
> Sorry, I'm with SPX on this one.  Unless there's simply NO randori then it's gonna be pretty applicable once the fight moves to grappling.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


I didnt phrase that very well; At least, I didnt phrase it with discussing with other people in mind - I was addressing the Logical Cycles in question. If You say Judo VS Judo = Judo can work well against anything else because they can be easily done without one on in the event of a grappling phase of fighting, means that "This is not always the case in regard to, say, a karate or TKD or kung fu school" is one big Logical Contradiction, since He seems to be referring to McDojos, as ascertained afterward. So if Judo can do it, saying Striking Arts cannot have the same logic applied is a Logical Contradiction, since these Sport Systems can be spoken of to say, that Light Contact Karate isnt hard to change into Full Contact if someone decides to hit full force. Sport TKD Techniques work on someone who doesnt have Gear on. Sport Kungfu Methodologies work well on someone who isnt using Sport Kungfu. Which is all relatively, factual. Its like saying Judo works for being Judo, but those others dont because they dont. It doesnt make any sense, given the reasoning being used here.

To perhaps express My View better, no matter whether its a Mcdojo, Sport, Traditional, or whathaveyou, the Methods are designed to work. In Sport Systems, theyre adapted to work better for the Sport. One way to put this, is Boxing Gyms that Train in Outfighting, and practically ignore the various other aspects, and focus on being good Outfighters, which is more Sport. It still works though, irrefutably. In a Traditional context, that depends on the Art. In the Mcdojo context, theyre still learning the same functional, effective Methodologies. It just perhaps isnt being Trained in too well. Then theres subcategories again. What is the Sport? Is it Knockdown based? Tap Point based? Stop Point? Continuous Point? Etc, etc, etc.

But in the context of what We were discussing, saying all that didnt really amount to much. I just addressed the minor generalizations taking place, and smoothed them over a bit with some context. Judo can be poorly Trained, just like anything else. It still works. It just means that its User may not be *as* able to use it in a Self Defense Situation or Engagement. He may well be fit enough to give it a good shot though. Or perhaps He wont be.
Theres a lot of variables here. Enough to quantify balancing out the board, rather than setting Judo above other Systems for being Judo, and stating that it, Poorly Trained, is for being Judo more effectual, without applying the same logic to other Systems.

I could go on further, but Ill leave it at that for now.


----------



## SPX

I'll just put it this way. . .

Judo doesn't require much "thought" when it comes to how you would apply it on the street.  Basically you would apply it the same way on the street as you would in training.  With, say, TKD on the other hand, I feel that you have to work it out in your head more.  You have to realize that striking a horse stance in a fight might not be the best idea, or that reverse punches with your hands cocked at your sides aren't practical, or that striking in a real confrontation bears only a vague resemblance to striking in a semi-contact point fighting competition with a boatload of rules.

Judo, on the other hand, translates quite well as is.  Yes, in an explosive SD encounter you will have to deal with punches in order to get to grappling range, but like lklawson said above, once you have your hands on someone it's pretty much the same thing that you've been doing during randori.


----------



## Cyriacus

SPX said:


> I'll just put it this way. . .
> 
> Judo doesn't require much "thought" when it comes to how you would apply it on the street.  Basically you would apply it the same way on the street as you would in training.  With, say, TKD on the other hand, I feel that you have to work it out in your head more.  You have to realize that striking a horse stance in a fight might not be the best idea, or that reverse punches with your hands cocked at your sides aren't practical, or that striking in a real confrontation bears only a vague resemblance to striking in a semi-contact point fighting competition with a boatload of rules.
> 
> Judo, on the other hand, translates quite well as is.  Yes, in an explosive SD encounter you will have to deal with punches in order to get to grappling range, but like lklawson said above, once you have your hands on someone it's pretty much the same thing that you've been doing during randori.



Wait, wait. Why the _hell _would You break out into Horse Riding Stance in a Fight? Striking from the Hip is a Finishing Strike, and also serves to improve the Body Mechanics for Punching from the Shoulder. And as for Your Hands being on someone, they could well keep hitting, instead of playing the Grappling game. And most folks will. Or maybe this Theoretical Person wont.
Horse Riding Stance is intended for Close Distance Striking in Confined Space. Some places exaggerated its width a whole lot, though. It is also a Transitional Stance, or a Side Facing Stance.

Traditional TKD is based on Basics and Application. Not... Horse Riding Stance and Reverse Hip Punches. Thats just weird. (weird as a focus.)

This makes Me wonder what Youve been looking at


----------



## frank raud

Cyriacus said:


> In the instance I saw, the Instructor was actually pretty good. Its just that they were so damnably monotopical about it. The problem is, that they were Training Judo to VS Judo. Its kind of like Sport Karate/TKD/Kung Fu/Pure-Sport-Boxing. Theyre Training to Fight each other.
> And Mcdojo Judo is basically a Judo VS Judo Mechanic. All of it works, against Judo. And You can apply that Logic to any other Sport System.



Round these parts, most martial arts are taught how to defend against a similar attacker. TKD vs TKD, karate vs karate, judo vs judo. Partially becuase in competition that is what you are going up against, another practicioner of the same or similar art. Rare is any club that focuses on how to defend against an different style of fighting. Teaching kick defense against a grappler? 

Is judo the be all and end all? No, but as an art that focuses on off balancing an opponent before throwing, locking or submitting them, it makes for pretty effective defense against other styles. Yes, the puncher can try to still punch at a judoka after he has been grabbed, but there wont be a lot of time before they hit the floor, and most strikes are not that effective if you dont have a solid base to strike from. The concept of kuzushi is a wonderful thing.


----------



## lklawson

SPX said:


> With, say, TKD on the other hand, I feel that you have to work it out in your head more.  You have to realize that striking a horse stance in a fight might not be the best idea, or that reverse punches with your hands cocked at your sides aren't practical, or that striking in a real confrontation bears only a vague resemblance to striking in a semi-contact point fighting competition with a boatload of rules.


I'm not exactly a fan of TKD but, that said, aware of any TKD schools that teach a horse stance for sparring or one-steps.  However, I have seen TKD sparring which teaches the students to keep their hands way, way down, not guard the head at all, and focus on kicking.  I assume this is the sort of thing you're thinking of.



> Judo, on the other hand, translates quite well as is.  Yes, in an explosive SD encounter you will have to deal with punches in order to get to grappling range, but like lklawson said above, once you have your hands on someone it's pretty much the same thing that you've been doing during randori.


Reminds me of the early "Striking vs. Grappling" debates.  Unless the other guy is a really good puncher and the Judoka is either exceptionally bad or very unlucky, the one or two punches he's likely to absorb closing range are not likely going to stop him most of the time.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

Cyriacus said:


> Wait, wait. Why the _hell _would You break out into Horse Riding Stance in a Fight?


You wouldn't.



> Horse Riding Stance is intended for Close Distance Striking in Confined Space. Some places exaggerated its width a whole lot, though. It is also a Transitional Stance, or a Side Facing Stance.


Huh?  The commonly accepted conventional line of thought now has it that the Horse Stance is intended for training leg strength and endurance.  Regardless, even in a confined space at close range, a Horse Stance is stupid.  The *only* time it makes sense as a "Fighting Stance" is when you are turning your side to your opponent and moving linearly along the imaginary line connecting your feet.  In the firearms world this is called "Blading the body" and in the Olympic Fencing community a modified version is used as the standard basic starting point.  The goal is to minimize target area on the body and move central organs out of the opponents path but at the expense of forcing linear movement (front and back).  Some old Kata have it as implied fighting "back against a wall" but I'm suspicious of that interpretation.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## SPX

lklawson said:


> I'm not exactly a fan of TKD but, that said, aware of any TKD schools that teach a horse stance for sparring or one-steps.  However, I have seen TKD sparring which teaches the students to keep their hands way, way down, not guard the head at all, and focus on kicking.  I assume this is the sort of thing you're thinking of.



I think what I'm saying is that there's a general disconnect in TMAs between how people train and how they actually fight.  In training, a TDKist might use things like a deep front stance or reverse punches, but in actual fighting (or sparring) these same practitioners will resort to boxing-style handwork and a kickboxing-style stance and movement.  You don't see any of that in judo.  So that's my point about a more direct translation into practical application.


----------



## SPX

lklawson said:


> Huh?  The commonly accepted conventional line of thought now has it that the Horse Stance is intended for training leg strength and endurance.



You see, this is another issue.  With the TMAs many practitioners tend to take problem techniques and interpret them in a personal way, rather than their being a universal interpretation.  Like yourself, I've heard the "leg strengthening" interpretation, but this is the first I've heard of the "close distance striking in confined space" interpretation.  And I've been through a fair number of TKD and Karate schools throughout my life.

Furthermore, I've also never heard of the reverse punch interpreted specifically as a finishing move.  In all the TMA classes that I've been in, it was just the way you're taught to punch.


----------



## dancingalone

lklawson said:


> You wouldn't.
> 
> Huh?  The commonly accepted conventional line of thought now has it that the Horse Stance is intended for training leg strength and endurance.  Regardless, even in a confined space at close range, a Horse Stance is stupid.  The *only* time it makes sense as a "Fighting Stance" is when you are turning your side to your opponent and moving linearly along the imaginary line connecting your feet.  In the firearms world this is called "Blading the body" and in the Olympic Fencing community a modified version is used as the standard basic starting point.  The goal is to minimize target area on the body and move central organs out of the opponents path but at the expense of forcing linear movement (front and back).  Some old Kata have it as implied fighting "back against a wall" but I'm suspicious of that interpretation.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



One of the common applications to shiko dachi, a variation on the horse stance in Goju-ryu karate, is to gain entry into the opponent for a standing valley drop throw.  

This isn't necessarily applicable to the people on this thread, but most of the time when I see people saying a certain traditional stance doesn't make sense, it's because they think one is supposed to assume it and then use it as a platform from which to spar.  Stances are meant to be transitory movements to acquire a specific goal in relation to your opponent.  Dropping into a horse stance can also give you momentary stability against force from the side, and also in karate, it can be use add power to a striking/pushing motion, particularly with a swinging or thrusting arm.  Not sure what the term is in a grappling art off the top of my head, but think about the throw where you push with one hand against the opponent's hip/midsection while you pull out his same side leg out from under him with your other arm.  This can work well employed from a modified horse stance.


----------



## SPX

dancingalone said:


> Stances are meant to be transitory movements to acquire a specific goal in relation to your opponent.



I've heard this argument many times.  Do we have it anywhere in writing that this is what the founders intended, though?  I'm not saying you're wrong.  I'm just wondering if there's documentation.


----------



## dancingalone

SPX said:


> I've heard this argument many times.  Do we have it anywhere in writing that this is what the founders intended, though?  I'm not saying you're wrong.  I'm just wondering if there's documentation.



Sorry, arts like karate or 'kung fu' just weren't documented that way.  You learn (hopefully) from your teacher.  Most karate in application looks like a high kicking fest precisely because information such as when you would employ a certain stance weren't transmitted properly.


----------



## lklawson

dancingalone said:


> One of the common applications to shiko dachi, a variation on the horse stance in Goju-ryu karate, is to gain entry into the opponent for a standing valley drop throw.








Tani Otoshi?  Huh?  Unless you're talking about from an already engaged "tie up" position in which one or both drop their weight a bit (such as in frame 1 above - but that's just where it starts, not the kuzushi, tsukuri, to say nothing of kake).  If that's the case than there are any number of throws from which to proceed from a "sunk weight" condition.  And it certainly doesn't make any sense to punch from it in this application.



> This isn't necessarily applicable to the people on this thread, but most of the time when I see people saying a certain traditional stance doesn't make sense, it's because they think one is supposed to assume it and then use it as a platform from which to spar.  Stances are meant to be transitory movements to acquire a specific goal in relation to your opponent.  Dropping into a horse stance can also give you momentary stability against force from the side, and also in karate, it can be use add power to a striking/pushing motion, particularly with a swinging or thrusting arm.  Not sure what the term is in a grappling art off the top of my head, but think about the throw where you push with one hand against the opponent's hip/midsection while you pull out his same side leg out from under him with your other arm.  This can work well employed from a modified horse stance.


Are you talking about a Single Leg or an Irish Pick?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

dancingalone said:


> Sorry, arts like karate or 'kung fu' just weren't documented that way.  You learn (hopefully) from your teacher.  Most karate in application looks like a high kicking fest precisely because information such as when you would employ a certain stance weren't transmitted properly.


That's a fine position to take, but, you realize of course, that it means you're tacitly agreeing with SPX?  In effect, you're saying, "the horse stance as it is taught almost everywhere is wrong and you're right that it doesn't work in the context that most instructors claim it does."

If that's what you're saying, then I don't see any conflict.  Further, I should introduce you to my theory on why "traditional blocking" doesn't work as claimed and is not seen in sparring.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

SPX said:


> I've heard this argument many times.  Do we have it anywhere in writing that this is what the founders intended, though?  I'm not saying you're wrong.  I'm just wondering if there's documentation.


I don't know about in Karate literature (there's a lot of it) but it's pretty well understood in certain European based sword systems.  So there is precedent for the theory. 

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## dancingalone

lklawson said:


> Tani Otoshi?  Huh?  Unless you're talking about from an already engaged "tie up" position in which one or both drop their weight a bit.  If that's the case than there are any number of throws from which to proceed from a "sunk weight" condition.  And it certainly doesn't make any sense to punch from it in this application.



Not the gif you posted.  I learned it as a "Valley Drop" throw, so that is the name I use.  The throw can be described as you and uke standing side by side so that you both face to the front, but you have a leg and part of your body behind him as you unbalance uke downwards and to the rear and throw him over your hip and lower section. 



lklawson said:


> Are you talking about a Single Leg or an Irish Pick?



This video is pretty close, except the attack I am describing is NOT to the inside as he demonstrates at 1:27.   Picture him scooping from the outside of uke's front leg instead from a reversed stance where his right leg is in front while uke's left leg is in front.  What would you call that?

[yt]rBfWfDWAnc4[/yt]


----------



## dancingalone

lklawson said:


> That's a fine position to take, but, you realize of course, that it means you're tacitly agreeing with SPX?  In effect, you're saying, "the horse stance as it is taught almost everywhere is wrong and you're right that it doesn't work in the context that most instructors claim it does."



I don't have a problem with that.  Stances theory is nonexistent in the majority of American dojo.  People do it just because they're told to.  Most never learn the why behind it.



lklawson said:


> If that's what you're saying, then I don't see any conflict.  Further, I should introduce you to my theory on why "traditional blocking" doesn't work as claimed and is not seen in sparring.



I stated in a post not too long ago on the TKD forum that I believe what is taught as traditional blocking to be inefficient at best.  Try me, I'll probably share many of the same perspectives.


----------



## jks9199

View the stance as a positioning of the body to achieve a goal; there are lots of times where some variant of a horse stance might be useful.  As a primary fighting stance -- it's probably only useful to a small number of very skilled practitioners.  But... do you generally stand around in a front stance?  a cat stance?  or is it maybe a bit more like a higher horse stance?  What advantages does stepping and dropping down into the horse stance give you for combat?  Does it prepare certain weapons for use?  Does it give you stability to receive an attack?  

Stances serve a purpose.  In my system, the equivalent of a horse stance, the H stance, is used initially for learning the basic movements because it provides a balanced starting point.  But that doesn't mean it's not got combative uses...  I might step in and deep, turning into an H stance to develop power for a punch.  Or I might use it while evading and trapping an incoming strike, to have the stability to off-balance my opponent.  Stances are points of stability; steps are transitions and movements between stances.  Hell.. I've already said this before.


----------



## lklawson

dancingalone said:


> Not the gif you posted.  I learned it as a "Valley Drop" throw, so that is the name I use.  The throw can be described as you and uke standing side by side so that you both face to the front, but you have a leg and part of your body behind him as you unbalance uke downwards and to the rear and throw him over your hip and lower section.


Tani Otoshi is the "Valley Drop" in Judo.  I think you're referring to Obi Otoshi.






I teach a pre-MoQ boxing version called the "Side Fall" where the throwing arm goes either behind Uke's back and grasps his opposite shoulder or comes across in front at the collar or neck. [edit: I'll try to post up a pic tonight]



> This video is pretty close, except the attack I am describing is NOT to the inside as he demonstrates at 1:27.   Picture him scooping from the outside of uke's front leg instead from a reversed stance where his right leg is in front while uke's left leg is in front.  What would you call that?


Sounds like Kibisu Gaeshi.






Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

dancingalone said:


> I stated in a post not too long ago on the TKD forum that I believe what is taught as traditional blocking to be inefficient at best.  Try me, I'll probably share many of the same perspectives.


The modern TKD/Karate block is misunderstood.  It is a 2-part motion, a parry and repost.  The "chambering" motion of the block is the actual block/parry.  The part of the "block" where the arm swings back out from Tori's body is a counter attack, usually a back fist or hammer fist.  Where modern TKD/Karate teaches the block as two moves with one goal: 1) Chamber back to the body 2) extend the arm and forcefully block.  In reality it is two separate moves chained together 2) parry inward 2) backfist the sucker.

Jack Dempsey teaches a similar set in his book Championship Fighting.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## dancingalone

lklawson said:


> The modern TKD/Karate block is misunderstood.  It is a 2-part motion, a parry and repost.  The "chambering" motion of the block is the actual block/parry.  The part of the "block" where the arm swings back out from Tori's body is a counter attack, usually a back fist or hammer fist.  Where modern TKD/Karate teaches the block as two moves with one goal: 1) Chamber back to the body 2) extend the arm and forcefully block.  In reality it is two separate moves chained together 2) parry inward 2) backfist the sucker.
> 
> Jack Dempsey teaches a similar set in his book Championship Fighting.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



That's certainly one likely interpretation.  The Okinawan Kempo people who follow from Motubu Choki Sensei lineage teach that one in their style.  You may know that Motobu Sensei gained some infamy from his fight with a boxer which was written about in the twenties and would have been around Dempsey's peak years. 

http://www.dragon-tsunami.org/Dtimes/Pages/articlec.htm


----------



## lklawson

dancingalone said:


> That's certainly one likely interpretation.  The Okinawan Kempo people who follow from Motubu Choki Sensei lineage teach that one in their style.  You may know that Motobu Sensei gained some infamy from his fight with a boxer which was written about in the twenties and would have been around Dempsey's peak years.


It shows up earlier than that, late 19th C. is the earliest I've found, but Dempsey is the most famous.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

lklawson said:


> Tani Otoshi is the "Valley Drop" in Judo.  I think you're referring to Obi Otoshi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I teach a pre-MoQ boxing version called the "Side Fall" where the throwing arm goes either behind Uke's back and grasps his opposite shoulder or comes across in front at the collar or neck. [edit: I'll try to post up a pic tonight]



Here. Hip and Shoulder throw from "Teacher of Sparring," Edwin Shaw, 1886





Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## SPX

lklawson said:


> That's a fine position to take, but, you realize of course, that it means you're tacitly agreeing with SPX?  In effect, you're saying, "the horse stance as it is taught almost everywhere is wrong and you're right that it doesn't work in the context that most instructors claim it does."



In essence what it tells me is that no one REALLY knows.  If we don't have a historical record that this technique was used in this way, or stances were used in that way, etc. then we really are just theorizing and trying to determine these things just by observing the system, applying logic, and drawing conclusions.

The other option is to believe that there is some handful of teachers who have had the "true knowledge of Karate" (or whatever martial art) passed down through an unbroken chain from the founder to instructors who are active today.

I remember when I first heard about Iain Abernethy, I thought what he is doing for Karate is quite interesting, but again, my first question was how is he getting his information?  Is he pulling it from some historical record or just inferring it by examining the kata?  If it's the latter, as it appears to be, then he's just guessing.  He doesn't REALLY know.  But with that said, don't take that to mean that I don't think that what he is doing is good.  I think it's very interesting and useful, in fact.


----------



## lklawson

SPX said:


> I remember when I first heard about Iain Abernethy


I've interacted with him a bit.  Nice fella.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Cyriacus

It is starting to consume more and more time to reply to these, so forgive Me if I seem less enthusiastic.



frank raud said:


> Round these parts, most martial arts are taught how to defend against a similar attacker. TKD vs TKD, karate vs karate, judo vs judo. Partially becuase in competition that is what you are going up against, another practicioner of the same or similar art. Rare is any club that focuses on how to defend against an different style of fighting. Teaching kick defense against a grappler?
> 
> Is judo the be all and end all? No, but as an art that focuses on off balancing an opponent before throwing, locking or submitting them, it makes for pretty effective defense against other styles. Yes, the puncher can try to still punch at a judoka after he has been grabbed, but there wont be a lot of time before they hit the floor, and most strikes are not that effective if you dont have a solid base to strike from. The concept of kuzushi is a wonderful thing.


Much in the same way, could a good Puncher not out-Punch the Opponent from His Position, much like how a Judoka can continue to Grapple?



lklawson said:


> I'm not exactly a fan of TKD but, that said, aware of any TKD schools that teach a horse stance for sparring or one-steps. However, I have seen TKD sparring which teaches the students to keep their hands way, way down, not guard the head at all, and focus on kicking. I assume this is the sort of thing you're thinking of.
> 
> Reminds me of the early "Striking vs. Grappling" debates. Unless the other guy is a really good puncher and the Judoka is either exceptionally bad or very unlucky, the one or two punches he's likely to absorb closing range are not likely going to stop him most of the time.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



You pretty much described Sport TKD. And as for Horse Riding Stance in 1-Steps, thats their problem, if theyre going to do something that absurd in the manner suggested.



lklawson said:


> You wouldn't.
> 
> Huh? The commonly accepted conventional line of thought now has it that the Horse Stance is intended for training leg strength and endurance. Regardless, even in a confined space at close range, a Horse Stance is stupid. The *only* time it makes sense as a "Fighting Stance" is when you are turning your side to your opponent and moving linearly along the imaginary line connecting your feet. In the firearms world this is called "Blading the body" and in the Olympic Fencing community a modified version is used as the standard basic starting point. The goal is to minimize target area on the body and move central organs out of the opponents path but at the expense of forcing linear movement (front and back). Some old Kata have it as implied fighting "back against a wall" but I'm suspicious of that interpretation.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



It is for Strengthening if its done alone. Done in Sparring, its meant to be a Side Stance or a Short Stance. And even then, its only for a singular attack. For example, were You to Knee Your Opponent, since Traditional TKD is based on Linear, Forward Movement, instead of moving back, You move into a Horse Riding Stance, then move into a better Stance.



SPX said:


> I think what I'm saying is that there's a general disconnect in TMAs between how people train and how they actually fight. In training, a TDKist might use things like a deep front stance or reverse punches, but in actual fighting (or sparring) these same practitioners will resort to boxing-style handwork and a kickboxing-style stance and movement. You don't see any of that in judo. So that's my point about a more direct translation into practical application.


In Training, Deep Stances and Reverse Hip Punches are used in Drills to improve Body Mechanics. Then You Train Punching from the Shoulder, in a manner quite similar to Boxing. Youre looking at it as though Reverse Punch is the main rear hand punch, when in fact, its more of a drill for Shoulder Punching. Or as a Knockout Punch.

Hell, even KKW WTF TKD has a Fighting Stance that You just dont see in the Olympics, and that everyone therefore assumes isnt even there because they arent aware of it.



SPX said:


> You see, this is another issue. With the TMAs many practitioners tend to take problem techniques and interpret them in a personal way, rather than their being a universal interpretation. Like yourself, I've heard the "leg strengthening" interpretation, but this is the first I've heard of the "close distance striking in confined space" interpretation. And I've been through a fair number of TKD and Karate schools throughout my life.
> 
> Furthermore, I've also never heard of the reverse punch interpreted specifically as a finishing move. In all the TMA classes that I've been in, it was just the way you're taught to punch.


Unlike Your examples, were getting these interpritations from the Head of the entire Organisation, who was one of the Original Founders of TKD. If an Instructor Misquotes His System, theyre corrected in a very timely manner. This is not My Interpritation. This is how an entire Organisation Trains throughout the Country.

And its unfortunate You didnt learn more about the Idealogy behind Reverse Punches.




*nods*


----------



## dancingalone

SPX said:


> In essence what it tells me is that no one REALLY knows.  If we don't have a historical record that this technique was used in this way, or stances were used in that way, etc. then we really are just theorizing and trying to determine these things just by observing the system, applying logic, and drawing conclusions.



Certainly.  Even the historical information about karate (who taught whom, where things like dan ranks and do-gi came from, etc.) is only verifiable from about the early part of the 1900s or so.  Beyond that it is all oral history if not outright mythology.  As for the technical aspects of what was physically taught... well forget even that as karate was never a homogeneous thing to begin with and there's just not a lot of material written down by its practitioners.

The best we can do is to start recording our own training recollections/methodology down right now as best as we can remember it if this interests us.  It is what it is.  



SPX said:


> The other option is to believe that there is some handful of teachers who have had the "true knowledge of Karate" (or whatever martial art) passed down through an unbroken chain from the founder to instructors who are active today.



That's really not the case either.  Karate only began to be standardized into 'styles' in the last century.  Given that understanding, it would be futile to start with an assumption that there is such a thing as 'true knowledge of karate'.  And true to life, karate is an organic thing.  Knowledge is constantly lost and added with each generation of student as students can never really understand everything to the same extent that their teacher did, and at the same it's entirely possible that a student may surpass their teacher is some fashion or in some facet.  The idea of neatly packaging up everything you know and doling it out to one's students is appealing, but I believe this rarely comes to pass.


----------

