# Multiple Attackers in Kata.



## arnisador (Dec 5, 2002)

The bunkai that I have seen have (has? is bunkai singular or plural?) overwhelmingly been against a single attacker, very often starting from a grab of some sort. Yet, being attacked by several people at once is so very common--shouldn't that be well-represented in kata also? Perhaps it is and I haven't seen such applications.

The kata presumably evolved from the Chinese forms through people trying to defend themselves--what were the typical attacks at the time? I would expect more defenses against weapons and groups but I see mostly the residue of the older native Okinawan grappling techniques. There are some defenses against staves perhaps but I haven't seen much else. The one-shot, one-kill philosophy seems to be how multiple attackers are handled.


----------



## c2kenpo (Dec 5, 2002)

> _Originally posted by arnisador _
> 
> *The bunkai that I have seen have (has? is bunkai singular or plural?) overwhelmingly been against a single attacker, very often starting from a grab of some sort. Yet, being attacked by several people at once is so very common--shouldn't that be well-represented in kata also? Perhaps it is and I haven't seen such applications.
> 
> The kata presumably evolved from the Chinese forms through people trying to defend themselves--what were the typical attacks at the time? I would expect more defenses against weapons and groups but I see mostly the residue of the older native Okinawan grappling techniques. There are some defenses against staves perhaps but I haven't seen much else. The one-shot, one-kill philosophy seems to be how multiple attackers are handled. *



Arnis,

In kenpo the katas or forms actually begin to deal with multiple attackers from the beggining. 

Short Form 1 deals with changing angles to deal with a different attacker from the 12:00 to 9:00 to 3:00 to 6:00 and back to 12:00 positions just blocking and staying neutral. 

Long 1 takes the same principle but then block then strike and stepping into attackers this time.

Short 2 then adds the other 4 clock positions...etc.etc..

Long 2 etc..etc..

Currently I am beggining to work Short 3 which deal with multiple attackers from different angles and different attacks with inserts and grafting to techniques so the form really does look like you are dealing with mulitple attackers.

I'm sure there has to be other katas, etc, that deal with multiple attackers I would love to see them myself.

Expand, Enunciate, Enlighten.
Dave


----------



## Little_Shoto (Dec 6, 2002)

As my name implies ...I've been practicing Shotokan for a few months.

From the start, our kata's are vs. multiple attackers. Taikyoko Shodan consists of down blocks and reverse punches to the north, south, east and west. Heinan Shodan does the same, but incorporates rising blocks and back hand knife blocks. 

I am currently working on Heinan Nidan and it incorporates all of the above, along with spear strike, double arm inside-outside blocks, and back kicks.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Dec 6, 2002)

The kata in the system I study uses the multiple attacker and single attacker both in the forms that are taught after the first year.  I know of one that comes to mind where you are fighting/defending against  attackers on both sides and one in the front  in one sequence of the form.  Not all of them are that involved , however it occures once in a while.
Shadow:asian:


----------



## sammy3170 (Dec 20, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Little_Shoto _
> *As my name implies ...I've been practicing Shotokan for a few months.
> 
> From the start, our kata's are vs. multiple attackers. Taikyoko Shodan consists of down blocks and reverse punches to the north, south, east and west. Heinan Shodan does the same, but incorporates rising blocks and back hand knife blocks.
> ...



I am not going to get into a long discussion about this but I can tell you the Taikyoku katas are NOT against multiple attackers. Now I'm not going to speak for some higher level katas because I am not 100% sure (pretty sure).  Funakoshi was a Ryukyu Kempo practitioner who created Shotokan to teach in the school system of Japan to improve the fitness (not self defence) of the students. His son had a bad attitude and as a consequence he didn't teach him any kata bunkai so he had to make it up.   I really don't want to get into this.  Just enjoy your training and look into the bunkai a little further (Dillman is a good starting point).   
Cheers
Sammy


----------



## Mads Nørby (Dec 20, 2002)

The techniquies/Bunkais within the kata´s often start of against a single grab og attack. But wouldn´t you try to finish the one guy of first and maybe just step out of the line of fire from the second guys attack. Trying to positioning one attacker in the line of fire of the other adversarys.

I can find numerous examples on this within the katas i pratice.


Basically i think it depends on the way you interpret your kata. The way i see it, kata is not a recipie on a certain series of attacks. first i finish of him - then i turn and finish of him - and soforth - get real !

To me the katas is a catalog of techniquies and concepts - then it´s up to you how you apply them.

Further more i distinct between to ways of studying the core of the kata´s.

We have bunkai jutsu and then we have Oyo jutsu

Bunkai jutsu is the appliance of the techniquies within the kata just as we see them - the basic way of doing them. If the techniquie goes 1-2-3 we do it in these steps.

To further advance with techniquies and concepts we do Oyo jutsu - using one techniquie/concept against numerous attacks.

e.g. gedan barai (low block) could be a release from a grip, a lock, a strangulation, and so on.

The techniquie doesn´t nessecarily goe 1-2-3, but maybe 2-1-3. Taking advantage of reverse motion and soforth. Further more we put them in to motion through sensitivity drills (Tegumi waza).


It is up to you what you find within the kata - it´s all there. One of the reasons why people always don´t see it on first hand could be their lack of knowlegde of the different techniquiespectre.

If you don´t know about locking techniguies - it is pretty hard to locate locks in the katas repetoire. The same goes with strangulation techniquies, multiple attacks, etc.


----------



## chufeng (Dec 20, 2002)

Nice post Mr. Norby,

It's nice to see the true intent of kata is still alive and well in some areas.

:asian:
chufeng


----------



## RyuShiKan (Dec 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by sammy3170 _
> *.......  Funakoshi was a Ryukyu Kempo practitioner who created Shotokan to teach in the school system of Japan to improve the fitness (not self defence) of the students. *



Actually no.
Itosu, Funakoshi's teacher, was one of the first people to develop karate to be taught in schools.......Funakoshi never taught Karate while he was employed as a school teacher and did not develop Shotokan. Funakoshi's students named the building where they trained "Shoto" after the name Funakoshi used to sign his calligraphy work with. So Shotokan means "House of Shoto"...........





> _Originally posted by sammy3170 _
> *....... His son had a bad attitude and as a consequence he didn't teach him any kata bunkai so he had to make it up.  *



Again....this is incorrect.
Funakoshi's son did NOT have a bad attitude and was very well respected, however he died at an early age due to TB.
Funakoshi's students chose not to teach "bunkai" because it didn't fit into the more popular sporting aspects.





> _Originally posted by sammy3170 _
> *.......  Just enjoy your training and look into the bunkai a little further (Dillman is a good starting point).
> *




Again....this is incorrect. 
Dillman would be one of the worst places to start. His ideas are a joke (no touch KO's.......paaaaalease) and his technique is poor.
There are plenty of other teachers that have far more and better knowledge than Dillman.


----------



## RyuShiKan (Dec 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mads Nørby _
> *
> 
> Further more i distinct between to ways of studying the core of the kata´s.
> ...




"Bunkai" is actually a verb in Japanese that has been misinterpreted in the West and used as a noun.
The word "bunkai" means "to break down or break apart" or "dissect". 
Justsu means "art".
"dissecting art"............"the art of dissection".......????
Therefore there is no such thing as "Bunkai Jutsu"




> _Originally posted by Mads Nørby _
> *Bunkai jutsu is the appliance of the techniquies within the kata just as we see them - the basic way of doing them.
> *



This is actually called "omote" type waza (waza= technique) and not "Bunkai Jutsu".
The deeper understanding of technique or "secret stuff" are known as the "ura" type waza.


----------



## Mads Nørby (Dec 21, 2002)

Regarding the term Bunkai Jutsu.

I am not a professor in the japanese semanitics and language constructions.

But doesn´t it depent on how the characters is written and read ?

If it´s true it doesn´t cover the concept i´m talking about - howcome the Okinawan masters as well as many other instructors use it ? - don´t they know their own language ?


If the word "bunkai" means "to break down or break apart" or "dissect" 
Justsu means "art".

When you take out a passage from a kata what do you do then -don´t you break (or if you like "dissect") down the kata ?

The art of breaking the series/katas into small concepts/techniquies, with the purpose of learning the student how to apply them effectively with power, focus and timing.

I heard it freqently during my visit to Okinawa.

Maybe the Okinawan Hogen accent and chinese terms could have some influence on it ?

Some claim it was that it was Kai Sensei who first introduced the term Bunkai in his first book on Goju ryu.


Even though i used the "wrong" term, i hope everybody get the picture. 


" It is not a crime for a Child to be afraid of the Dark.
The greatest crime is when Men are afraid of the Light! "  

Plato


----------



## Matt Stone (Dec 21, 2002)

Mr. Norby - 

While I think everyone here understood what your intention was insofar as what the message was you were trying to communicate, RyuShiKan was simply trying to correct your incorrect usage of Japanese.

RyuShiKan has been living in Japan for the last 14 years, and is fluent in Japanese (as well as having a good command of Hogen from what I understand; perhaps he could clarify).

I would suggest you simply take the correction for what it was, rather than try to maintain that the incorrect usage should be satisfactory since others use it incorrectly.

It is also possible that the Okinawans you allege use the words incorrectly were simply "playing to the crowd," and using terms (incorrect though they may be) that were understood by the audience.  In the time I lived in Japan, I found I was using a number of terms incorrectly, but my Japanese friends, rather than embarass me and correct me, allowed me to continue using them incorrectly since they knew what I meant anyway...

Regardless of the terms you use, you seem to be in a very good school with very good training going on.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:


----------



## RyuShiKan (Dec 21, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Mads Nørby _
> *   Regarding the term Bunkai Jutsu.
> 
> If it´s true it doesn´t cover the concept i´m talking about - howcome the Okinawan masters as well as many other instructors use it ? - don´t they know their own language ?*



My own teacher uses the word "bunkai" as do other Okinawans, but not in the manner you were referring to.
They use it as a verb to describe the process of analyzing kata and not as a type of technique or art.
The terms you were describing are called "omote" and "ura"..................literally  "front" & "back".
Omote being the more obvious techniques and Ura being the less obvious and often higher level techniques.



> _Originally posted by Mads Nørby _
> *
> Some claim it was that it was Kai Sensei who first introduced the term Bunkai in his first book on Goju ryu.*



I couldn't say who was the "first' person to use it but I know the term has been around before people started writing books about the subject.


----------



## Mads Nørby (Dec 22, 2002)

Don´t get me wrong - i´m not trying to start a "war" and show disrespect to anybody.

I´m not trying to withhold a wrong term I am only giving it the benefit of the doubt. 

Actually i keep a very open mind to elements in the MA, it´s the only way you can broaden your mind and be progressive in order to continue the personal development in the arts.

The first priority for me is that i understand the movements and how to apply them effectly. Then some of the terms might bring me a better understanding of why it was constructed this way.

Thanks for the corretions Ryushikan.


----------



## sammy3170 (Dec 22, 2002)

> _Originally posted by RyuShiKan _
> *Actually no.
> Itosu, Funakoshi's teacher, was one of the first people to develop karate to be taught in schools.......Funakoshi never taught Karate while he was employed as a school teacher and did not develop Shotokan. Funakoshi's students named the building where they trained "Shoto" after the name Funakoshi used to sign his calligraphy work with. So Shotokan means "House of Shoto"...........
> 
> ...



Depending on where you are it may be difficult to find a good teacher of kata bunkai.  George Dillman has released many videos which may at least provide a starting point.   As for the other stuff I guess I was miss informed but hey thats life. You live and learn.

Cheers
Sammy


----------



## Shuri-te (Jun 21, 2003)

I know this is an old thread, but thought I would add some thoughts. There are several issues. As a caveat, I speak with some knowledge of Okinawan kata, but cannot extrapolate to Kempo or Chinese arts. 

First, your effectiveness against multiple attackers will be significantly related to how quickly you can dispose of the initial attackers. The longer it takes to stop the first one, the greater the risk that attacker 2 or 3 can launch a successful attack, especially from your blind side. Also as your "engagement" with attacker A drags on, the risk also goes up that two simultaneous attacks will occur, which puts you at really great risk, especially if one is an attack to your legs with a one or two legged takedown.

So if your can't stop the first attacker in a reasonably short period of time (or at all), then the whole issue of multiple attackers kind of becomes moot.

My biggest concern with the vast amount of bunkai I have seen in a variety of karate systems is that it would not be effective against a large attacker. I will get on my soapbox here. A surprising amount of bunkai isn't just "not good". It's bad. Bad fighting principles are used. 

I have trained in systems that practice great ideas in non-kata related self-defense. They get off the line, use multiple counters, often to the neck, there is good body mechanics to maximize power, and many combinations include takedowns. Just plain good fighting. But then they do their bunkai. They don't get off the line. Blocks are used in ways that they would likely not work well. And so many of these defenses launch a single counterstrike to the solar plexus. 

I call this single strike defense the "arrogance of karate." I have had the good fortune to have had exposure to lots of different systems (Chinese, FMA, MT, JKD, Kempo) and this principle isn't found elsewhere. Why? IMO, against a large attacker, this is a good way to get really hurt. Arnisador, in the opening of this thread, mentions the one shot-one kill approach, but against a larger attacker, there is just an unbelievable amount of risk with that approach. Especially because the target of choice is most often the solar plexus, something that is really hard to hit on a large fast-moving attacker. If you miss, which is likely, you hit the upper ribcage, sternum, pectorals or abdominals. These are not exactly vital targets. In reality, these are just about the worst targets to choose on a large attacker.  

So you have to start with meaningful interpretations. Let's assume we have them. We have multi-counter combinations that are designed to really stop a big guy. 

Regarding Okinawan kata, there are lots of techniques that help against multiple attackers, but I will discuss two general principles that are based on the footwork of common turns in the kata of Shuri te and Naha te. When turning in Naha te (Goju) kata, it is common for the front right foot to step across the back left foot to turn 180 degrees. This movement gets you off the line of an attack from the rear. If you can't see the attack, but you have an idea it is coming, you need to take a guess at what it might be and how you might respond. I would argue that a right strike (probably one with some arc.) has the highest probability. So by stepping with your right foot, off to your left, you are stepping off the line and away from a right strike you assume, but can't see.  

Also, by pivoting counterclockwise, you set up combinations where you block with your left and strike with your right, all on the counterclockwise turn. You bring good body mechanics to both the block and the strike. (Assuming they are near simultaneous, as they probably should be.) And if you are right-handed, you might like this setup of your right hand to be used for the counterstrike.

Let's compare these Naha turns to those found in Shuri te (Shorin Ryu) kata. Here the turns are commonly done with the back foot, and some of these turns go up to 270 degrees with a counterclockwise spin. This wonderfully complements the Naha approach.  The turns become throws and takedowns, which are commonly done with big spins requiring the backfoot to step. Now you can use these takedowns to insert wounded attacker A in the path of attacker B. 

Think of a fight as a game of chess or pool. For those of you with  skill in either of these, you know that you don't make moves or shots in isolation. Moves and shots are taken to establish good position. They set up further moves and shots. The same can be said of these movements in kata. One might choose technique A because it puts an attacker from one's right, over to one's left. If there are  two attackers, that would be a good option for an attack coming from the right. Or if there is someone behind you where he can't be seen, then you might choose a technique where the takedown puts the attacker 180 degrees to the rear.

But here we are getting into the realm of true mastery of kata. We need to be able to add a new dimension to our choice of defensive combination. You still have the usual considerations. (what is the attack?, how big is he?, how skilled?, what's open?, etc.) But now you add to that what the next risk is. (e.g. of the three attackers, after the first, which guy is bigger, more aggressive, or can't be seen.)

There are plenty of other ideas on this concept of multiple attacker defense that I can share if there is interest.


----------

