judo for self defense

[BrendanF]

My approach is based on my years of extensive research.

Not the other way around.

Are you sure about that? For someone who claims to have done such research, your views are noticeably off base. How many koryu jujutsu schools are you familiar with?

I am very sceptical of these stories from guys nobody can even ask anymore. But is interpreted by some sort of disciple.

It gets very cult like to be honest.

Again - you know this how?

I'm confused as to how you come to frame the knowledge I referred to above in those terms - what makes you think anyone is talking about 'stories from guys nobody can ask anymore'?

When you learn a BJJ technique, and hear some of the history around it - the famous 'kimura' for example - do you immediately dismiss the technique because you are being told 'stories from guys nobody can even ask anymore'? Or does the historical background simply add some further context and at times technical or tactical information to your understanding of the art?

 

[drop bear]

Are you sure about that? For someone who claims to have done such research, your views are noticeably off base. How many koryu jujutsu schools are you familiar with?



Again - you know this how?

I'm confused as to how you come to frame the knowledge I referred to above in those terms - what makes you think anyone is talking about 'stories from guys nobody can ask anymore'?

When you learn a BJJ technique, and hear some of the history around it - the famous 'kimura' for example - do you immediately dismiss the technique because you are being told 'stories from guys nobody can even ask anymore'? Or does the historical background simply add some further context and at times technical or tactical information to your understanding of the art?

No. I learn a technique from a guy who can do that technique. I have no idea who kimoura was. I just know there are guys who can break my arm with it.

 

[BrendanF]

So to be clear - you have zero experience with koryu jujutsu systems.. and you dismiss them for 'having little practical experience'?

Beyond that, you are willfully ignorant of the history of your own system.. and presume to lecture others.

 

[drop bear]

So to be clear - you have zero experience with koryu jujutsu systems.. and you dismiss them for 'having little practical experience'?

Beyond that, you are willfully ignorant of the history of your own system.. and presume to lecture others.

Yeah. It is a simple logical process.

If someone did have practical experience with koryu jujutsu it would be really easy to demonstrate that. They could just do it to someone.

We wouldnt need all this silliness about how a hundred years ago a guy we have never met in a place we have never seen used a system that nobody can use.

And by the way I think I do have experience with koru jujitsu. We have recently had a guy turn up to our club with I think exactly that resume.

The infamous Zohan.

I did a bit on it.

I will see if I can hunt down his resume.
Here we go.

https://m.facebook.com/groups/203014026473087/permalink/4374289096012205/

Is that one good enough.

 

[caped crusader]

The infamous Zohan.

never heard of him plus when i read Ninja & pressure points i am suspicious. visiting a seminar does not make you an expert.
Have you trained contiuously in this system or just looking at videos with a seminar under your belt?

also suspicious when people talk about having black belts in multiple martial arts.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

So to be clear - you have zero experience with koryu jujutsu systems.. and you dismiss them for 'having little practical experience'?

Pretty much by definition, no one currently practicing or teaching a koryu art has personal practical experience in the real-world application of that art, at least in its original context. Kajiya Takanori has not been in any actual duels to the death using real swords. Ellis Amdur has never assassinated a house guest with a knife while serving him tea*. (At least I certainly hope not! )

This is not to say that individuals involved in these arts may not have practical experience from outside their koryu training. Some have been in real world fights and may even have made pulled off some technique from their koryu repertoire in a modern context. Some have experience in other arts where pressure testing is normal. Some even have subjected their art to pressure testing with sparring, either in-school or against outside practitioners, such as at a Dog Brothers gathering or a HEMA tournament. (I'd have to say that last group is a pretty small percentage of koryu practitioners, though.)

And of course, a higher percentage of the founders of these systems likely had real world practical experience in what they taught, although it is really hard to separate fact from legend and determine what their level of skill and experience would have been or how well they managed to transmit their knowledge to their students or how much functional understanding may have been lost through the generations where those skills weren't applied outside of drills and kata.

*This particular Araki Ryu kata raises all sorts of questions for me. Did an Araki Ryu practitioner actually assassinate a guest under orders of their lord as tradition states? If so, did he practice something like that kata as mental preparation for the deed? If so, did it help him pull off the necessary deception, or did it play out just about like any modern premeditated gangland murder? Were any other Araki Ryu practitioners called upon to perform similar assassinations over the years? If so, did the kata help them pull it off? Or was the whole thing just a psychological conditioning ploy, to get members of the ryu accustomed to the idea that they might have to commit murder on behalf of their feudal lord? What purpose does the kata play for modern practitioners? I've read Amdur Ellis's description of the mindset involved - remaining calm and giving no sense of the intended violence, but does it really work the same way for practitioners who know they will never be required to commit murder? Should it? Sorry ... got sidetracked there. Or maybe not - this sort of application is sometimes brought up to distinguish the context of a historical ryu from a modern competitive art, so it's worth thinking about.

 

[Steve]

So to be clear - you have zero experience with koryu jujutsu systems.. and you dismiss them for 'having little practical experience'?

Beyond that, you are willfully ignorant of the history of your own system.. and presume to lecture others.

If the focus is on observable, measurable skill, then the history is really beside the point. Nice to know, maybe.

If the art has internal integrity, you really don't need to know anything about its history to observe the results. A person doesn't need to know anything about how to cook to judge for themselves whether the gumbo tastes good or not. Because the skill is objectively measurable.

And they don't even need to know the history of Cajun food to learn to cook it. Because the history is irrelevant to the teaching of practical skills.

 

[BrendanF]

Yeah. It is a simple logical process.

If someone did have practical experience with koryu jujutsu it would be really easy to demonstrate that. They could just do it to someone.

And you have zero experience to refute that idea. I for one have practical experience with koryu jujutsu and could 'do it' to you.

We wouldnt need all this silliness about how a hundred years ago a guy we have never met in a place we have never seen used a system that nobody can use.

What are you talking about?

And by the way I think I do have experience with koru jujitsu. We have recently had a guy turn up to our club with I think exactly that resume.

The infamous Zohan.

I did a bit on it.

I will see if I can hunt down his resume.
Here we go.
https://m.facebook.com/groups/203014026473087/permalink/4374289096012205/
Is that one good enough.

No, that one is not good enough. That person has nothing to do with authentic Japanese martial arts.

Maybe you could get in touch with Phil Hinshelwood and tell him that his training is entirely 'theoretical' that 'nobody can use' - he does real Japanese jujutsu, and I think is in your area: Budo Japan Yagyu Shingan ryu

 

[drop bear]

And you have zero experience to refute that idea. I for one have practical experience with koryu jujutsu and could 'do it' to you.



What are you talking about?



No, that one is not good enough. That person has nothing to do with authentic Japanese martial arts.

Maybe you could get in touch with Phil Hinshelwood and tell him that his training is entirely 'theoretical' that 'nobody can use' - he does real Japanese jujutsu: Budo Japan Yagyu Shingan ry

Why is it that nobody can ever just show a real example of their stuff working and instead we have to constantly go down this garden path of people using every trick in the book to justify a system without doing the one honest thing that would justify the system?

Look just find some video of live sparring where anybody uses these ideas you are saying work.

 

[BrendanF]

Why is it that nobody can ever just show a real example of their stuff working

What do you mean 'working'? Why is it that you can't follow a linear conversation? Why did you completely ignore my suggestion that you contact a teacher, who is in your area... and maybe actually gain some experience around something you claim to know about?

Look just find some video of live sparring where anybody uses these ideas you are saying work.

No problem:

And because Tony mentioned him:

 

[BrendanF]

Pretty much by definition, no one currently practicing or teaching a koryu art has personal practical experience in the real-world application of that art, at least in its original context.

That depends. If you define the 'original context' to be completely scenario-specific then I suppose you would be right. I would suggest that claiming the original context is 'assassinating a guest while serving tea' is about as accurate as saying that Karate kata are only effective if one's opponents line up perfectly in order for one to perform the scheduled techniques, as dictated by the kata.

In my koryu training it has always been made clear to me that we learn concepts and principles which may be applicable to certain situations.. but may not. I've not been in any 'duels to the death using real swords', but I have confronted a hatchet wielding home invader with a wooden sword. And I'm sure my koryu training helped me there - despite my opponent not being a 15th century Japanese warrior.

This is not to say that individuals involved in these arts may not have practical experience from outside their koryu training. Some have been in real world fights and may even have made pulled off some technique from their koryu repertoire in a modern context. Some have experience in other arts where pressure testing is normal. Some even have subjected their art to pressure testing with sparring, either in-school or against outside practitioners, such as at a Dog Brothers gathering or a HEMA tournament. (I'd have to say that last group is a pretty small percentage of koryu practitioners, though.)

Again I just don't view things in this way - one should have obtained 'practical experience' from their koryu training. And of course outside the dojo, in addition.

This particular Araki Ryu kata raises all sorts of questions for me. Did an Araki Ryu practitioner actually assassinate a guest under orders of their lord as tradition states? If so, did he practice something like that kata as mental preparation for the deed? If so, did it help him pull off the necessary deception, or did it play out just about like any modern premeditated gangland murder? Were any other Araki Ryu practitioners called upon to perform similar assassinations over the years? If so, did the kata help them pull it off? Or was the whole thing just a psychological conditioning ploy, to get members of the ryu accustomed to the idea that they might have to commit murder on behalf of their feudal lord? What purpose does the kata play for modern practitioners? I've read Amdur Ellis's description of the mindset involved - remaining calm and giving no sense of the intended violence, but does it really work the same way for practitioners who know they will never be required to commit murder? Should it? Sorry ... got sidetracked there. Or maybe not - this sort of application is sometimes brought up to distinguish the context of a historical ryu from a modern competitive art, so it's worth thinking about.

It is an interesting one. I would suggest (if you haven't) you get a copy of Mr Amdur's 'Old School' book, which features a chapter devoted to the origins of Araki ryu - and discusses this kata set in depth. From memory - forgive if I'm off at all - the founder of Araki ryu wrote that he was taught by someone who had obtained an unbelievable amount of power (martially) and then been corrupted by it; he was ordered to kill his best friend. Under a pretext he lured the friend to a suitable spot and murdered him while serving tea/sake. Mr Amdur speculates that the person was Shinmen Munisai - Musashi's father.

I don't believe the kata was practised as preparation - I think it was codified as a lesson. I don't think it is intended to 'teach' someone how to assassinate someone in those specific and somewhat obscure circumstances. I think it is intended to teach a number of things, starting with mindset and running through a number of other things.

Does it work that way for practitioners who know they will never be required to commit murder? Good question - do you think sword training 'works' the same way for people who will never find themselves on a feudal battlefield? I guess I feel like the training was never intended to be a literal analogue, so that question - while relevant - is not necessarily the be-all end-all.

 

[drop bear]

What do you mean 'working'? Why is it that you can't follow a linear conversation? Why did you completely ignore my suggestion that you contact a teacher, who is in your area... and maybe actually gain some experience around something you claim to know about?



No problem:

And because Tony mentioned him:

I don't travel hundreds of kilometres to train with your guy because if the training is anything like the videos I will still walk out without ever knowing if the system works or not. Drills are no real indication. Every thing works in a drill.

Others can go much less distance and work with legitimate guys who can prove their systems work.

And train in a live manner so that I can see if their system works fo me.

 

[BrendanF]

Cool cool cool. Maybe stick to commenting on these modern systems that you 'know work' then, and refrain from talking about things you have zero experience or understanding of.

 

[drop bear]

Cool cool cool. Maybe stick to commenting on these modern systems that you 'know work' then, and refrain from talking about things you have zero experience or understanding of.

But my point is that if you train in the manner that those videos demonstrate. You may never know if your system works. Because you are not testing it properly.

So at least I know what to look out for in a working system even if I don't understand the system itself. And I know what a working system looks like when I see it.

So technically I have more understanding and experience in what you are trying to achieve than someone who is physically training in that style.

 

[BrendanF]

But my point is that if you train in the manner that those videos demonstrate. You may never know if your system works. Because you are not testing it properly.

My point is you have zero knowledge of how those people train. And you have zero understanding of what 'testing it properly' means. As a result you regularly resort to mischaracterisation and assumption.

That's why I suggested someone who I know is legit that you could contact and learn something from - not 'my guy'. But you have said repeatedly that you prefer willful ignorance.

So at least I know what to look out for in a working system even if I don't understand the system itself. And I know what a working system looks like when I see it.

The fact that you actually think you can 'know what to look for in a working system even if I don't understand the system itself' says it all.

technically I have more understanding and experience in what you are trying to achieve than someone who is physically training in that style.

I bet you believe that.

 

[drop bear]

My point is you have zero knowledge of how those people train. And you have zero understanding of what 'testing it properly' means. As a result you regularly resort to mischaracterisation and assumption.

That's why I suggested someone who I know is legit that you could contact and learn something from - not 'my guy'. But you have said repeatedly that you prefer willful ignorance.



The fact that you actually think you can 'know what to look for in a working system even if I don't understand the system itself' says it all.



I bet you believe that.

If you understood the system yourself you would have an opportunity to address any mischaracterisation and assumption.

For some reason you seem to be trying to avoid doing this. You avoid showing your martial arts in a honest fashion.

If you can't be honest or upfront you can't accuse people of being misinformed.

You have consistently shown dead drills as an example of functional martial arts for self defense. And dead drills while being important building blocks for learning martial arts. Are not a good representation for its ability to function in a real situation.

Here is a basic explanation as to what aliveness is. And why it is important for an honest assessment of practical martial arts.

 

[BrendanF]

If you understood the system yourself you would have an opportunity to address any mischaracterisation and assumption.

This has been done in the past; you have ignored it. That's why so many members here have said they ignore your posts.

For some reason you seem to be trying to avoid doing this. You avoid showing your martial arts in a honest fashion.

If you can't be honest or upfront you can't accuse people of being misinformed.

Again, you simply resort to petty name calling. What on earth do you mean?

You have consistently shown dead drills as an example of functional martial arts for self defense. And dead drills while being important building blocks for learning martial arts. Are not a good representation for its ability to function in a real situation.

No I have not. Can you show me a single example of where I have presented dead drills as an example of functional martial arts for self defense?

Here is a basic explanation as to what aliveness is. And why it is important for an honest assessment of practical martial arts.

Hahaha thanks champ. I don't need the Thornton 'aliveness' lesson explained to me; I understand what you are saying. You on the other hand, don't seem to comprehend what you are told. A common trait of the willfully ignorant.

 

[drop bear]

No I have not. Can you show me a single example of where I have presented dead drills as an example of functional martial arts for self defense?

drop bear said:
Look just find some video of live sparring where anybody uses these ideas you are saying work.

No problem:

 

[BrendanF]

As I said, you have a habit of misreading and making false assumptions. Easy to do when you don't care to actually understand or learn anything.

 

[drop bear]

As I said, you have a habit of misreading and making false assumptions. Easy to do when you don't care to actually understand or learn anything.

Ok. So why wouldn't I understand that video?

I mean it isn't exactly uncommon. It was osotogari a wristlock throw and a straight arm bar.

They are techniques done by just about every other martial arts.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=525209585229687