M
Mike Clarke
Guest
Michael,
I take it that's a yes then?
Mike.
I take it that's a yes then?
Mike.
Shorin and Goju.
- Thread starter arnisador
- Start date
G
GojuBujin
Guest
Osu,
I'll be emailing the address to you in the next few days. Thanks!
Michael C. Byrd
http://www.inigmasoft.com/goyukai
I'll be emailing the address to you in the next few days. Thanks!
Michael C. Byrd
http://www.inigmasoft.com/goyukai
M
Mike Clarke
Guest
"No worries"!
D
Dave Fulton
Guest
Hello Mr. Byrd,
Please give my regards to Sensei Hobbs. He was my sensei (gave me my dan grades in Shorin-ryu and Goju-ryu). I lost track of him several years ago. I would be interested in corresponding with him via e-mail, if he is also interested. Please let me know.
Best regards,
Dave Fulton
G
GojuBujin
Guest
Osu,
Please email me [email protected] and i will be more than happy to give you Sensei Hobbs Email Address
Michael C. Byrd
http://www.inigmasoft.com/goyukai
Please email me [email protected] and i will be more than happy to give you Sensei Hobbs Email Address
Michael C. Byrd
http://www.inigmasoft.com/goyukai
S
SRyuFighter
Guest
I take Seibukan Shorinryu Karate. And it is a pretty hard style. There is very little softness involved.
R
RyuShiKan
Guest
You do some of the same kata we do and they have "softness" in them.
S
SRyuFighter
Guest
That's true but my point was that it's not like Tai Chi or Aikido.
R
RyuShiKan
Guest
The actual kata might not be performed like Tai Chi or Aikido however the “tuite” within the kata are performed in a “similar” manner to Aikido and some of the advanced level body movements and strikes are almost identical to TaiChi.
C
chufeng
Guest
RyuShiKan's point is that you need to stop looking for differences...start looking for similarities and apply those things that are common.
I've seen tons of Aikido in many of the forms I practice (Chinese forms)...
I've seen Naihanchi Shodan movements (and movements from many Okinawan and Japanese karate systems) in our forms, as well...
Many of the movements in forms look like (whatever) but are really (something else)...vary the distance and relationship to your uke and SEE what is right in front of you.
The more you train and compare, the more you will see how much ALIKE the systems are...the real difference is in the training and in the teaching...those who DON'T understand pass on bad information...but it is still there, in your forms, in your drills...just look for it.
:asian:
chufeng
R
RyuShiKan
Guest
Kind of like "omote" and "ura".....................
S
SRyuFighter
Guest
I know that martial arts are related and have similarities. I don't even know how that came into play here. All that I said was that my style of Karate is more of a hard than a soft style. I'm not trying to classify anything it just simply is what it is.
C
chufeng
Guest
But, just perhaps, you aren't seeing the soft in the hard...the internal in the external...if you always view your art as a "hard" art, you will miss some very important lessons. Just trying to help.
:asian:
chufeng
:asian:
chufeng
S
SRyuFighter
Guest
I am seeing the soft in the hard. It's just not always there. There is not an extravagant amount of soft is all that I'm saying.
R
RyuShiKan
Guest
I guess it depends on how people define “soft” and “hard”.
If people are talking about hard = stiff like the JKA/JKF type karate I would say I do a soft style.
If people think of soft like some sort Chi Kung looking art I would say I do a “hard” style.
Some of the techniques involved with our kata (Naihanchi, Kusanku, Passai, Seisan etc..) have what would appear to be soft looking techniques but in reality hurt like bloody hell.
Soft doesnÂ’t equal weak
If people are talking about hard = stiff like the JKA/JKF type karate I would say I do a soft style.
If people think of soft like some sort Chi Kung looking art I would say I do a “hard” style.
Some of the techniques involved with our kata (Naihanchi, Kusanku, Passai, Seisan etc..) have what would appear to be soft looking techniques but in reality hurt like bloody hell.
Soft doesnÂ’t equal weak
M
Mike Clarke
Guest
It's never been clear to me why people refer to their karate as 'hard' or 'soft' ?
Karate as I understand it has both elements at work and the balance shifts depanding on the problem you're trying to solve by the attack that's comming at you. A bit harder here, a little softer there. Above all I think the aim is to balance both these elements in such a way as to 'blend' with the attacker.
A lot easier said than done I know. Never the less, such an approach will mean effective technique once the strength of youth has passed.
Karate really is without styles. They exist more for marketing than anything else as far as I'm concerned. If you have a good understanding of ANY form of legitimate karate, then you will have a good grasp of ANY style.
Sure some groups make more of a point on particular things, but this does not mean those things are not found in other types of karate. For example, throwing is not obvious in karate kata, but there are many types of throw and take-downs in karate kata.
This does not make karate into judo or jujitsu. There are may strikes and kicks in aikido, but this does not make it karate.
Different paths, same mountain. I think it's a mistake to limit ones thinking in to styles. If they [styles] have any value then it is only as fingers pointing to the moon.
What was it Bruce said in Enter the Dragon, oh yeh,
"Don't look at the finger, or you'll miss the moon in all it's hevenly glory."
Well something like that anyway.
Mike.
Karate as I understand it has both elements at work and the balance shifts depanding on the problem you're trying to solve by the attack that's comming at you. A bit harder here, a little softer there. Above all I think the aim is to balance both these elements in such a way as to 'blend' with the attacker.
A lot easier said than done I know. Never the less, such an approach will mean effective technique once the strength of youth has passed.
Karate really is without styles. They exist more for marketing than anything else as far as I'm concerned. If you have a good understanding of ANY form of legitimate karate, then you will have a good grasp of ANY style.
Sure some groups make more of a point on particular things, but this does not mean those things are not found in other types of karate. For example, throwing is not obvious in karate kata, but there are many types of throw and take-downs in karate kata.
This does not make karate into judo or jujitsu. There are may strikes and kicks in aikido, but this does not make it karate.
Different paths, same mountain. I think it's a mistake to limit ones thinking in to styles. If they [styles] have any value then it is only as fingers pointing to the moon.
What was it Bruce said in Enter the Dragon, oh yeh,
"Don't look at the finger, or you'll miss the moon in all it's hevenly glory."
Well something like that anyway.
Mike.
S
SRyuFighter
Guest
Good post Mike Clarke. Exactly what I was trying to say.
Sensei Manny
White Belt
Thank you Chiduce for sticking to the facts. I've heard it before that we need to have a line drawn as to what is imagination and what are the facts. "Guilty", I too have a tendancy for rambling personnal belief and / or opinions into the huge digest of martial arts (karate-do).
Imagination or fact, but I have always been of the belief that back in the day, many (most) of the founding Masters trained and shared in a respectful friendship, their learned fighting / self defense systems and / or styles.
Dare I say, no matter what the name of the style is, we all share a common philosophy; Martial Philosophy would be an interesting topic.
The uniqueness of GoJu is sometimes misunderstood. Where it starts out hard from Sanchin, it more then redeems itself with Tensho kata. Most karate-ka never fully understand how the GoJu, “hard/soft relate, and so miss the greatness of the art. :asian:
