Soft parrying type of karate

[repz]

What karate styles parry and deflect as opposed to forcefully blocking an incoming attack?

I tried looking for what each karate style offers, but all I found was a wikepedia link with only a little bit of info.

I have seen Goju Ryu parrying in circular motions, as well as Shorin Ryu and Uechi Ryu, but how much of their defense is made of of soft parries?

I take shotokan, but I was always a parrying kind of guy, especially since I enjoyed Wing Chun's defense when I trained in it.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

What karate styles parry and deflect as opposed to forcefully blocking an incoming attack?

I tried looking for what each karate style offers, but all I found was a wikepedia link with only a little bit of info.

I have seen Goju Ryu parrying in circular motions, as well as Shorin Ryu and Uechi Ryu, but how much of their defense is made of of soft parries?

I take shotokan, but I was always a parrying kind of guy, especially since I enjoyed Wing Chun's defense when I trained in it.

Isshin-Ryu is based on Goju-Ryu and Shorin-Ryu and uses both hard and soft techniques. Goju-Ryu means, as I understand it, 'hard soft'.

I think both hard and soft techniques have their place and time.

 

[Gary Crawford]

I think most styles do it,especially the more experienced practitioners.

 

[harlan]

Might even depend on the school's training paradigm. I've heard that some Goju basically teach mostly 'hard', and beginners are taught to 'block hard'. On the other hand, some Goju lines teach 'soft parrying', slipping and following the attack.

 

[seasoned]

Might even depend on the school's training paradigm. I've heard that some Goju basically teach mostly 'hard', and beginners are taught to 'block hard'. On the other hand, some Goju lines teach 'soft parrying', slipping and following the attack.

What you are describing is GoJu as it was meant to be. GoJu, hard/soft starts out very hard and progressively blends the two concepts together. In order to achieve the two concepts together, hard/soft, takes much dedication. The end result is a truly unique art that blends the best of both worlds. Most blocks in the higher ranks are redirects and parries.:asian:

 

[72ronin]

Its there in Shotokan aswell, just not taught that way for some time.
Emphasis is on hard blocks initialy in 5 step then 3 step sparring,

Later on we get to use the chambering of the blocks as parries in one step and free sparring etc

Like the upper block, that hand that shoots out first can be a parry or even capture, then the block itself can be a strike, or break at captured arm.

Same with knifehand gaurding block, outer, inner etc.

A freestyle Karate i did when i was younger only had open hand parries and no hard blocks, only used boxing stance etc. I prefer trad arts much more, its ALL there even something like Shotokan.

 

[K-man]

What karate styles parry and deflect as opposed to forcefully blocking an incoming attack?

I take shotokan, but I was always a parrying kind of guy, especially since I enjoyed Wing Chun's defense when I trained in it.

There are some of us who would maintain that there are no 'blocks' in karate and that even the parries can be aimed at particular targets.
You have mentioned Wong Chun as if it is 'soft'. When we look at the origin of karate it too has its roots back in China. Why would things have changed so radically? Hard blocks make no sense to me at all. :asian:

 

[Grenadier]

Even the "hard" styles, such as Shotokan, teach deflection, rather than absorption.

For example, if you look at the standard high block that everyone should have already practiced to death, there's a subtle rotation of the forearm, inside to out, that is performed as the forearm is being elevated. As a result, the goal is to knock the attacker's limb away, rather than to absorb all of the kinetic energy of the attack.

The same can be said about any other block performed in Shotokan, be it open handed or closed handed, that the goal should be to deflect it away, with minimal impact to one's own arms. Thus, you're already doing "soft" blocks as it is. As you become more advanced, you'll be relying more on the body's shifting to position the arm in the most ideal position (more of avoidance), and less of using the arm itself.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Hard blocks make no sense to me at all. :asian:

Hard blocks have their place too, in my opinion. When properly applied, a hard block can damage an attacker's limb to the point where they cannot use it again in the fight. My sensei teaches us that we should generally respond to hard with soft, and to soft with hard. If an attacker throws a weak punch, a hard block into it will devastate the limb, done correctly. A parry would work as well, but then the attacker could continue to use it, and perhaps more effectively.

 

[repz]

Yes, I am aware that shotokan does have some softiness at some level. I have learned palm strike parries for example. I just wanted a side by side comparison of karate styles. I have seen videos of a heavy influence of chinese kung fu like parries, and even some training that seem similar to kung fu and then another clip where I see no such thing from the same style (and yes, I am well aware of chinese origins in karate) and there doesnt seem to be much of a comparison between styles.

 

[TimoS]

there doesnt seem to be much of a comparison between styles.

That's because there are so many styles and even within any particular style, one instructor may emphasize something totally different than another, making such comparisons waste of time and effort.

 

[MilkManX]

Both Enshin and Ashihara Karate use more of a soft parry since you move to your opponents "blind" spot while countering.

See examples of it here.

 

[K-man]

Hard blocks have their place too, in my opinion. When properly applied, a hard block can damage an attacker's limb to the point where they cannot use it again in the fight. My sensei teaches us that we should generally respond to hard with soft, and to soft with hard. If an attacker throws a weak punch, a hard block into it will devastate the limb, done correctly. A parry would work as well, but then the attacker could continue to use it, and perhaps more effectively.

Agreed. But, I would call it a forearm strike rather than a block.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Agreed. But, I would call it a forearm strike rather than a block.

We're taught that a block is a strike and a strike is a block, so I certainly take your point. However, when we engage in that sort of thing, we do call it a 'bang block' or a 'hard block', so I guess it's all down to whatever your tradition calls it. It's certainly a 'counter' since it would be of no use if launched against empty air. The opponent has to strike first to use it.

 

[repz]

In that case I would refer to organisations. Usually organizations have a syllabus, for example the SKIF, JKA, and have testing procedures for ranking. Yes, I do know many sensei's add some new material regardless of associations, but they are usually told to follow the outline of the organisation if they are to continue membership and get their students promoted under their org., so I dont see how it would be impossible to chart the differences in styles when it comes to the main ones under their respective orgs.

With the whole block is a strike deal, I can only say a typical block can be a elbow/shoulder lock. The outside and inside forearm block can break a two lapel hold and set up an arm lock on the way coming inside easily without much modification. Others have said they can be arm breaks, imagine grabbing a hand and performing a low block (strike) to the elbow.

 

[seasoned]

In that case I would refer to organizations. Usually organizations have a syllabus, for example the SKIF, JKA, and have testing procedures for ranking. Yes, I do know many sense's add some new material regardless of associations, but they are usually told to follow the outline of the organization if they are to continue membership and get their students promoted under their org., so I dont see how it would be impossible to chart the differences in styles when it comes to the main ones under their respective orgs.

With the whole block is a strike deal, I can only say a typical block can be a elbow/shoulder lock. The outside and inside forearm block can break a two lapel hold and set up an arm lock on the way coming inside easily without much modification. Others have said they can be arm breaks, imagine grabbing a hand and performing a low block (strike) to the elbow.

Yes, I could agree that with the absents of a grab that soft parrying is a good option. In doing this it leads to soft parry hard strike. Once you have been grabbed it is a little different in that the closed block are now strikes.

 

[matrixman]

Actually, not to stir the pot, but there are no soft blocks in karate, and if there are, then it is not karate. Karate is based upon movements outward from the tan tien, once the blocks come back towards the person they are no longer karate. Orig poster is very astute, the differences between karate and wing chun define the differences between arts, and once you mix things up, you get much, or unresolved training methods. I know there will be people who hold other opinion, but if you define the arts in such simple manner as I have done here, they become incredibly easy and quick to learn. It is only when they are mushed that they become difficult. Have a great work out. Al

 

[TimoS]

Actually, not to stir the pot, but there are no soft blocks in karate, and if there are, then it is not karate. Karate is based upon movements outward from the tan tien, once the blocks come back towards the person they are no longer karate

Not quite sure what you're saying. IF I understood you correctly, what you're saying is that in karate all the moves should be directed away from you and not towards yourself? If so, then I guess I can agree with that up to a point.

 

[punisher73]

There are some of us who would maintain that there are no 'blocks' in karate and that even the parries can be aimed at particular targets.
You have mentioned Wong Chun as if it is 'soft'. When we look at the origin of karate it too has its roots back in China. Why would things have changed so radically? Hard blocks make no sense to me at all. :asian:

There are some softer styles of gung fu, and there are harder styles of kung fu. There are MANY kung fu styles that do forearm conditioning drills with a partner to harden them for blocking and striking. The arts after they went to Okinawa continued this tradition.

Saying there are "no blocks" in karate is a semantics game. It implies that EVERY time you see a block in a form, it is a joint lock etc. That can be a use, but many times you are also striking into the person's arm to inflict damage and by some definitions that would be a "block". So you could say that while there are no blocks, there are still blocking concepts using the same movements.

 

[punisher73]

Actually, not to stir the pot, but there are no soft blocks in karate, and if there are, then it is not karate. Karate is based upon movements outward from the tan tien, once the blocks come back towards the person they are no longer karate. Orig poster is very astute, the differences between karate and wing chun define the differences between arts, and once you mix things up, you get much, or unresolved training methods. I know there will be people who hold other opinion, but if you define the arts in such simple manner as I have done here, they become incredibly easy and quick to learn. It is only when they are mushed that they become difficult. Have a great work out. Al

Need you to further define what you mean by no "soft blocks" in karate. If you mean that all blocking motions are done as a strike, and that all softer motions when done are parries and not blocks. Than you might make that case by how you define your terms. BUT, if you mean that there are no soft redirectional movements at all in karate, I would disagree. There are MANY found in a traditional Goju-Ryu curriculum that hasn't changed to a "modern approach".

I would also agree that if you are trying to apply WC's centerline concept for attacking and defending and not moving your arms off of that line, and you try to apply it to karate styles and how they attack/defend, than you are going to cause confusion because they are different methods that are not wholly interchangeable.