Like a few others who have commented on this most lenghty of threads, I too am a student of Phan Ku Ryu.
Cool, good to have you aboard.
I was amused by the fact that even after another website did a favorable review of our style, many were still not satisfied. The other website was childishly disparaged and what it claimed about our roots were still held in doubt by some.
Well, the concerns were not overtly about the effectiveness of the system itself, they were more that the origin story seemed to have more than a few holes in it, including the unusual name, and a number of aspects that don't gel with anyone that knows about Japanese culture. You may notice that when Naosuke put down which site had a good review, it was censored on our site here. The reason is that that particular site tends to lead to rather too many headaches, including legal threats and so forth, so that tends to have us not really take it as definitive.
Yes, the Colonel studied under Masato and a Japanese POW.
If he did study under Masato, the timing would indicate the term "judo" rather than "jujutsu", and it would seem highly unlikely that a Japanese POW would teach one of his captors. To the Japanese way of thinking being captured is the greatest humiliation that they can suffer, so they expect to be treated incredibly badly (which also explains their treatment of POW soldiers under the Japanese), and would not be wanting to "help" the enemy. There's more, but I think the general idea is there. This claim isn't impossible, but it is incredibly unlikely. Would there be any evidence that can be presented, photos, documentation etc?
I also couldn't believe that 4 of the pages of this thread were arguing over a "u" vs. an "i". Really?
Er, yes. Really. Arnisador asked about "jitsu" versus "jutsu" back in 2002, was told the correct pronunciation, and has argued it since then. Don't really know why....
Chris Parker, you did make a great comment though regarding one of the other Phan Ku student's posts. The guy took the time to post an answer to the original question, and he was blown off as unreliable by elder999. ???
Well, in Elders defence, Naosuke came on, made two posts, and then never returned to answer any questions that he said he was here to clear up. His entire history on this site consists of those two posts on this thread, leaving after I posted a responce. So if Elder was going to "blow him off as unreliable", this could be one reason. But that's a supposition on my part, really. I just didn't think Naosuke had given us enough to know if he was reliable or not yet, and it seems like he never will. Pity.
How do I know that anything elder999 says is reliable on this site?? He posts a lot? No, I just trust that he would take the time to come on this site to provide reliable info.
We have features such as the "rep" system (reputation, the little green [or sometimes red] dots), as well as the "Thanks" system. So while not perfect, you can get a sense of how members are thought of here, and an unknown quantity (including yourself at this point) is just that: unknown. But an established member, whether you know them or not, is known.
But so you know, in cases such as this it is not uncommon for individuals to sign up under a variety of names to post positive reviews/comments giving the impression of a number of people. This has extended up the instructors/heads of systems, as well as devotees of certain less-than-credible groups and teachers. So until Naosuke became a known quantity, he would be subject to this very scrutiny. This is the same for everyone here, by the way, unless you already had an established reputation from another site or otherwise.
All that aside, yes, the Colonel gave us an unusual name, but who the heck cares!
Well, the aspect of caring is less than recognising the message that such a name gives. On one hand we are presented with a man who is US Military, studied a Japanese system (Judo), ostensibly learnt another system (also Japanese), and then gave his expression of this a name which is Chinese (Phan Ku) combined with Japanese terminology (Ryu, Jujutsu). That is typically an indication of less-than-legitimate systems as there is nothing in the given history that explains this name.
To give you an idea, it's like claiming you learnt under the great French chefs, then naming your "French"-style restaurant Le Pizza Shoppe. Not somewhere I would expect to get great French cuisine.
I invite any of one of you internet grand masters who come from styles that have the correct letter in the name of their style, and whose styles were reviewed favorably by the correct website, to stop by the Corpus Christi school (Asian Academy of Martial Arts, Sunrise Mall, second floor), and step out onto the mat with John, Paul, or Merell. (the other students who have posted on this thread are from Mike's school across the bay)
Friendly word here: This could be taken as a challenge. Such things are not kindly looked on. Just so you know.
Really, the tone here has gotten a little aggressive, and you seem to be missing the point. The issue was never "is Phan Ku Ryu an effective system?", it was more asking about the legitimacy of the history. I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find that your technical side of things is good (particularly if it is based on older Judo training forms, which is looking more and more like the case), but that doesn't explain the odd name and certain gaps in the story.
Names and lineage aside, the proof is in the pudding. This is a serious invitation. Please introduce yourself. No ill will here. I would like to meet you. Perhaps you'll kick our *** and this debate will be settled once and for all.
These short, choppy sentences actually say there is ill will here, or at least aggression (most likely at an assumed slight or offence), just so you know. Again, you are still an unknown quantity here, you my be one of the most knowledgable people on this board, but we don't know that yet. As we continue, we will learn more about you, and you will learn about us, and hopefully you will see that such a tact is not necessary, nor indeed well advised, or even realistic (I live in Melbourne, Australia, so I'm hardly likely to take up your "invitation", such as it is).
I never quite get why people get all bent out of shape when their history is called into question like this, and they always resort to "Well, it works, and if you don't believe that, come and try us, see if you can beat us!". That really isn't the issue here at all. I might turn up and beat everyone you have there, it doesn't prove or disprove the history issues. I might turn up and get beaten by everyone there, it doesn't prove or disprove the history issues. And hiding behind "The Col. was a 3 War Veteran" really isn't a defence, as that is completely removed from the issue (I know that wasn't you, but it has come up in this thread). The implication is "well, I respect him, therefore I believe what he tells me, so you should too", when there have been many veterans (and claimed "veterans") who have been less-than-factual in their claims.
But to be completely accurate here, non-legit systems can be highly effective, and a range of traditional systems can be far less practical, particularly in this day and age, so to say that the "proof is in the pudding" and that someone kicking someones *** will settle any debate is missing the issue itself. All that shows is the technical side of the system, not anything to do with legitimacy issues.
Thank you for your time.
Thanks for joining in.
