What kicks besides a sidekick...

[Koshiki]

Strange too, since I always think of Naihanchi as being just about the oomphiest series I practice or have seen...

Not my style, per se, but I saw this a while back didn't think it was too bad, in terms of oomph. Passion I can't speak to, but oomph, perhaps...

 

[JowGaWolf]

Strange too, since I always think of Naihanchi as being just about the oomphiest series I practice or have seen...

Not my style, per se, but I saw this a while back didn't think it was too bad, in terms of oomph. Passion I can't speak to, but oomph, perhaps...

At my school the students are always told that our form practice should be able to hurt someone who accidentally gets in the path of the form. If we do the form and it looks like we can just walk into the form without getting hurt them the person that is doing the form isn't doing it with enough power. I would have to say that this guy is one of those who I wouldn't want to accidentally walk into his form. It looks like it would hurt if I did. I also have to say I've never seen anyone drive power from their knees like that, it could be a disadvantage if those movements are "tell-tale signs." But it's definitely the "oomphiest" lol

 

[PhotonGuy]

Hi everyone.
I have a question to ask today.
What kicks can be executed from the front leg.
See picture below.

This is a step behind posture found in nihanchi's movement to the right ( first right side sequence )
View attachment 19576

Reverse roundhouse.

 

[TSDTexan]

Reverse roundhouse.

Do you mean a hook kick?

 

[Koshiki]

Do you mean a hook kick?

I would guess he means what I would call an inverted kick, or inverted round kick. Where, generally speaking, you leg comes up and across the other leg, and kicks laterally out to the side.

If the kick were to head towards the front arc, this cross leg position is a relatively easy place to throw it from.

 

[elder999]

Do you mean a hook kick?

No kick. There is no kick. Look there, at that part of the kata-there is no kick there in the kata, "secret" or otherwise. The "secret"'s in the kata, not something that you have to add to the kata.

Do you mean a hook kick?

 

[Chris Parker]

I'm with Elder in, well, everything he's saying here… TSDTexan, I think the issue here is that you're trying to see something that you've decided should be there, rather than actually looking at what is. You've mentioned your own assumptions (post 10, where you say you think the "hidden" aspect is a kick) and presumptions (post 37, with your "general presumptions" about Okinawan martial arts), and so on… the typical question for your beliefs is, of course, "Why?"

Why do you believe it's a kick? Where have your presumptions come from? From education and teachings of those above you, or from your own thinking? If the former, we can compare and contrast with others lessons… if the latter, cool, but we then shouldn't discount the idea that, well, you might not be on the right track in the first place.

 

[TimoS]

The "secret"'s in the kata, not something that you have to add to the kata.

Exactly. There is actually no need for any "hidden" or "secret" techniques in Naifanchi or just about any other karate kata, for that matter. It's all in the kata

 

[JowGaWolf]

Exactly. There is actually no need for any "hidden" or "secret" techniques in Naifanchi or just about any other karate kata, for that matter. It's all in the kata

I don't know about kata but in kung fu it's possible for one movement to have 5 or 6 different applications in this case the applications that aren't taught are hidden "hidden." Our first combination is taught as a counter to beginners. It consists of 4 movements (2 blocks 2 punches) of the top of my head there are 10 counter applications dealing with the 1st 2 parts. I know of only 5 attacks of the that involve only the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th parts as a combination. The offense portions were never taught to me because my Sifu kept it to himself so you can say that they were "hidden" from me. The only reason I learned about them was because I was digging deeper into the basics and discovered that they weren't so basic.

We also have other techniques that are "hidden" to our opponent. One of our training activities requires us to become comfortable with punches coming in. In order to do this we can only block, remain calm, and take "mental notes" of what is going. During my second session I started to realize that man of our punches and attacks are "hidden" in the technique, meaning at times I literally can't see my opponents hand because it is being hidden by the body or moving outside of my range of vision/ focus. Other times I may not see a technique because my attention and focus is being pulled away from certain locations as a result of being punch or focusing on defending against a punch or a kick. One can say that these "techniques are hidden" to the opponent.

I don't look a my kung fu forms the same now. Students and people may see only one movement for one purposes, but it's much deeper than that and I would think karate would be similar. If you did deeper into the kata you should be able to find deeper meaning and actually better applications of the movement that you are doing.

I'm not saying that your statement is wrong, I'm just sharing my experience with my kung fu forms and thinking that it may be the same with kata.

 

[elder999]

I'm with Elder in, well, everything he's saying here… TSDTexan, I think the issue here is that you're trying to see something that you've decided should be there, rather than actually looking at what is. You've mentioned your own assumptions (post 10, where you say you think the "hidden" aspect is a kick) and presumptions (post 37, with your "general presumptions" about Okinawan martial arts), and so on… the typical question for your beliefs is, of course, "Why?"

Why do you believe it's a kick? Where have your presumptions come from? From education and teachings of those above you, or from your own thinking? If the former, we can compare and contrast with others lessons… if the latter, cool, but we then shouldn't discount the idea that, well, you might not be on the right track in the first place.

That's not to say that you couldn't add some kicks to it-it's an interesting exercise......

....as is practicing it with your back against the wall.....

.....or from in a corner......

or turning each time you cross-step....

or doing all three naihanchi together, one after another, if your style has all three and you've learned them....

or doing all three one after another and turning with each cross step

not that any of that is "secret."

And, as far as that goes, I'm fairly certain that what Motobu said was "hidden," not "invisible, " or "secret," or "unshown." It's hidden, which usually means-when it comes to kata- "in plain sight." It's actually a collection of several grappling applications that are hidden....and, blather about kyokushin and its degeneration due to knockout tournaments (which allow just this sort of throw!) notwithstanding, it's something that's still pretty much taught-as in taught-as in demonstrated, as in shown when the student is ready for it, by a great many teachers........

 

[Tez3]

Wado...only one Naihanchi and definitely no kicks in it hidden or in plain sight.

There is this but do read Iain's comments about it's practicality, as he says it's worth knowing/seeing for the historic value.

Ground-hold following on from Naihanchi / Tekki bunkai (video) | Iain Abernethy

 

[TSDTexan]

Might be due to lacking as a student on my part, but I see little passion, little oomph in any of the videos posted in this thread. (I know, I'm a heathen)

Passion has to be part of an instruction manual?
Since when?

I am curious about when that tradition got started.
Because kata wasnt, for a very long time a performance art... it simply was a repository of knowledge.
When karate was an outlawed thing and folks has to do it with very dim lanterns... in the dark of night.... just a single student and teacher it certainly was not a performance art.

 

[TSDTexan]

I'm with Elder in, well, everything he's saying here… TSDTexan, I think the issue here is that you're trying to see something that you've decided should be there, rather than actually looking at what is. You've mentioned your own assumptions (post 10, where you say you think the "hidden" aspect is a kick) and presumptions (post 37, with your "general presumptions" about Okinawan martial arts), and so on… the typical question for your beliefs is, of course, "Why?"

Why do you believe it's a kick? Where have your presumptions come from? From education and teachings of those above you, or from your own thinking? If the former, we can compare and contrast with others lessons… if the latter, cool, but we then shouldn't discount the idea that, well, you might not be on the right track in the first place.

Chris.
In answer to your question. Chosei Motobu said there was a kick there. Per Choki's instruction.
Then because I have such a bread crumb... I start to explore and experiment with the kata.

And then, I also ask people, such as friends through email, on the tekephone, through skype and even on martial arts forums such as this one.

Turning over stones, looking for an answer to a question that was raised by a comment by Chosei Motobu. Why do I... think it is a kick... cause Chosei said it is a kick.

As for your thinking that I am trying to read something into the kata of my own imagination. . . Your exact words:

TSDTexan, I think the issue here is that you're trying to see something that you've decided should be there, rather than actually looking at what is.


Would you be so kind as to do us a favor...
and please actually read for content because you clearly missed where I had said Chosei said it was a kick. & When discussing what others are trying to see... refrain from guessing about motivation, which you clearly admit too.

I am a kata investigator, not a kata invention-injection-interpretation.
I am going to borrow two words from another field of study.
Exegesis and Eisegesis.

I believe in exegesis of kata.
I shun eisegesis of kata.

Question: "What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis?"

Answer: Exegesis and eisegesis are two conflicting approaches in the study of texts.

Exegesis is the exposition or explanation of a text based on a careful, objective analysis. The word exegesis literally means “to lead out of.” That means that the interpreter is led to his conclusions by following the text.

The opposite approach to textual study is eisegesis, which is the interpretation of a passage based on a subjective, non-analytical reading. The word eisegesis literally means “to lead into,” which means the interpreter injects his own ideas into the text, making it mean whatever he wants.

Obviously, only exegesis does justice to the text.

Eisegesis is a mishandling of the text and often leads to a misinterpretation. Exegesis is concerned with discovering the true meaning of the text, respecting its grammar, syntax, and historical and cultural setting.

Eisegesis is concerned only with making a point, even at the expense of the meaning of words.


So I am personally reticent to dogmatically declare anything about kata. I am far more likely to cite an authority who has spoken about kata.

As I have done with Chosei and the hidden leg kick (actually several kicks in naihanchi shodan)

I spend a lot of time reasearching two specific oma kata.
They are my area of focus.
Sanchin and Nafanchi.
So anytime someone like Chosei speaks up and says Choki said "xyz134" about this step of this kata my ears perk up.

 

[elder999]

Chris.
In answer to your question. Chosei Motobu said there was a kick there. Per Choki's instruction.
Then because I have such a bread crumb... I start to explore and experiment with the kata.

And then, I also ask people, such as friends through email, on the tekephone, through skype and even on martial arts forums such as this one.

Turning over stones, looking for an answer to a question that was raised by a comment by Chosei Motobu. Why do I... think it is a kick... cause Chosei said it is a kick.

As for your thinking that I am trying to read something into the kata of my own imagination. . . Your exact words:

TSDTexan, I think the issue here is that you're trying to see something that you've decided should be there, rather than actually looking at what is.


Would you be so kind as to do us a favor...
and please actually read for content because you clearly missed where I had said Chosei said it was a kick. & When discussing what others are trying to see... refrain from guessing about motivation, which you clearly admit too.

And again, missing a smiley-this time the one that raises the "B.S." flag.....

Show us directly where "Chosei Motobu said it was a kick."

As for what you said directly

The reason I ask is Chosei Motobu said there is a hidden technique. Here, and I think its a kick.

Dude. Seriously?

 

[TSDTexan]

And again, missing a smiley-this time the one that raises the "B.S." flag.....

Show us directly where "Chosei Motobu said it was a kick."

As for what you said directly



Dude. Seriously?

I expressed myself poorly in the oldest post.
It should have been.
Its a hidden technique, and I think chosei said it is a kick.

But I expressed myself poorly. And it looks like "I think it is a kick" is all I was going on there. (Which was not the case) I had seen a kick but didn't get a good view because of the camera angles and my three year old demanding my attention while the wife was cooking dinner.

Also the camera was shooting video from a stationary frame, and they did not perform the same bunkai facing the other direction so you could see the other side of the body.

So I had a very brief view of a kick.

This oldest post was generated after a brief flyover viewing of the dvd with family interuptions.

I was intrigued by the kick being taught right there in a kata with no explicit kicks.

So I started asking questions and experimenting.

Perhaps, Elder...you missed where....

Later in the thread (on october 12th), I said that I grabbed my pen and notebook, and rewatched the video taking notes....that ChoseI actually covered the kick.

Here is a quote from that October 12th post:
I saw what I missed the first time.
Chosei does a bunkai and the kick is a front snap kick from the right leg and it is a left leg step over/in front of the person.


And now I will be even more to the point
And with the sound turned on (which wasnt the case the first time I saw the kick) you can hear the English translation of the narator.

 

[elder999]

I expressed myself poorly in the oldest post.
It should have been.
Its a hidden technique, and I think chosei said it is a kick.

But I expressed myself poorly. And it looks like "I think it is a kick" is all I was going on there. (Which was not the case) I had seen a kick but didn't get a good view because of the camera angles and my three year old demanding my attention while the wife was cooking dinner.

Also the camera was shooting video from a stationary frame, and they did not perform the same bunkai facing the other direction so you could see the other side of the body.

So I had a very brief view of a kick.

This oldest post was generated after a brief flyover viewing of the dvd with family interuptions.

I was intrigued by the kick being taught right there in a kata with no explicit kicks.

So I started asking questions and experimenting.

Perhaps, Elder...you missed where....

Later in the thread (on october 12th), I said that I grabbed my pen and notebook, and rewatched the video taking notes....that ChoseI actually covered the kick.

Here is a quote from that October 12th post:
I saw what I missed the first time.
Chosei does a bunkai and the kick is a front snap kick from the right leg and it is a left leg step over/in front of the person.


And now I will be even more to the point
And with the sound turned on (which wasnt the case the first time) you can hear the English translation of the narator.

The kick is added then-an option-it is not part of the kata. It is not hidden in the kata. It is not an interpretation of the kata. It is an application-a derivation-of what can be done from a certain position. One could as easily say that another punch was available from that position-or what options might be available if one were armed with a knife or stick from that position....

 

[Koshiki]

I fall in the camp of: all the movements are in the form, anything "hidden" is just an application of those same motions, no added technique, kick or otherwise, is needed.

However, TSDTexan wants, whatever his reasoning, to experiment with kicks here. Fine. Let's tackle it from that aspect.

Personally I don't add any kicks in my Naihanchi practice. (Not to say the legwork isn't aggressive, but that's a different story!)
But, if were going to explore how sprinkling some kicks in can function with TSDTexan's applications, I do really think we need a clearer idea of what exactly his applications are.

If, TSDTexan, you're largely viewing this as ranged striking, your applicable kicks and targets are different than if you're viewing it as closer trapping, which is different again from if you're viewing this as largely grappling...

Right now though, I don't think anyone really understands what sort of "stuff" you're trying to pull out of the form. I mean, for my own part, there are very few applications that I personally practice that seem like they lend themselves to any sort of snap front kick at this point. Which makes me wonder what I'm missing from your interpretation.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I mean, for my own part, there are very few applications that I personally practice that seem like they lend themselves to any sort of snap front kick at this point

The easiest way to find out would be to actually test it. Do the cross stance in front of someone in a fighting stance. You'll know which ones aren't the best choice of attack right away. Anything that feels off balance or feels as if the person standing in front of you is going to knock your head off, throw you to the ground, or kick your ribs are most likely not the "secret / hidden" technique that follows. The OP can try this from various ranges to see what works.

 

[Koshiki]

The easiest way to find out would be to actually test it. Do the cross stance in front of someone in a fighting stance. You'll know which ones aren't the best choice of attack right away.

Except that we're talking not just about kicks from this stance, but specifically kicks from this stance at this specific point in the kata Naihanchi Shodan. Depending on what the practitioner is doing at that point in their interpretation, the kicks that can be added will vary greatly, strategically.

Since I don't think any of us know what exactly Texan is trying to get out of the movements, it's hard to say what kind of kick can be just added in, and goes far beyond which kicks can be comfortably thrown with good balance from a certain stance.

 

[elder999]

Except that we're talking not just about kicks from this stance, but specifically kicks from this stance at this specific point in the kata Naihanchi Shodan. Depending on what the practitioner is doing at that point in their interpretation, the kicks that can be added will vary greatly, strategically.

Since I don't think any of us know what exactly Texan is trying to get out of the movements, it's hard to say what kind of kick can be just added in, and goes far beyond which kicks can be comfortably thrown with good balance from a certain stance.

Which kind of gets back to my original question, which one should always try to be conscious of when internalizing kata.