Sounds like a good plan Ed, I shall try and remember and run through the matsubayashi kata to remind me of it.

A good place to start,

Just got to see the clips. Dang Ed! what that bag ever do to you!?

In your concentrated attempt to keep the arms 'loose' and let your legs, hips and core do the work (a shared principle with western boxing), i noticed that your wrist locked into alignment at the very last moment.

Q1. Having practiced this way for some time, did you come to feel that the extra point of 'whip' in the wrist added significant power to the strike, or did the safer option of maintaining punch alignment at the wrist, whilst still working on the basic concept of the power generation net good results for you also?

Q2. having practiced this for some time, how did it translate into use against a moving partner? ie, if they came into close range did you incur any injuries through impact during last moment transition into wrist alignment?

thanks Cord. I think just the general sense of being loose until impact is style independant.

your second question...my personal feeling is whip action and hip gymnastics is for longer range. for close-range, core rotation (hips moving with arms) is much faster and gives for better mechanical advantage when both arms are simultaneously active with a resisting opponent...maybe slightly less power - not sure, but it's worth the speed and tactical gain. some disagree, but I assume they've studied matsubayashi longer.

one really cool thing with MB's whip strike, is how they use it to 'slip the punch'....maybe someone can explain it.

didn't make the vids yet. In the meantime, have a look at these...the contrast is basically what we have talked about -

keep in mind, these are training kata. full of stylistic movements in order to concentrate on disciplining the particular body mechanics for that style.

Goju - Gekisai Dai Ichi
http://www.spokanekarate.com/kata

Matsubayashi - Fukyugata Ni
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q79Yo7mSyZo

Differences:
* hourglass vs natural stance/stepping. straight stepping must be swifter, but believe me, cresent stepping has alot more utility.

* Matsubayashi whips the hips whereas Goju tends to rotate it's core. (but Goju does use like whipping usually during turning throws as in Aikido - similarly, Shorin systems do seem to have core rotation as well, assuming when the application calls for it).

* Goju tends to plant a split second before a strike. MB seems to stop it's forward momentum with the front foot right at the end of a strike.
note: when hitting a bag, I notice the Goju method stayed the same - yet in the MB method, in order to conteract the recoil, I had to tighten slightly with the rear leg.

in other words, the mechanics changed when hitting something other than air using the MB natural stance. whereas the Goju mechanics didn't change. thought that was an interesting find.

I have to conclude that just by looking at these most basic methods in either style and trying to extract tactics, I come up with the following:
1. Range optimization. Shorin seems optimized for 1 arm length away. Goju seems optimized for closer. (that doesn't mean ineffective in the other range...it just means optimized for a particular range - and at this particular stage of learning: beginner).

2. The speed/stability tradeoff...can't get something for nothing. If you are a bit further away, you have a need for more agility and speed...particularly lower body.

3. I noted the differences in the stress of training drills as well. Goju tends to do more strength building exercises (heavier on the hojo undo-weight training)...whereas Shorin seemed to focus on speed and stepping drills more than mass building.

No doubt that as a student progresses in either style, the range proficiency evens out, and in fact, some Shorin styles begin with naihanchi...which definitely contains close fighting principles. so thats interesting because then it seems it just becomes a preference or rather, a question for the instructor..."what range do you want students to start in?". If my theory holds, then it would also make sense for the people starting with naihanchi to be heavier with the weight training, initially.

If you tend to have new students with grappling experience - formally or informally as part of kid culture perhaps, then close-in would be the best place to start. If you tend to get boxers or fist-fighters as new students, then starting at that range would make sense....or so I'm thinking.

reportedly, Okinawans grew up with wrestling as part of it's schoolyard culture...whereas in the west, boxing/fist fighting is the cultures roughhouse of choice. It may be a culture decision to decide what range to start in. I don't know, I'm just suppossing.

keep in mind a couple things (eg:disclaimer), the particular MB club I was with didn't do very much impact training - I did that on my own. so what I found might not hold true for ALL matsubayashi. plus, as I mentioned and can't stress enough, I was only studying MB for a single year.

Thats pretty much all I have on the subject...I'm interested in hearing your comments/arguments/disagreements etc.

for lazy people that skip to the end, a summary : What I found as the only main beginner's difference between Goju and Matsubayashi were: range optimization.

Ed, I will say this one last time. Matsubayashi IS for inclose fighting. I mean I should know what you had for lunch fighting! Secondly, in Matsubayashi if you want to get strong you lift weights. Third, there is no change in the techniques to strike something, if you know what you are doing. You must do impact training from day one to develop your atemi waza. The problem is people who don't understand Matsubayashi try to create the "snap" or whipping power artificially, meaning on the air. This is good for movie sound effects, but not real fighting. The snap from the whipping power comes from correct technique and power generation which is effective when actually hitting something. Actually this reminds me of a story about Chotoku Omine who was sent by Nagamine to replace Ueshiro in the US. Some old school guys and him were training back in the late sevenites/early sixties and a goju guy was there. He was performing Sanchin and Omine asked him why he performed the kata the way he did. The Goju guy said so he would not get hurt and could receive a technique when someone hit him. Omine said okay you do that and I'll hit you. Well the Goju guy had seen the way Omine trained and said no. Shorin lacking power, only if you ain't doin it right.

maybe you misunderstood or just scanned too fast. no art can teach it all in one year...right? do we agree on that? everyone has to start somewhere.

MB STARTS with stepping that is quick and agile. Goju STARTS stepping with notions of rooting and circular.

(did you read the word: STARTS? that means in the one year I was there, those were the differences I noticed)

doesn't mean thats all there is...of course both have answers for close and arm length range.

I think I mentioned on every post that I was only there a year.

did I mention I was there for 1 year? lol

also, you missed the point of the entire exercise. maybe you are reading it as a threat to your system...as if I'm saying goju is superior. I'm not. nor do I care of antedotal stories that X Goju guy vs. Y Shorin guy.

I was trying to be a little more sophisticated than that, by saying MAYBE:
1. the 2 systems have the most difference in philosophy when training STARTS (kyu ranks). as in non-advanced training.
2. MAYBE those differences are according to priority of range.

thats it. nothing more profound or intimidating than that.

Well, Ed it depends on who you are teaching. I think I said earlier that I would have trained you differently from your Matsubayashi teachers did. Since you were already a yudansha in goju karate you would be on my excelerated program. You would start with the first two kata to learn basics. Now, what you would learn here would be the same as newbies. You would learn to punch and kick. You would learn to defend against striking attacks at all three levels, high, medium, and low. You would learn to counter attack off of those defenses. You would learn hard blocking and parries. You would learn basic unbalaning and takedowns. You would learn elbow destructions with simultaneous parrying with the guard hand. You would learn how to close the distance and penetrate through covering and striking your way in. These are all skills learned in the first two kata which cover the first three months. Now this is not a kinderkarate program or one with people who have zero coordination and don't know their left from their right. This is for people who came to learn the real deal. Now if I was teaching someone who was already a legit yudansha in karate I would skip pinan kata and naihanchi (for now) and go to ananku and wankan. I personally think this is the reason Ueshiro made his kata because his first students were fighters and already had both power and good footwork (which is what is learned in pinan kata and naihanchi the first time around.) Ananku teaches using body weight to greatly increase striking power and wankan teaches fighting combinations combined with inclose clinching techniques/striking techniques. This would cover the first 9 months. Then we would go back to the pinan kata to teach some principles of kusanku which are contained in pinan kata and the 45 stepping to get inside at the right angle. We would probably work Pinan shodan for the last three months of the first year. Now a beginner would work the first 5 pinan in that first year to develop coordination as well as the 45 stepping. The beginner should be able to step in at 45 and counter attack and take their opponent down. However, would not be skilled enough for a lot of the clinching, hand fighting, and inclose grappling that is involved in the first year. However, they are taught to deflect and control incoming techniques to get them out of the way for and inclose strike and takedown. However, on a more skilled opponent you need to learn the underhooks, over hooks, body locks, joint locks, chokes, and head tie ups used in close. I personally don't like teaching people those things until they have passable striking skills combined with good footwork to control their distance and enter without getting knocked out.

Ed,

I think you have hit the nail on the head (im sure we have discsssed this before).

The 2 arts 'start' from a differnt perspective and ultimatly lead to the same place (functional non 'styalistic' karate).

I guess different roads up the same mountain is wholey accurate and reasonable to assume.

Of course when one trys to 'qualify' those different technical places the whole subject of individuals expierience, different dojos training methods and reasons for training come into play - nothing is 'totally' right, there is always the exception.

One mans Matsubayashi is definatly different to anothers, the same for Goju.

my thought process is that yep this is good and fine, but lets step back from the 'defensive position' (ie it is not a mine is bette rthna yours conversation) and open our minds a little, by seeing the different approaches we strengthen our core system messages and begin to understand another way of moving/doing things..........

Forget modern 'systems' and go back to when there were only 2 methods (IMO), shorin and shorei - LOL, and IMO Crane and Tiger...........with Dragon coming over time.

sounds good. so you'd teach punching range before grappling range in the first year....which is reasonable. and if someone had previous grappling, it may make sense to start with naihanchi for them...ie: principals of rooting and core rotation.

Ed,

May I ask a noobie question about Goju? I mean this exactly as I stated and mean to imply nothing by the asking, but how on earth is power generated? In MB, koshi is everything and without it, there is no power generation other than the muscular kind (i.e "pushing" the punch).
To me (no experience other than MB) it seemed "stiff". Perhaps you could explain so I can understand because "rotating the core" didn't really help me "get it".

Thanks.