the quote was what was written on the amazon site in it's entirity. you are trying to confuse issues by splitting hairs, and to tell you the truth...I could care less.

what do you even call a martial art without martial connection?

Farcial Arts?


back to kodo ryu...ok so kodoryu is a system based upon 3 or 4 okinawan kata which are performed either with sai or pushing hands to help you learn how to arrest people.

....thats it?

Sho

Mines on order--should take a few more weeks.

But if the folks that actually have copies would start posting direct stuff--would speed things up.

Well, what a warm welcome.

Time to connect to the forum is not the issue here, Ed.
And no, I didn't say that I started teaching ko-do years before it was invented. That would not be possible.
I started teaching ZSD, which in turn became ko-do ryu.

Claw positions referred to are the ones seen in Rokushu and Uechi Sanchin. I can't talk about other kata which I don't study.
The Uechi fist where the little finger and the index are raised pertains to a sai hand form WITHOUT the sai in our opinion.
If you think it is for heel-palm strikes or the such, that is fine with me. I can respect that but will not be teaching it as such.
By the way, if anyone has photos of Uechi Kanbun performing Uechi Sanchin with sai, I would be most pleased to see it.

'Archeology' is just a way of talking about the sai/kobudo section of our style. Its research into Uechi Sanchin and Seisan ( the first and advanced sai manipulation kata in OUR style). It's a bit like a history course. We are not teaching people to arm themselves with sai and go out attacking people. Sai need a context; this would be China in the past (and Okinawa by extension) at a time where weapons were banned by the authorities and so kobudo kata were almost outlawed. Those who continued to practise them had to do so without the weapons.

To use a sai you need an opponent who is armed with a bo or a sword (to be used by both hands). Their choice of weapon reduces their freedom/possibilities of attacks and so the sai is more adapted to civil arrest techniques than another sword or the such. We are also talking about a certain mindframe at the time where civil arrest techniques were favoured over barbaric attacks. This does not mean that people didn't clobber each other or bite, or kick or maim etc. It's just that noble gentry, who might be trained in kobudo as they would be able to obtain metal weapons (as opposed to farm tools like a bo/staff for the poorer masses)probably had a higher position in society and could not beat up people officially.Like an olden day police force with jitte.

The sai were taught, WE believe, to stop a swordman or bo-weilder before they started swinging widely.
We do not believe that two sai could stop a sworsdman in full flow. The idea was to anticipate and disarm him before he started the momentum to cut the "sai-man" to death.
In the same way that naihanchin is useful for stopping someone before they get too balistic. In the same way that the police should arrest someone with wrist locks and not just beat the life out of them.

However, we do not practise grappling (and certainly not sai work) with a view to fighting. We don't teach self -defence (although our techniques do have a practical basis).
We enjoy using these kata in our pushing hands format.

Goju Ryu has named sanchin and rokushu as the two jewels in their crown and we also acknowledge their fundamental position. Goju Ryu kakie and our pushing hands have similarities. Chinese tui shou shares similar traits to both these styles.
Therefore, we must ALL be on the same lines and heading in the right direction.

Nathan is not selling the "truth".
The fact that the book is on the market and is not available on PDF is not something to explain. Yes, you have to buy it unless someone lends you a copy. That is how books are circulated. But, there are no secrets. Get a copy somehow and read it. Watch the dvd and then see what you think. If you don't like it, fine. Don't do what it suggests.
I imagine that most people on this forum own karate manuals from other teachers. Were you bitter to pay so much for them? Or do you retain something frothese books which helps you to train well and enjoy your style?

And yes, it seems to outsiders that Nathan has made a huge change from Zen to Ko-do books but it's not so shocking. The grappling kata are just as before.The intention in using them is still just as "zen" as before. The pushing hands format used in ZSD is the same as now in Ko-do.

All Nathan has put forward is that certain kata were for weapons, and in particular Uechi Sanchin and Seisan. They do not work with other weapons instead. Try Sanchin with a nunchaku or a sword. Try to explain the advanced techniques of Seisan with a tonfa in your hand. It doesn't work. Body mechanics seem to be the indicator here. Not Nathan.

And they say here that "seuls les imbecils ne changent pas d'avis", meaning that "only fools never change opinions".
Nathan had to swallow his pride when he published the last book. He knew he was flying in the face of his own work and contradicting his own findings. He says that Barefoot zen was the culmination of his findings then. Things have changed and he's the first to admit it.

Once people thought that the world was flat and at the centre of the universe but now we accept other ideas.
Maybe if you read more about The Great Karate Myth you might also agree with Nathan, or it may help you to feel more secure about your own style.

Gaug

"only fools never change opinions"

holding your ground on that position are you?


"Some build castles in the sky And some go and live in them."

hope the next theory is better researched than this one....or at least better defended.

gang

So your a uechi-ka then?

Thus qualified to speak on exactly "what" a given hand formation is "for" in your specifc Uechi tradition?

Are you getting the point here---you issued a statment of FACT earilier--no "if's "and" or "other" qualifiers.
You stated a titular "fact" when no such facts as supported.

That may be your intepretation---but a fact it is not.

In term of 'stopping a sword weilder" do you train with the sword?
I ask because if that is what your claiming the sai to be defending against---it would be rather nice to know exactly how extensive your sword training might be and from what ryu.

It also begs the question, givent he manner of handleing the sai and its range, if one can "anticipate" a sword or bo BEFORE it gets into play---then why the need for a sai at all??

If the logic is based around "atticipation" then one would presueme that one could use feet/hands far faster than one could draw and or use their own weapon--thus its use in that regard would seem rather pointless.

2nd-why bother with a sai at all?

2-A--A single tiened jutte would be easier to make/balance, and its actually USED vs the sword in some schools.
Its also generally smaller, thus "faster" and thus more easy to used to "anticipate" a strike.

2-B, a smaller, more easily concealed weapon would work just as well if one suppsositon is that "anticpation" is the "key" here.

Sorry, but the logic is faulty, "anticipation" as a stratgy/tactic simply does not require the use of a sai.
In fact, its can be rather strongly shown that such a idea is NOT all that likley.

No, just becausue YOU claim to be going the "right" direction because you "borrow" some kata and principles from goju does not automatically mean that you are.
Goju may well be heading in the right direction--you riding its coattails in terms of claims does NOT automatically follow.

AGAIN, one of my main problems here is that a concise, well spread body of sai kata ALREADY exsisted, and was easily available for study, thus there is no need what-so-ever to add MORE kata of dubious conjecture to the mix.

In effect you wish people to belive that rather than walk down the street to sensai A--who is DIRECTLY teaching "sai vs bo" etc kata and bunkai with the real weapons--INSTEAD they DON'T practice the weapons at all--and just go thu highly changed motions WITHOUT actually training with the weapons actual weight and handleing.

Not bloodly likely

If nothing else, not actually using the weapons to train would make it VERY hard to effectivly use them when the time came---you kinda need to get used to the weight and how to use them.

A much better explaination is that the 'empty hand" kata can be pressed into serve with weapon training--much the same way I can pull up stumps using my car.

Not what I bought it for, not what its generally used for, but it CAN be used for such--if "better" equipment is not avaialble.

That is "at best."

Our grappling studies are based on three Chinese kata; Sanchin, Rokushu and Naihanchin.
If you only practise these kata without a pushing hands format they lose any adaptability.That is why Nathan, aided by his club members, developed a pushing hands format based on previous tui shou.
If not we would have been obliged to just practise for example the six wrist escapes in Rokushu in a two-man preempted drill.
Now we can push hands and add our applications from Sanchin, Rokushu and Naihanchin giving a more practical emphasis.

The kobudo section is a bolt-on as said. It is less practical by its weapons nature. But it can be perfomed in a "zen" way with the same degree of civility and with the same mindset as our pushing hands. However it involves a more choreographed backdrop because weapons are more harmful if used badly. And for this reason we practise drills in a less freestyle way.

gang

Wow, so I CAN'T "adapt" a technique I learned in naihanchi, unless I filter it thu push hands work???

Really?

Wow and to think I was waseting all that time working my techniques on the heavy bag.

Oh, you still have a whole bunch of stuff to address from my previous post---just a reminder.

No I am not from uechi ryu. You can see that from my profile.

But you needn't be from one school to see how to use their kata. The kata are universal. I just cannot believe that fingers jabs and open hand fighting techniques work with this kata, as is often taught here. The range is wrong, the trajectory is wrong in MY opnion.
However, someone armed with a bo has a distant to respect in order to manoevre properly. This distance can then be closed down. And that is what Open-hand sanchin teaches for us. As does Seisan.

What do you use these kata for? I would very much like to see other possiblities. For fighting in a bar? For blocking a slow punch?

When we train with sai we have to use a bokken or a bo. Otherwise how can we practise? The sai is redundant without an attacker who is armed. That's the point.
Any kata supposes an opponent or a training partner. Otherwise why develop a "fighting/grappling" kata if you have no-one to work with?
So yes, we use bokken or a bo, and carefully.

I DO agree that a jutte is a good option; the form of both the sai and jutte are similar. As is a butterfly sword from Wing Chun.
Whether a jutte would be faster depends on the athletic prowess of the weilder.

And anticipation of an attack before the swordsman draws his weapon would not require sai. If he has empty hands then you could grapple him as I said.
The sai or jutte would only be useful when the sword was drawn. And before it started swinging.

Now, can you tell me of any kata taught for fighting where the students are not anticipating an attack? Surely all kata in modern karate explain this.
Teachers spend hours developing applications for fighting in bars, in the street etc. using traditional kata. I name Naihanchin as a one-man-versus-several as a prime candidate from the Shotokan school. Teachers would have you believe that this kata explains how to fight lots of people at once (and in a paddy field or on a cliff edge - that is very precise anticipation); in fact how to anticipate certain moves from multiple attackers in a pre-ordained order. Surely that is very exagerrated.

you don't need a pushing hands format to adapt your naihanchin if you are using it for grappling. But it would help.
How do you use your naihanchin if it's not based on some pushing hands contact?

no-one is borrwing kata. They do not belong to one school or another. We are not into lineage and my master was Bruce lee neighbour.The kata is the master or the school. Not the political choices or kata taste of previous masters.
Certain masters favoured one kata over another and so chose to only study them and drop other kata.

Certain schools have chosen certain kata.
We have chosen three and have studied them extensively. Shotokan chose Tekki but doesn't perform Tensho. Goju doesn't do Tekki. Wado does Niahanchin higher up. These are choices from teachers before.

We just feel that our three kata sit nicely together as they share fundamental common positions and history. Look at the body mechanics.