what if there is no evidence that S. Nagamine actually wrote anything about Tegumi?
He doesn't mention tegumi his whole life, then after his death in 2000, suddenly we see a chapter devoted to it? I'm thinking: show me the 1986 Japanese version of the book first before I unconditionally believe that one.

The timing of GJJ/BJJ. The timing of an admittedly resurected and defunct term of a dead practice in order to name compiled grappling drills. The timing of Nagamine suddenly having alot to say on the subject of tegumi, after his death. The need for Karateka to have history as oppossed to crosstraining.

Tegumi: the term and Nagamine's words, were raised from the dead to first create a 'movement' then create a product which was popular for the grappling times, while at the same time making it palateable for the traditionalists by not calling it crosstraining and instead establishing it's history thru (perhaps) liberal translation of Nagamine's estate. Then all the subsequent unchallenged references to the book, branching out from there.

A couple things about us Karateka: we like to believe at one time, 'it was all there'. That way we can keep pride with the newcomers on the block like MMA's. heck back when Judo was popular, it sounds like Karateka were crosstraining that as well. Now we are comfortable with saying the sportive judo throws 'were always there'. not quite. Some throws similar to Judo's illegal throws can be found in kata. but the tactic is quite different - it's not who falls first, but who falls hardest. When's the last time you saw a Judoka purposely train aiming a throw so the opponent slams into a wall upside down on their neck? before that, Te crosstrained with CMA's.

Thats what karate has been, an ever-changing, ever-crosstrained art... based on the contemporary trends and needs at the time. Which again is great, but just don't try to sell me that a Karate version of GJJ is an ancient lost secret Ryukyuan Art. sounds rediculously dumb. If it was 'always there' then it was never lost...if it was 'secret' then it wouldn't be a DVD on amazon.com for $49.95.


hasn't karate as an Art grown up enough and comfortable enough with itself that it's practitioners can say without shyness that they crosstrain in a grappling Art like JJ without having to feel the need to cover it with a historical term? alternatively, why wouldn't people feel just as comfortable NOT including groundfighting if they choose a different strategy for the Art's interpretation?

The irony of the position is people developing the most modern systems of Karate today via crosstraining, while trying to use the oldest sounding names and establishing links to the past in hopes of veiling the direct links to the present influences. enough is enough.

am I delusional? am I outta-line?

See Matt, that's just it. You are assuming that the study of karate did not include grappling skills. Does karate include weight lifting, Nagamine's does. I think the problem is most people just don't believe that karate includes things they were not specifically taught by their instructors.

Ed, the fact remains that I saw the grappling applicatons in kata when I was 14 in 1990 and used them as well. I'm sorry I wasn't old enough to write a book about it and I'm also sorry that MMA in the US just happened to begin right when the internet blew up. I wonder if the internet was around long before MMA if this information would have gottten out sooner rather than later. However, these are all things I can't do anything about. So either you found out the greatest con of okinawa and uncovered a secret plot developed by Patrick McCarthy and every other okinawan karateka who 20-35 years before the first UFC got joint locked and choked out in a small dojo in okinawa with no fan fare, no cameras, and no pay-per-view or you might actually be wrong and something exists in the world of karate that you and your instructors never knew. It, however, is interesting that it seems no one believes that old style karate had many supplementary exercises both formal and informal which directly related to one's ability to apply techniques from kata and kihon.

Med though you made a solid point that it did exist. What some may remember is your reference that YOUR system has the secret techniques taught by the few and taught to the fewer, in refernce to grappling.

Only to find that you have cross trained to mend the missing fence poles like everyone else. And though Nagamine had knowledge of grappling as did most Karate founders he didn't include it in his teachning. If so you wouldn't not have had to use your college wrestling skills to mend fence holes in his system.

I admit that I Xtrained in wrestling, Judo, Silat, Jujitsu and a little Aikido to mend my missing gaps, but me doing that didn't make your Karate any less or mines. I think this is were we differ, you use to spout this. I can't find your exact post stating that, but I'm sure the Engineer can.

Matt, did you not read my post regarding an assertion in Nagamine's book Tales of Okinawa's Great Masters that Te, the precursor to karate was a combination of tegumi grappling, striking, and kicking? So there is evidence published by one of the most famous okinawan karate researchers that grappling and karate did not develop independently. Maybe that means nothing for AKK, but it means alot for Matsubayashi.

Med, did you not read Ed Morris' post here:

Quote:

---

what if there is no evidence that S. Nagamine actually wrote anything about Tegumi?
He doesn't mention tegumi his whole life, then after his death in 2000, suddenly we see a chapter devoted to it? I'm thinking: show me the 1986 Japanese version of the book first before I unconditionally believe that one.

---

One source does not always a history make, in any case.

Read it, I know the history. In Matsubayashi that is 50% of the history. Nagamine wrote two books.