I certainly did not intend this Ďstudyí to be a complete answer, but one has to investigate the toolbox before one can pick the appropriate tool. No where would I assume a Seito trained person would just be sticking the arm out to work on. This investigation is just to look at some of the potential ways that can be used to work on that arm attack, if the appropriate entry is devised.

And I realize thereís much more than striking involved. For example if one was just trying to strike me, Iíd be just as likely just kick into their opposite hip to stop them from a greater range. But thatís the issue trying to put complex answer into simple words, you canít convey the entire range of your answers. It is not my intention that these responses are the complete or necessarily correct answer to the attack.

But then again Iím not particularly concerned that a Seito stylist is going to attack me anytime soon, or a stylist in any other system of training. New Hampshire is currently pleasantly below zero, with wind chill in the -20ís, and I would be interested in seeing how Seito attacks one in full winter garb while standing on ice. In reality I would probably to choose to respond with my tai chi chaun in these circumstances, but then I practice it outside in the winter and have for 18 years now. But enough of such pleasant digressions.

All Iíve tried to do is suggest a series of potential answers against that Seito strike. This is just a very minor portion of the studies I do, and in this case I was working on my students arms to understand where youíre coming form.

I chose that simply because of your making the point it is the superior strike, so it is a starting point. In reality I doubt there is anything really special preparing for a Seito stylist than many others I would choose as a model to focus on. But I thought this might show how one can logically proceed to examine the contention.

One rarely gets a chance to see how anyone really uses their system. Nor can you really get the focus of my students study from this analysis. FYI, the responses Iíve chosen actually come from my practice as follows:

Response 1 is the first technique taught by Shimabuku Tatsuo and is a 100% application of the same technique in Chinto and Kusanku Kata.

Response 2 and 3 are direct applications from two different sections of Isshinryu Wansu Kata. It took me years doing it from the first Tjimande(cjimande) Juru taught to me before I realized it was already within the Isshinryu kata. This is where looking at other systems might show you what is also within your own training. Course you often first have to wake up. But I came from the days nobody in my Isshinryu lineage worked kata application, and Iíve had to continually fight myself not looking at what I was doing.

Response 4 is from my Isshinryu Sanchin practice. I had been working variations of this for years when I saw the Cjimande version with a slight change of angle of insertion. In practice it is extremely fast, the art depends on how you set up the situation that theyíre delivering their arm. The Indonesian version involves shifting away drawing them out, but Iíve done a lot of work slipping in alongside the strike to use in that way too. Perhaps you might be surprised at how fast this can be applied, but it is not a universal answer either.

Response 5 is 100% Isshinryu Kusanku, first shown to me by the late Sherman Harrill. It works the triceps insertion and it involves more movement than Iíd prefer and requires much more set up to deliver, but in the appropriate circumstances will do as delivered.

A very necessary understanding is that kata application potential is only a small piece of the puzzle, which I know you are well aware. There are other important aspects of the art, which as youíve indicated.

Iím interested in why you feel the applications I described came from other than the Isshinryu kata implying older versions. Iíve been doing a bit of work comparing one Matsumura Orthodox Kusanku to Isshinryuís Kusanku, and while on a macro level they are similar (moving in somewhat the same direction) on the micro level they are completely different. Each has entirely different application potential, and I find that neutral, for either set of potential can work, theyíre just different, as all the Okinawan kata are.

I have tried to study Ďolderí kata versions, but not to learn them, just to understand where they moved as time progressed. Currently Iím trying to get into a study of the movement changes within Patsai kata in a dozen or so different Okinawan versions, all of which are real movement, and involved many different principles.

From my probably incomplete understanding but still my operating system, the kata being used are irrelevant, the deeper principles are the issue, and if you understand them you can work at making any kata variation work. Thereís a vast difference between basic application to teach beginners some technique and/or where to move spatially in kata performance, and the range of any techniques potential on the macro level down to the fractal analysis of the movement.

Now as to the concept of limb destruction, the tjimande/cjimande training I received (really very little but it works very well) concentrated on limb destruction. But Sherman Harrill using just Isshinryu did an incredible amount of working the limbs.

As to the entire range of things you mentioned you might use for in-close fighting, I see nothing that we also donít address. But then weíre all from the same pot, Okinawan karate.

Finally we donít always assume our students are facing ĎSeitoí opponents. Many people will be attacked by somebody grabbing them first, and the angle of insertion of a grab is almost identical to the strike you describe. In fact in some parts of the world. Most attacks begin by a grab, so these response have merit in practice for multiple reasons too.

Pleasant discussion, thanks.