PDA

View Full Version : Muto dori.......Really???????



Howard Quick
20th May 2006, 23:32
Just curious.....and nothing better to do at present.
How many people out there who practice a sword art they would consider to be effective, or atleast reasonably so, also practice mutodori???? And why?

mews
21st May 2006, 00:30
I'd hate to have to try it.

but if you reference this thread, on bringing a knife to a gunfight, sometimes 'scream and leap' beats standing around waiting to die.

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26266&highlight=salvador+iraq

mew

Jock Armstrong
21st May 2006, 01:44
I have to agree - last ditch effort to make it out alive- or at least take the sunafabitch with you. The worst thing is that people who aren't that good tend to cut short- which makes it even harder to get inside the sword arc.... damn! Ain't nuthin' easy??? Evasion sems the answer- evade to another grid square....

Howard Quick
21st May 2006, 06:17
Hi All,
thanks for the thoughts.
I agree with the scream and leap theory in that, you're right about not just standing there and waiting to die. Also, if your screaming, you may not hear your body opening up, which would be good!
I was viewing a website posted in the Jujutsu section on ebudo in which they practice muto dori. For the life of me, I can't work out why anyone thinks they could disarm a swordsman without the use of a better weapon.Do people really think swordsmen are that stupid that they're going to cut just once and stand there waiting for the other guy to take their sword away?
And, why is it that muto dori is always practiced against a straight attack of some sort?

Any thoughts, rants, venting accepted. ;)

Maro
21st May 2006, 12:02
I guess I'd try it if it were life and death but I've no doubts it would be extremely improbable to succeed.

I prefer being the other end of the sword.

John Lovato
21st May 2006, 20:29
I agree that against a skilled swordsman your chances of prevailing aren't great. But I would say there are alot of , lets say, less than skilled swordsmen out there. Either way I would rather have some training and practice in dealing with the situation than try and figure it out at the moment of attack. I think it is best to be prepared for anything. I find the idea that muto dori is inefective a bit myopic. Of course i agree no one cuts once and waits for the technique to be done. Good muto dori practice should involve multiple cuts and random attacks. Do you feel the same way about unarmed knife defense?

Howard Quick
21st May 2006, 20:36
I think against an idiot with a knife who really has no idea how to use it, you have a better than average chance of defending yourself. Against a person trained in the use of the knife....not much chance at all!
There is also a 3 foot reach difference in dealing with a swordsman as opposed to dealing with someone wielding a knife.

I don't see the sense in practicing something which firstly, you will be extremely unlikely to encounter and secondly, something which you would most likely not be able to pull off.
Makes more sense to me to spen your time practicing something useful.

John Lovato
21st May 2006, 21:17
You practice sword, and you are extreamly unlikely to encounter a swordfight, so are you spending your time practicing something useful? I'm not trying to be a jerk, I just don't really see your logic here.

Howard Quick
21st May 2006, 21:33
John,
I was waiting for/expecting it. I practice a sword art because I enjoy it. I enjoy using the weapon and I enjoy being around like minded people.
I have been practicing Jujutsu for 20 years and I practice that mainly for self defense reasons (as well as the above, but primarily self defense).
I would rather spend my time working on 'slightly' probable knife defense scenarios and defenses against such things as, in our case cricket bats, screwdrivers and bottles than waste my time on most likely impossible muto dori.
Tell me something, do you know anyone who you think would be able to get your sword from you (them being unarmed)?

John Lovato
21st May 2006, 21:56
One more thing. Muto dori teaches things that are extreamly useful. Things like entering, closing the distance while being under realistic and fast attack and remaining calm. Timing, moving at the moment the swordsman has comited to his strike and can't retract. I'ts all about taking control of the fight and the distance. Good muto dori should not be defensive. I find it odd that there are many ryu-ha that have some kind of sword disarm and you think they are all wasting their time? Are all these ryu-ha wrong?

Andy Watson
21st May 2006, 22:16
John

While my initial reaction to mutodori is not positive, you make a good point. I have seen our patron iai/jo sensei make the rest of us look stupid at times when we are wielding a sword and he is not. Undouptedly that is because he understands the sword better than most.

There is I think the possibility that mutodori can be taught correctly and reasonably effectively. The problem is that some mutodori is dreamed up and taught by people who are utterly clueless about the sword and have no concept of the speed and distance differences that exist between armed and unarmed combat. I laugh and walk away when I tell people that I do iai then to be told that they do aikido/jujutsu/karate and have learned to disarm a swordsman. Sorry to be disrespectful to aiki people but even having watched such aikido giants as Tomita sensei do kendori, I am not convinced.

My own sensei relates a story of when he was invited to teach some iai to the advanced students of a karate club in our area. He knew that they learned sword catching (!!!) and decided to put them straight. He started off the lesson by saying something along the lines of, right let's be clear about sword catching - who can cut this? He then delivered one of his typical cuts and there was a stunned silence. "Right, now we've got that out of the way let's practise iai."

Therefore my own conclusive opinion is that mutodori could/might be a legitimate art but I have never seen it demonstrated convincingly by anyone other than one who understands and practises the sword.

John Lovato
21st May 2006, 22:32
Andy,
I agree, I have also seen alot bad stuff out there. You are right not to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Howard Quick
21st May 2006, 22:36
Nice post Andy.
And on your last statement,


Therefore my own conclusive opinion is that mutodori could/might be a legitimate art but I have never seen it demonstrated convincingly by anyone other than one who understands and practises the sword.

anyone who understands and practises the sword arts should realise that it is highly improbable if not impossible.

John,

Timing, moving at the moment the swordsman has comited to his strike and can't retract

What if the swordsman doesn't commit to an attack and always gives himself the option to change his movement.
If a swordsman is competent, you should not be able to enter in on him.


I find it odd that there are many ryu-ha that have some kind of sword disarm and you think they are all wasting their time? Are all these ryu-ha wrong?

In a word, yes!
Opinionated I know, but as a practitioner on both ends of the sword I believe it to be true.
You still haven't answered my original question.

do you know anyone who you think would be able to get your sword from you (them being unarmed)?

Maro
21st May 2006, 23:22
I haven't seen any example of a technique where the swordsman wasn't "Offering" his hands first.

This doesn't happen. If you can show some me sone pictures which refute this that would be interesting.

renfield_kuroda
21st May 2006, 23:28
If you have not seen an unarmed or "lesser" armed defendant disarm and defeat a sword-wielding attacker, it is because you haven't seen an adequately proficient demonstration. I can think off the top of my head two sensei that I seriously doubt most folks on this board could touch, even with a sword and said sensei unarmed. (And no, I do not want to devolve into a "my sensei can beat up your sensei" argument.)
Like all force multipliers, a sword is more effective in certain ways, and less in others. For example, the moment after a cut, the blade usually needs to be turned in order to re-engage, unless you want to smack your enemy with the mune or shinogi. A basic avoidance and close technique is to come inside and to the side of the sword; for example as in various tessen, jutte, tanken, and aikido techniques. Also at the end of the cut, the swordsman's hands and forearms are nicely exposed.
Practical? Useful? As mentioned before, I don't plan on being in any sword fights anytime soon, so no, certainly not. Easy? Nope. Requires impeccable maai among other things.
But by the same argument, do you actually think you know more than 300+ years of techniques? Thanks, but I'll trust that my sensei's sensei's sensei's sensei's ... sensei knew what he was talking about.
In closing, I am reminded that Niina-gosoke often says "there is only one technique in Mugai". Part of what he means is: we practice at least 20 different solo kata, 15 kumitachi, shizan, and various other weapons, and they're all basically the same. Sword, jo, tessen, unarmed, it's all basically the same.

Regards,
r e n

Eric Spinelli
21st May 2006, 23:32
Here is a good discussion on Aikiweb about muto no jutsu. There are some good translations from Heiho Kadensho, as provided by Jun Akiyama.

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7655&highlight=muto

fifthchamber
22nd May 2006, 00:37
I think you could train in Muto Dori for several reasons but that primary among them would be the need to train in something that teaches you entry, and how best to avoid the object coming at you. There are several ways to do this in training but using something as hard to dodge as a sword would make for some very good training.
We train with pet bottles with grips for fun at the end of class and it is impossible against anyone but the very newest students to remove the blade without getting hit..However, the lessons that it teaches are rather invaluable and I would suggest that that is enough of a reason for many ryuha to have left some form of muto dori in their curricula.
For us, although there is not a special unarmed section in training, the need to close rapidly with the aite and maintain control of his body as you do so is fundamental to the majority of what we do.. It doesn't matter what weapons he is using, you do still need to be able to avoid them as much as is possible and get into an advantageous position.
As was perhaps best said in Dodgeball,

Patches: "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."
I think that might sum up what I think about it all really.
Regards.

Enfield
22nd May 2006, 01:28
This horse got a thorough and fatal thumping a few years ago, right here on e-budo.

Aiki Kogeki/Emonodori (http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18257&highlight=aiki+kogeki+emonodori).

Enjoy.

gmanry
22nd May 2006, 02:38
If you are studying bujutsu that includes swords, it seems to me that you should understand all the weaknesses and strengths of the weapon. Mutodori exploits the weakness of close range and the need for the swordsman to bridge a gap. Swords have inertia, as does the body wielding it. There are timings and positions that cannot be recovered from in combat, particularly with a 2.5-3lb. piece of steel that is 27-30 inches long or more.

That being said, even when I am against my wife in a free form mutodori, my chances of success tend to be very low. Neither of us are exceptional or even very skilled at iaijutsu at this point. We use bokuto, of course. Part of it is that she knows I am "trying to get her." So she is very defensive in her commitments and vice versa. Also, we are trying to avoid maiming one another, both in cutting and in defense. We use lighter bokuto, so the cuts can be very fast, faster than if we used heavier bokuto.

I think in many circumstances over confidence would be present on the part of the swordsman. It is a slim chance to capitalize on it, but better than just giving up.

This is also why shuriken and other distractors were conceived and implemented. You should never be unarmed. It is a dangerous world out there. ;)

Howard Quick
22nd May 2006, 02:45
I know this topic has been discussed before but I was reading a jujutsu school's posting on here and thought I'd ask the question. They list muto dori in their curriculum.
Our system of jujutsu used to incorporate muto dori but once my teacher saw a competent swordsman in action, he removed it from our system.
We practice defences against long weapons such as a jo which can be likened to more modern weapons such as a baseball/cricket bat. These same techniques could, if necessary be used in a last ditch, one-off attempt to defend yourself against a sword but it would have to be exactly that. All other avenues have been exhausted and if you don't do something you will certainly die.
Better to die trying! which I'm sure everyone agree's with.
I agree that against a swordsman with a sheathed sword you may have some semblance of a chance....still not much.
I witnessed a 'koryu' system in action on the weekend. If that swordsmanship is anything to go by, I guess there is a better chance of defending yourself!

John Lovato
22nd May 2006, 06:18
Howard,
A swordsman can make non-commited strikes all he wants but in order to hit someone he has to make that commitment and that is when the defender can make his move. Like you said the sword gives a three foot advantage, But that means it also brings him within three feet.

As far as the answer to your question. I don't know. I think it would be vain to say it could never happen. Saru mo ki kara ochiru.

Sam(urai)
22nd May 2006, 15:52
I have observed systems that opreate from both sides of the sharp pointy bit. As an interesting aside two old koryu styles (names long forgoten... i'm v.sorry but it was yearrrrrs ago!) where the swordsmans cut is avioded and closed in on... at which point he releases one hand from his sword and draws his wakasashi from his obi and guts the would-be attacker (I also saw another varient where first he strikes to the do with the tsuka before drawing).... also I've seen the reverse where the attacker closes in and draws the swordsmans wakasashi against him before he can change his tac...

Just my ten pence worth...

Don't mind me :D

gendzwil
22nd May 2006, 16:51
A swordsman can make non-commited strikes all he wants but in order to hit someone he has to make that commitment and that is when the defender can make his move. Not anywhere near the level of commitment that is demonstrated in any of the tachidori/mutodori demonstrations I've seen. Also, stepping inside a cut that is not straight up and down (not to mention glacially slow as are most of the demos) is a tad more difficult.

John Lovato
22nd May 2006, 18:11
Of course it would be silly to practice against only one type of cut or slow cuts.

pgsmith
22nd May 2006, 19:16
I have noticed that no one has mentioned the most compelling reason for practicing muto dori. That being that it is part of your ryu's curriculum, and sensei said "today we work on muto dori!" That is why I have done so in the past, and will in the future. Actual efficacy in use doesn't really enter into it, although it makes for interesting discussion.

Howard Quick
23rd May 2006, 06:32
Sorry Paul,



That being that it is part of your ryu's curriculum, and sensei said "today we work on muto dori!"

For me, that would mean a change of arts/schools/teacher!

johan smits
23rd May 2006, 07:55
Hi all,

Reading this post a question came to mind. How many of us are not hobbyists? Or put another way, how many of us deal on a regular basis with the kind of violence directed against us which put our lives in danger?

I am not I am a civilian, snug with a cup of coffee thinking about my jujutsuclass this evening.

I do not think we have the mindset of Bushi of old who may have been abel to do mutodori (as a last ditchtechnique) against a drawn blade. We are weekendwarriors and against a competent swordsman with a drawn sword we are going to do mutodori? Noop we are going to die trying.

The only reasonable chance to do mutodori against a sword is when it is still in the scabbard. I really think that this should be stressed by people who "teach" mutodori.

The best jujutsuman of the world against a mediocre swordsman? My bet would be on the swordsman.

best,

Johan Smits

Jock Armstrong
23rd May 2006, 09:17
A sword is a weapon same as any other- it's only as dangerous as the man wielding it is skillful. Nobody has claimed that tachidori/mutodori would be easy. That some groups do a unrealistic kind of muto dori is a good point, however to say that it is absolutely impossible is like saying that a man armed with a handgun is invincible. Half the stuff I've seen taught as knife or pistol disarms/recovery are on the same level as the crappy tachidori- it comes back to people not really understanding what is involved, with the weapon or the unarmed part. Would you want to try it? No. Would you be guaranteed to succeed? No. Would you just kneel down, expose your neck and wait? For my part, no.
People have made their points well here but I don't think anyone is going to "convert" the other to their way of thinking. Maybe we've run our course.

Dave Humm
23rd May 2006, 10:20
Within the book "Budo Hidensho" which was written/compiled in 1968.

Loosely translated from the section, "The truths regarding 'muto no jutsu'":

"Regarding the "Muto no jutsu" (the techniques/tactics of "muto"), it does not have to mean that we must always take away the opponent's sword. Also, it is not showing that one can take away the opponent's sword and make it into an achievement. It is the technique of not being cut when you do not have a sword yourself. The spirit of trying to take away the sword is not essential.”

Some commentary on the text states (translated),

"The "Muto Dori" of Yagyu Shingan ryu is rather famous, but there is no scarcity of the number of interpretations of its contents and meaning. When faced with a person who is wielding a live blade and without the benefit of armor, the "muto no jutsu" required to take away the sword is, in essence, throwing yourself into the worst possible situation yet still being able to achieve victory."

Loosely translated from the next section, "Victory is in not getting cut":

"One does not have to always take away a sword of a person who does not want his sword taken. In other words, an opponent with his heart set on not having his sword taken has forgotten how to cut; because he is too busy thinking about not having his sword taken, he will be unable to cut. In this situation, this is victorious for us as we are not going to get cut. Taking away the opponent's sword is not the objective; rather, we are training not to be cut when we are without a sword..."

"The techniques of "muto" are not aimed at taking away the opponent's sword, but rather, to be able to use the available tools around you freely. If you have the ability to take away your partner's sword, then it will not matter what your partner wields. So, you may be able to face a sword-wielding opponent with just a fan and still come out victorious. This is the crux of the "muto no jutsu." If you are walking around with a bamboo cane without your sword, even if someone tries to cut you with a very long sword, you may be able to deflect with your cane, perhaps taking away your partner's sword or not as the case may be, be able to control your partner, and end up not getting cut; that is victory. Take this into consideration as the crucial meaning of the "muto no jutsu."

Loosely translated from "The core of muto is maai":

"The objective of "muto no jutsu" is not to take away your opponent's sword nor to cut your opponent. Take away the sword from your opponent when he has the intention of doing nothing else but cutting you, but do not have the intention of taking away the sword from the beginning.

The primary objective of "muto no jutsu" is to take proper maai. You need to understand at which distance you can be with a sword-wielding opponent and still not be able to get cut. If you understand this distance, then you will have no fear of being cut; also, if you know that you can get cut, you can work on the tactics opposing that situation. You will not be able to use "muto no jutsu" without being in the range of having one's flesh cut. You will only be able to take away the sword if you are in a position of being cut - in other words, by getting cut, you can take away the sword."

Loosely translated from "Enter under the handle of your opponent's sword":

"In "muto no jutsu," have the intention of using your bare hands as weapons when your partner is wielding a sword. Because a sword is long and your arms are relatively short, unless you enter into your partner's body to the point of being in danger of getting cut, this tactic will not work. However, is it really possible to take away your opponent's sword? In order to achieve that, you must enter through the distance of your opponent's blade and enter under your partner's sword handle. Of course, this may not be possible depending on the time and place, but unless you are willing to go into your partner's body, it will be impossible to take away the sword."

The above translation raises several points for consideration when training muto-dori application. I think the opening statement from the "truths of muto no jutsu" sums up what we should be thinking and attempting to achieve.

"...it does not have to mean that we must always take away the opponent's sword. Also, it is not showing that one can take away the opponent's sword and make it into an achievement. It is the technique of not being cut when you do not have a sword yourself. The spirit of trying to take away the sword is not essential."

"...it is the technique of not being cut when you do not have a sword yourself."

From a tactical stand point entering under the handle of the sword (IE when it is raised to Jodan no kamae) is the safest option however; the speed at which a sword can be raised and then brought to bear is incredible thus; one's speed and perception of when to act must also be equally incredible.

"...Because a sword is long and your arms are relatively short, unless you enter into your partner's body to the point of being in danger of getting cut, this tactic will not work. However, is it really possible to take away your opponent's sword? In order to achieve that, you must enter through the distance of your opponent's blade and enter under your partner's sword handle."

Regards

Howard Quick
23rd May 2006, 10:40
Good point Johan,
I bounced at a 'well known' for all of the wrong reasons nightclub in Melbourne's West for around 5 years. During that time I faced all sorts of assailants brandishing all manner of weapons under all sorts of influences.
I used Jujutsu on a weekly basis, infact I only took the job on as I saw it as the only way I could 'legally' put into practice and 'try' what I'd learnt in class.
Happy to say, it worked very well.
I would be kidding myself if I said MA wasn't a hobby for me, but I try to practice it as more a way of life than a past time. 20 years at six days per week, travelling all over the world makes it a 'serious' past time!
It just really amazes me that people who practice the art of swordsmanship think they can be disarmed by an unarmed person.
It's as bad as a demo at last years Aiki Expo where an Aikido practitioner defeated 4 swordsmen with a Jo! How ludicrous.
I agree with the die trying theory if there is no option but, you WILL die!
As for this topic running its course, I was hoping a few more people might contribute. This topic hasn't been discussed at length here for some time.
Thought it might be fun!

Ron Beaubien
23rd May 2006, 13:45
Hello,


A sword is a weapon same as any other- it's only as dangerous as the man wielding it is skillful.
I'm not so sure about that. I've seen a good number of stupid people wielding shinken but lacking skills who still manage to be a danger to themselves and/or other people nearby. Some weapons are inherently more dangerous than others.

Just another perspective.

Regards,

Ron Beaubien

Jock Armstrong
23rd May 2006, 15:32
Of course they are a danger- that's what a weapon does- it gives the idiot more capability. It doesn't mean that you should necessarily give up in the face of an armed opponent. The first course is to fight an armed opponent with a weapon of your own . If you don't have a weapon, run like hell. If you are trapped, well you gotta do something. Understanding the weapon you have to fight against is the first step- hence tachidori. My personal preference would be a double tap to the centre of the seen mass, perhaps followed [in order of preference] by judicious use of the wakizashi/tanto but you use what you have............

BTW this theory goes for knives and anything else sharp or nasty. A half brick to the noggin can work wonders....

gendzwil
23rd May 2006, 16:26
I agree Jock, the main problem I have with the technique is how it is instructed and/or demonstrated. I've never seen the instructor say "you are in all likelihood going to die, so here's your only hope out". I've only seen "well, all you have to do is step in here, grab this, a little spin and shazam!"

Andy Watson
23rd May 2006, 18:34
I agree Jock, the main problem I have with the technique is how it is instructed and/or demonstrated. I've never seen the instructor say "you are in all likelihood going to die, so here's your only hope out". I've only seen "well, all you have to do is step in here, grab this, a little spin and shazam!"

And the same is said for lots of weapons defences. A jujutsu instructor friend-of-a-friend went to one street defence class to see what they did. There the instructor was getting his students to hold marker pens to each other's necks to see if their defence techniques were effective enough to stop them from getting cut. My FOAF had a go, held the pen to the instructors neck and just drew a line across his throat before the instructor had time to say go. At that my FOAF said f... off and walked out.

Some of the ridiculous things we see at SENI (the UK martial arts expo) are equally stoopid with all kinds of stunts against knives going on.

Now add a couple of feet to the sword and...hey presto.

Ron Tisdale
23rd May 2006, 18:56
I've heard exactly that...last ditch effort. only hope. Better than dying. I'm surprised that phrase is so unusual in relation to muto dori.

Best,
Ron

I agree Jock, the main problem I have with the technique is how it is instructed and/or demonstrated. I've never seen the instructor say "you are in all likelihood going to die, so here's your only hope out". I've only seen "well, all you have to do is step in here, grab this, a little spin and shazam!"

pgsmith
23rd May 2006, 19:04
For me, that would mean a change of arts/schools/teacher!
There is a difference in what is done in the traditional Japanese arts and what is done for "modern street effective fighting". The main difference that I have noticed is that the modern arts tend to teach "if he does this, you do this!" The traditional Japanese arts have a more holistic approach. They teach a way of reacting, without actually teaching specifics. While there are specific kata taught within all of the Japanese arts, they are not there to teach technique, but rather to instill a particular set of reactions and movements as defined by the overall outlook of the ryu. I would venture to guess that the muto dori practice of, say, the Yagyu Shinkage ryu, is more concerned with teaching principle than in teaching actual "techniques". While I can't say that this is a fact since I do not practice this art, I can say that this is the way that all of the koryu approach their teaching.

So, I wouldn't know any where near enough about any art to question whatever sensei said I was to practice. If you really didn't trust your sensei enough to believe that he knows what he's doing, then I agree with you Howard, it would definitely be time to change instructors.

God'zilla
23rd May 2006, 21:30
It just really amazes me that people who practice the art of swordsmanship think they can be disarmed by an unarmed person.


Someone like Yagyu Munenori?



Within the book "Budo Hidensho" which was written/compiled in 1968.

Loosely translated from the section, "The truths regarding 'muto no jutsu'":

renfield_kuroda
23rd May 2006, 23:07
It's as bad as a demo at last years Aiki Expo where an Aikido practitioner defeated 4 swordsmen with a Jo! How ludicrous.
I don't know about the demos at Aiki Expo, but you have never seen a truly skilled jo practitioner if you think jo could not defeat sword, even multiple attackers.
Shindomusoryu jo was developed specifically to defeat sword, and all things being equal (if such a comparison was possible) it's at least even money if not better odds for the jo.
Such blanket statements are fairly ludicrous in and of themselves, then again I think you are not considering traditional arts in the relevant context, comparing them against 'modern street fighting', for which they were never intended, and therefore obviously will come out lacking.

Regards,

r e n

Simon Novelli
24th May 2006, 00:30
Funny thing when talking about being unarmed against a weapon, the general idea is "well thats it he's got a weapon, i've had it", well i think the simplest way to explane muto dori could be "what if he misses?"
And whats one of the first things you learn in martial arts, get out the way!
So you get out the way, he misses his attack, were do you go from there?
And just because it doesnt have a sharp edge doesnt make it an inferior weapon, you wouldent try to deflect the sharp edge of a sword with a jo, but the sharp edge is only a small part of the sword itself and the person who uses it.
Dont forget you need your arms and hands to use a sword, take away his ability to use his hands and you take away his ability to weild a sword, with a jo this is easy to show as the most obvious would be to avoid the attack and then strike his hand just below the tsuba.
Also keep in mind you cut with a sword using the top few inches of the blade, if you are close in there is less chance of you getting cut, and as the same muto dori techniques can work against many weapons you may encounter (such as a baseball bat) the same applys, all the force is at the end of the bat, the closer in you are the less it is going to hurt.
Its not such a ludicrous thought if you realy think about it.

Maro
24th May 2006, 01:20
One thing to remember is that the blade is long but the pivot point in your hand is very small. Even a missed cut can be converted into a thrust/defensive stance by a small hand movement.

The unarmed person has to move his body a lot more than I have to move my hand.

Also, the styles I've seen (which is not exhaustive BTW) focus on not overcommitting the cut to leave you exposed. Obviously, a "real-life" scenario is going to be slightly different.

Aden
24th May 2006, 01:28
Shinkage Ryu Iaido has (at least) 5 empty hand kata in the curriculum... for different social situations sith sword in or out of saya, standing or sitting.

Facing an experienced swordsman with desire to do grevious injury, definitely a last ditch thing, but even in 16th century Japan many potential opponents were not experienced swordsmen.

Against the inexperienced or against someone that underestimated the unarmed or someone hesitant due to doubt (for example facing a known sensei may put doubt into the mind of a student level practitioner), or someone tryign to arrest/detain rather than kill it would be much more viable as long as the muto person was more experienced than the swordsman.

Even someone as slow as me can practice their understanding of mai and timing when teaching kendo students tenouchi by occasionally stepping into the swordsman to avoid the shinai (though a raw beginner tagged me on the outside of my left shoulder doing it last night - showing it is not a sure thing :) ) so I have no trouble thinking a competent practitioner could do it to the less prepared.

Aden

johan smits
24th May 2006, 08:54
Hi guys,

There are a few things I have been thinking about and I would like to put in.

Howard is someone with experience in the field and quite a lot I think.
Jujutsu is effective, very much so. I have been training jujutsu for some thirty years and occasionaly have put it to good use. That would be ranging from some scuffles (stupid and boring to tell) avoiding bikes and being alert enough in some foreign cities to avoid trouble. Nowadays I mostly use it to keep fit and limber (ah well).

Aikidoka - with all respect - are not swordsmen. Aikidoka brandishing a sword will not attack like swordsmen do - they will attack like aikidoka do using a sword to facilitate aikido techniques.

Shindo Muso is indeed created to defeat a sword (or was it a bokken the creator had in mind since he developed the system after being defeated by Musashi. I seem to recall that Musashi used a bokken in this fight or so the story goes).
Are there any other known situations of Shindo Muso-ryu being used to defeat swordattacks?

One of the things I don't get is that a of people seem to think a swordsman with his sword drawn has to make an attack to kill you. He doesn't have to!
With the sword in chudan gamae or whatever name you use for the kamae he will starts moving towards you that alone is an attack. He is not going to give any openings (until he has cut you and you are bleeding and feeble).

All this does not mean that I am in favor of giving up fighting as in "okay you can kill me", not me but to come to the best ways to deal with a weapon we have to understand it. And a lot of us do not.


Simon wrote:

"Also keep in mind you cut with a sword using the top few inches of the blade, if you are close in there is less chance of you getting cut, and as the same muto dori techniques can work against many weapons you may encounter (such as a baseball bat) the same applys, all the force is at the end of the bat, the closer in you are the less it is going to hurt.
Its not such a ludicrous thought if you realy think about it."


Simon with all respect and I do not say this easily - you are wrong - this is dojotalk and dojotraining.

A baseball bat and a sword are two very different weapons, different dynamics, different ways of handling, they are both dangerous in different ways, different ways to deal with them.

You are saying one only attacks with top few inches of the blade?
Well than muto dori techniques will work out fine for you. No trouble at all.

Best regards,

Johan Smits

Simon Novelli
24th May 2006, 13:22
Yes i see were you are coming from, and i agree that they are two different weapons, and to echo what has been said before all of this is last resort.
However, i dont think you would dissagree that the end of a baseball bat (whilst being swung in your general direction) holds the majority of force, if you move into the attack and the bat hits you close to were the guy is holding it the impact will be far less.
Of course there are many ways of hitting someone with a sword, you can use the tsuba or the tuska, as with a bat you can use the end your holding, but as far as i understand when you cut you are cutting with the top few inches of the blade, and as with the baseball bat example if you get hit with the part just above the tsuka, the damage will be far less.
And if my understanding of the katana is correct it wonts simply cut you if you make contact with the edge of the blade (to a certain degree, oviously it depends on how hard it may hit you) it needs a 'pulling' motion to make the cut.
I said that when you cut you cut with the top few inches of the blade, not to imply that you can only attack with a katana using the top few inches.
Also someone said that it is very easiy to turn your blade and attack again if your first cut missed, this is very true, however muto dori takes this into account and in my experiance teaches to not alow them to be able to make the second cut, to close the gaps as it were.
It seems to me that muto dori would not still exsist if it was so uneffective, and for what i have seen and experianced it is quite possible to disarm someone using muto dori, i am no expert nor have i been training for a long time, i am simply going of logical conclusions to what i have witnessed myself in the Bujinkan.
I understand what you say about a swordsman will not give any openings untill he has already cut you, but in the moment were he has decided to make his attack he will be already doing so and he still has to move is sword from one possition to another to be able to cut you, in this instant is were you need to get out the way and respond accordingly.
His sword must go from wherever it is to wherever you are, in between these two instances is were you have your chance, not before and not after, well lets face it afterwards you'd be dead.
It is not so much that i am saying you would handle a sword and a bat the same way, rather the principal behind muto dori stays the same, the 'feeling' of muto dori if you will, of course your distance and physical movement will differ, but the idea behind it i dont think changes.
Like i say i am no expert and i am glad people step up and say "you are wrong" because it gives me something to think about, but does what i'm saying make sense? Can you see were i'm coming from? and by all means tell me if i am wrong.

johan smits
24th May 2006, 13:38
Simon my post may have sounded a bit more negative than was the intention but...Even is only part of the blade is free from the scabbard (with most part still inside) it can be used to do very serious damage close by.

The chudan kamae in itself is an attack. The swordman will run or walk you through without changing the position of his sword. No need for him to change the direction of his attack. The point is directed at you and it is backed by a long cutting edge.

The fact that muto dori still exists does not say anything about it's effectiveness when you ask me. There are situations where those techniques could probably be used not as a technique of choice but as a last resort. But those situations would probably be when the one doing muto dori would be wearing armour. That would be a different story.

Best regards,

Johan Smits

Howard Quick
24th May 2006, 14:46
Simon, thanks for taking the time to be involved in this topic. Agree or not, it's all interesting.
Sorry about the heading, you asked to be told.
If you make the slightest contact with a sharp sword the effects could be devistating. It doesn't need a pulling or pushing motion. Dotan giri is a cut that does not use a pushing or pulling motion and it is rumoured that the record for cutting (more like chopping with dotan giri) is seven bodies in one cut!
The speed at which multiple cuts can be delivered whilst using a decent amount of body movement to cut from multiple angles and directions is frightening and something I believe nobody could defend against or even survive. Have you ever been on the receiving end of a baseball bat? I have (actually a cricket bat). Nothing like a sword! You can move in on someone brandishing a dull weapon and to a certain degree, wear or absorb part of the weapons momentum. It won't cut you if you brush up against it! If you try to absorb or wear any part of a sword blade, the resulting injuries will be horrific.
You are absolutely correct about the last few inches of the long weapon being the most dangerous, however that does not apply to a sword as the entire length of the weapon is razor sharp. Infact, the closer to the tsuka, the sharper a sword usually is as that part doesn't get used very often.
Johan, thanks for a very well written, thought out post. Not because I mostly agree with it, but because this is the sort of conversation I was hoping to provoke.
Ren, as I said earlier, I have been training in MA solidly for the past 20 years.
Actually since I was eight and lived in Malaysia.
I have travelled all over the world and witnessed many, many demonstrations from a great deal of arts, styles and teachers/practitioners.
I think I've witnessed my fair share! Including some horrific accidents whereby the attacker didn't move 'correctly', thus causing serious injury to the muto dori exponent. (now that was real).
I have never seen muto dori demonstrated from a decent attack performed by a competent swordsman. I have however seen it demonstrated probably hundreds of times by people who are in total denial and believe themselves to be more skillfull than they actually are.
the demo I refer to at Aiki expo was performed by apparently one of the USA's best in their field!!! :rolleyes:
Ren, would you actually be willing to face a swordsman, with shinken and attempt muto dori?
I would say that whatever demo's of muto dori you've seen are not realistic simply for the reason that the person swinging the sword would have been either a student, teacher, friend whatever of the person demonstrating muto dori and therefor the intent to kill is not present. Infact the intent to 'not harm' would be extremely high and seriously playing on the mind of the attacker.
Anyway, it's all good healthy discussion, keep it coming guys.

Ron Tisdale
24th May 2006, 15:22
Aikidoka - with all respect - are not swordsmen. Aikidoka brandishing a sword will not attack like swordsmen do - they will attack like aikidoka do using a sword to facilitate aikido techniques

Hmm, did anyone suggest otherwise?

Best,
Ron

John Frakes
24th May 2006, 15:27
A sword is a weapon same as any other- it's only as dangerous as the man wielding it is skillful.

I think that pretty much says it all. Don't get me wrong, I like reading all the different ideas and opinions on e-budo, but I really gotta go with Mr. Armstrong on this one. I mean lets face it, when it comes to any "will this work in real life" question, that is pretty much the answer. If you're more skilled than your opponent, it'll probably work. If you're not, it probably won't. Thats true of everything; whether you're talkin about swords or sledgehammers. :)

As far as the question "would muto dori work in real life?" I suspect that if you have any proficiency at it at all, then yes I suspect it will work. The reason I say this is because, as far as "real life" is concerned, the only kind of person who would attack you with a medieval japanese melee weapon is gonna be someone who undoubtedly does not know how to use it effectively. ya know, one of those guys who learned kenjutsu from watchin the american ninja sequals. (ninja swords are straight, samurai swords aren't. :) )

johan smits
24th May 2006, 15:31
I agree with Howard this is a good discussion and it is very interesting to see people with different backgrounds participating.
Talking about one's art, sharing ideas will make ones art stronger (that is if you train as well...).
There are still a lot of things we do not understand correctly I quess. That is not because we lack intelligence or ideas but because we lack information which is available in Japanese but not in English (apart from some of the boards like this one).

I am at the office right now (pc at home crashed) so I don't have access to sources but:

One of the senseis of Daito-ryu has stated that the techniques against multiple attackers (in which they are all thrown on a big heap) are not very realistic and mainly done as form of advertising the art during demo's.

Now that is an eyeopener. Some people didn't believe it (or didn't want to believe it).

I think it was Ellis Amdur who wrote on this board about Shosho-ryu being a very farmerlike very country art and in one of their techniques (basically a judo tomoenage) uke flips over and lands on his feet. This was done as amusement, for fun. As in something else to do while training. I had seen the technique but didn't know this until Ellis Amdur wrote about it. It is now probably part of the curriculum but that is what the background is.

With mutodori it is much the same I quess. Sure there are some techniques to be used on the battlefield as a last ditch. But a lot of it is just for demo's - doing pretty techniques, a crowdpleaser maybe it was even so 150 years ago in Japan. The teachers then needed students too, to make a living. So what do you do? Expand your style's curriculum - so they will train with you for longer. Make your style more attractive so they will come in crowds.

And what does the general public do? With mouths agape watch them do unbelievable things.

When my children reach a certain age I plan on teaching them jujutsu. I have asked myself will I teach them techniques to use in case their lives were at stake? Yes I will. Will I teach them mutodori techniques? One or two I quess and I will point their attention to this discussion so they can make up their own minds.

Best regards,

Johan Smits

johan smits
24th May 2006, 15:48
Ron, nope you are right nobody did suggest that. :) :rolleyes:

One more thing - I don't think a weapon is only as dangerous as the man wielding it is skillful. Someone not trained can do an enourmous amount of damage wielding a sword. Even an expert without weapons would be at a grave disadvantage fighting a mediocre swordsman.

When it concerns weapons there are different levels of danger.
A jo or bo or wooden weapon wielded by a mediocre attacker - you got a good chance I think even unarmed. Against a mediocre swordsman? Nope.

best regards,

gotta run and teach class

Johan Smits

gendzwil
24th May 2006, 16:09
If you're more skilled than your opponent, it'll probably work. If you're not, it probably won't. Thats true of everything; whether you're talkin about swords or sledgehammers. :)If you re-wrote that to say "exponentially more skilled", I might agree. The FMA guys do this with knife practice - hand someone a marker, try to take it away without getting "cut". They almost always get cut, even against complete beginners. Take the time (like, under an hour) to give the beginner a little instruction and the odds get much, much worse.

There's a reason we invented and use weapons.

John Frakes
24th May 2006, 19:22
There's a reason we invented and use weapons.

You're right. You're absolutely right. When an unarmed man faces an armed man the unarmed man is doomed. He might as well just get on his knees and beg for mercy. All martial arts training aside, no unarmed man can defeat a man who is armed. I completely agree.

...

This is a martial arts forum isn't it?

gendzwil
24th May 2006, 19:38
All martial arts training aside, no unarmed man can defeat a man who is armed.Did I say that? Let me be more clear: the weapon makes up for a whole pile of training. Your assertion that the more skilled will generally prevail is false. To defeat an armed opponent when unarmed requires a great deal more skill. I don't maintain that it is not worth training, merely that the reality of the situation is much more dire than many instructors think.

It's pretty simple if you want to test it. Go down to your local kendo club, pick a fairly low level guy (say, 1 or 2 years training) and see if you can take his shinai away without getting hit. I'll bet your success rate is under 10%. Now try it with the instructor. I'll bet you'll blow an afternoon trying to get your success rate above 0.

John Frakes
24th May 2006, 19:53
Your assertion that the more skilled will generally prevail is false.

so your assertion is that a less skilled individual will generally prevail against a more skilled?

gendzwil
24th May 2006, 20:47
so your assertion is that a less skilled individual will generally prevail against a more skilled?If the less skilled individual has a weapon and the skilled person not, yes.

John Frakes
24th May 2006, 21:02
If the less skilled individual has a weapon and the skilled person not, yes.

that may be singularly the most absurd and ridiculous thing I have ever heard (seen) a martial artist say (type).

gendzwil
24th May 2006, 21:19
that may be singularly the most absurd and ridiculous thing I have ever heard (seen) a martial artist say (type).I think it's more absurd that you believe the hype of whatever it is you practice. Here's a hint: even if you're both unarmed, it's not a lock just because you have some skill. If the other guy's got speed and/or muscle on you, trouble may ensue. Think of a knife in his hand like all of a sudden you're facing a pro football tackle.

Try it for real, or at least as real as you can safely make it - many people have. Put on some old clothes, give a guy a magic marker and try to take it away without getting a mark on your clothes. Let him swing a shinai freely, try to take it away without getting hit. It's an eye-opener.

NathanH
24th May 2006, 22:08
Interesting topic. I would note that the whole conversation turns on edged vs. blunt weapons--edged being decisively less forgiving than blunt. I recall being told the first rule of knife fighting is that you're going to be cut. The marker game was pretty much always a game-like exercise of trying to do the impossible.

I think it's still valuable as an exercise if only to sharpen the avoidance skills and to understand what's required when facing the worst (and I've always liked silly games). The level of risk being the unarmed person is huge, even when the skill gap is gigantic. I recall it was also a rather fun drill on those rare times when you succeeded.
give the beginner a little instruction and the odds get much, much worse.A year ago, I could consistently close the distance and remove the shinai from my son's hands without being hit. After a year of kendo, it's near impossible. I expect that as soon as he stops being intimidated by the size difference, it will be completely impossible (unless I step up my skill and speed by a few orders of magnitude).

I've still got a few more years until I reach mediocre swordsman status.

Ron Tisdale
24th May 2006, 22:14
What's worse Nathan, is that he's probably still getting quicker...while you and I are probably getting slower!

Best,
Ron (But our timing is hopefully getting better!)

pgsmith
24th May 2006, 22:56
that may be singularly the most absurd and ridiculous thing I have ever heard (seen) a martial artist say (type).
I don't see any way at all that you can possibly say that with a straight face! Martial artists are not super heroes. Kill Bill was not real. Of course the odds lie with someone that has a weapon, even if they've never used it before in their life. You would be absolutely amazed at the damage a tire tool, in the hands of an angry man with no martial arts training at all, can do. There is a reason that law enforcement officers, and everyone that I've met has been a trained martial artist, will shoot a knife weilding suspect rather than attempt to disarm him.

God'zilla
24th May 2006, 23:38
However, we should take into consideration the fact that a trained fighter, facing an armed opponent, will probably get armed as quickly as possible. I am a trained fighter, were I to encounter soemone brandishing a katana in such a way that was threatening to me, I woud use one of the weapons I always have handy, (cell phone) call in some retainers of mine whose koku I provide (local p.d.). I would, if forced to fight this maniac, get a weapon, create a weapon, or take his. A trained fighter doesn't accept formalized tactics.
i believe this thread is a waste of space, muto 0r tachi dori is/ can be done. You just have to be good at it.

Howard Quick
25th May 2006, 02:23
Guys,
this is an interesting discussion. Please try not to get too emotional and don't go down the road of insulting eachother. These types of threads usually end up with trading personal attacks. We can agree to disagree.(just getting in first)
John,
I was with you right up until


i believe this thread is a waste of space, muto 0r tachi dori is/ can be done. You just have to be good at it.

If you believe this thread to be a waste of time, nobody is forcing you to post!

Have you guys seen the pic's floating around of the cop who 'tried' to disarm the knife wielding assailant?
If you haven't I can send them to you...but be warned, they're extremely graphic!(he did survive...amazingly. I believe his partner shot the guy!)
It is a perfect example of what happens when someone assumes that because they're trained they're 'good at it' and can 'make it work'.
10 years ago, I was teaching muto dori at our Jujutsu school. I believed I was pretty good at it. 9.5 years ago I started training in a Japanese swordsmanship art (Shinkendo). I gave up teaching or practicing muto dori. When my jujutsu teacher saw a demonstration of the art I was practicing, performed by my teacher (at the time Paul Pocock Sensei), he removed all swordsmanship from his syllabus/curriculum.
His thoughts..."you're better off trying to catch lightning". We still practice defences against long dull weapons (using a jo) which can be likened to a bat or garden stake (seen some horrific injuries from one of those) etc but they're not sharp.
For me, the possibilities of defence against a swordsman would include throwing rocks and the best and only real defence.....don't be there.
Someone on here used to have in their signature, the line " In the situation of unarmed defence against a sword, be the guy with the sword"!

fifthchamber
25th May 2006, 02:59
Hi Howard.
I think given the choices, that I would rather have trained in it and try and use it against a swordsman (Or, for sake of argument any weapon bearing attacker) than not have trained in it at all. Simply because if the attacker is good then I'll get hit (or cut) anyway and if they are poor then I'd stand at least a chance of something if I had had experience in something like it. You just don't know..But I'd rather have some kind of training in it.
That said, I train in because it's in the curriculum..Not because I think I'd have any reasonable chance of surviving an attack by a sword wielder..
Who knows..I'd rather have something than the option to try nothing.
Regards..

Howard Quick
25th May 2006, 03:25
Hi Ben,
I absolutely agree that people should train against longer weapons as I pointed out previously, BB bat, garden stake etc. If there is absolutely no choice then these techniques could be attempted against a sword. The problem is, teachers are telling students that whether the weapon is sharp or not makes no difference, it's all the same for long weapons. This is obvious by what Simon has been told by his teacher (the last few inches is the dangerous part...not picking on you Simon :) )This is just plain wrong! There is 28" (just to pick a number) of razor sharp difference.
It is extremely dangerous to teach people in this manner. The main issue being, an overly confident student who has been repeatedly praised for his excellence in class will attempt one of these techniques in a 'real' not 'dojo' situation and he will be seriously injured or worse still killed! If the teacher had told him to run or throw rocks instead he would most probably have survived!
This is exactly the situation I was put in when confronted by a 'speed high' assailant at the nightclub where I used to work. I was overly confident! I'd been training in Jujutsu for 10 or so years at the time, I was a Nidan (I think) and I thought I was pretty good. I put myself in the position of being attacked with a cricket bat and I was very lucky to get away with it. It was an entirely ego driven move! I was 'showing off' infront of my peers. Thinking back, at the time had the guy been wielding a sword I'd probably have attempted the same. Had that been the case I probably wouldn't be typing this. The smart thing to do would have been to call the police.

renfield_kuroda
25th May 2006, 04:59
however that does not apply to a sword as the entire length of the weapon is razor sharp. Infact, the closer to the tsuka, the sharper a sword usually is as that part doesn't get used very often.Not quite true. Depends totally on the polish, which often depends on the user/school. Some schools don't even bother giving the area of the blade down near the tsuka a decent edge as it's not used to cut, and is left intentionally meatier to be used, for parrying, for example.


I have never seen muto dori demonstrated from a decent attack performed by a competent swordsman. I have however seen it demonstrated probably hundreds of times by people who are in total denial and believe themselves to be more skillfull than they actually are.
the demo I refer to at Aiki expo was performed by apparently one of the USA's best in their field!!!Well, I have not seen nearly as many demos, but there are a couple of individuals who I have seen and trained with on whom I would put my money, even if going up against an armed opponent.


Ren, would you actually be willing to face a swordsman, with shinken and attempt muto dori?Me? What are you nuts?! I can't face my own unarmed wife without resorting to attempting bribes of fine leather shoes in order to save my own skin.


I would say that whatever demo's of muto dori you've seen are not realistic simply for the reason that the person swinging the sword would have been either a student, teacher, friend whatever of the person demonstrating muto dori and therefor the intent to kill is not present. Infact the intent to 'not harm' would be extremely high and seriously playing on the mind of the attacker.I agree 99.9%, but it's that last 0.1% that really impresses.
Is muto-dori totally pointless as a training tool? That of course totally depends on WHY you are training in the first place. I certainly do not train in arcane koryu with a sword under the delusion of modern self defense, and anyone who does is certainly a fool. I cannot speak for the plethora of aikido, karate, etc. practitioners out there who may or may not use muto-dori, think it's useful, and/or be preparing themselves for 'the street.'
We also don't practice muto-dori in Mugairyu, so again I can't comment from experience.
My experience with street fighting, both in highschool, began with me getting hit and ended with me running faster and farther than the hitter. So I cannot speak from experience there.
So I feel this discussion is at an impasse, and unless someone of adequate skill (who are most assuredly few and far between these days) gets attacked with a sword whilst unarmed, we may never truly know the answer to this question.
I certainly feel that out of all the (arguably few) martial artists I have seen, I have seen two whom I believe have a fair chance of 'winning' if unarmed and attacked by a sword.

Regarding the discussion of armed-unskilled vs. unarmed-skilled, I think blanket statements are largely irrelevant. "Skilled" in what? Sword? Cricket? Generally unfit couch potato?
However, in general I think an unskilled attacker specifically with a sword will
a)have a high likelyhood of hurting himself,
b) wield the weapon in a less-than-efficient manner, and
c) actually limit his abilities due to wielding the weapon.
I draw these conclusions simply from seeing beginners in the dojo and how they act and move with a sword the first couple of times. Sure, the pointy end is sharp and dangerous, but give the typical joe blog off the street a sword and I actually think I, even with my minimal skill, would have a chance.
Then again, I once talked to a huge (like I've ever seen a small) US Marine who, when asked what he would do if we faced off with swords, replied: "I would throw the sword at you and follow it in."

Regards,

r e n

Howard Quick
25th May 2006, 08:42
The only swords I haven't seen polished all of the way along are some gunto which are typically polished to within an inch of the habaki. One way of identifying them.

No, I'm not nuts...atleast not in my mind. I like your sense of humour!

Simon Novelli
25th May 2006, 10:56
Hey Howard, no worries mate i dont see it as you picking on me like i said its better if someone makes me think "hmm i wonder if i'm wrong on this" than if i was totaly wrong and no one said anything.

I didnt say that my instructor had told me the tip is the only dangerous part, of course it is dangerous all the way down the blade, and like i said the tsuba and tsuka are also used to strike if you are close in, to close maybe to cut.
It is very likly if you attempted to disarm someone you would get cut, even if just a nick on the arm or leg, but that would be far better than having your head cut off i'd imagine.
We have practised with shinai, and bokken in muto dori, granted most time its not full speed, but even so i have seen people go full whack and still manage to get out the way without being 'cut'.
And to touch on your last point, the first thing we are taught is to avoide violence, so if i were to enoucter anything like that on the street, the first thing i would do is try and get the hell out of there, but if i had no choice then i'll be glad i did all those lessons in muto dori.
But even if the techniques are not effective, it still teaches good distance/timing and movement.

Eric Spinelli
25th May 2006, 15:17
Then again, I once talked to a huge (like I've ever seen a small) US Marine who, when asked what he would do if we faced off with swords, replied: "I would throw the sword at you and follow it in."

Yagyu Shingan Ryu that has a kata very similar to this. Search "Yagyu Shigan Ryu ken" on YouTube, it's the third or fourth kata in. Sword drawn versus sword undrawn, fling the sword out of the scabbard, and enter making additional distraction/protection with the saya.

Even having been taught the standard aikido muto dori techniques, I see the fallacy in it. I heard that my instructor, Irvin Faust, recently demo'd live-blade tanto dori in Cambridge. I've never seen him do anything like that in the dojo; methinks the comments about flashy demonstrations are right on.

I've also been taught, by varying instructors, to run, throw, and slap away (from you, not necessarily the attacker) the weapon rather than trying to grab at the hand/arm and disarm.

However, as for surviving stabbings, those who are members, please read http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51438&highlight=death+and+dying at SwordForum. I found many of the links and anecdotes quite interesting/impressive. It shows the resiliency of the human body at times, specifically in the case of puncture wounds. A man can live four days with a puncture wound to his heart...

-Eric

kdlarman
25th May 2006, 23:03
The only swords I haven't seen polished all of the way along are some gunto which are typically polished to within an inch of the habaki. One way of identifying them.

No, I'm not nuts...atleast not in my mind. I like your sense of humour!

That's not a great rule of thumb for identifying gunto. Sure, gunto will tend to have it but I've seen no shortage of shinto, shinshinto and of course gendai sword still exhibiting ubu-ba. It is part of the proper shaping of the sword when first made to have that area near the hands and can extend up the blade a good bunch of inches. Traditionally shaped blades tend to have a type of lengthwise taper that means *if* the polish is well done that area will not be sharp since it would require futzing up the overall shaping. That means altering the angle of the plane of the ji, removing material in a rather important place for blade strength. Traditionally in the craft of polishing it was simply left alone as a dull edge.

As the blade is repolished over the years the sharpness tends to "push" down towards the habaki. After a few reshapings the blade is sharp from tip to habaki.

Also do not forget that the overwhelming majority of koto blades were significantly shortened in their lifespans. So the nakago is cut shorter and the machi moved up the blade. That will also remove any evidence of ububa even on a blade that is relatively healthy with few polishes.

Ububa is not a controversial subject in terms of antiques and the craft of the Japanese sword.

Yes, the older the blade the less likely it will have it, but that doesn't mean it is limited to gunto. Far from it. Gunto are very likely to have it simply because they are usually in their first polish when we see them today. They haven't had time to be polished umpteen times and who would bother trying to machi-okuri one anyway.

Ububa is a kantei point for understanding things like whether a blade has been altered, how many times it has been polished, etc. All those things also help you understand how old the piece likely is. Ububa on an old koto blade is very rare indeed simply because the blade is very old, probably been polished a bunch of times, and probably would have been suriage'd. If you find an ubu koto blade, healthy, with ububa... That is a great find.

But rarity of ububa today on old blades doesn't mean they weren't made that way originally..

That said you have to be a fool to grab a blade bare handed while someone else is holding it. I hold blades barehanded all day long but I sure as heck wouldn't want someone else to push/pull/shift the thing while I"m doing it...

And frankly most mutodori I"ve seen does not involve grabbing the blade. I've seen holding on the back and holding by the tsuka. Holding the edge will give you a new nickname -- stumpy.

And fwiw I think it is certainly a ballsy move. But like many others I find great value in it in terms of understanding maai, in terms of upping the stress level of the training, in terms of dealing with something with a sharp edge, etc. Training is often about exploring variety to ensure a well rounded level of ability. Tossing in things of varied danger, size, reach, being sharp, etc. all changes your options and forces you to learn new things.

One's odds in an encounter would be totally dependant on the skill of the attacker, the "attitude" of the attacker (letting his guard down a bit because of hubris), etc. Of course there is also hubris involved in those who believe they can easily do this sort of thing with anyone -- that's obviously a load. My various sensei in Aikido all say the same thing -- if someone comes at you with a sword and you're unarmed -- run! But a few years ago we had a young man take a baseball bat away from someone else when it was swung at him using a method he learned practicing against a bokken...

Training is sometimes about simply getting better at your art. Even if the specific thing you're trying has a very low chance of success it may also teach you a great deal about distance, timing, and how you're going to have to approach it should something similar happen. And that's all good.

Just my 2 cents... I don't see the problem. Frankly I find sword arts to be totally archaic anyway, so the criticism of effectiveness seems hollow at best. You're more likely to be attacked by a crazed one-legged albino eskimo named Billy Bob than a trained swordsman on the street.

Of course thinking it is easy or really effective against a trained swordsman is absolutely silly. You're dead. But to me coming to the conclusing that it is a total waste of time is similarly absurd.

Lots of folk have talked about doing the pens and t-shirt exercise. How often is someone going to go after you with a pen? Isn't that a waste of time as well then? No, of course not. It teaches you something. Learning muto-dori can help improve someone's techniques in general. It might even work with an amateur with the sword. Or an experienced person in the middle of a hubris attack who drop his guard not realizing how very experienced the other person is.

Train in what you choose to train in. And do it well.

Richard Elias
25th May 2006, 23:17
Best post in this whole thread.

gendzwil
25th May 2006, 23:30
Best post in this whole thread.You could just go around replying to any of Keith's posts in any thread, and that would be true.

Thanks, Keith.

danielsangood
26th May 2006, 00:55
Hi! I was browsing your forums here and was wondering how to get started and this seems like a great opportunity.

I realize that "muto-dori" seems impossible against a trained swordsman, but then I heard this story from my uncle-in-law.

I don't know about now, but a long time ago all Japanese policeman had to train until second dan in Kendo (this was when they still used and constantly carried around swords). Well during this time many Japanese policemen were known to abuse power in Korea, and attacked many people. My grandfather-in-law happened to be one of those people. Two swordsmen drew their swords on my grandfater-in-law (don't know why, didn't want to ask) and basically, he ended up killing them both. He then immediately fled to China until after the Japanese had left post-WWII. This was obviously a stunning feat so I asked what martial art he had learned. He honestly replied "None." This was amazing but obviously this isn't the most confortable subject so I asked no further about the fight. However it's clear from others that he killed the policemen with their own swords.

The point? However unlikely, I think that muto-dori is very difficult and unlikely, but nevertheless it is in no way impossible; and if someone who was not even trained in any martial art did it, imagine the increased probability of success if one was trained and taught?

Regards,
Daniel Johnson

Brett Charvat
26th May 2006, 02:24
"The main issue being, an overly confident student who has been repeatedly praised for his excellence in class will attempt one of these techniques in a 'real' not 'dojo' situation and he will be seriously injured or worse still killed!"

--Really? Am I the only budo student who has absolutely no desire to attempt any techniques outside the dojo if avoidance is at all possible? In my opinion, saying that muto-dori techniques have no place in the dojo because they will NEVER work is as ridiculous as saying that another technique is taught because it will ALWAYS work. "Always" and "never" are two words that I'm always hesitant to apply to any technique. For example, take a kata of my school of iai called muko-zume. It's a fairly standard vertical draw, parry, cut, re-sheath kata. I train in this technique because sensei says to and because it's a part of my school's curriculum. But I feel fairly confident that were I being attacked by three well-trained men armed with Glock 17s, even a perfectly executed muko-zume would fail to save my bacon. Does that negate the martial value of muko-zume? Is it therefore an impossibly useless technique? I guess what I'm failing to understand is what the difference is between muto-dori techniques and all the other techniques we do in the dojo.

The only time I've ever heard any of my various sensei use the word "always" is in the sentence "Running away is almost ALWAYS preferable to technique."

DDATFUS
26th May 2006, 05:35
You know, from our point of view today, it would be a bad thing if practicing muto dori in the dojo made a student overconfident. If someone got the idea from muto dori that they could easily deal with an armed opponent, got into a fight with an armed opponent, and got themselves hurt/killed, that would typically be a bad thing.

Does the same hold true of fuedal Japan? Most of the koryu seem to have been designed primarily to train soldiers. I would think that any training that would make them more likely to charge recklessly forward into a dangerous situation would be a good thing, at least as far as front-lines troops is concerned (not from the point of view of the troops themselves, of course). From what little I know of the history of military combat training, most of it seems to be geared towards helping people overcome their natural reluctance to getting too close to pointy things, or the reluctance normal people feel towards taking human life.


Then again, I once talked to a huge (like I've ever seen a small) US Marine who, when asked what he would do if we faced off with swords, replied: "I would throw the sword at you and follow it in."

Isn't that just the type of attitude that you want a front-lines soldier to have? Isn't that just the type of attitude that Marine training is designed to produce? (I'm asking because I'm not entirely sure-- someone with more first-hand knowledge may be able to correct my misconceptions) Maybe some of the samurai sword instructors of old thought it wouldn't be such a bad thing if their students walked out of the dojo with that type of attitude.

renfield_kuroda
26th May 2006, 10:20
Impossible to comment on the motivations of military training for samurai without considering the context (location, rank, time period, etc.) -- some where straight up foot soldiers, expected to die well and soon, others trained more esoterically, some were generals, others armchair warriors, etc. And some had nothing at all to do with military training again depending on context. Some just needed some basic survival on the streets of Kyoto skills, others defending ruffians on the mountain roads, and still others impress my students as we'll never see real combat.
I've never been a Marine, but that man was trained not to get into something he couldn't get out of, and also trained to get out of just about anything.
Agreed though that there is a fine line between confidence and hubris.

Regards,

r e n

Sam(urai)
26th May 2006, 11:40
Firstly the bad points...

The number of classes I've watched/attended that demonstrate muto dori where the sensei has his sempai perform a weak sloppy cut towards him only to say... 'hang on... no the cut should be here...' etc... WHAT!!! :eek: so you can only stop it if the cut was two inchs to the left and a bit deeper allowing you to move in quicker?!?!?!?!?!? obsurd.... (yes I realise that not everyone is like this, it's just a comment on a number of times I've heard/seen this!!). Then when the student leaves the class thinking 'I really got that today!!! if I go out tonight I know I'm safe...' WHAT!!!! :eek:
Please realise I'm not commenting on the techniques but the teaching in this case. If a sword is used instead of a bokken the sensei would be pissing blood all over his dojo floor and an ambulance would be on its way, children would be cying, there would be mass histeria, dogs and cats living together...

Good points...

I train in the sword arts... I have no asperation of being a 'REAL' samurai or that now I can defend myself, my girlfriend and my family from evil do-ers!!! I train in an art that has held me in awe since a very young age. My dad always did judo... I did judo... my dad loved the Japanese culture and old traditions... i loved the Japanese culture and old traditions too. I've seen a few (very few!!) good exponents of jujutsu and aikido that I would not like to face... I've seen san dan+ that I know I would definately win against using only a bokken, overall I would fancy my chances with a shinken though!!!

Conclusion...
A lot has been said about the fact that sword aren't used anymore, etc... well... When your koryu art or the koryu art on which your modern system is based was founded they were... thats why your curriculum includes muto dori today. Is it useful to talk about it in this way?.... yes it is... Is it useful to practice?... yes it is...

We all practice the arts we practice for different reasons but anything you learn that can increase your speed, reaction time, Techique quota to call from, muscle memory, etc... can only be a good thing. Would it work? to each their own, if you are confident that it will work then if it becomes necessary (and I hope it never does!) to use then you can only blame yourself for the outcome, win/loose (or just loose an arm or a gain an extra hole on one of your arteries!) it's your own decision.

John Frakes
26th May 2006, 17:05
I can't help but feel that this topic is becoming just a little over complicated.

Now, it's very true that a sword is a dangerous weapon. Thats a no brainer. But its not like its a death ray. Its a single edged hand held weapon. You can only do so much with this object. When it comes to muto dori, if you're facing a man who very deeply understands how to utilize the strengths and weaknesses of this weapon, and who will be effective in its utilization, your odds are not good. If you face a novice, your odds are much better. Now, this assumes that you understand the strengths and weaknesses of this weapon and are able to incorporate that understanding into your muto dori. If your muto dori sucks, odds are you'll get chopped up in either situation. If your muto dori doesnt suck, then your odds are better in either situation.

But thats true of everything. It doesnt matter whether its a sword or a punch or a kick or a swing from a baseball bat or whatever else. If you are more skilled at avoiding the attack that the attacker presents than he is at delivering that attack then odds are you'll get out of the way.

There's really nothing complicated about this.

Lemme put it another way. When it comes to modern warfare I'd say the US army is something of an authority on the matter, at least in as much that they're better than most other countries can boast of being, so lets use them.

When you're going through infantry training down at Ft. Benning one of the very first things that gets repeatedly drilled into your head is the idea of minimalizing or negating enemy fire. Think of any war movie you've ever seen where someone yells "COVER!" and you'll know what I'm talking about. the idea is when the enemy fires on you there are things you can do to help protect yourself, whether its moving to physical cover or going prone or whatever. but thats not the point. The point is when the enemy attacks; you get your !!! outta the way.

And I'm sure it was the same for the samurai. Dont get me wrong, I don't believe theres any "end all" way to do muto dori that will completely neutralize a skilled swordsman so that he will eventually walk away in disgust and frustration. Thats not what Im saying at all. I'm saying the muto dori movements (at least the ones that Ive seen) are designed to minimalize the damage. Yes, avoiding the blade completely is nice, but thats not really the point. The point is: when the attack comes, you get your !!! outta the way.

Does that mean it will work? No, not necessarily, but it's better than just standing there isn't it? Like I said, the question of "will this work?" depends on you and it depends on your opponent. The mindset, mental and physical conditioning, environment, training and experience, and whatever else will all play a part in determining the answer to the "will this work?" question as it applies to anything. It doesnt matter whether you're talkin about swords or kalishnakovs.

combat is always a very fluid situation, and I think that's something that we can all agree on.

(sorry for the long winded post. my workload is nonexistant today, so I have alot of free time.)

johan smits
29th May 2006, 09:32
I was thinking about this muto dori discussion and I still think most of us are armchair warriors. I wonder how many of us have worked with just knives in a professional environment? I grew up around a butchery and have worked in it. We are talking big butcherknives you know - the long ones. And that is not even close to a katana.

A weapon is just a weapon and as good as the man or woman handling it is just not true. As I said before - one stands a chance against a sword as long as it is inside the scabbard. Once it is free the only thing the swordfighter has to do is to stand in seigan or chudan or whatever you call it and come towards you. You stand almost no chance because without a weapon of your own you are not going to close the distance.

best,

Johan Smits

John Lovato
29th May 2006, 17:31
It is amazing to me how people can speak with such certainty about what works and what does not work. I think it is the height of arrogance to say 'these old traditions don't work because i was in a fight once so I know better than everyone that has come before me. There is really nothing that relates to working with a sword, not knives, or bats, not sharp pointy sticks. Anyone who speaks in absolutes is really showing how little they know. A friend of mine sent me some photos of a police officer who had been cut up with a knife, he had a deep cut across his chest, one on his belly and one down the length of his back. These were long deep cuts and he surrvived. No outcome is a certainty.

johan smits
30th May 2006, 08:45
It is a bit theoretical I quess but to know if mutodori really "works" we should know the figure of incidents and the outcome of those incidents from the moment these techniques came into existence until now.

As in how many people used mutodori and lived a happy and healthy life after and how many died trying. Only then would we have a reliable answer.



John said:

"I think it is the height of arrogance to say 'these old traditions don't work because i was in a fight once so I know better than everyone that has come before me."

Speaking for myself, this is an important point. I do believe the older traditions had a lot of good or have a lot of good. But the whole misunderstanding about mutodori comes from a lot of dojowarriors not being very critical also not when it comes to the old traditions.

Books are not to be believed but to be subjected to inquiry - I think Umberto Eco said this in "the name of the rose". I think the same holds true for the old or for that matter new traditions.

best,

Johan Smits

John Lovato
30th May 2006, 15:01
Hi Johan,
That’s the problem, we shall never know how many times it worked or failed. And I don't have a problem if people don't want to practice such things. The problem I do have is when people use terms like 'absolute' and 'impossible' to me these words should not exist in a martial artist’s vocabulary. They doom one to failure.
The other problem I have is when people start picking apart an art and say this doesn't work and this does. I don't think these techniques were ever designed to be about two martial artists challenging each other. The guy with the sword sees his enemy and steps in and cuts him down. He is not shifting around trying to do non-committed attacks and knowing with a certainty the other guy is going to try and enter and do a sword takeaway. If you were holding a gun on someone and had decided to shoot him or her down. You don't walk around them shifting the gun from hand to hand and try non-committed attempts to shoot them because you think they might enter in and try and take your gun away. You simply point the gun and shoot them down. But even that outcome is not for certain.
I do agree with you and Mr. Eco, that everything is subject to inquiry. But it always helps to ask the right questions.

Andrew S
30th May 2006, 18:12
My extremely limited understanding of muto dori is that it was/is the highest skill in swordsmanship and only possible after years of training and the possession of not only incredible physical skills but also a deep and profound understanding of the sword.
Interestingly enough, I haven't found mention of ri-ai on this thread, which I would have thought pivotal.

kdlarman
30th May 2006, 18:16
John's comments reminded me of the fact that some police departments train in close combat gun take-aways. And assailants have been successfully disarmed using some of these methods. And police have been shot and killed trying to take them away as well. I was lucky in being allowed to learn these with one of the trainers I know for a local police department. Good, solid technique. But they require some proximity to the aggressor that a trained gunman would know better than to allow.

They do not make someone immune to attack or absolutely able to survive a situation with a gun. Heck, it is a *HORRIBLE* situation and most likely someone is going to die. I just have no intent to stand there and let it be me. I wanna go out with at least doing something to control my own destiny.

But against the trained gunman I'd have virtually zero chance. He or she wouldn't let me be close enough to do anything. And the moment I even twitch a round would probably enter my chest. Followed by another one and possibly one to the forehead. Not good survival chances on that one. But it goes directly back to John's comment about two trained martial artists up against each other.

The police absolutely don't abandon gun takeaways just because against a trained gunman you don't stand a chance. Of course not. Most assailants on the street aren't trained gunmen. But lots of bad guys have guns. So it is good to know. And you might as well try *if* you believe that you're going to get shot anyway. And policemen are intimately aware that someone pointing a gun at them is usually a sign of a very desperate assailant. Bad situation.

Historically not all guys with swords were highly trained, highly conditioned swordsmen. Having a sword does not make you a proficient swordsman. At many times in history the poor guys on the front line were drafted peasants with crappy swords hanging through their tattered obi. Sometimes with only the most rudimentary of training. Heck, there were time periods when swords were made en masse and were very low quality. Those swords weren't being made for experienced, highly trained and valuable swordsmen. They were made for the "troops" who were likely to be perforated under a shower of arrows the next day. How much training do you guys think those guys had?

"Hold the sword with both hands, bring it over your head, run over towards the other guy and whack him until he stops moving! There, you're ready... And when you die make sure you fall in front of them so they trip over you before they come this way..."


Heck, just watch some of the nitwits who post videos of their "master" sword techniques. Spinny, swirling crap, gross over extension, deep follow through, huge openings, etc. Sure, they can still get ya, but you have a chance with one of those twits. In part due to their lack of proper training but also in no small part due to the hubris of the person holding the weapon.

How many guys in the days of old looked pretty much like this fella below when they first held their sword?

http://summerchild.com/kkk/KrappyKarateKamae_files/image021.jpg



But in the end the reason I train in it is that it is part of the curriculum. And I get a great deal out of the practice. I am also under no illusions that many of the folk posting in this very thread would likely cut me in two if I tried it with them. But not everyone with a sword is a "swordsman", neh? And anything I can do to improve my abilities overall, to expand my vision, to expand my understanding of space, time and movement are good things to me. Anything to stress the edges of what I can do is a good day of training. And that stuff certainly pushes the envelope.

johan smits
31st May 2006, 06:58
Keith and John,

You both are right I think in what you say. John about asking the right question. What grizzles me a bit though is the ease people talk about taking a sword away as if it is nothing. I also think Keith's comparison to gun take away's by police is very good.
My point of view is very much that of a civilian (which after all I am). Police officers who use their arts in reallife situations for me come very close I feel to the mentallity that is needed for mutodori techniques to be succesful.

That by the way does not change my thinking that unarmed against a sword you have a chance only if the sword is in the scabbard. Unarmed against a sword which is free - okay two options - the guy is an absolute moron with a sword than you will probably have a fighting chance. Against someone with only mediocre swordskill - nope - your head on a plate.

I have trained in mutodori and tried with some friends who are trained in swordtechniques. Although I do not lack confidence in my own abilities which are quite reasonable (my own words I hasten to say) but I do suffer from a healthy dose of realism in my outlook on training.

best,

Johan Smits

Howard Quick
31st May 2006, 23:49
The original question was

How many people out there who practice a sword art they would consider to be effective, or atleast reasonably so, also practice mutodori???? And why?
Key words being "effective" and "atleast reasonably so".
With this in mind, if you think muto dori is possible then you must believe your sword can be taken from you, or that a person can defend themselves against you (you being a competent swordsman, them being unarmed).
Therefor if this is your belief, you are not practicing an effective system of swordsmanship!
You can't compare gun take-aways to muto dori. Firstly, you can grab the barrel of a gun (as is practiced by many Jujutsu schools). There is nothing sharp to worry about. Secondly, a person has to aim a gun. A sword does not need to be aimed at a person, it merely needs to come between the two. As far as I am aware, from talking with people trained in professions which use a gun to arrest/subdue an assailant/criminal, they are told that if they hold their gun to the person they may as well hand it to them. These are people trained in the weapons' use. Taking a gun is not that difficult and therefor not relevent to this discussion.
John, I believe the attacker in that knife attack was shot by the victims partner. If not, he would have surely died!

The guy with the sword sees his enemy and steps in and cuts him down.
This is exactly the reason people think muto dori is possible. Why do people always think that a cut with a sword has to be a full bodied, committed action?
What about stepping backwards and cutting?
What about feinting an attack from one angle and changing to another angle?
Just what defences are possible against a kesa (diagonal) cut?
How are you supposed to move in on a swordsman when you can't even see the blade???

John Lovato
1st June 2006, 00:43
Howard,
I want to know why you are using feints and attacking from other angles and doing all this fancy stuff against an unarmed man? It must be to stop them from entering and doing some kind of takeaway. So if you are doing this to ensure the unarmed man doesn't take your sword away this validates the possiblity that it might work. Otherwise you would just walk up and cut down the poor defenseless man.

I just think you are being incredibly arrogant. I don't care if you have been training for twenty years or fifty years. You have not seen everything out there nor have you experienced everyones technique, so for you to say that it is impossible just shows your imaturity.

Let me get this straight, taking a gun is not difficult? Are you kidding? I would rather go up a guy with a sword than a guy with a gun anyday.

As for my ablity with a sword, I have the utmost confidence in the effectiveness of myself and my art.

This has been an interesting discussion but I don't think we will ever come to any kind of an agreement. You belive what you want. Good luck with your training.

Brett Charvat
1st June 2006, 07:02
"You can't compare gun take-aways to muto dori. Firstly, you can grab the barrel of a gun (as is practiced by many Jujutsu schools)....Taking a gun is not that difficult and therefor not relevent to this discussion."


--These types of statements are typically heard by folks who have minimal (if any) training in how to apply a firearm in a lethal force encounter. Unless your arms are seven meters long, you won't be grabbing any well-trained and prepared gun-fighter's barrel. However, rather than dwell on Mr. Quick's experience with firearms, it's interesting that his assertions somewhat prove the case FOR training in muto-dori, rather than against it. As Mr. Larman pointed out above, many if not most police officers are trained in rudimentary firearm disarming techniques, even though a well-trained gunman wouldn't dream of choosing to engage his/her target at contact distance if it could be avoided. The obvious conclusion is that police are training to take firearms away from poorly trained attackers. Why would that be any less the case with a sword? Even if muto-dori techniques only exist/are taught to provide a last-ditch effort to disarm a very poorly-trained swordsman, isn't that reason enough to learn them? How ridiculous would it be to be an expert swordsman who was unable to disarm a violent but untrained nutbag wielding a sword because "he wasn't well-trained enough?"

johan smits
1st June 2006, 07:04
Gentlemen,

About the original question - I did practice a sword art and I do believe someone can take my sword away, but only when I have not drawn it yet. :)

I also do not think a swordfighter will make the mistake once he has drawn his sword and is facing me (unarmed) to chance his postition from chudan kamae, since it is not necessary.


The comparison John made with guns is actually very good I think. Sword and gun are both lethal weapons different though. The pointing of the gun and pointing of the sword are much the same. What I was trying to say in my previous post was that the mindset needed for gun take aways is when you ask me pretty much the same as for mutodori.

Oh and Howard, you are supposed to move in on the swordsman if you can't see the blade (means it is in the scabbard).

The strategies for gun and knife (sword) are different though. I read this somewhere on the net (can't remember where): you rush a gun and run from a knife. That's good advice.

I'll be away for a short holliday.

best,

Johan Smits

JAnstey
1st June 2006, 08:06
Oh and Howard, you are supposed to move in on the swordsman if you can't see the blade (means it is in the scabbard).

Johan Smits[/QUOTE]

erm, not at all... wakigamae (Waki kamae)

The only reason I post this is there is so many absolute assumptions being made. What if this, what if that etc.

IF Muto-dori was in my Sensei's curriculum, I would study it, why, because he said so. Agree or disagree, if it's in the Ryu - then this should be respected.

Yours in Budo

Jason

johan smits
1st June 2006, 09:32
Jason,

You know it was a bit of a joke. Actually if the swordsman is any good you won't see the blade if it is held in chudan gamae.

I agree with you, if mutodori was in my sensei's curriculum I would study it but I would be very critical about it. One of the things I would want to know from my sensei is if he had ever used the technique in a reallife situation.
If it is in the ryu than it should be respected is not how I feel about things. Anything in the ryu is to be subjected to inquiry (all at the proper time of course meaning at the correct level of expertise within that ryu).

Happy landings.

Johan Smits

JAnstey
1st June 2006, 09:53
Hi Johan,

I am pretty sure we would all be in agreement in regards to certain points if we were sitting around a table, sipping a beer without the internet in the way.

Cheers mate :)

Jason

johan smits
1st June 2006, 10:05
And to you Jason!!

best,

Johan Smits

John Frakes
1st June 2006, 15:18
Muto dori....... Really???????

(aka The Thread That Wouldn't Die :rolleyes: )

Andy Watson
1st June 2006, 15:40
Indeed. Shall we discuss the inside of a pingpong ball? :rolleyes:

Richard Elias
1st June 2006, 21:08
I think it's impossible to even consider discussing the inside of a ping pong ball without actually having been inside one.

:p

Eric Spinelli
1st June 2006, 23:06
I'm still confused why everybody keeps arguing about disarming techniques. The Budo Hidensho has been linked to and quoted earlier in this thread (page 3) which clearly states that muto dori is not necessarily about disarming, but about not being cut. Now that sounds like a much more reasonable goal.

I understand that this is a modern text from a single school but I think the ideas are much more universal than disarming techniques. Is nobody mentioning this because there is a lot less to argue about?!?

gendzwil
2nd June 2006, 00:03
Well, I think most of the people are talking past each other at this point. But if I may summarise the consensus opinion:

1. muto dori is a last ditch effort for survival
2. just because it's hard and chances are low doesn't mean you shouldn't practice it
3. wrt 1 & 2, at least acknowledge that it's hard
4. practice of the technique has benefit in and of itself
5. it's in the curriculum, so shut up and train it already
6. nothing in life on this big blue ball is certain

Richard Elias
2nd June 2006, 00:37
7. Most people can't fit inside of a ping pong ball.

Neil Yamamoto
2nd June 2006, 00:50
8) Be the ball

On the other hand, I know a few places in Tiajuana where someone fit a ping pong ball into...

Howard Quick
2nd June 2006, 00:51
Mr. Charvat,

Please re-read my post.


As far as I am aware, from talking with people trained in professions which use a gun to arrest/subdue an assailant/criminal, they are told that if they hold their gun to the person they may as well hand it to them.

In other words, you are correct. A person trained in the use of a gun will not hold their gun close enough to a person for them to reach it!

Also, I have trained extensively in the application of gun disarming, using real guns (unloaded of course)...how about yourself.
I should have clarified things a little more. Guns are not easy to take away from a person, however, relative to swords they are alot easier 'as long as they are held close to you'! Only gangsters in movies and fools hold a gun against a person. Against a trained person with a gun, not much hope, if any!

John, I never said I wasn't arrogant. I'm also oppinionated. I don't believe I'm immature but if you want to have an insult slinging match because I don't agree with you...have at it!

If you guys want to discuss the inside of a ping pong ball, do it elsewhere!
If you don't want to discuss muto dori, don't! Simple really :rolleyes:

Richard Elias
2nd June 2006, 02:11
"If you guys want to discuss the inside of a ping pong ball, do it elsewhere!
If you don't want to discuss muto dori, don't! Simple really"

Dude, lighten up
It was a joke

No offense but...
Disscussing the inside of a ping pong ball is just as valid as the opinion on the efficacy of muto dori from someone who doesn't train in it.

Have a beer

:toast:

John Lovato
2nd June 2006, 02:42
Howard,
It was an observation, not intended as an insult. To me when people use absolutes and words like impossible to me that shows a certain level of inexperience or imaturity. Maybe I'm wrong. But if I have a choice to belive Yagyu Munenori or Howard Quick, I'm going to go with Yagyu.

So, no hard feelings, I hope. Like I said, good luck with your training.

renfield_kuroda
2nd June 2006, 04:22
To point out the really obvious: muto dori, and various other forms of unarmed training, are quite relevant for weapons training as well. In my brief study of sword, tessen, jutte, jo, kusarigama, and tanjo to date, 90% of the techniques are the same; closing, evading, use of the hips and center, etc.
Closing while avoiding a cut is very similar to cutting while deflecting an attack.
Learning how to effectively close/parry/block/avoid/sucker/deflect also helps when you are on the attacking end, in that it may give some insight into how your target may react, thus informing your attack.
This is of course only relevant for my beloved arts, your mileage may vary. And as Lovato states: there are no absolutes.
I just have to believe that the techniques handed down through the generations had some relevance back in the day, otherwise they would not have been transmitted as such.

Regards,
r e n

Andy Watson
2nd June 2006, 13:51
Howard

You are quite right in saying that if we don't want to contribute to this thread then we should get off.

My light hearted comment was made to reflect that this discussion had continued on for several pages, was becoming extremely repetitive, was having no new opinions being brought to the table and that no one seemed to be any closer in reaching a concensus of opinion.

I think Neil's summary of 6 points is right on the mark. Whether this discussion carries on is of course entirely up to the broad population, my only point was that it doesn't seem to be going anywhere and I can't for the life of me foresee where it can go.

With sincerity

johan smits
6th June 2006, 07:42
Renfield said:

"I just have to believe that the techniques handed down through the generations had some relevance back in the day, otherwise they would not have been transmitted as such."

In a light non-offensive nor insulting tone - :p I hope that much is clear I would like to share the following:

This seems a very important point. Muto dori techniques had relevance back in those days. Professionaly trained warriors who made it their business to use arms. I can imagine that for those people mutodori was difficult, last ditch, not preferred but what else and then it works.

For us as civilians, who train maybe two or three hours in a week. Are we ever going to get to that level? No we aren't - but we can pretend and make others (future students) believe that we actually can. Or we can adjust our training to facilitate mutodori techniques.

In most modern jujutsu styles there are no offensive techniques as in one sits or sneaks up behind an attacker and smashes his head into the ground. In other words most people do not take initiative. This when it goes on for several generations of students changes the mental outlook or mindset within the system.
In my opinion mutodori needs an agressive attitude as opposed to the self-defence attitude found in most modern jujutsustyles. So I think mutodori would not fit in well with (most) modern jujutsu.

In a lot of older jujutsu systems, the defender is the agressor as in sneak up behind ...etc. Mutodori belongs more to that mindset if you ask me.


Pingpong balls are not bad you know they just act that way. But hey come on give them a break.

best,

Johan Smits