PDA

View Full Version : Nathan Scott is FIGHT SCIENCE!!!



Arman
21st August 2006, 04:56
Nice work, Nathan! I thought you and Obata Sensei performed admirably. Too bad the producers spent most the time on the ninja and the roided out tae kwon do guy, and you guys got only like 30 seconds or something. And why on earth did they put a katana in the tae kwon do guy's hands?? Wow, that was bad. If anybody should have been hacking at the body dummy it should have been you or Obata.

Nice work on the shuriken, and the tameshigiri was really nice. Was this your television premier? Will we be seeing more of Nathan Scott, The Ultimate Warrior? :)

Best,
Arman Partamian

Nathan Scott
24th August 2006, 07:53
Holy Saba - so much for laying low!! ;)

And here I didn't think anyone watched the National Geographic Channel...


Nice work, Nathan! I thought you and Obata Sensei performed admirably.

Thanks brother. An old training partner of mine had called me and asked if I and Obata Sensei could help out with the project. The final result wasn't quite the same as the picture they painted for me prior to filming, but at least the footage they shot of us turned out o.k. They actually cut a lot of stuff we did out - like, anything that was not live blade work (a good dynamic tachiuchi kata).


Too bad the producers spent most the time on the ninja and the roided out tae kwon do guy, and you guys got only like 30 seconds or something.

Yeah, after seeing the piece I figured out that they must have decided to invite a bunch of folks from the MA competition circuits to make sure that the serious martial art stuff didn't get "boring". I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but a part of me keeps thinking someone is going to film a new version of the Eien Naru Budo (AKA: "Budo - The Art of Killing'") documentary. I guess that ain't ever going to happen!


And why on earth did they put a katana in the tae kwon do guy's hands?? Wow, that was bad. If anybody should have been hacking at the body dummy it should have been you or Obata.

Well, funny enough, they originally asked us to hack away at the balistic gel mannequin, and I told them no - "Japanese swordsmanship is a dignified art, and we don't want to film testing such as that for the general public to watch". So of course, they ignored us and got someone else to do it. Better him than us, but I still felt shamed to have been a part of the segment after seeing him wildly hack at a human shaped gel mannequin. That wasn't "science" of fighting, that was just stupid, and I hope the public doesn't think that is what Japanese Swordsmanship is about.


Nice work on the shuriken, and the tameshigiri was really nice.

Thanks again - as a disclaimer on the shuriken though, they asked me if I knew anyone that practiced shurikenjutsu and who would come to throw them some time that week. I told them no, but that I had experience with them as a side interest, and if all they wanted was someone to throw them I'd be happy to do it. I warned them I wasn't really formally trained, and wasn't ranked or licensed, but they were just excited to have found someone to do it. So I showed up with all my gear and historical documents, thinking they must be wanting to see bo-shuriken throwing (spikes), since it is far harder than just throwing shaken (throwing stars). Silly me. But it was fun anyway. I never get a chance to throw much anymore.

And BTW, the reason they showed me cutting is because they were hot to see the simulated "arm" target, in which we wrap a full tatami omote around a length of bamboo. It probably wasn't obvious in the shot they printed of me cutting it (aside from the thud of the cut target), but that was the bamboo core target. They filmed the cut piece a number of times, but didn't show it for some reason.


Was this your television premier? Will we be seeing more of Nathan Scott, The Ultimate Warrior?

Why do I feel like William Shatner on the Comedy Channel Roast!?!

Naw, I did a little something on a Discover Channel show (History vs. Hollywood? I forget...) as well as a bit for a Japanese TV channel and a few other misc. bits. I used to work behind the scenes in the film industry, and living in LA, figured I'd leave the door open for the right type of occasional opportunities (not acting, don't worry!). We'll see how good the next sales pitch is... ;)

It's funny though - I was driving around at work today wearing, well, non-martial arts type clothes and sun glasses, and a guy and his kid in a truck pull up next to me and said "Hey, you look familiar - weren't you on a TV martial arts show recently?". No kidding - how whacky is that?

Anyway, thanks for the roast!

PS. In case some of you don't know what we're talking about, and are morbidly curious to see what is going on, there is apparently a webpage up for the program:

http://www9.nationalgeographic.com/channel/fightscience/index.html

Regards,

Fred27
24th August 2006, 08:17
The show seems very..uhm...american :)

Prince Loeffler
24th August 2006, 08:18
Nathan , will you autograph my chest ? with permanent marker !! :) :) :) :)

Arman
24th August 2006, 20:22
Nathan,
Good point on the gel mannequin. Watching the tae kwon do guy hack it to pieces was just. . .ugly.

I also wondered why you were throwing shaken instead of the spikes. Silly me, of course it was a production decision. And of course they would cut out the tachiuchi stuff. It always seems that any attempt at serious martial arts production turns into a vehicle for the goofiest stuff.

"Budo-The Art of Killing" is a classic.

And as for roasting you, what else are friends for? :)

Best,
Arman Partamian

Asura
25th August 2006, 09:16
What kills me is that they have alllll that equipment at their disposal, and all they can do is show a) oh look Rickson CAN really break someone's arm by armbar
b) A samurai sword is ht3 dead1y
c) think of similar inane topics related to a and b

THey get a WUSHU guy to represent chinese martial arts? :rolleyes:


No faults on you Nathan, I was wondering why you or Obata didn't demonstrate on the gel mannequin...can't say I blame your decision after watching that atrocity.
Funny how I thought the exact same thing...would've been interesting to see them model the body connection involved in throwing shaken...

MarkF
25th August 2006, 09:31
I just love the guys who are bare of jacket but still seem to have a need to hold something closed.


I've been seeing promos for this show for weeks but had no idea you were in it, Nathan. Even the best of these shows are only 'this much' above bad, but it will be nice to see you do, ah, whatever it is they wanted you to do. You are just too generous, Nate. Generally, the BS meter is on the moon in anticipation for it, but now that I know you're one of the "Ninja Martial Arts champions," a roast is definitely in order. I'll now have to really consider watching it, too.:)

Say, did you get a copy of the rough cut? Those are always more entertaining than the demo "Dim Mak" fus. Perhaps you would want should post a clip or two? You did not sign a waiver, did you? Please say you didn't sign a waiver.

Quote from participant: "I feel like Superman..in a very humble way." Was that one of the highlights?

Sorry, someone has to get the roast going.;)

Me wishing you luck in getting more work in the future, actually. But, sorry, all my connections I left in the business upon leaving LA in '86 are retired or dead, or are getting their intros to that part of one's career.

Best,

Mark

Mark Jakabcsin
25th August 2006, 14:23
I roasted Nathan a little by phone a few minutes after the shows end on the Right Coast, hence I won't bore the forum at general with a replay.

The topic of a good documentary has come up several times. Why not grab a film student and make one? While this would be a huge project it probably will never happen unless someone from the inside applies the energy, vision and will power to see it through.

Once finished it could be pitched to TV or flipped straight to DVD. I can think of several distribution options for such a DVD.

Just thought as I would love to see a good show on the topic.

Take care,

Mark J.

Nathan Scott
28th August 2006, 02:50
The show seems very..uhm...american

If you mean it was over the top and fairly cheesy, I would agree over all. So maybe we need to find a foreign independent film company to produce a new budo documentary? Or, we'll all just compile our private budo footage into a documentary...


What kills me is that they have alllll that equipment at their disposal, and all they can do is show
a) oh look Rickson CAN really break someone's arm by armbar
b) A samurai sword is ht3 dead1y
c) think of similar inane topics related to a and b

I agree. Their scientific conclusions were for the most part elementary or somewhat wrong. Not to mention flawed in the testing method. They want to compare Chinese vs. Japanese vs. Korean vs. Western methods, but they use different size/strength/age exponents with very different training experiences and levels of skill. Especially funny after they concluded that, when it comes to punches, "size does matter"!

Their other conclusions weren't much more inspired: "With the most effective strikes, the power was generated from the ground up". No kidding. And that with the nunchaku, a semi-flexible weapon, it failed their practical test because of relatively slow recovery time after making an impact. I've struck things with nunchaku many times and found it to be just fine as long as you have the technique to control it. The actual weakness of nunchaku, IMO, is in the ability to block or deflect, and that the users center mass is often the easiest area to penetrate from the standpoint of nunchaku defenses (ie: thrusts are relatively hard to block). But that's just me - I'm no scientist!


THey get a WUSHU guy to represent chinese martial arts?

Yeah. To me it was obvious that the wushu guy was a solo form competition specialist, with very little applied striking training. Most of the competitors that were used for the punching impact test were horrible at punching as a result. It's also funny that the competitors were considered to be expert representatives in their arts (when was Japanese swordsmanship incorporated into Tae Kwon Do?), but all appeared to be in their mid-twenties.


No faults on you Nathan, I was wondering why you or Obata didn't demonstrate on the gel mannequin...can't say I blame your decision after watching that atrocity.

For the reasons I explained in my last post. From a modern swordsmen's training perspective, it would be useful to test technique against balistic gel. On the other hand, straw and bamboo are time tested human-simulations. I wouldn't be opposed to cutting up balistic gel in my own dojo, or even doing it off camera at the location and having them just explain what the results were (or maybe motion capture it). But this show was clearly not an "academic" piece, it was largely entertainment. I don't see how cutting up simulated human bodies on TV would be an appropriate representation of the value of training we aspire to by training in budo.


...would've been interesting to see them model the body connection involved in throwing shaken...

Yep. I think it would be similar to other traditional Japanese arts though. Some methods involve a slight "whipping" motion of the whole body, from the ground up, that increases in potential exponentially the further through the body it gets (what they called on the program "kinetic linking"). Other methods, like the standing shaken kata I demonstrated that involved twisting from hanmi to hanmi while thowing, maintains the "hitoemi" straight line principle found mostly in older ryu-ha. That kata and the method of throwing from a kneeling position were ones I picked up from Obata Sensei. I'm under the impression that the standing one is quite old.

One thing they didn't bother to pay attention to was what I explained to them about the purpose of shuriken throwing. They did show a small part of me explaining this, but it was then followed up by computer images showing how deep the throwing starts could penetrate into a human chest. Sure, it's possible...


Say, did you get a copy of the rough cut? Those are always more entertaining than the demo "Dim Mak" fus. Perhaps you would want should post a clip or two? You did not sign a waiver, did you? Please say you didn't sign a waiver.

I don't recall signing a waiver, but I don't have any rough footage yet. I'll call them up and try to get that from them. As I said, there is a lot of stuff they ended up not using that should have turned out pretty good. If I do get it I'll let you know.

Regards,

Jason Chambers
28th August 2006, 03:27
Mr. Scott:

I JUST saw the last 3/4s of this show tonight...

THANK YOU for contribution. The rest of it was just awful kid stuff.

Asura
28th August 2006, 05:32
Yep. I think it would be similar to other traditional Japanese arts though. Some methods involve a slight "whipping" motion of the whole body, from the ground up, that increases in potential exponentially the further through the body it gets (what they called on the program "kinetic linking"). Other methods, like the standing shaken kata I demonstrated that involved twisting from hanmi to hanmi while thowing, maintains the "hitoemi" straight line principle found mostly in older ryu-ha.

Nathan,
The twisting from hanmi to hanmi description was awesome...caused me to remember something else I'd thought about after seeing that show.

Individually I thought the show touched on some major pitfalls in the "normal" mode of human movement. Namely loss of power for the sake of speed. Gaining power but losing control and balance, etc etc.
Their comment on the "sway" in the human body was actually the only "cool" thing in the program. It would've been intersting if they measured the "sway" in the human body when the individuals were striking and using a weapon. I'd bet $$$ that your teacher would have virtually nill in his body when striking with the sword. Getting him on the balance poles would've been just as interesting.
I'd say that a basic component that's overlooked currently is how to develop the body to minimize "sway" after the delivery of a strike. Its probably this point which the guys way back when caught onto, and started coming up with the skill of 6-directions, roppo/happo no chikara etc...
It's like, you bring up all these problems, but then really fail to give a solution...so what happens when you get a guy whose trained his body to deliver it in a manner so that there's virtually no sway before, during and after whatever movement you do? How did he do it, etc.

Just some thoughts :)

Nathan Scott
28th August 2006, 06:11
Individually I thought the show touched on some major pitfalls in the "normal" mode of human movement. Namely loss of power for the sake of speed. Gaining power but losing control and balance, etc etc.

The TKD guy said at one point that the faster you move, the more power you generate. That of course is not necessarily true. Also, when testing the crow bar and baseball bat out, he said that if he had missed the target he would have lost his balance. Why? If you have formal training in swinging methods, you should know how to swing either at full power or at a power level in which you can stop the weapon at the end of the stroke. The cut I performed on the tatami/bamboo target is an example of how to cut full power without worrying about losing control or balance (even though I didn't cut full power, that is the technique principle).


Their comment on the "sway" in the human body was actually the only "cool" thing in the program. It would've been intersting if they measured the "sway" in the human body when the individuals were striking and using a weapon. I'd bet $$$ that your teacher would have virtually nill in his body when striking with the sword. Getting him on the balance poles would've been just as interesting.

Although Obata Sensei can move surprisingly quick, he is very rooted. He is a very natural and talented type of martial artist, who began training hard at a young age, so his taisabaki in terms of unification and control is flawless.

The program said that scientists consider human walking to be a relatively awkward "series of controlled falls". That may be true, but controlled falls can be performed as gracefully as any other animals stride if trained correctly. Balance is a learned skill, as is what I call transferring weight when moving. If you think about it, walking or moving your body across the ground is a combination of body coordination skills and distance judgement. Ever see someone use suri-ashi (sliding foot) methods on a glossy gym floor? As an example of either extreme, if you misjudge the distance you want to transfer your weight to (aiming your weight transfer to a distance that is the same as where you move your foot to), you will either stumble forward (weight is placed at a distance behind where the foot is placed) or slip backward (weight is placed at a distance in front of where the foot is placed). On the other hand, if your judgement of how to "fall forward" (transfer weight) is tuned to match where you guide your foot to go, you can perform suri-ashi across a sticky floor with the appearance of ice skating. All this is to say, "sway" (weight transfer) is a critical element of movement, since to move while perfectly in center balance is un-natural and physically far more tiring.


I'd say that a basic component that's overlooked currently is how to develop the body to minimize "sway" after the delivery of a strike. Its probably this point which the guys way back when caught onto, and started coming up with the skill of 6-directions, roppo/happo no chikara etc...

That would have been good to investigate. They indicated that the ninjer had developed extraordinary control of his muscles and bone alignment in his feet, which allowed him to make minute adjustments to maintain his lack of sway. Makes sense. What I find interesting about sway after the delivery of a strike though is the concept that - at least most koryu budo - was developed for use outdoors (ie: wearing waraji or some other covering between the foot and ground) on often un-even terrain, but the training method became largely indoors while practicing bare foot. I know that there are a number of subtle things I do with my feet barefoot on tatami or wooden floors that would not hold up outdoors while wearing shoes.

Outdoors, the historical answer to balance and sway appeared to be to drop the weight down into lower stances. I train indoors and outdoors, and I find training both ways to be a very important practice in terms of feedback.

Regards,

Dan Harden
28th August 2006, 14:59
I don't get the point about the indoors/ outdoors thing. Lower stances have little do with inddors or out. Comparatively the lower stance will effect you equally whether indoors or out. I understand your point avout the evolution to edo and stand up suri-ashi. But all in all, the end result isn't predicated on location.

The major contibution I would attribute to maintaining balance AND eliminating sway, is in what your connective tissue is doing with your frame. Indoors or out, upright or low stance. How we hold our frame and then how we generate power while moving in Budo should be an "unnatural" and learned form of movement that makes us relaxed and yet feel rigid at the same time. Making it difficult to take our balance and yet steal theirs. Our balance should be trained to be held at zero by going out in all directions at will. For every reaction there being an opposite reaction to achieve "balance." Most send power one way and lose balance. What would happen if you swung and someone removed the heavy bag at that split second. Most would fall down..... go boom. We should be able to deliver heavy power and transfer wieght, then use mass X velocity and yet remain balanced in the action. So we maintain zero.

Frame, and connective tissue, make structure. Structure and breathing add to power. How we use that structure and how the Japanese solved the dilema of fighting all day in armor with weapons is the real study they missed.

My son got a hoot out of the whole thing. He was watching the Buff TKD guy and the Chinese stylist going full speed with the bag not doing much and did a "What the _______?" He dents bags and sends them out at 45 deg angles at full speed without giving away balance or major-muscle dedication.
He still doesn't get it when he meets other MA people who cant budge him and he makes them fold with just a hand. He grew up in it and he still expects others to know this stuff.
He spotted the TKD sword work right off and scoffed. I didn't say a word and he picked Nathan and Obata's group out and said "These guys are real right dad?"
Nathan, sorry you tried to help and ran into modern T.V. hype. You might look prettier in silky pajamas :)

At least they left in Rickson. The advertisers probably cought the UFC/pride dollar value connection.
Rickson, Obata 10%
Crap 90%
Just what we needed- Buff teenagers cutting up human body shapes
Yup...... T.V.

Oh well
Dan

Kyro Lantsberger
28th August 2006, 15:38
I agree with what has been said previously.

What would have been a good idea took on a circus atmosphere largely due to the poorly chosen participants.

On another sword forum, I recently was part of a discussion that it would be interesting to see how ballistic gelatin would perform as a cutting medium. The impetus behind that question was someone bringing up that the Crusade era Egyptians and Persians used a special clay for cutting practice. This is very interesting, since clay can be reformed far more easily than chopped up tatami.

I would have been interested in seeing Obata cut the gelatin, but I agree that the format that the show was arranged in wasnt that good.

I would be very curious if JAMA or some other reputable source would arrange something similar but with more professionalism.

Dan Harden
28th August 2006, 15:55
Ballisitc gellatin is more in keeping with soft tissue traumas. Penetration and the effects of energy absorbtion. Sword cuttings biggest trouble is with bone and delfection due to cloth and or armor.
Doubt it? Buy Hog hips and wrap them in cloth or leather. Cut with a katana or try to stab with a knife. There is a whole world of learning there.

That said the point is to avoid those things and find openings or.....in the case of the proverbial duel..cut anywhere, while not being cut. :rolleyes:

If you are under a proper teacher test cutting isn't all that necessary. In the day, it was more for testing the sword not the man. I've had guys who never cut a thing, just trained and walked out the dojo door and cut trees. Not surprisingly the same ideas of body training apply to the spear, the sword or the hand.

cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
30th August 2006, 21:07
Hey Dan,


I don't get the point about the indoors/ outdoors thing. Lower stances have little do with indoors or out. Comparatively the lower stance will effect you equally whether indoors or out. I understand your point avout the evolution to edo and stand up suri-ashi. But all in all, the end result isn't predicated on location.

I disagree. The main reason stances got to be higher in the Edo period, outside of likely WMA influence, is because budo-ka were training in controlled, indoor enviornments without obstacles, hills, or varied surfaces. Especially barefoot, they could make strikes (ie: project force outside their center of balance) from a higher (read: faster) kamae while maintaining their balance. Think kendo. If you go outside, and you are on wet grass on an incline, a lower center of gravity combined with a wider base (think: race cars vs. SUV's) will compensate for the impacts and centrifugal force being extended. Especially in older style tsuba-zeriai encounters, or kumiuchi for that matter. When wearing foot coverings outdoors, the only way to increase your "connection" with the ground is by assuming a deeper, lower stance.

What you were saying later in your post makes sense from a strictly movement standpoint, but I was replying to what Mr. John had stated:


I'd say that a basic component that's overlooked currently is how to develop the body to minimize "sway" after the delivery of a strike.

Regards,

kokumo
30th August 2006, 22:15
Hey Dan,



I disagree. The main reason stances got to be higher in the Edo period, outside of likely WMA influence, is because budo-ka were training in controlled, indoor enviornments without obstacles, hills, or varied surfaces. Especially barefoot, they could make strikes (ie: project force outside their center of balance) from a higher (read: faster) kamae while maintaining their balance. Think kendo. If you go outside, and you are on wet grass on an incline, a lower center of gravity combined with a wider base (think: race cars vs. SUV's) will compensate for the impacts and centrifugal force being extended. Especially in older style tsuba-zeriai encounters, or kumiuchi for that matter. When wearing foot coverings outdoors, the only way to increase your "connection" with the ground is by assuming a deeper, lower stance.

What you were saying later in your post makes sense from a strictly movement standpoint, but I was replying to what Mr. John had stated:



Regards,

I've got to agree with Nathan on this -- two of the most fruitful training exercises I've ever undertaken were a) clearing a hillside of sumac saplings with a beater blade and b) an afternoon class of basic paired sword drills outdoors in the driving rain on a lawn that was rapidly turning to soupy mud in the deluge.

In both circumstances, I quickly discovered that anything but a very low stance was an invitation to swift and painful consequences.

YMMV,

FL

Trevor Johnson
30th August 2006, 22:37
I've got to agree with Nathan on this -- two of the most fruitful training exercises I've ever undertaken were a) clearing a hillside of sumac saplings with a beater blade and b) an afternoon class of basic paired sword drills outdoors in the driving rain on a lawn that was rapidly turning to soupy mud in the deluge.

In both circumstances, I quickly discovered that anything but a very low stance was an invitation to swift and painful consequences.

YMMV,

FL

I had the pleasure of watching demonstrations by Ellis Amdur, Meik Skoss, Dave Lowry, and some of their students at the Japan Festival in St Louis 2 years ago. They did some demonstrations indoors and some outside on the grass. Some of their kata they did standing high, and some they did while very low and in wide stances. The explanation I remember for this was that the higher, lighter stances were a more modern development that was post-armor, and the lower wider stances were what you'd use in armor.

I am not a koryu person myself, so there may be gokui that I don't know involved as well, but this I do remember.

Dan Harden
31st August 2006, 02:53
Nathan and Fred

You guys missed my point!..or I suck at making them :)
What I am saying is that Lower stances are superior .......whether....indoors or out.
Make more sense? I know, I know. "Why didn't you say that in the first place.
No doubt lower is better, to a point. And there is no reason you cannot practice weapons in lower stances....indoors. I do it all the time. It's a staple of our art. You both know what I am referring to..shhhh.

So that was my point here......quote
I don't get the point about the indoors/ outdoors thing. Lower stances have little do with indoors or out. Comparatively the lower stance will effect you equally whether indoors or out. I understand your point avout the evolution to edo and stand up suri-ashi. But all in all, the end result isn't predicated on location.

So the fact that you both are reciting the history and evolution is beside my stated point. we all know Edo citified and narrowed stances isn''t the point. Stand up suri-ashi is NOT a good combative way to move indoors or out IMO.

Ok, my other point was that there are better, more effiecient ways way to move even *if* you are standing up and in a narrow gate that can reduce or eliminate sway and give more whole body power to a directed force. One example is if you watch most guys hit a heavy bag, only half their body is doing the work and even then, many will show a re-actvie feedback into their shoulders from the bag. You can train to maintain connection so that more of your body is actually hitting the bag, and ...there is no force feeding back. The bag gets it all. It noticable, and evident. Have folks "hold" the bag and have different people hit it, then have someone who is connected hit it and they will immediately tell the difference.
Holding a hand out and not winding up or retracting and beating the crap out of the bag demonstrates it in more of a martial sense.
It is a key to sumo strikes and the way they carry the bodylines joined with the spine. And.....that said. We should still be able to deliver a lot of power standing up. We "demonstrate" (just as an exercise) from a locked knees position with locked arms, then hit the bag and it goes flying. Its practice to demonstrate maintaining frame.
My engineer father in law sees and watches it. But tells me its not possible.

Anyway lower stances are key to "training" but Fred I'd be cautious about over playing the functionality and saying In both circumstances, I quickly discovered that anything but a very low stance was an invitation to swift and painful consequences.
Weapons are weapons but were we to face off with knives I'd be low then stand up and reaching in all over the place. And in a freestyle fight (which is what we started this off with) it is NOT the best way to go.

cheers guys
Dan

Dan Harden
31st August 2006, 03:11
Just a side note. I think we'd three agree, but i'm thwowing it out for discussion The is a fine line between "adopting" a low stance. VS where you'd be were you "carrying" 40 lb. of armor on you center line and then "had" a lower stance due to the weight. Artificially lowering yourself- too far -can have negative effects as well.

cheers
Dan

kokumo
31st August 2006, 19:51
Nathan and Fred

Anyway lower stances are key to "training" but Fred I'd be cautious about over playing the functionality and saying In both circumstances, I quickly discovered that anything but a very low stance was an invitation to swift and painful consequences.
Weapons are weapons but were we to face off with knives I'd be low then stand up and reaching in all over the place. And in a freestyle fight (which is what we started this off with) it is NOT the best way to go.

cheers guys
Dan

Dan,

It makes much more sense, thank you.

A knife fight would be a different circumstance than those two, right?

And terrain would matter there too.

On the hillside, if I didn't have a low stance, I couldn't cut low enough without cutting toward myself. Damn near took off my foot before I worked that out. Fortunately, I had sturdy high-top leather work boots on.

In the rain and mud, a high stance consistently resulted in either a foot stuck in the muck or a slip and a fall.

Each situation has its own optimal parameters of movement. Low is likely generally best. But sometimes, the wrong thing to do is the right thing to do if your opponent expects you to be too well trained to do the wrong thing and leaves an opening.

More than beauty of movement, I now tend to think that the knowledge of what is sound practice and doctrine is what is martial, and a well-trained intuitive sense of when to throw sound practice and doctrine out the window is what is art.

As the old texts say: this is a matter to study carefully.

Dan Harden
1st September 2006, 04:05
Dan,

It makes much more sense, thank you.

A knife fight would be a different circumstance than those two, right?

And terrain would matter there too.

On the hillside, if I didn't have a low stance, I couldn't cut low enough without cutting toward myself. Damn near took off my foot before I worked that out. Fortunately, I had sturdy high-top leather work boots on.

In the rain and mud, a high stance consistently resulted in either a foot stuck in the muck or a slip and a fall.

Each situation has its own optimal parameters of movement. Low is likely generally best. But sometimes, the wrong thing to do is the right thing to do if your opponent expects you to be too well trained to do the wrong thing and leaves an opening.

More than beauty of movement, I now tend to think that the knowledge of what is sound practice and doctrine is what is martial, and a well-trained intuitive sense of when to throw sound practice and doctrine out the window is what is art.

As the old texts say: this is a matter to study carefully.

Hi Fred
Again........I agree, a low, or lower stance as a basic. With classical weapons or new. On A-N-Y terrain. Including indoors or out. The only transient exception being resorting to more stand up for certain spot techniques. I brought up knife as a sort of model to juxtapose to, as it is somewhat unique, both in speed, and articulation. There are very practical reasons to move from low to high there in rapid successions.

cheers bud
Dan

DRooster
2nd September 2006, 23:28
As a side observation I have noticed watching pairs involved in fairly realistic weapons combat training that the combatant with noticeably lower stance is usually the more skilled, and usually the winner. Not always, just usually. Maybe its just the stronger fitter legs ...

Unskilled_Blade
3rd September 2006, 04:25
Nice job, Nathan! Very good performance and kudos on sticking to tradition.
I would have loved to see you throw the bo shuriken; I always love to see how techniques differ from person to person.(theres nothing better than the feeling you get after a "stick", is there? Shuriken wise at least!):D

Nathan Scott
3rd September 2006, 20:59
Nice job, Nathan! Very good performance and kudos on sticking to tradition.

Thanks very much.


I would have loved to see you throw the bo shuriken; I always love to see how techniques differ from person to person.(theres nothing better than the feeling you get after a "stick", is there? Shuriken wise at least!)

Yeah, it's all about the perfect hit. Once I've dialed in my distances, I can really let those suckers fly. It takes a lot of practice, but shuriken can be thrown pretty damn accurately once you get the knack for it. The producer of the Fight Science show asked me to throw the shaken into the makiwara from the ground up in time with the camera panning up, and then had me sink a number of them in almost the same spot for another still shot. I actually missed the makiwara (somehow) on one of my throws during the filming, and it went sailing clean through the wall of the set and stuck perfectly into the power cord of one of the stage lights behind the set. Oops.

Come to think of it, there were some other good times on the set as well. Raphael, the owner of Valley Martial Arts in the San Fernando valley of SoCal, was supplying various weapons to some of the guys on set. He had brought some high-tech indestructible plastic bokken to the set to play with, and for some reason challenged me to break it. So I went to a vertical I-beam behind the set and performed a full power side cut against it! Man, it sounded like I hit a gong, and that bokken flexed like hell. Left a bit of a bend in the bokken, and a big dent where I hit the corner of the I-beam (as well as a dent in the I-beam believe it or not), but the sucker didn't break. James Lew and the crew didn't fully embrace our scientific test, but it isn't every day that someone tells you to try to break something.

Dan,

Thanks for the clarification.


Just a side note. I think we'd three agree, but i'm thwowing it out for discussion The is a fine line between "adopting" a low stance. VS where you'd be were you "carrying" 40 lb. of armor on you center line and then "had" a lower stance due to the weight. Artificially lowering yourself- too far -can have negative effects as well.

I'm sure wearing armor or not is a factor in whether stances were higher or lower, but IMO terrain and the need for a "hanmi" stance on a battlefield were probably bigger. I've worn armor, and I didn't feel as though sinking into a lower stance was going to relieve the weight. If anything, it would have been easier to stand up in shizentai. Standing in hanmi automatically drops you into a lower stance (as compared to most forward stances more typically used these days), and widens your base considerably. In fact, the lowest stances I remember seeing in any well preserved koryu are from Maniwa nen-ryu, and based on MNR's geography and history, I suspect they haven't thought about wearing armor at all. But MNR exponents practice outdoors still a lot of the time. Kuroda Tetsuzan is a model example of someone who has learned to move faster and more efficiently using the "original Japanese movement system" of lower hanmi stances than anyone else I've ever seen, and he claims his Komagawa kaishin-ryu kenjutsu is an not an armored style (even though it looks like kaisha kenpo to me).

If wearing armor while fighting, the increased body weight would more likely give you better traction with the ground, reducing the need for lower stances. It is my understanding that lower hanmi stances became a core part of koryu budo because of the need on the battlefield to maintain a smaller target profile to incoming arrows and other attacks (and also allows for closer troop formations). I'm of the opinion that the hanmi low stances were continued because an outstanding movement operating system had already been established, and one could put still armor on and fight if needed without changing how they move and fight drastically.

All this is to say that I believe a look at the history and development of the arts will give all the answers as to what is best and when/why it changed. Sure, artificially lowering your stance can inhibit your speed and movement, and often times is not necessary during movement transitions (not striking). But I've seen people like Kuroda move faster from a lower hanmi stance than I've observed from kendo-ka, who move from a very high stance designed specifically for (western style) speed.

Regards,

Dan Harden
3rd September 2006, 23:09
Hi Nathan
That’s more in line with what I was referring to; mobility and stability. The stances adopted and trained are trained indoors 90% of the time. But their rationale or pedagogy was still inexorably tied to field work where both stability, balance, and mobility were paramount. Further, that there still exists –irrespective of a ryu’s doctrine practical means for the stances. We practice outdoors as well, in uneven terrain. We have even practiced in snow storms through drifts. Optimal Bujutsu movement remains in a horizontal plane, where the hips are stabilized and a smooth even transition is made across the bridge between the rear and forward leg. As well, hanmi can offer increased stability across the body lines. However, lowering below the point where the hips transfer horizontally creates a need to launch or rise. While the rising can be done at a forward or backward angle as need more effort (power and time) is needed to react in the same space. Outside of obvious cases where you just have, or happen to be in a lowered stance (crouching, eating, sieza, rising from sleeping) the trademark bujutsu movement would theoretically optimally be displayed in a lowered stance that offers clean transfer of power. Not stand-up and not lowered past horizontal.
Last, there exists in some jujutsu schools a taught method to move in keeping with this weapon rationale. So that the hips are in-line with the upper body and they do not rise to throw. Unless one chooses to drop-under. More connections from Koryu weapons to bujutsu movement. And oddly in keeping with Sumo.

Cheers
Dan

Ken-Hawaii
4th September 2006, 01:17
Aloha, Nathan:

I usually hang out on the Sword Forum, but wanted to add my thanks to you & Obata Sensei for your segment on Fight Science. Very impressive. My wife & I are MJER students out here in Hawaii, & Maeda Sensei has just started us on tameshigiri. We can see that we have a long way to go to catch up with you & Obata Sensei....

I'm more than slightly torqued with National Geographic - I e-mailed them right after seeing the show the first time, & asked how we can purchase the DVD, but they didn't even bother to respond. Any idea when or if they'll turn that loose?

Nathan Scott
25th October 2006, 07:18
Hello Mr. Goldstein,

Thanks for the kind words. I haven't heard back from anyone yet, but will post something here if something becomes available. In the meantime, apparently youtube has part of our performance on their webpage (movie):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhE-PnTqryc

I can't play it, but I suspect it is of the swordsmanship section. The shuriken section is probably on a different clip...

Brian Owens
25th October 2006, 08:15
...In the meantime, apparently youtube has part of our performance on their webpage (movie):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhE-PnTqryc

I can't play it, but I suspect it is of the swordsmanship section....
It is, indeed.

Unfortunately only the middle third of the clip is of you and Obata Sensei.

The first and last thirds are of some bare-chested karate guy whose obi is tied unevenly jumping around swinging a sword like it's a baseball bat, twirling it like a baton major at cheerleader's camp, making faces, and flexing his muscles, and then hacking at a gelatin torso as if the sword were an axe.

It's KKKK at its worst.

Fred27
25th October 2006, 08:51
It is, indeed.

Unfortunately only the middle third of the clip is of you and Obata Sensei.

The first and last thirds are of some bare-chested karate guy whose obi is tied unevenly jumping around swinging a sword like it's a baseball bat, twirling it like a baton major at cheerleader's camp, making faces, and flexing his muscles, and then hacking at a gelatin torso as if the sword were an axe.

It's KKKK at its worst.

I almost hesistate to ask, but what does KKKK mean?

Ron Tisdale
25th October 2006, 15:18
OMG...

Nathan, sorry to see that you and Obata Sensei were juxtaposed with that rubbish...

The two of you did a fantastic job.

Best,
Ron

Brian Owens
25th October 2006, 22:39
I almost hesistate to ask, but what does KKKK mean?
"Krappy Karate Katana Kamae" -- an old thread we had going a while back, featuring people who thought expertise in one martial art automatically conveyed ability in swordsmanship...and who were wrong.

It started out as some fun/funny (to us) pictures of KKKK, but evolved over time to other types of "interesting" photos.

judasith
26th October 2006, 16:00
Dear Nathan,

Even if it may sound fun, I ALSO saw the video dubbed in Italian on Adventure One channel!

While the "science" part was done good, they chose a whole bunch of semi-serious people, for no apparent reason. I do agree that you and Obata Sensei were the most serious ones.

In my personal order of what a MA should NOT be, there was: the australian big-jim guy (WHY GIVE HIM A SWORD!!?), the black guy trying to convince me that nunchaku is the ultimate weapon, the KILLING-BLOW NINJA, and of course the jackie chan guy.

Then I asked myself, as a practitioner of a serious MA, BUT WHY THE HELL did they call xxxxxxx Gracie (there are too many of them, my head is full of Gracies, but just how many children the average brazilian family make?!?!) to rehepresent jujutsu?????? It was REALLY terrible, almost made me want to just go out and stick to boxe... I believe it didn't make any good advertisement to jujitsu and aikido... as opposed, probably now the two "Bulldozer Boyz" will have a lot of people: just like "weee, I smashed myself into an ice wall". I don't particularly like Obata's aikijutsu, but CERTAINLY it is a serious and working martial art as opposed to the other shown, why the hell they cut you out?


The other funny thing was that every group wrote under the name that the teacher was "xx" time champion of [name of each one's art]... the HELL they are! When I create my own association and my own art, just naming it new-wave karate doesn't mean I am a "karate WORLD CHAMPION".

In any case, you did fine, and now that you say you really wanted to do bo-shuriken (the REAL ones) I'm much more relieved... I also believe you lost a lot of weight from the last time I saw you in a video!

Best regards,

Giacomo Merello

Dan Harden
26th October 2006, 16:57
Dear Nathan,

Then I asked myself, as a practitioner of a serious MA, BUT WHY THE HELL did they call xxxxxxx Gracie (there are too many of them, my head is full of Gracies, but just how many children the average brazilian family make?!?!) to rehepresent jujutsu?????? It was REALLY terrible, almost made me want to just go out and stick to boxe... I believe it didn't make any good advertisement to jujitsu and aikido...

Giacomo Merello

Rickson Gracie is considerd by many to be the best rep of the Gracie family.
Ricksons vale tudo/jujutsu is an excellent, relaxed approach, to fighting. I'd guess not taking -him- seriously would last as long as trying to remain on your feet in front of him.
I don't see the trouble with including modern derivations of combatives as serious arts in with older ones.Perticularly ones that have a reproducible, principle, driven basis for movement. I fullly realize there is a dissmissive attitude toward these type of fighters. But I think it serves as a detriment to the arts in general.

As for new VS old "serious" (whatever that means) or silly-If we went back in time.... we'd all be doing Gendai Budo. So all that would remain is a definition of serious or not.
And for what its worth in a new VS old- that would make the Gracies art older than Shinkendo.
I think there is a better argument to be made then to dismiss Rickson Gracie.


I'm a great proponent of
1. Does it work?
2. Is it replicable/teachable
3. Is it definable

Beyond that I'd say keep traditions intact. And there are thankfully many of us doing that very thing. And then exploring, refining, experimenting, perfecting our own movement. Fighting at various levels including sparring is a very good way to do that.

The lack of depth is an obvious issue. And many see right through it. But overly complex, cooperative pretzel-logic has a fallacy all its own. The real sadness was not examining the efficiency of movement and loss of energy in many martial artists movements. The speed at hitting the heavy bag and the obvious loss of power was appalling and unwarranted. Even laughable.

Cheers
Dan

Fred27
26th October 2006, 21:08
"Krappy Karate Katana Kamae" -- an old thread we had going a while back, featuring people who thought expertise in one martial art automatically conveyed ability in swordsmanship...and who were wrong.

It started out as some fun/funny (to us) pictures of KKKK, but evolved over time to other types of "interesting" photos.

Heh, ok thanks :)

Jason Click
27th October 2006, 22:09
Any idea who the shirtless guy was?

Jason Click
28th October 2006, 05:29
Ah I found it, Bren Foster.

Maro
6th November 2006, 22:33
I saw the part of it with the TKD guy cutting. Well :rolleyes:

How Embarrassment as they say............

Brian VanCise
6th November 2006, 22:55
Nathan I enjoyed watching your part, Obata Sensei's part, Dan Inosanto and Rickson Gracies parts as well. As for the Tae Kwon Do guy flailing with the Katana. Well that part I could have done without. :)

Maro
6th November 2006, 23:38
Nathan I enjoyed watching your part, Obata Sensei's part, Dan Inosanto and Rickson Gracies parts as well. As for the Tae Kwon Do guy flailing with the Katana. Well that part I could have done without. :)

Could any one decipher his Kiai?

GavinPay
14th November 2006, 11:58
<snip>I'm sure wearing armor or not is a factor in whether stances were higher or lower, but IMO terrain and the need for a "hanmi" stance on a battlefield were probably bigger. I've worn armor, and I didn't feel as though sinking into a lower stance was going to relieve the weight. If anything, it would have been easier to stand up in shizentai.<snip>

I've fought in medieval armour for a few years and it does help to have a lower stance, at least with the western style armour that I wore. I was adding an extra 30 kg ( about 65 lbs I think, including sword and shield) to my weight (I weigh 75kg), 3/4 of which is distributed above the waist. Since you are unnaturally top-heavy wearing it, the lower stance definitly helps with balance and keeping a nice low centre.

You're right about it not relieving the weight though, actually made my thighs work harder to keep me up :)

And let me add my kudos to the others... it was nice to see something real in amongst the posturing and ego stroking.