PDA

View Full Version : control



rsamurai2
4th September 2001, 02:35
Let me throw this out for all you sport judo guys.

In sambo in order to score tori must remain standing and in control after a throw. In judo most throws wind up with tori and uke both on the ground. There seems to be less ju and kuzushi and much more muscle and over commitment. It often seems that it is no longer a throwing contest but who can land second on the mat. It doesn’t take a lot of skill to plow into someone and knock them down but it does take skill to throw. Now the question. Would you all be in favor of a rule change that stated tori must remain in control after the throw? if so why. if not, why not. Of course, this would exclude sutemi waza, but even when executing that tori still must show technique and control.

captainkirk
4th September 2001, 05:25
The definition of an Ippon is- A throw in which uke lands with force on his back.Since a throw must be initiated by tori and be done with a technique, this would mandate tori being in control.If tori is not in control and uke lands on the ground all be himself, it is not a throw.If tori throws uke without any control or force or lands him not on his back it isnt an Ippon but a lesser score (wazari, yuko, koka). Contest judo doesnt need any more rules.We have enough problems with all the ones we have.

Matthew kirk

efb8th
4th September 2001, 06:05
Well Said!

My sensei hammered home the fact that not every throw works. Subsequently, I learned over time to initiate at least one new attack during the fall. Never be satisfied to see how the throw is "coming out;" your job as tori is to keep fighting for ippon until the arm goes up.

Don't be lilke the window washer who steps back to admire his work. Fall into kesa or yokoshiho; fall into an armlock or choke. Smother. Be tori until the fight is over, and let the looser buy the beer (or "Pay for his lesson" as we used to say).

Regards,

dakotajudo
4th September 2001, 12:56
Originally posted by rsamurai2

In judo most throws wind up with tori and uke both on the ground. There seems to be less ju and kuzushi and much more muscle and over commitment. It often seems that it is no longer a throwing contest but who can land second on the mat. It doesn?t take a lot of skill to plow into someone and knock them down but it does take skill to throw.


I think this is a rather negative attitude to take about competitive judo and an over-simplification as well.

The fact is that when you have two equally skilled competitors fighting, neither will give up very much kuzushi. Frequently these competitors will also be good enough to have some control of tori while being thrown, making it more difficult for tori to remain standing.

It's relatively easy for a throw to look good in the dojo, or when you have an obvious mismatch in skills (I throw my students for ippon on a regular basis). Whenever you have two closely matched people competing the results will frequently be less than perfect.

But you live for those rare moments of perfection.

Ju is an ideal, and the majority of judoka do strive for it. For every competitor whose make technique is to "plow", you'll find at least two others who try for a clean ippon with every throw.

rsamurai2
4th September 2001, 13:39
i understand what makes an ippon. However, sambo people remain standing after a throw. Therefore, the argument about equal skill doesn’t seem to wash. now if you throw and move in to newaza that is different. Nevertheless, I don't see that all to often, i seen tori falling on uke more than an actual clean throw. If judo is to symbolize the samurai on the battlefield, i have a hard time imagining the samurai in armor falling on each other in battle.

tommysella
4th September 2001, 16:26
I don't think following down to the mat is based on that on bad technique. Perhaps the reason is that the competition judokas are very good at turning out of throws. To ensure that the opponent is not turning out I belive it is better to follow him down to the mat...and you also have an opportunity to follow up the technique with some newaza.

When it comes to "battlefield" techniques...Well this is an totaly different story compared to what you see on a competition...For example if you look at the techniques included in the Kime no Kata, Kodokan Goshin-jutsu and Koshiki no Kata (particular if you are talking about the Samurais) you will see a different approach on getting someone to the ground...

Tommy Selggren

rsamurai2
4th September 2001, 16:51
in competition judo, albeit there is some follow down to newaza i am not commenting on that. i have seen sloppy technique in order just to score an ippon. i was always taught, and i have also read, that judo was about the perfection of character as well as technique. in the gokyu, in draegers article"anaylisis of competition" and gunji koizumi's paper on contest judo all have a common theme. contest judo breeds sloppy technique. now i am not advocating doing away with contest judo at all. only makeing it more in line with what kano wanted judo to be. if the sambo players can throw someone to the mat with control and technique at there high levels of competition, so can the judo players. are we not as technical as they? are we not as good as they are? i believe we are. again i am only posing topics for disscusuion by no way am i belittleing judo so please don't start the flameing. everytime i offer something i get a ton of hate mail in my pm or personal addresses.

joe yang
4th September 2001, 16:53
Consider hapkido a minute. We practise every throw to remain standing. However, we also train to follow our opponent down if we have to, fists, knees and elbows directing strikes. We even understand in the real world, given the variables of terrain, size and weight of opponent, outside influence, i.e. other combatants, obstacles, etc. a perfect throw, me standing, enemy down is only an ideal. Did you hit first? Did I fall too? Did I fall second? Did you catch my fist, elbow, knee? Can you get up? Can I get up? In the real world, the winner might just be the survivor. Me, I don't even train to win. In my world, I train to defeat the enemy at any cost. I don't know about sport grappling.

Don Cunningham
4th September 2001, 17:07
If judo is to symbolize the samurai on the battlefield...
I think this may be the problem here. You've made a false assumption about the purpose of judo. It was never meant to be simply a representative of a battlefield art. There is one kata, based on an earlier style of judo, which illustrates grappling in armor techniques. You can see immediately how radically different the battlefield techniques are from the more modern jujutsu styles which form the basis for most of judo.

Judo is a sport. While this may irritate many out there, it is no different than any other athletic competitions in that there are rules and referees. While I can see your point about control, I've been a judo referee and it's darn hard to see who actually executed the throw in many situations. It's hard to see whether it was a ippon, wazarai, or yuko in many cases as well. Why do you think they have three judges? It's because no one can be sure of making the call by themselves.

Introducing such a rule would only make it much more difficult to referee a judo match in my opinion. It would also eliminate many very dramatic and effective techniques from scoring ippon. I would therefore not be supportive of such a rule.

Judo is also a martial art. In this case, I would expect it is generally more advantageous to remain standing. It would certainly be preferable to maintain control of your opponent. However, this is not a scored event with referees and judges. No one cares what an observer's opinion is of the technique used in this situation.

Judo is both sport and martial art. While it shares characteristics of both, they should remain clearly delinated. I am against confusing one for the other. It doesn't make any more sense than trying to compare baseball or chess to battlefield scenarios.

rsamurai2
4th September 2001, 19:14
Don,
Don’t you think if tori remains standing and in control it would be easier to distinguish who initiated the throw? I know i lost a match to a brown belt when i was a white belt because my instructor thought he threw me. (I guess his rank was greater than mine so when it came to a judgment call he got the point) i had him in a front choke (guillotine) and threw him backwards (like a tomanage)so i would hit the mat first and then roll on top of him and submit him. This is a standard jujutsu tech. but when my back hit the ground first my instructor yelled ippon and i thought i won. Not the case. My sensei thought he threw me backwards as an escape. if sutemi waza OR ippons done with tori standing and in control wouldn't that make it easier to call?

Don Cunningham
4th September 2001, 20:51
There's always going to be some calls which are hard to make. Sometimes it seems unfair. I've lost several matches in a similar manner. It may have been referee error, being "home-teamed," or it may have actually been that the person made some move which gave them the throw. Technically, unless it's a clear sacrifice, the person who's back hit first is the loser. I may be mistaken, but I think that's the rule or at least the interpretation. You just have to take it when the referee makes such an error, though. It's all part of competition and complaining doesn't get you anything. Overall, I still think it's better not to require the tori to remain standing.

CEB
4th September 2001, 20:53
Yes, if tori stays standing and in control it is easier to tell who initiated the attack. Thats how I used to get burned quite a bit. I am pretty heavy but not particulary strong. If found that many sutemi waza seemed to work well for me. But if the technique wasn't real clean I would often lose a point for a throw I initiated. But they were rarely Ippons. Sloppy techniques should not score Ippons. But many Ippons are clean techniques where both parties hit the mat. Good strong makikomi comes to mind. In a clean makikomi there is no doubt who the initiator is. But, in a match between two competitors of equal skill level an Ippon is a hard thing to get or at least it was 20 years ago. But then again I walked 10 miles to school, uphill both ways ......;)

C. E. Boyd

rsamurai2
4th September 2001, 22:04
Originally posted by CEB
[Good strong makikomi comes to mind. In a clean makikomi there is no doubt who the initiator is. But, in a match between two competitors of equal skill level an Ippon is a hard thing to get or at least it was 20 years ago. But then again I walked 10 miles to school, uphill both ways ......;)

C. E. Boyd [/B]

i was excluding makikomis. i guess the reason i brought this thread up was my disillusionment with judo. At least the sport aspect. I never knew there were two judos. In the last few big tournaments i have been to including the senior nationals i have been very disappointed with the players. I have seen a lot of muscle being used and very little technique. Maybe this is why we can't win any medals. I know when i was taking some testosterone enhancing supplements (the legal kind) i got strong as h#ll. I could blow thru many of my peers. But was i really doing judo? I don't think so. Judo should be about technique and shiai about the exhibition of technique against players outside of your own dojo who know how you fight. When i see players using muscle and very little ju and then falling all over each other i have to wonder if this is what kano warned about or what he envisioned about judo. Like most of you, i would like to see judo grow. However, with bjj/gjj on our heals (and these people are very technical) and coaches forcing players to compete before they master any technique i just don't see it happening.

Aaron Fields
5th September 2001, 00:30
Let me start by saying I am not a rule hound.

In Sombo a throw is scored a point lower if there is sacrifice, also Sombo scores "wrestling style" takedowns more readily than you find in judo. The kurtki design and gripping rules allow for techniques to be applied differently.

In my experience, within both sports, there is a very different feel. Technically there is similarities, but rules, cultural context, and uniforms make for a very different sport.

In summary, don't show up for a rugby game in a helmet and shoulder pads (even though any person with sense would want to. :laugh:) or visa versa

dakotajudo
5th September 2001, 04:11
Originally posted by Aaron Fields


In Sombo a throw is scored a point lower if there is sacrifice, also Sombo scores "wrestling style" takedowns more readily than you find in judo. The kurtki design and gripping rules allow for techniques to be applied differently.


How does sombo scoring work? Is it a single point like judo (meaning you can end the match with a single clean throw) or do you accumulate points like freestyle wrestling?

Aaron Fields
6th September 2001, 19:52
Sombo has a "major victory" (judo ippon,) but it requires uke to land flat on his back and nage to remain standing (nothing other than the soles of his shoes touching the ground.)

You gain points (like freestyle) based upon how uke lands and if nage sacrifices or not. Sacrifice tecnhiques lower the score.

You can hold down only once per match, a 10 sec hold down is 2 points and a 20 sec is 4. (If you score a 10 early than you can't score again on hold downs.)

Instead of typing out all the specifics of scoring I'll refer everyone interested to www.blackmagic.com/ses/sombo/stech.html for a list of scores.

A few interesting points is that in Sombo a kiai will get you disqualified as the ref will assume you are resitsting or attempting to the point of injury. (I got booted from two matches before I learned that lesson.)

Also, unlike judo (which I love, don't get me wrong) in Sombo it does not matter how you got the guy, you score based off how he lands regardless of beauty.

In sport Sombo there is no chokes or twisting locks (heel hooks are aginst the rules) and no grip rules. Because the belt goes through the kurtka, if you use the belt you have control of your opponents hips.

Ben Reinhardt
10th September 2001, 03:08
Originally posted by rsamurai2
Don,
Don’t you think if tori remains standing and in control it would be easier to distinguish who initiated the throw? I know i lost a match to a brown belt when i was a white belt because my instructor thought he threw me. (I guess his rank was greater than mine so when it came to a judgment call he got the point) i had him in a front choke (guillotine) and threw him backwards (like a tomanage)so i would hit the mat first and then roll on top of him and submit him. This is a standard jujutsu tech. but when my back hit the ground first my instructor yelled ippon and i thought i won. Not the case. My sensei thought he threw me backwards as an escape. if sutemi waza OR ippons done with tori standing and in control wouldn't that make it easier to call?

Using bad refereeing doesn't work well to make your point, Richard. If you initiated the throw, our sensei needs glasses.

Ben Reinhardt

Ben Reinhardt
10th September 2001, 03:13
If I throw you for ippon, say, with Harai Goshi, and land on top of you with my hip bone in your ribs, either cracking them or knocking all the wind out of you, how can you say I had no control simply because I did not remain standing ? That doesn't make any sense to me. If you cling to me as I throw you, and I land on top of you, I don't have control ?

Come on, Richard. Falling on someone on purpose is as much control as remaining standing.

Ben Reinhardt

rsamurai2
10th September 2001, 04:11
Ben,
i am not talking about throwing yourself down on purpose like a makikomi. What i have witnessed is a lack of control. More or less falling on uke. Not caring so much as a clean throw as an attitude of "as long as i hit the mat second". I went to a clinic with martin Bergman and he even advocating that when you fall just look at the ref and kiai, this way the ref thinks you were in control.

captainkirk
10th September 2001, 05:51
Richard,

Maybe if you had Kiaied and looked at the referee when you threw that white belt, your sensei might have given you the score! It is a common tactic in higher level competitors to look at the referree after completing a throw.Martin Bregman's credentials as an international official and 6th dan are unquestionable. I have heard him give that same piece of advise many times and I believe it is the reason for many "almost ippons" being called as "Ippon".Judo has rules for competing and any competitor who uses those rules to win is simply playing the game correctly. I do agree with you that Judo sometimes looks rather sloppy in competition.I suggest you become a referree and start improving the level of technique seen in shiai (martin bregman also says that).
matthew kirk

MarkF
10th September 2001, 08:04
Originally posted by captainkirk
Maybe if you had Kiaied and looked at the referee when you threw that white belt, your sensei might have given you the score! It is a common tactic in higher level competitors to look at the referree after completing a throw.


This tactic is not only used in judo competition. Watch tennis matches, and you will see a player occasionally making the motion for an ball to be in (or out) and the lines person will do exactly that; call it the way the player saw it.

I've seen judoka get up after a throw, raise his hand as the shinban would for ippon for a throw which was clearly not ippon. Sometimes they do need a little help, and rather than look for help, they will call it the way the player saw it. All the silent kiai in the world may not get you the ippon you deserve.

I have received waza-ari for throws in which I did muscle. It isn't always in Sombo and not always in horse shoes. Shinban error is not unlike the "blind" umpire in baseball.
*****

Watch the small lady's matches for big discrepencies from the mat judge and the line judges on just what ippon is. I recently saw a match in what would have been the minimum weight division for women in which one did an ippon seoiotoshi by lowering her center so low (she was on her knees to ankles position, and uke simply rolled off her back on to her own back. Tori's head was on or nearly on the mat). The ref called waza-ari while the line judges called ippon. She did land on her back, that was obvious, but with any kind of force, no, but this is a judgement call, and it wasn't argued by the mat judge at all.

Centering is another way to manipulate the rules, but in this case, she simply continued to get lower and lower. That is where the center should be, isn't it?

Mark

rsamurai2
10th September 2001, 16:09
matthew,
i didn't know that at the time. i can over from 8 years of jujutsu. we fight a little differently. my first day of judo i won every match in about 1 minute. of course everything i did was ilegal. but i didn't know that at the time. but as long as there is an emphasis on sport judo and winning at any cost than judo technique will not improve. people are being forced to compete before they even come close to perfecting techniques. thus the sloppyness. only my opinion.

captainkirk
11th September 2001, 00:59
richard,
I dont necessarily agree with sport emphasis however anyone who doesnt feel comfortable competing shouldnt.period.However the reason for novice divisions is to let beginners compete.Some coaches wont let white belts compete.others do and that's a large source of the crappy technique i am sure you are seeing.But remember since judo rank is in large part determined by competing then people often volunteer to compete just to get promoted.The only way to improve techniques seen in competition is to send YOUR students when they are ready and not before or to put on the ref uniform and call koka when tori falls on top of uke (then you can get yelled at by the little league style "ref dads" on the sideline);)
matthew kirk

dakotajudo
11th September 2001, 01:43
Originally posted by rsamurai2
but as long as there is an emphasis on sport judo and winning at any cost than judo technique will not improve. people are being forced to compete before they even come close to perfecting techniques. thus the sloppyness. only my opinion.

Don't paint judo with such a broad brush - most judoka are not training to "win at all cost". I've also found that competition is a great way to find where your techniquese are most sloppy - you can get into a comfortable pattern in the dojo and start to play against your most common partners' tactics. You might be practicing sloppy technique, but never realize it because you've got fairly willing partners.

You often don't find out where your techniques are weakest until you go against someone you don't know, doing things you've never seen.

About 4-5 months ago I took a student to a tournament we both came back with a whole slug of insight into our skills that we wouldn't have gotten had we stayed home. And I'm still working on those skills.

Ben_Holmes
11th September 2001, 03:37
"You often don't find out where your techniques are weakest until you go against someone you don't know, doing things you've never seen."

Absolutely!! I hear comments all the time deploring competition in Judo, but it has it's place. Many people never stop to think just what the role of competition is, in Judo... but this is a good example of one of the reasons for competition.

(And, just to make everyone jealous, I ebayed a copy of Jigoro Kano's 1937 Judo book. Interesting read, but nothing earthshattering)

rsamurai2
11th September 2001, 04:13
well i understand that, but you don't need a shiai for that. you can have randori with other dojo's. take the medal away and people play differently. Tonight my new instructor Jim Haynes, was telling us back in his day many players would hurt each other on purpose take the slight penalty and win the match. All because there was a medal at stake.well i understand that, but you don't need a shiai for that. you can have randori with other dojo's. take the medal away and people play differently. Tonight my new instructor Jim Haynes, was telling us back in his day many players would hurt each other on purpose take the slight penalty and win the match. All because there was a medal at stake.

Ben_Holmes
11th September 2001, 05:20
"well i understand that, but you don't need a shiai for that. you can have randori with other dojo's. take the medal away and people play differently."

If you practice randori the same way you do shiai, then you've completely lost the idea of randori. Randori is not, nor was it ever intended to be, a different form of shiai. (This is, apparently, one of the root misunderstandings between Judo and BJJ, by the way...)

"Tonight my new instructor Jim Haynes, was telling us back in his day many players would hurt each other on purpose take the slight penalty and win the match."

Yes, and there is one person in the news here in California who knifed 5 people for the fun of it. It will not affect *MY* use of knives in any way whatsoever... I will still slice tomatoes when I need them for sandwiches. Just because there are people who study Judo who fail the lessons of charactor that Judo teaches, is no reason for *me* to lose sight of those goals. Jita Kyoei does have meaning... even if some have forgotten.

By the way, not ranting at you personally, even if it might look that way. But people who forsake the lessons shiai teaches, don't do themselves any good. I think that tradition needs to be looked at carefully, and changed slowly. There's reasons for tradition, many times good, sometimes outdated... but that's a whole 'nuther conversation...

rsamurai2
11th September 2001, 05:45
What is it that Shia is supposed to teach that randori does not? I personally dislike both. I would rather, and i get more benefit from, attack defense drills. Tori attack with his best attack and i defend. Than i attack and he defends and or counters. Much like was the grandfather of randori done. Judo randori and shiai teach allot of bad habits with respect to self-defense. This is why i took up martial arts. Not sport. I have a great disdain for martial sports i view them as a watered down bastardization of what the martial arts should be. Look what happened to tkd. If an Olympic gold medallist and hee il choi (sp) were in a fight, my money would be on hee. Judo was a viable martial art before WWII once it became an Olympic sport it lost much of its effectiveness. If a judo martial artist went up against the sport judoka in an altercation my money would be on the martial artist, his training is far superior with respect to techniques he practices. Most sport judoka my dojo included only practice what can be used in a shiai. even our randori is done that way. I know what i say pi$$ you all off but i am sorry. If it were not for our new instructor who I picked out personally to teach the judo, (remember in earler post i was taking over the dojo,well i got it.)i would have quit judo after my shodan test and only taught jujutsu and karate.

MarkF
11th September 2001, 09:16
Actually, Richard, what you describe as going to other dojo and playing randori are usually called "Invitational" tournaments. You know, one dojo invites a few others over for a day of fighting (shiai)? Randori is not for practicing your tokuiwaza, it is for practicing everything else one doesn't get a chance to practice. Coaches, at least the national/international ones are those who "choose" the tokuiwaza for you, not sensei.

But I think you have gotten your point across more than once so perhaps it is time to move on?

Just a suggestion.

Mark

As described by Dr. Karl Koiwai of the USJI. "Judo is a Combative sport, similar to boxing or wrestling."

I can live with that very well. I wonder what the martial art of volleyball is like."

dakotajudo
11th September 2001, 21:16
Originally posted by rsamurai2
What is it that Shia is supposed to teach that randori does not? I personally dislike both. I would rather, and i get more benefit from, attack defense drills. Tori attack with his best attack and i defend.

Judo is taught under two methods, one called Randori and the other Kata.
-Jigoro Kano



Judo randori and shiai teach allot of bad habits with respect to self-defense.

Randori not only trains the will of the learner but gives him mental composure
-Jigoro Kano.



Judo was a viable martial art before WWII once it became an Olympic sport it lost much of its effectiveness. If a judo martial artist went up against the sport judoka in an altercation my money would be on the martial artist, his training is far superior with respect to techniques he practices.


How can judo have lost it's effectiveness? It still has the same variety of techniques that were present before WWII.

Individual judoka may not be competent, but I doubt you could go to the Kodokan and convince any of the instructors there that judo has lost it's effectiveness.

If I where betting my money, I put it on the randori trained judoka over the kata trained judoka.

Randori is a central feature of judo training and is one of the features that separated judo from most other styles of jujutsu. If you don't randori, you're not really practicing Kano-ryu.

Robc
12th September 2001, 00:07
"In the book 'History and Tradition' there is a picture of Hatsumi-sensei throwing two foreign students of Judo in a demonstration. It has a very interesting story behind it also. Aparently they asked if Hatsumi-sensei could throw them around as easy as he does his own students. He asked them to come up, they grabbed him and he tossed them both at the same time. This was about 20 years ago though."

I mean no disrespect however whenever I read of things like this it makes me wonder: Were the two people thrown (a) compliant demonstration partners or (b) significantly smaller opponents?

I believe that it is unrealistic to think that one person can simoultaneously throw two similarly sized opponents who are truly intent on attacking the thrower. Sure, we see things like this all the time in Kung Fu theatre but it doesn't work that way in real life.

Try it yourself. Try randori against two people roughly as skilled as you and of a similar size. Try throwing them, strangling them, knocking them out, whatever, at the same time. Good luck.

One of the values I see in practicing judo is that, in randori, one is required to "fight" with a resisting opponent. It's an ideal way to test your abilities, both your techniques and your ability to execute them under pressure and against a resisting, like-minded opponent.

Regardless of your style -- Bujinkan, judo, boxing, karate, whatever -- regularly fighting against someone who does not comply with your wishes, i.e., who really fights back, teaches one invaluable lessons about body mechanics, fighting spirit, and ability.

If we're not doing randori or sparring (in whatever form) on a regular basis I don't think we really understand what we can and cannot do. Further we do not understand how we will react and which skills we will retain under pressure.

Rob Canestrari

dakotajudo
12th September 2001, 00:13
Originally posted by Janty Chattaw
"Kukishin Ryu. Kukishin is particularly well-known for its techniques involving staves of various lengths. Kano was a weapons expert, so it is not surprising that Takamatsu and Kano were relatively close friends and colleagues. Takamatsu's favorite empty-hand technique was a technique that most of us would recognize as hiza-guruma. It is from Takamatsu that Judo's hiza-guruma comes."

Kano and Takamatsu-sensei were close friends, although Takamatsu-sensei beat him (in friendly matches) many times.

And where does this tidbit come from? I don't know of any judo book (and I have some with Kano's own writing) that suggests that Kano was a weapons expert.

Kano's primary influences were Kito-ryu and Tenshin Shinyo-ryu. I've not read any judo history that connects Kano with Kukishin.

As for hiza-guruma, the technique is listed Ueynishi's "The Textbook of Jujutsu as Practiced in Japan", in Hancock and Higashi's "The Complete Kano Jiu-Jitsu" from 1905, and in "Jiu-jutsu or Jiu-do, Selection from the Kodokwan Method" published in 1920.

From what history I can gather, Takamatsu was born in 1887, was in Kobe until about 1910 and China until about 1919. Kano, in contrast, was born in 1860, founded the Kodokan in Yokyo in 1882 and was primarily a teacher throughout his career with the Kodokan.

From this it seems highly unlikely that Kano and Takamatsu had several "friendly matches" and much less likely they were close friends.

Sounds like Bujinkan revisionism.

dakotajudo
12th September 2001, 00:41
Originally posted by Janty Chattaw


I do agree that Randori is very important in Judo, I don't think that the Randori Judouka will always fair well against the Kata Judouka though. Although they do come hand and hand, it depends on your training.

I've trained aikido, tai-chi, Bujinkan and judo. I'm pretty sure about randori training versus kata.


In the Bujinkan there are many ways of preventing throws found in Judo.

There are also, in Judo, many ways of preventing throws found in Judo. That's why we randori, to learn counters, and counters to counters, and combinations, and when to time a throw so it can't be countered.



In the book 'History and Tradition' there is a picture of Hatsumi-sensei throwing two foreign students of Judo in a demonstration.
Are you sure this picture is in "History and Tradition". I can't find it in my copy. What page number?

dakotajudo
12th September 2001, 05:33
Originally posted by Janty Chattaw
http://judo1.net/ju01002.htm

Read up and you will see just how close Kano and Takamatsu-sensei were.

This doesn't say anymore than the paragraph you quoted, and certainly doesn't confirm that Takamatsu competed with Kano.

BTW, are you referring to Takamatsu Toshitugu or Takamatsu Chosui, or was this another alias?
(http://www.shinjin.co.jp/kuki/history4_e.htm)

Ben Reinhardt
12th September 2001, 07:06
Originally posted by rsamurai2
Ben,
i am not talking about throwing yourself down on purpose like a makikomi. What i have witnessed is a lack of control. More or less falling on uke. Not caring so much as a clean throw as an attitude of "as long as i hit the mat second". I went to a clinic with martin Bergman and he even advocating that when you fall just look at the ref and kiai, this way the ref thinks you were in control.

Richard,

Bad Judo is not good, and a lack of control is bad Judo. Or an attempt at good Judo that failed. If you throw without control, there is no score, or a reduction in score. But then, if you did throw uke, then there had to be SOME control,didn't there ?

Dr. Bregman is speaking strictly from the point of view of a competitor trying to win a match. A high level referee such as he isn't fooled by loud kiai and no real throw. I've had players try this one on me, and it has never worked (when I am refereeing). Buti it's worth a try.

Dr. Bregman isn't advocating lack of control in a throw, it's just a trick to try to salvage a point. You can argue whether not that is against the true spirit Judo, but it does not have anything to do with control in a throw.

Hitting the mat second is not such a bad idea in the context of a sport Judo contest. Of course, you can do sutemi waza where you hit the mat first and still get ippon. When I throw someone, I want to end up on top or in a control position, one way or the other. That usually involves not hitting the mat first, except as noted above in sutemi waza.

Ben Reinhardt

MarkF
12th September 2001, 10:35
Originally posted by Janty Chattaw
http://judo1.net/ju01002.htm

Read up and you will see just how close Kano and Takamatsu-sensei were.

From Steven R. Cunningham's Brief History of Judo:

*Most of this is from oral transmissions (kuden), personal notes, and so on. In some cases, my ear may not have been able to properly discriminate the Japanese sounds, so I apologize for any errors. Undoubtedly, there are also omissions.

*********

Many have claimed close friendship with Kano over the period of his life (1860-1938) including that of Sokaku Takeda. You can read that interview at http://koryu.com .

Of course, you have to take into account that it was the son of Sokaku, Tokimune who states that to be so (kuden). Tokimune says, in the same series of interviews, that the Takeda family are a family of "wall-passers."

There are about two sentences in that history which mentions Takamatsu, and probably is the extent of any "relationship."

But why the disagreement over it? In the scheme of things, it means little. Since the term "judo" has actually been around since the eighteenth century, would this contradict Kano's judo? No, Kano thought this the term which fit best his intent with the Kodokan (the hall/house of the ancient way). Most judoka also recognize that while he may have been the first to reinvent the wheel, most say "founders (plural)" when speaking of early judo.

Some of you need to do some growing and stop wasting bandwidth trying to prove one's idol over the other. Kano is my personal god, but everyone knows it, thus I don't have to consistently prove it with obscure quotes from someone else.

I'm also wrong a lot. When you get nearly four decades behind you, you're allowed, sometimes, to be wrong.

(See Steven Cunningham's caveat at the end of his brief history. It goes here just fine.

Mark

dakotajudo
12th September 2001, 13:43
Originally posted by Janty Chattaw

Kano was a "great martial artist" according to Takamatsu-sensei. But according to many, was no match for Takamatsu-sensei (the last combat ninja). I am only reporting what has been recorded.

Where is this recorded?

Robc
12th September 2001, 22:14
http://204.95.207.136/vbulletin/att...hp?postid=66776

Mr. Chattaw, this photo is the kind of thing that makes "martial artists" look like people living in a fantasy world. Please, do you really think this sort of thing happens in real life? Do you think people can do this against real attackers, even if they've studied martial arts for 50 years?

I hope you're not relying on these sorts of techniques for self defense. They are wonderful choreography but they are pure fantasy.

Leading people, especially young people, to believe techniques like this work does nothing more than create a false sense of security. It is irresponsible and can get people injured or killed when they try using it against street thugs who, after laughing, bash their heads in.

Sorry to rant.

Rob Canestrari

Robc
12th September 2001, 22:58
Mr. Chattaw,

I think Mr. Hatsumi is a fine human being and, according to those that know him, an equally remarkable martial artist. You, also, seem to have years of very good, solid experience. Me, too. Many, many years.

My comment was on the technique pictured and those types of techniques I believe it represents, not an indictment of Mr. Hatsumi or the Bujinkan. If it came across that way I apologize. You'll see pictures like that in any hapkido, aikido, or daito ryu book.

I wish you best regards and much successfull training. I am a few years older than you and hope you'll consider one thing I've learned: be scheptical of anything that smacks of magic. That's not beign closed minded; it's just checking assumptions against reality.

Warm wishes,

Rob Canestrari

MarkF
13th September 2001, 09:35
How did they grab him? Why did THEY grab HIM? If it was an exhibition, it was staged, it wasn't in the natural act of every day defense. He knew how he was going to respond and HE told THEM to grab him where they grabbed him. It is a lot like the "Combat Ki" demonstrations. They set themselves, then are misdirected to doing something as a show. Nothing is ever as it seems. There is a saying:

"Do not believe anything you read or hear, not an nth of what you see."

You also state you have Kodokan Judo teaching licenses? From whom and are they with the Kodokan? The USJF, etc?

Who were your teachers? I grew up and trained most of my life in Southern California and know the Nanka Yudanshakai pretty well, so I really do have an interest here. I spent a lot of those years as a member of Nanka, member originally of the US Black Belt Federation, and then when it changed its name to the USJF. I'm a member of Nanka today so I know most of the dojo around then and which are around today. What do you call a "teaching license?" In the US, especially in Southern California (Nanka), you must be sandan to have a dojo without supervision, so where did you teach?

Throw out the original head of Nanka and I won't say another word about the subject.
******

It really doesn't matter. Most know of Kano's club and who are drawn to it and why. I was taught to let it go when those who are not appropriate to represent judo, be, and to let any ego be silenced by example, not beating my chest, so I'll stop and let it go. I need to breathe now.

Some lessons need to be practiced over and over and again and again. Simple breathing is one lesson I note being forgotten in MA even within those who practice sanchin.

Mark

Ben Reinhardt
13th September 2001, 17:49
Originally posted by Janty Chattaw
Mark,
it is a well known fact that Kano studied both Yoshin Ryu Jujutsu and Kukishin Ryu Bujutsu with Takamatsu-sensei and they were close friends. Takamatsu-sensei was a 5th dan in Kodokan judo. Hatsumi-sensei also holds license in Kodokan Judo also.

I am not arguing over it, I was just adding some interesting info about the connection between Kano and Takamatsu, and the fact that a certain technique (Hiza-guruma) came from Takamatsu-sensei's teachings. It is just some interesting facts.

Dakotajudo,
is is also a well known fact that there were close ties between Takamatsu-sensei and Jigoro Kano. (according to Soke and according to what is written in Takamatsu-sensei's journal that Hatsumi-sensei shares info from time to time, plus the multiple other people Takamatsu-sensei knew in his time) all have reported on the close ties between the Kodokan and Takamatsu-sensei. Of coarse Takamatsu-sensei would'nt brag about defeating anybody, but he did feel that Judouka wouldn't ever gain real powerf because they relied on their backs. He felt that Kano was a more powerful martial artists, because of the fact that many times Kano won bouts, without bending over and going directly to the ground. These are various notes shared with me in my beginning days of the Bujinkan.

Bending over is not considered good Judo posture. Sometimes it is necessary, but overall, shizen hontai is considered the best overall poster. Even in jigohontai, one's back is erect.

As Judo became more and more of a sport, poor posture became more common, to where it is endemic today, especially outside of Japan.

Ben Reinhardt

MarkF
14th September 2001, 11:02
Originally posted by Janty Chattaw
I hold a teaching license in Judo....


Originally posted by Janty Chattaw
Me- I hold a teaching license in Judo under the Ryobu Kai.


Well you could have fooled me. You say you do, then you don't, then you do. I just would like to know who authorized you to teach Kodokan Judo?

Here is another old saying: "If it is Kodokan, it is judo. If it is Judo, it is Kodokan.

So where and from whom did you get your teaching "license" in judo? Kodokan or the USJF, it is still Kodokan Judo. What does a license mean to you?

If you had claimed Japan, I would have believed you had 1-dan or even 2-dan. They are much more liberal with the dan grades as they still hold the meaning of the beginning to be in the grade of shodan. But not here.

Was it some kind of Jr. Black belt or something?

Mark

PS: Again, I have to breathe.;)

Kit LeBlanc
14th September 2001, 19:09
Are we about to have a Bujinkan vs. judo/jujutsu war like we had with the Aiki wars?

BTW, people don't "attack" people by walking up and grabbing their arms (well, I guess cops do. Maybe this is a "defense against arrest" technique...)

A demo is a demo. Whether or not they are his students makes little difference in this case. I think FEW serious and respectful martial artists would walk up to a respected teacher of another tradition in a public demonstration situation and intentionally try to embarrass him. Instead you let him work his stuff and make your own assessment from there. Without a lot more detail surrounding the circumstances of this grainy black and white picture we can have no definitive answer. The Bujinkan party line as to what it is is immaterial.

Such a demo is not a fight or even remotely close to one, and is not a true indicator of what someone can do under stress against a resisting opponent. It is far closer to something like beginning aikido randori....the uke tanks, just not so easily.

I confess I know little about the Bujinkan. I have a friend that used to be a member and he worked corrections and said he found a lot of it very practical. I have seen and heard of other cops, military and spec ops guys who swear by it. Hell, I read a Steven K. Hayes article once where he mentioned some tight tactical considerations that Hatsumi told him about that were right on the money and I think would not have even been considered by a wannabe samurai commando. That gave me pause.

From the P.O.V of an outsider the politics look all screwed up, it looks like they give away dan ranks for dollars, and it seems that it is a little confused as to whether it now wants to be ninpo or samurai jujutsu, but some of the stuff looks very much like it would be effective.

This does not make it magic. Janty it sounds like you have a lot of experience in martial arts. You cannot seriously believe that ANYONE is capable of taking on two judo yudansha at the same time and throwing them effortlessly in a resistive situation. If you do, it unfortunately shows how much you really know about fighting.


Kit

Rob,

Keep speaking the truth, man. Good stuff. Send me a private message so I can e-mail you, I am just down the road from you.

Kit LeBlanc
14th September 2001, 20:10
Originally posted by Janty Chattaw


I don't believe in magic. Rob and I spoke via E-mail and I explained it better to him and he explained his view better to me. We came to an understanding. I have much respect for the guy now.

And mine for you is growing. Very nice reply and well said.

Kit