PDA

View Full Version : Judo & Striking



AST
24th October 2001, 06:49
Most Judoka point out that Judo is a very complete art, in that it contains throws, groundwork and striking. One is reminded that just because one does not see any striking in the curriculum does not mean it does not exist.

The Kodokan sites the Tehshin Shin'yo school as being the source of Judo's striking techniques. Now my question.

Are there any judoka out there, in any country, who have learnt the striking curriculum of the Tenshin Shin'yo Ryu?

The Judoka I have met have all used Karate to provide them with a striking base. If one was to go to the kodokan in Japan would they teach you? Is there a minimum ranking? Is it only for the "inner circle" of seniors?

The one final thought I had is, is it any more effective than Karate? Or would the average Judoka save himself a lot of time and hassle by simply enrolling at their local karate / tae kwon do school? :eek:

My limited research into the question leads me to believe that the Tenshin Shin'yo and their atemi waza have become more of a legend than anything of practical value.

If you could correct me I would appreciate your opinions and insights.

johan smits
24th October 2001, 08:30
Hi,

I think it is custom here to sign with your full name, but you know that I quess.

TSR did have a great deal of influence on Judo so probably it's atemi waza as well. I have read somewhere (can't remember where) that Kano and Funakoshi knew each other and Kano asked Funakoshi to teach some basic karate techniques.
To make a good comparison you best ask a senior TSR practitioner.

About "more effective", when you ask me the best is to look for an art which complements your original art in a good way. Theories of motion, body movement should be as close as possible so there won't be any loss of effectiveness.
Judo with Shotokan karate
Judo with Wado karate
Juod with Teakwondo

Each of these combinations will turn out slightly different.
My personal opinion would be Judo is best complemented by Wado because this style originates for a large part from jujutsu and is less likely to leave "gaps" than the other combinations.


My two cents.

Best Regards,


Johan Smits

MarkF
24th October 2001, 10:00
The only "inner circle" of the Kodokan is the Kenshusei, an organization of appointed instructors in/for the Kodokan.

To your question. Continue your research, and don't believe anything on the Internet. I've found most research ends up as the opinion of the one who is conducting the research. If you go in looking for something, you'll find it, even the legends and myths. Especially the legens and myths.

The fact remains that the syllabus of Kodokan Judo contains the kata in which the different forms of atemi are utilized. Is it easy to find someone teaching kata? Probably.

Mark

AST
24th October 2001, 10:44
Johan

Sorry about the name, I do know the rules. My sig contains my full name, however I adjusted my profile and I have obviously done something to turn it off. I will correct that, wasn't trying to be evasive. In regards to finding a senior TSR practitioner, in South Africa? The chances are slim, min and none.
Hell, are there any senior practitioners outside of Japan? If anyone is aware of any, or relevant websites, books, or other media please let me know.

I have over a decade in Karate and at the beginning of this year started studying Judo because I wanted to learn throws, groundwork, strangles and joint locks. My karate style contains some of the above but does not concentrate on them as much as Judo. I also wanted to be able to practice techniques full speed against resisting opponents, one of the marked superiority’s of the Judo system. Around here though Judo is regarded, as a poor cousin to Karate and that could not be further from the truth. Yet even some of the people I train with regard Judo as sport and Karate or boxing as what you need to win a real fight. Coming from the other side of the fence, I keep telling them that they do not appreciate the effectiveness of what they do.

It just seems to me that if Judo could reintegrate their atemi syllabus back into their training it would go a long way to changing perceptions of the art. The kata may contain the atemi, but what I have seen of it’s practice, it is little more than a dance memorised at grading time to earn the next rank. It is a shame though because I can see so much potential in those kata, but I guess you don’t need them to win a competition.

Disclaimer: The above viewpoints are mine and mine alone. They are based on my limited experience, and are not intended to represent the wider Judo or Karate community.

Adrian Teixeira

MarkF
24th October 2001, 11:32
I was on the contest circuit for close to 20 years and won't dispute that judo is a sport. So is boxing, and both are described as combative sports.

You are also correct considering a resisting opponent, but in actuality a smaller percentage of judoka do regularly compete.

Both Don Draeger and Robert W. Smith, both accomplished judoka, not to mention all other forms of grappling they have done, incl koryu, have said that taking the walk in the always dark alley, that they would choose the judoka to take the walk with than the karateka (or anyone else for that matter, when an unarmed attack occurs, that is).

It may not seem like it, but once a decent judoka gets on the inside, you should give up then, as being thrown through the floor, having an arm broken as easy as a pretzel, or being choked to unconciousness, is inevitable.;)

But in the strickest sense of the term "fighting," stricking arts certainly make a better fighter. The thing is, some just don't join for that reason. When you've put in thirty plus years of hitting the floor, there must be a better way. A strong foundation, or a weak one, just a foundation in judo, when all else fails, judo simmers to the top. The last sentence was a paraphrase from one of Koryu's most published writers. No one says you are wrong, or shouldn't think it, but judo is a refined, basic art with principles that hold up. Shiai, btw, is a contraction for shi ni ai.
All MA have gaping holes in them; Aikido = little groundwork. Karate = no groundwork, thus the reason for doing judo, Koryu, no randori, thus no resisting opponents, and the list goes on (I shouldn't lump all koryu together, but it was for the point I was trying to make), BJJ no tachi-waza, or bad ones. It is a pity, but there really is no perfect MA. That is the main reason for not leaving it for long periods.

Mark

AST
24th October 2001, 12:38
Terming the martial arts as sports has always been difficult for me. Sure Judo can be practised under controlled conditions with a guiding set of rules, and thus it becomes a sport. However by the same token than so is Karate / Tae Kwon Do and NHB Fighting. The NHB people would tell you that theirs is reality combat, but theirs is merely sport with the least amount of rules. Yet I agree that many people train in these arts without competing, and enjoy them for reasons other than combat or competition. So if it exists without needing it’s sporting aspect is it still a sport.

The thing with Judo competition is that it has become Judo’s main focus, and from my limited vantage point it seems to take it’s toll on the body after a while. So once the practitioner has stopped competing their seems to be very little for them to continue on with. I have already met a number of seniors that my instructors have trained, that having attained their sho / ni dans and having done the tournament circuit are no longer motivated to continue with their Judo training. It is sad to me that you get so far and then cannot see a reason to continue. It is my thinking at least that if Judo adopted a weapon syllabus and reintroduced it’s atemi syllabus to it’s seniors, then the motivation to continue past a certain stage would be there. I acknowledge that Judoka can fight I just think they need a life beyond competition.

From what I have read Kano wished the Kodokan to be a repository of koryu knowledge, preserved and then slowly improved upon. He had great vision and I don’t think that he wanted his art to only be limited to a competitive aspect. I have read about a return to traditional or root Judo, if it includes the expansion of the Judo syllabus I think it would be a good thing.

tommysella
24th October 2001, 12:56
If I'm not wrong the only places you can learn Tenjin Shinyo-ryu is in Japan and Australia. One problem is also that it is not like walking into the local Judo dojo either...

I looked a bit at the atemi techniques we have in our two (I belive) most common self-defence kata, Kodokan Goshin-jutsu and Kime no Kata.

As tori you will learn how to use:

Naname-uchi (or shuto-uchi)
Ago-tsuki or tsuki-age
Choku-tsuki
Ura-tsuki or uraken-tsuki
Mae-geri
Yoko-geri
Shotei-tsuki or teisho-tsuki (palm strike)
Metsubishi (not really a strike, but more of a distraction to the eyes)

As uke you will learn the following:

Naname-uchi or yoko-uchi (strike with the side of the hand)
Ago-tsuki or tsuki-age (uppercut)
Ganmen-tsuki (jab)
Tsukkake (straight punch)
Suri-age (punch with the palm of the hand)
Mae-geri or Ke-age (straight kick)
Yoko-geri (side kick)
Hiza-geri

Compared to Karate this is not much, but they give the Judoka a rather good foundation, and perhaps most important of all...they are allready linked in to other techniques like throws and joint-locking techniques.

One shouldn't forget Seiryoku Zen'yo Kokumin Taiiku either. This kata is not tought that much these days, but I saw that Kodokan tought it at there summer kata course this year...

Regards,
Tommy

johan smits
24th October 2001, 13:19
Hi Adrian,

Some time ago there was someone (really sorry can't remember his name) who wrote an article about the Go no Kata (as opposite from Ju no Kata) from Kodokan Judo for a Hoplos newsletter.
When my memory serves me well that gentleman was a senior practitioner of TSR. You might be able to get his name from Hunter B. Armstrong from Hoplos.

Judo is one of the most underestimated arts for fighting, I have said it before it's just that most teachers (in my experience) teach the art as a sport that is where their bread and butter is.
So Judo get's a reputation as a sport which diminishes it's reputation as a fighting art.

Judo is a great fighting art, however I do think that due to build-in changes in the execution of the techniques for safety reasons the effectiveness of these techniques have lessened to a certain degree. You can see the differences in execution of techniques when you compare old judo books with those of later date.

What you said about memorised dances for gradings I have seen that many times. Point is when you forget a martial art is about fighting you won't train it with a fighting attitude and an important part is lost. With fighting attitude I do not mean a fighting attitude during a shiai which is, no matter how tough, a controlled environment no I mean a fighting attitude in an enviroment with unknown variables.

Well my viewpoints.

Mark, how can say the perfect martial art doesn't exist when we got JUJUTSU?

Yeah,

Best Regards,


Johan Smits

hector gomez
24th October 2001, 13:29
AST, for what it's worth, one of the best training principals judo has,is that, it is practiced on a live resisting,unwilling opponent,whatever
striking art you choose ,keep that principal in mind.

HectorGomez

rsamurai2
24th October 2001, 19:37
I here this often," judo is practiced against a full resistant opponent." the implication is that the other martial arts are not. I do not understand this. I have black belts in two different styles of karate, one American karate that is sport/point karate and shotokan. Both styles we went ageist fully resisting opponents. In my jujutsu system, our randori is across between the karate sparring and judo randori. Again fully resisting partners. My judo instructor once made a comment in class that karate only pulls their punches and punches air. This is not true. kata punches air. That is it. I had my jaw dislocated one in class. In order to throw someone in jujutsu we strike the body hard that achieve the kusushi, and then we throw. So judo is only one of many martial arts that practice full-blown and oh yea, i know many kung fu people who practice pretty darn hard. Again with strikes and punches and no of us are hurt any more or any less then we are in judo. As matter of fact i have been hurt more in judo than any other martial art because my focus is less (i assume) because of all the built in safety factors I am not as careful..
Just my experiences.

hector gomez
24th October 2001, 20:03
Richard ,one of the reasons you always hear this outlook on
karate or striking,is because unlike judo, that is practiced with the same format
all over the world,unfortunatley striking arts ,are not ,they are
to many variables and interpretations, as to how to train and it varies
from differrent schools to different gyms.

So if my comment ,did not apply to you ,and you feel like you
are training against a unwiilling resisting opponent,when it
comes to striking .then you should have no problem.

Hector Gomez

CEB
24th October 2001, 20:27
I've practiced karate almost 30 years. But the hardest I was ever hit was practicing randori back when I played Judo while in college. My opponent went to throw Marote Seionage and when he came around somewhere between tskuri and kake my gi slipped and he cracked me on the chin with his elbow. Good night Irene. I also remember all the purple bruises I used to on the left side of my chest where people would hit me with a variation of the Bruce Lee 6 inch power punch while gripping my kesa. :)

My teacher would tell stories about his teacher. His name was Sensei Kim. I don't remember his first name. I believe he was one of the head people in the USJF. One time Mr Kim was asked 'Sensei what is your favorite throw?'. He answered O Soto Gari. His students were puzzled and replied 'But sensei you never throw O Soto Gari." Sensei replied 'Yes, because Americans smash.' Evidently Mr. Kim would drive the forearm so hard that it would seperate the ribs at the sternum. Therefore he quit using O Soto Gari in free practice.

BTW, My Judo Teacher did teach atemi waza. We didn't spend a lot of time on it. It was very basic stuff but effective.

Have a good day.

Ed Boyd
Karate is nice. We can practice with light, minimal cantact if we want. Too bad we can't control gravity. Gravity is a very unforgiving thing.

rsamurai2
24th October 2001, 23:14
i guess i have been very fourtunate in finding martial art instructors. we never did anything light. even sparring was done 80% intensity. attack drills(one step 2 step sparring) was done full blown. if we couldn't block a technique ad counter in class than under the stress of real assults we would fail. so my blocks were done as hard and focused as possible and counter attacks were done again about 80% to 100%. my class could take a punch just like the boxing club that was down the street from us. jujutsu was the same way full intensity. but again i guess that is why many of us are/were bouncers or bodyguards.

MarkF
25th October 2001, 10:10
For those who want to know the secrets of judo, hidden for all these years, here is an introduction from a pamphlet written in 1948 by Gunji Koizumi of the Budokwai, and the oath taken by early judoshugyosha:

JUDO

JU-DO: literally, JU means gentle, soft, tender, pliable; DO means road, or way. This name, or term, is derived from the fact that the main tactic of judo is never to resist, but to yield to one’s opponent’s force. In feudal days, the art was monopolised by the samurai class and was more commonly known as Ju-Jutsu, or Yawara: it then played a vital part in mortal combat; therefore the art included methods too dangerous and harmful to be practised as a competitive sport. The late Prof. Jigoro Kano studied under various Ju-Jutsu masters and realised the merit of the art and the value of its training in mental and physical culture. With the idea of making the art safe to be practised as a sport by eliminating all dangerous methods, and selecting the best of all schools, he formulated a system, and called it Judo. In 1882, he founded the school, The Kodokan. But to prevent the art from being abused, and to avoid all undesirable elements, he made it a condition that the pupils admitted to the school must sign a declaration which includes the following:

Without permission of the authorities of the Kodokan, I will not teach or divulge the knowledge of the art I shall be taught.
I will not perform the art in public for personal gain.
I will lay no blame on anyone, except myself, in the event of accident, even if it should result in my death.
I will conduct myself in such a way as never to discredit the traditions and honour of The Kodokan.
I will not abuse, or misuse, the knowledge of judo.

Originally the art was invented purely for its usefulness but, as with many other inventions, the human mind sought to develop it into an art satisfying both to the physical and aesthetic sense, thereby incidentally increasing its efficiency. Technically, judo is a scientific study of the weakness and strength of the body-mechanism and the most effective ways of applying this knowledge. The training, or practice of it for skill, provides a means for attaining all that is best in sport - promotion of mental and physical development, gratification of the competitive instinct, and stimulation of the spirit of fair play. Then, the inter-relation between the body, mind and spirit imbues one as one acquires skill with the qualities of balanced poise, self-confidence, and the principle of non-resistance and calm alertness.

The efficiency of the art depends on the skilful application of theoretical knowledge developed upon the experience of centuries. The skill is composed of technical accuracy, co-ordinated movements and initiative. Therefore to attain a high degree of proficiency, one must be prepared to devote lifelong study and practice, which entails attaining and maintaining physical vigour and progressive mental development. Light-hearted enthusiasm which fades in facing difficulties, slowness of progress or hard work, is a waste of time and energy for both the student and the teacher. The value of judo however, like food, depends upon digestion and assimilation: it can only be appreciated by experience.

The art of judo can roughly be divided into six technical sections:

Nage-waza: Methods of throwing.
Osaikomi-waza: Holding.
Gyaku-waza: Locking.
Shime-waza: Strangling.
Atemi-waza: Striking, or kicking, the vital nerve centres.
Katsu: Resuscitation.

The aim of all these sections except the last is to put the opponent out of action either temporarily or permanently. Throws are applied when the opponent loses his balance, either voluntarily or involuntarily. In practice, the opponent is thrown to the ground on his back: in reality, it should be on his head or shoulder. Locks are applied on the arms, legs, body, in such a way as to produce dislocation of the joints. The purpose of holding is to keep the opponent on his back, on the ground, helpless. Strangling is applied to the neck, to reduce the opponent to a state of coma by stopping the blood-circulation to the brain. The aim of striking or kicking the vital nerve-centres is to paralyse the opponent. Katsu is the method of reviving a person from the state of the coma.
_____________________


Mark

johan smits
25th October 2001, 10:35
The contents of the pamphlet is more or less what is stated in the book My study of Judo by Koizumi. I have seen a video from the Budokwai in which Koizumi demontstates with I think T.P. Legget. Now that is judo. What comes to mind however is that most of the early great Judoka had a background in jujutsu.
Koizumi's primary influence was Tenjin Shinyo Ryu.

In My study of Judo a glimpse is given of judo as a total art, it becomes obvious that by Koizumi it was taught as such.

Best Regards,

Johan Smits

AST
25th October 2001, 14:01
Richard

I hear what you are saying and perhaps the term “fully resisting” is not adequate. It is true that karate randori can be done against fully resisting opponents, I have done so myself on a regular basis. However there comes a point in striking randori were you cannot go any further. You cannot launch full, speed full power techniques against one another, you cannot practice eye thrusts, knee stomps, or palm strikes to the base of the nose at full power because you would cripple one another. It gets even worse with weapons. I’ve engaged in slow randori bo vs bo and bo vs sai, and slow is as good as it gets. You know that the first man to to make a solid high speed connection with his weapon is going to finish the fight. Incidently I believe that this type of training produces excellent tai sabaki, since egos are put aside, and you have to move or you are finished. However in regards to striking randori, there is that point and no further. There is no shame in this limitation, Kano himself faced this problem and was forced to discard atemi from competition since it was too dangerous.

Mark

It’s funny how the wheel turns.

Judo consists of 6 components:

Atemi-waza: Striking, or kicking, the vital nerve centers. (Kicking, hands, elbows, knees)
Nage-waza: Methods of throwing.
Osaikomi-waza: Holding.
Gyaku-waza: Locking.
Shime-waza: Strangling.
Katsu: Resuscitation.

JKD revolutionsed the martial arts world with the concept of 5 ranges:

Weapon range ( ballistic down to small knives, drawing mainly from Escrima)
Kicking range (drawing from Karate, Wing Chun, Muay Thai, Tae Kwon Do etc)
Striking range (see above, plus western Boxing)
Trapping range (drawing from Wing Chun)
Grappling range (Today mainly drawing from BJJ)

So someone tell me what exists in the second list that is missing from the first. Weapons granted, but Judo contains Katsu which modern systems do not. We maim but we can’t heal. JKD concepts were considered revolutionary, but have they actually given us anything new. Is there anything new under the sun, or are we simply reinventing the wheel?

All these NHB types are cross training to produce that Ultimate Martial Art, yet the oldest and most disregarded taught in its entirety may be the most perfect beast yet.

Also question.
Koizumi talks about the removal of the dangerous techniques. Were these actual techniques or merely dangerous ways of doing otherwise standard techniques? What is your opinion?

johan smits
25th October 2001, 14:25
Hi Adrian,


Some of the techniques which were abolished are neck/spinelocks; leglocks; do-jime (bodyscissors) throwingtechniques which go against the natural motion of the elbowjoint. You make a shoulder throw and while executing the technique you follow the natural bend of the elbow, you don't go against it (gyakute position). Older jujutsu schools have a lot of these techniques.

When you throw a person you don't throw them headlong into the ground, you pull them up so they can break their fall, instead of throwing them in such a way as to prevent a breakfall.

The way judo techniques are executed has also changed, some would say for the better, as in the techniques have matured - others would say these changes have diminished it's potential as a fighting art. From my pov both views are correct.

best regards,


Johan Smits

hector gomez
25th October 2001, 15:03
AST ,your analogy is correct ,i don't think anything new has really
been invented lately,i would like to probably refer to it as refinement in all areas,grappling ,striking etc.

As far as striking goes ,atemi waza,this is a very controversial
issue in my opinion,because although it is great to know where
the vital areas are ,i am really having a hard time just hitting big areas
much less small ones,so one should practice and perfect the most
common techniques that will be employed 90% of the time.

live resisting opponents ,is probably a wrong description of strike
training enterpretation,but if anyone has had experience in boxing
or contact karate or even some tournament karate realizes how hard
it is, to hit a moving target ,much less a small vital target.

Yes they are sports and they do have rules,but there are certain
realities within the rules, that are very real,boxing for example, you have someone trying to cause some serious damage with their hands ,if one learns to defend themselves under these circumstanses it
goes a long way for protecting yourself in a self defense situation,just like judo someone is
trying to physically throw you on your back,if you properly learn
how to defend yourself it goes a long way in dealing with that part of actual combat.

Hector Gomez

AST
25th October 2001, 20:12
Johan

Just out of interest would Syd Hoares A-Z of Judo contain some of those techniques? What you say about dropping someone on their heads is very true. Years ago my karate instuctor showed us how to preform a throw and force the person to land on their heads rather than their backs. Radically changed my estimation of throws and their value in combat.


Hector

I hear what you are saying. Even though a boxers sparring may not be life or death, it is painful enough and stressful enough to teach him to operate properly under said stress.Thus in a real situation were the stress is immense, he can handle it, not freeze and still perform.

This, in my opinion is the merit of any form of competition. It may not be realistic, or life and death, but you do learn to deal with nerves and to operate under stress.

tommysella
26th October 2001, 06:29
Hi all!

I read here about dropping someone on their head. The question I have now is...why?

Even for a self-defence situation I would not drop someone one their head. If my intension (spelling?) is to drop someone on their head it is to do severe damage to my opponent. Damages that can also lead to death. Doing so I wouldn't consider me no better then the one who attacked me in the first place...

Of course the instructors students perhaps thinks it's cool to learn these kinds of stuff...but for self-defence...?

Regards,
Tommy

johan smits
26th October 2001, 08:04
Adrian,

Yes these kind of techniques are in the A-Z of Judo by Syd Hoare. The book is great it is a must have for both judo and jujutsu practitioners.

Tommy,

I understand what you're saying, I would rather not fight at all, and I think the best weapon (mine anyway) is to pay close attention to what is happening around you.
An experienced judoka will be able to direct someone during a fall in such a way that they will fall on their head, it isn't something that has to be trained. It's just that the old jujutsu systems had a lot of these techniques. When you compare systems it is fair to say that eliminating more dangerous techniques diminishes the potential of a system as a fighting art, or a self-defense art.

For now,

Best,

Johan Smits

AST
26th October 2001, 09:22
Tommy

Why you would use such a technique goes to the very heart of a self defence situation. If your imagined situation is a male on male ego based confrontation, then I can understand your reluctance to use such a technique.

Now let me give you the South African scenario, you come home / wake up in the night. You are confronted by 3-5 youths armed with knives and possibly some guns as well. The blades will be anything from 4 inches to machetes / pangas. Their intention is to rob and assault you, there is high chance that they will rape any female members in the household and depending on their mood they may just kill you for the hell of it.

If you decide to resist understand that they will immediately escalate towards lethal force. If you are not willing to use lethal force in said situation then be prepared to accept that you are likely to be killed. My first karate instructor always stressed that the counter technique we chose must be capable of stopping the most viscous opponent we could think of; otherwise we were in for a hiding. This need to be gentle and loving with our assailants flies in the face of the Japanese concept of one chance / one technique / one life.

It also demonstrates that Judo, regarded as a nice sport, was once a warrior art and can be used as an incredibly effective combat system. If you know how.


Johan

I’ve tried to order that book twice without success, it looks like I’m going to have to go back and try again.

dakotajudo
27th October 2001, 01:02
I think it's important to distinquish between a training partner who is actively resisting and an opponent who is actively attacking.

It's rare to find a training partner who can come at you with the same focused intent when you're doing kata-style practice that you get when you face an opponent in shiai. No matter how hard your partner attacks, he is attacking to help YOU practice YOUR techniques.

An opponent in shiai, and commonly in randori, is more interested in applying HIS techniques to you, no matter how unwilling you may be. For me, that makes all the difference.

The waza, be it strikes or throws or locks, aren't so important. I value the test of wills that is part of randori

Barry Southam
27th October 2001, 13:32
Friends,


Of course the striking in Judo isn't as in depth as someone who studies a striking art such as Karate.....Just as many Karate systems don't go into detailed study of Throwing holding choking and jointlocks...Oh, they may learn a few throws,etc.,etc., but they for the most part don't understand how a throw works and the principles behind them or why they might fail when applied incorrectly.....Today,Judoka don't study as in depth the Striking and blocking techniques as those who study Karate...However, a Judoka who learns BASIC blocking skills along with BASIC striking skills using the fist,knifehand,ridgehand,palm,spearhand,elbow along with front snap kick,sidekick,back kick, knee, stomp and maybe roundhouse kick....Will have more than enough to ENTER the attacker and have the attacker in the JUDOKA's back yard or playing field to end the situation effectively with the force appropriate to the situation...
I certainly have no problem if any of my students study Karate and I welcome it....I have two Taekwondo blackbelt students studying Judo from me....They know very little about anything other than blocking and striking...So Judo is very advantageous to them likewise karate would be of benefit to those who study Judo and want to learn in depth blocking and striking techniques...

By the way: I'd be very careful in making sure any American that claims ranking in either Tenjinshinyoryu Jujutsu or Kitoryu Jujutsu is able to show proof of legitimacy in those arts before you begin studying from them.... There are those claiming ranking but when asked for proof of credentials well ??????????????????

It's really a shame that the Kodokan didn't keep a section for the study of various Jujutsu arts within it's building....I'm told that a high ranking Judoka who teaches at the Kodokan Judo Institute also is a present leader in Tenjinshinyoryu Jujutsu by the name of Kubota...


Take care

Barry E. Southam

johan smits
29th October 2001, 08:28
Kubota Sensei heads one of the lineages of TSR, Meik Skoss treats the TSR in a chapter in the first book published by koryu books (even if only for this chapter jujutsu - and judopractitioners should buy the book).

Any claims where it concerns koryu should be looked upon with a healthy amount of suspicion, especially when the web is the source.
Koryu.com and Hoplos are very reliable sources.
I think the person who did the "Go no Kata" article is a student of Kubota Sensei.

Best Regards,

Johan Smits