Koryu: Right of Way

[DCPan]

Hi all,

Was just wondering, does koryu kenjutsu address the concept of "Right of Way" or something similar to it?

Is there an equivalent or similar concept in kenjutsu?

Training method?

Thoughts?

Or why concept is irrelevant?

Thanks!

[renfield_kuroda]

Not entirely sure what you mean, but in Mugairyu Iaihyodo we have a few kata and techniques dealing with walking down the street and getting jumped, or more subtly, getting one's saya knocked intentionally (the modern day equivalent would probably be flicking the bird or throwing signs.
We've got ryoguruma, versus two attackers coming at you from directly in front, blocking the road, and also mikaeri, and wicked naiden kata in which you are attacked from behind (most likely the dude who just came towards and passed you) and do a quick turn-cut, and also tsukikage-kanno, another naiden in which you are attacked from behind and do a reverse grip draw and stab behind.

Also all of our kumitachi are walking/running at each other with swords sheathed, drawing in reaction to uchidachi's draw and attack.

Is that what you mean?

Regards,

r e n

[Earl Hartman]

I don't think that is what David is talking about, Renfield.

In Western foil fencing, the term "right of way" refers to who has the right to attack, sort of like who has the right of way in certain driving situations.

IIRC, in foil fencing, the fencer is required by rule to parry an attack before he can riposte. So, until the initial attack is dealt with, the right of way remains with the fencer who initiated the attack. I believe the intent of this rule is to teach the fencer the proper self-preservation instincts. I presume that the idea is that no one in his right mind would attack without warding off the attacker's sword first.

I do not believe this rule applies with what is called a "stop thrust", that is, a thrust delivered to stop the attacker in his tracks as he attakcs. However, I am not sufficiently familiar with the rules to know when this does or does not apply.

I don't believe this concept applies to either saber or epee.

Anyway, I don't think there is any such thing in Japanese sword arts, koryu or otherwise.

[renfield_kuroda]

Interesting. Thanks for the clarification.
I've never heard of such a thing in koryu. We seem to have four ways to respond to an attack:
* counter-attack before his attack is committed sen sen no sen
* counter-attack simultaneously sen no sen
* stop the attack (parry, block, etc.) and then counter go no sen
* avoid the attack (taisabaki) and then counter go no sen

Of course there's also DIE and RUN AWAY, two ways of responding to an attack that seemed quite popular, if not always by conscious choice.

Regards,

r e n

[Earl Hartman]

Well, right of way is analagous to go no sen.

Yes, "die" and "run away" are two time-honored concepts, but you forgot one:

Mutual Slaying

[DCPan]

Originally posted by Earl Hartman
I don't think that is what David is talking about, Renfield.

Yeah. I will explain below

Originally posted by Earl Hartman
IIRC, in foil fencing, the fencer is required by rule to parry an attack before he can riposte. So, until the initial attack is dealt with, the right of way remains with the fencer who initiated the attack. I believe the intent of this rule is to teach the fencer the proper self-preservation instincts. I presume that the idea is that no one in his right mind would attack without warding off the attacker's sword first.

The reason why I think something similar could be useful in Japanese swordsmanship is because it gives your riai more clarity.

If you *know* your aite have the right of way and you went for it anyway, "sutemi" waza has more meaning or nioi.

I guess the other difference is that I don't view debana-waza to be the same thing as beating the opponent to the punch while at times, it seems like that is what it was reduced to. The reason is this. I think of beating someone to the punch as having a greater 0 to 60 while I think debana waza is about timing and set-up. You can properly place yourself and debana someone without greater speed, whereas I don't think the same is true in the other situation.

I simply think having the concept of right of way will gives one's timing a fuller dimenion in riai...

Originally posted by Earl Hartman

Anyway, I don't think there is any such thing in Japanese sword arts, koryu or otherwise.

Yeah, but I think it might be a useful "learning" device. I certainly would think having a rule that a kendoka has to parry an attack before riposte would make things kinda funny!

[DCPan]

Hi all,

FWIW, I was under the impression that originally, "Right of Way" was a way of recognizing who has the advantage in the attack.

In foil fencing, you are thrusting.

Naturally, the one who extends in arm first has the advantage if you were to both thrust at each other.

It is the ability to recognize who has the advantage if you were to both attack now that I want, and not the "rigid" rule of having to parry and then riposte that's at issue.

In translation, for Kendo, it'd be the one who seize the centerline first, would it not?

FWIW

[Eric Montes]

Howdy,

Earl you are correct regarding right of way in foil fencing. This concept is also applicable in Sabre fencing, but in epee the concept is thrown out the window.

I would have to check the rule book to be sure, but I believe the stop thrust is only allowed in epee bouts. BTW epee fencing is the closest modern analog to 'first touch' rapier dueling. Again I will have to check sources but the foil is derived from court swords and has (in my IMHO) has the most contrived rules (right of way, scoring only on the torso) while epee has the least (first touch gets point, valid touch on any part of the opponent's body, double touch) [can you tell I am an epee fencer? ]

I immediately thought of Gashi-uchi (Shinkage ryu) and Hitotsu no tachi (Itto-ryu) as examples where the concept of right of way has no applicability.

[DCPan]

Originally posted by Eric Montes
I immediately thought of Gashi-uchi (Shinkage ryu) and Hitotsu no tachi (Itto-ryu) as examples where the concept of right of way has no applicability.

Please explain?

I guess perhaps, using "Right of Way" was a bad choice of words because there's implied and accepted meanings to the term, esp if you are a western fencer.

My goal was mearly to search for recognizing who has the attacking advantage at a given point

A lot of assumptions goes into recognizing the terms of establishing that advantage...when you change a given condition, the tables can be reversed.

For example, it is commonly said in kendo that no two swords can be on the centerline at the same time...but really, a lot of "assumptions & conditions" have to be met for that to be true

[Eric Montes]

For example, it is commonly said in kendo that no two swords can be on the centerline at the same time...but really, a lot of "assumptions & conditions" have to be met for that to be true

I think your sensei has described the situation better than I can here. no assumptions, no conditions.

Using the fencing concept of right of way, if your opponent cuts shomen, you would be obligated to block/parry before you can riposte/countercut.

And at the risk of VASTLY oversimplifying the examples from Shinkage-ryu and Itto-ryu. If your opponent cuts shomen, then you cut shomen on the exact same angle. Then "no two swords can be on the centerline at the same time". One will stay on line, one will not. Preferably, your opponent's will not. (As a caveat, I practice neither of these koryu.. )

HTH

eric

[DCPan]

Originally posted by Eric Montes
I think your sensei has described the situation better than I can here. no assumptions, no conditions.

Actually, I said the latter part

Originally posted by Eric Montes
Using the fencing concept of right of way, if your opponent cuts shomen, you would be obligated to block/parry before you can riposte/countercut.

That's my point earlier! (Pardon the pun).

I shouldn't have used the term "right of way" because it isn't about being obligated to parry then riposte.

It is more about if the opponent has the advantage "by seizing the centerline" in kendo (OR extending his arm in foil), you need to recognize that fact and deal with his control of the center in your plan before you strike, or risk getting stop-tsukied on his chudan.

I botched my explanation totally huh?

[renfield_kuroda]

As mentioned above, we have kata and kumitachi that vary sen-sen-no-sen, sen-no-sen, and go-no-sen.

So regarding using Right of Way as a training tool, we sort of already do. For example in the kata gyokko, you want to attack sen-sen-no-sen, but you're too late, and end up stepping back and narrowly avoiding the enemy's blade, then drawing and cutting go-no-sen.
The kata is in part to teach the timing of when to go for it, and when to wait for it.

Regards,

r e n

[DCPan]

Originally posted by renfield_kuroda
As mentioned above, we have kata and kumitachi that vary sen-sen-no-sen, sen-no-sen, and go-no-sen.

Well, in the case of the Kendo Kata, there's been quite a bit of discussion over how mittsu-no-sen is explained in there...as pointed out earlier. First, only two of the three sens are present in the kata. Second, some of the "assignment" of the sen doesn't match how the sen is explained.

Hence my search for these things and hoping they are better answered in koryu. Frankly, I find the current explaination of mittsu-no-sen in the kendo curriculum a little too abstract for me. It appears in my limited experience that western fencing has a more overt training device for grinding that concept into place.

[gendzwil]

Originally posted by DCPan
It is more about if the opponent has the advantage "by seizing the centerline" in kendo (OR extending his arm in foil), you need to recognize that fact and deal with his control of the center in your plan before you strike, or risk getting stop-tsukied on his chudan.

Our training mechanism for this is mune-zuki. If I have a student who jumps in continuously without somehow dealing with my shinai, I'll just keep hauling him up short with mune-zuki. After a while he gets frustrated and changes his approach.

[DCPan]

Originally posted by gendzwil
Our training mechanism for this is mune-zuki. If I have a student who jumps in continuously without somehow dealing with my shinai, I'll just keep hauling him up short with mune-zuki. After a while he gets frustrated and changes his approach.

There is one adverse side effect and one minor difficulty with this.

The side effect is that the student/beginner just learns not to come in straight rather than deal with the fight for the centerline.

The minor difficulty is if you use a carbon shinai, it is much harder because unless you get it just right, the carbon just bends...