Likes Likes:  0
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 85

Thread: Weapons free-exchanges in Japanese koryu?

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    126
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by renfield_kuroda
    There seems to be this perpetual misunderstanding of what kata are and how practicing kata is done in an increasing difficult and free way.
    The basic moves of a kata, say a two-man pattern, are pretty much set. He cuts, I counter, he counters, I counter and win or something like that.
    And it's practiced like that for a long, long time.
    And then it gets harder: the timing changes, the targets change, the 'victim' aggresively tries to control the centerline, cuts are no longer stopped just before contact, but are carried through with full intent, and sometimes the kata changes in the middle...
    And sometimes you end up like this:
    http://renfield.net/blogged/2004/08/ouch.html
    A fairly minor bonk on the head, actually. That was when I was shidachi -- I was supposed to win -- but uchidachi came in faster than I could counter, I backed off more than is usual but still couldn't clear, and he connected nicely with my temple.

    So when I hear "free play" or "sparring" or "that stuff they do with wooden swords in The Last Samurai" the answer is yes: kata.
    Do not let the fact that it is a series of set moves fool you into thinking there is no freedom to play.
    It has been stated before, but I believe the concept of "kata" as it exists in koryu does not really make any sense to anyone not actively involved in a koryu. Sorry if that sounds like a cop-out on my part in attempting to explain, but all the words in the world still wouldn't give you a working definition. You have train it and live it to understand, so please take my word for it; there is plenty of free-play in koryu, and it works just fine for training, thanks.


    Regards,

    r e n
    ***

    Originally posted by hyaku
    The fact that we know what they are going to do allows us to deal with it and not injure them. But moves are so quick its difficult to add a high percentage to an attack one sometimes concentrate more on avoiding.

    Protective equipment and mock weapons or both allow us a sense of freedom that can without doubt become too free if taken lightly. That's when we can afford to feint whatever and try things out. But do tryouts dont help us win the day? Isnt its the techniques we have commited to memory, the ones we can do subconciously that usually win.
    Guys,

    OK, I find the particulars of JSA katas interesting, based on what you have posted above. I can see that the variation on timing, etc., can "free" things up a bit. Thowing in an unfamiliar move in the middle of the play will certainly test one's skill too.

    But (and correct me if I'm wrong here), you're still dealing primarily with a specific set of moves, which is still a very far cry from dealing with an opponent where you have no idea what attack he's going to launch (aside from what one can gather by observing the fighter's guard, movement, etc). This is what concerns me with the "pro-kata-only" argument.

    In addition, it appears (based on your descriptions) that the kata are geared towards dealing with similar weapons and/or modes of combat--do any kata exist, for example, which pit the kenjutsuka against an opponent armed with a Chinese dao and rattan shield, or a Korean flail?

    Thanks,

    David
    David Black Mastro


    "The Japanese are the most warlike people in this part of the world. They have artillery and many arquebuses and lances. They use defensive armor for the body, made of iron, which they have owing to the subtlety of the Portuguese, who have displayed that trait to the injury of their own souls." --Gonzalo Ronquillo de Penalosa, commenting on well-equipped wako in the Philippines, 1582.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,394
    Likes (received)
    84

    Default

    Nanban

    But thats my exact point on currrent trends in "free play"

    You don't train to defend vs ANY weapon but a copy of the one your useing.

    More to that point, you didn't have classical rapier guys training vs the flail either.

    So thats a non-point.

    Classical JMA trained in sword vs spear, naginata, chain, various other weapons.

    More pointedly (yes thats pun) I don't really consider it "free play" when you only train in a heavily regulated enviorment where your oppt MUST strike ONLY specifc targets.

    To quote you:

    "Your dealing with a specific set of moves, which is a far cry from dealing with an oppt where you have no idea what attack he is going to launch"

    Ok, I'll bite, so standing on the strip, facing an oppnt I have NO idea what he goign to do?

    Or would it more accurate to say that I know for a fact that ther are any number of things he WON'T DO.

    He is NOT going to stab me in the face.

    I know he or she he is NOT going to grab my wrist, trip me and then stab me.

    I know he is NOT going to stab me in the calf or the groin.

    I know he is NOT going "tie me up" and punch me in the face with the guard.

    I know they will not pull a dagger.

    I know he he or she is going to fight me pretty much like I am going to fight him.

    He will be trying to hit the same limited number of target areas I will aiming for.

    Use the foil in pretty much the same manner and follow the pretty much the same rules and behaviors as I do.

    And Amberger works (with other) are pretty quick to both illustrate this and to show how that can be deadly.

    I just don't see that as being "really" free play.

    Thus I don't think its an accurate "apples to apples" way to compare and contrast them.

    This IS NOT some indictemnt of western methods.

    No method is perfect, each devloped due to specifc enviroments and for specific reasons.

    Chris Thomas
    Last edited by cxt; 4th August 2004 at 18:12.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    685
    Likes (received)
    111

    Default Tanomo, Tanomo - - -

    There is no ryu that did not have kata as the primary training base. Some included sparring components - but kata was still the gold standard (Renfield K.'s post describes kata training at the higher levels wonderfully well).

    Free-style training was endemic. It was called shiai/dojo-arashi/dojo-yaburi/as well as vendetta, duels, etc. When young bushi wanted to test themselves they "free-sparred" with opponents from OTHER schools. This was regulated by many laws, but much as France several hundred years ago, the regulation controlled chaos rather than eliminated the practice.

    Best

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Renfield_kuroda

    "Kata", at its highest levels, is NOT a set of predetermined moves. Uchidachi is actively trying to win, Shidachi is actively trying to win. The moves (attacks and defenses and counters) are done in such a way so that, given the proper attack, the only reasonably defense/counter is the one as determined by the kata. Remember, the kata is teaching you how move within the theories of a given sword style. Some styles do A in response to X, some do B. So style 1's kata goes X->A, whereas style 2's kata goes X->B.
    That is an excellent post and description. Thank you. It would seem that the formula you are describing is not so different after all. In boxing, fencing and even wrestling one is expected to defend against specific attacks with an appropriate defense. Oftentimes there are numerous ways to defend a single, specific attack.

    So the opponents moves are not predictable nor is the opponent not fully resisting, thus at high levels, even with bokken, hundreds of years ago and even to this day, people get hurt. Alot.
    So, in essence, is the highest level of classical kenjutsu kata pretty much the same as free sparring? It seems so according to your description. If not, where in lies the difference?

    Unfortunately, in this day and age, most people who do kata are, as Niina-gosoke tells it, "just dancing".
    I think that is a lot of the kenjutsu kata I have seen. This seems even more prevalent in the unarmed arts. It would seem that few classical unarmed schools these days (at least in my area) are training realistically.

    So what we do now is NOT what they did 200 years ago...but what they did 200 years ago is not what they did 400 years ago. The key is, is the ryu evolving the same way, or was it fairly static for centuries and then, all of a sudden in modern times, it all went to hell?
    That is what I would like to know with some certainty, although it does seem impossible to know for sure. What is your opinion on it?

    Thanks for your post. It was very informative.
    Carl Massaro

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    6
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    cxt,

    I am NOT and was NOT argueing historical western sword schools. Only current practice. Which for my money is so signifiactly different from what was done "back in the day" as to make comparision problematic at best.
    I understand, and I actually agree with you. I have received some flak for voicing that opinion on some SFI threads. I argued that there is no way of knowing how close any reconstruction is to the real thing. Some European manuals had concise, cryptic text, with no pictures, and I got the impression that some people believed that what they reconstructed from those manuals was pretty close to the original combat art. Some manuals are easier to interpret than others, and there are some techniques that are fairly rudimentary, and seemingly obvious. But yes, I agree with your statement that much of the European reconstructions are probably off from the real thing. We can only surmise.

    Not questioning that historical western sword schools used "free play". I am questioning if that it was an "empahsis" because as far as I know.

    A-It was only ONE of a number things they did--as list which includes extensive 2-person drills, solo work on specific pattrens of lunges, parries, footwork, etc (which for my money could be considered a form of kata) a sort of target work. etc.

    B-We really don't know what folks spent more time on.
    I still think that bouting was a fairly prominent form of training given the history and the evidence. But, I thought you were arguing that it was probably rarely done. I understand your stance now. Nothing wrong with a cautious view on the matter.

    As I said it probably varied from school to school, master to master.
    I would agree with that. Especially considering that the 16th century weapons master, George Silver, complained that there were Italian rapier schools opening up in England that were not training realistically. Apparently he was a big proponent of free-play. As I mentioned before, he argued that many schools failed to used grappling, pommel strikes and other realistic techniques in their training.

    What we know of the Japanese method would indicate that kata was the primary means of instruction--again amoung other methods, such as solo practice, target work, drills, etc.
    Does any of this information come from pre-19th century scrolls? How certain are the scholars regarding the training methods of the past?

    NOT saying one is beter than the other, I AM saying that the question is not clear cut as it might seem
    I understand. I am sorry for any confusion on the matter, my intention was not to come on here and offend. If you I came off that way, I apologize. Things seem to be cleared up now. Hopefully we can continue this thread in constructive manner.
    Carl Massaro

  6. #66
    Mekugi Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by wmuromoto

    That most present day koryu jujutsu schools don't emphasize randori and contests is probably due to the success of Kodokan judo as a national sport. If it works, and works so well and broadly, why set up splinter groups? ...Just focus on kata geiko if you want to do koryu and if you really want to do randori and shiai, join a judo club. In fact, I visited the Hontai Yoshin-ryu jujutsu school once a long time ago. The younger Inoue sensei taught the system with his father, the soke, and on alternate days, as a judo godan he taught Kodokan judo. --No big deal to him. Each served a purpose.

    Wayne Muromoto
    Incidentally, Tenjin Shinyo Ryu seems to retain some sort of randori in it's curriculum- seemingly a little rougher than Kodokan Judo. I do not know how one may have influenced the other; maybe Steve Delaney can explain this better when he gets back from the UK.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    126
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Chris,

    Originally posted by cxt
    Nanban

    But thats my exact point on currrent trends in "free play"

    You don't train to defend vs ANY weapon but a copy of the one your useing.


    But the fact that the play is comparatively free makes up for that.

    More to that point, you didn't have classical rapier guys training vs the flail either.

    So thats a non-point.


    Come on now, Chris--I think you know better than that!

    The rapier (rappir) against the flail (pflegel) may be seen in Jakob Sutor's New Kunstliches Fechtbuch of 1612.

    Despite the fact that the rapier was primarily intended as a civilian weapon for use in the duel and personal self-defense, it sometimes had to be used against other weapons (especially in the latter scenario). In addition, rapiers were sometimes taken into battle, although most experts advised against this (see Sir John Smythe's Certain Discourses Military of 1590). Girard Thibault, in his famous Academie de l'espee of 1630, pitted the rapier against the two-handed sword. Luis Pacheco de Narvaez, in his treatise on the destreza from 1600, showed the rapier opposed to the Turkish kilij ("scimitar"). Miguel Perez de Mendoza showed the same thing, in his Resumen de la verdadera destreza de las armas of 1675. In 1686, Francesco Antonio Marcelli showed rapier (spada) vs. saber (sciabla).

    This mixing of weapons was probably a carryover from earlier sword traditions, where a variety of military weapons were used against each other. Silver spoke of the "vantages" that various weapons had against each other, Marozzo showed the two-handed sword's utility against polearms, etc.

    And, even well into the age of the smallsword, this trend continued. Donald McBane, in his classic Expert Swordman's Companion wrote about how to use the smallsword against the broadsword, the backsword, the shearing sword (spadroon), the long Spanish cup-hilt rapier, etc. He also gave advice on how to use the broadsword and shearing sword against the smallsword. French smallsword masters often gave advice on how to deal with ethnospecific guards, like that of the Italian smallsword, the German smallsword, and the Spanish rapier. In Fencing Familiarized, or, A New Treatise on the Art of the Scotch Broad Sword, Thomas Matthewson pitted the broadsword against the pike and bayonet.

    So with all due respect, I'd say you're wrong on that supposed "non-point".

    Classical JMA trained in sword vs spear, naginata, chain, various other weapons.


    I've seen stuff like that, yes.

    More pointedly (yes thats pun) I don't really consider it "free play" when you only train in a heavily regulated enviorment where your oppt MUST strike ONLY specifc targets.


    But that's exactly what your doing in the kata, even as described by Renfield and others.

    To quote you:

    "Your dealing with a specific set of moves, which is a far cry from dealing with an oppt where you have no idea what attack he is going to launch"

    Ok, I'll bite, so standing on the strip, facing an oppnt I have NO idea what he goign to do?

    Or would it more accurate to say that I know for a fact that ther are any number of things he WON'T DO.

    He is NOT going to stab me in the face.


    Only if it's foil.

    I know he or she he is NOT going to grab my wrist, trip me and then stab me.

    I know he is NOT going to stab me in the calf or the groin.

    I know he is NOT going "tie me up" and punch me in the face with the guard.

    I know they will not pull a dagger.

    I know he he or she is going to fight me pretty much like I am going to fight him.

    He will be trying to hit the same limited number of target areas I will aiming for.

    Use the foil in pretty much the same manner and follow the pretty much the same rules and behaviors as I do.

    And Amberger works (with other) are pretty quick to both illustrate this and to show how that can be deadly.

    I just don't see that as being "really" free play.


    It's certainly still more "free" than the kata on a certain level, IMO.

    Thus I don't think its an accurate "apples to apples" way to compare and contrast them.

    This IS NOT some indictemnt of western methods.


    Likewise, I am not condemning Japanese methods.

    No method is perfect, each devloped due to specifc enviroments and for specific reasons.


    Agreed--and I must say that I do at least have a better understanding of kata as it applies to JSA, than I ever have before.

    Peace,

    David
    Last edited by Nanban Bushi; 5th August 2004 at 12:36.
    David Black Mastro


    "The Japanese are the most warlike people in this part of the world. They have artillery and many arquebuses and lances. They use defensive armor for the body, made of iron, which they have owing to the subtlety of the Portuguese, who have displayed that trait to the injury of their own souls." --Gonzalo Ronquillo de Penalosa, commenting on well-equipped wako in the Philippines, 1582.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    126
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by Mekugi
    Incidentally, Tenjin Shinyo Ryu seems to retain some sort of randori in it's curriculum- seemingly a little rougher than Kodokan Judo. I do not know how one may have influenced the other; maybe Steve Delaney can explain this better when he gets back from the UK.
    Mekugi,

    The Tenjin Shinyo Ryu was Kano's original jujutsu style, so there was certainly an influence on judo there.

    Peace,

    David
    David Black Mastro


    "The Japanese are the most warlike people in this part of the world. They have artillery and many arquebuses and lances. They use defensive armor for the body, made of iron, which they have owing to the subtlety of the Portuguese, who have displayed that trait to the injury of their own souls." --Gonzalo Ronquillo de Penalosa, commenting on well-equipped wako in the Philippines, 1582.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    126
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Chris,

    You mentioned that you feel that modern sport fencing has no combative application; I mentioned that that has not been reflected in my own MA experience, as well as that of others. Since you seem to be unwilling to consider my opinion on the matter, here's an interview with Ray Floro, from the Realfighting.com site:

    http://www.realfighting.com/issue7/floroframe.html

    I think we should all consider Ray's opinions seriously, as he happened to train under a man who was arguably one of the last "real" swordsmen (ie., someone who skillfully fought and killed enemies with a sword) of the 20th century, the late GM Antonio Ilustrisimo. Ray Floro finds much merit and application in modern fencing.

    Peace,

    David
    David Black Mastro


    "The Japanese are the most warlike people in this part of the world. They have artillery and many arquebuses and lances. They use defensive armor for the body, made of iron, which they have owing to the subtlety of the Portuguese, who have displayed that trait to the injury of their own souls." --Gonzalo Ronquillo de Penalosa, commenting on well-equipped wako in the Philippines, 1582.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    126
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Folks,

    What is the earliest documented use of the practice yari with the padded tip?

    Thanks,

    David
    David Black Mastro


    "The Japanese are the most warlike people in this part of the world. They have artillery and many arquebuses and lances. They use defensive armor for the body, made of iron, which they have owing to the subtlety of the Portuguese, who have displayed that trait to the injury of their own souls." --Gonzalo Ronquillo de Penalosa, commenting on well-equipped wako in the Philippines, 1582.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Tokyo
    Posts
    768
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Quoting from various posts is a pain, so I'll do my best to sum up and answer what I can.

    Lesse, this week I did sword versus:
    sword, tessen, jutte, kusarigama, and kodachi.
    So yeah, we train with all kinds of weapons, and boy nothing messes with your maai like a 4 meter chain.
    I did techniques including: parry and counter, hip throw, aikido-like arm bar and takedown, flying headbutt, throat smash, kick to the balls, and step-on-foot-pin-wrist-smash-backbone-with-iron-weight.
    So even within the limits of the kata, there are many, MANY kata.

    As Ellis said, the main purpose of kata was to familiarize you with the essence of the ryu; the strategies and techniques that make one ryu different from another. So for example in Mugairyu, we always cut gyakukesa from the draw against an opponent who has already drawn his sword, and/or is on the right...until of course the advanced levels, where one does the 'secret' techniques, because naturally everyone KNOWS that Mugairyu always cuts up and to the right in certain situations, so to counter what the opponent thinks he knows, and knowing what we know about school XYZ, the advanced technique is...well I can't tell you but you get the idea.
    So when doing kata, first you're just dancing; playing back and forth to familiarize yourself with the essential techniques of your school. At advanced levels, strategy becomes important, specifically targeting and timing.
    But given all that, there are really only a certain number of things you can do effectively with a given weapon against a given opponent. If I have a katana, and you have a katana, and I am in hasso, and you are in jodan, you CAN try to attack my anywhere below my waist, but it is basically inconceivable that you'd succeed before I embedded my blade in your skull. In fact, my left wrist is probably looking tasty, especially since I'm holding it so far away from my body...but then again you KNOW it's a trick, a ploy my school uses to get you to lower your sword...but it's SO tempting, and if you use your school's secret 'stepless' technique to close the gap so quickly you probably CAN cut my wrist before I can react...but you don't know that I know the counter to your secret move, and as you close so quickly to cut my wrist, I LOWER my kissaki, and cut up into your chin from below, dropping my center of gravity, which pulls my wrist JUST out of your reach...
    Yes there is a kata for this, and when done correctly it's magical, and when done badly fingers get smashed and temples bonked horribly. And of course uchi can just screw it all and go for a nice head shot, too. But it is really quite stupid to practice from that position a cut to the leg. Remember this is training for BOTH participants, and to allow uchi to do random, stupid things doesn't help prepare shidachi for a 'real' opponent (well ok maybe it helps prepare against a really stupid opponent) and it doesn't help uchi prepare either.
    So yes there are 'limits' on kata, at first many, but at advanced levels only within the bounds of reason.
    There are also several ways of practicing kata; sundome (no contact), sunate (minimal contact), and at advanced levels "if-you-get-hit-it's-your-fault."

    Then again, and as you have experienced, MOST schools these days hardly ever get past the dancing stage.

    Regards,

    r e n

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,394
    Likes (received)
    84

    Default

    Nanban

    Speaking personally I have not found that the modern/current methods of fenceing have much if any "carry over" to more robust combatives.

    Again I can only speak for myself, in the limited area of saber.

    But I have found that the methods, use of the blade, the footwork, the body mech, etc.

    Simply did not allow me ( or anyone else in the classes) to effecively use a "real" saber.

    In fact I would go so far as to say that it was harmful--all the 1000s of hours or work on the "sport" appraoch had established patterns of response and "reflex" (for lack of a better term) that proved disasterious when "real" (blunted but of real weight and handleing) weapons and far less "sport" based level of play was undertaken.

    Can't speak for everyone, just for me--and for me, that experiment left a deep distrust of modern "free play" as being at all useful for "real" fights.

    But a concussion and some stichs would tend to do that to you.

    So no, I don't agree with you on that score.

    Just so you know, I have not had the same set of problems with the JMA methods.

    But I am perfectly willing to concede that others have.

    Like I said no method is perfect, each has its strengths and its weakness.

    Again your mudding the waters.

    You have a single example of a rapier vs flail--from one author--that does not an argument make.

    Since you used the examples of a Chines Dao, in your question ertaining to katana--do YOU have an example of rapier vs Chinese Dao?

    The examples of rapier vs 2 handed sword and saber and scimter only reinforce my orignal point that you train vs weapons your likly to encounter--and even that is far, far, far back in current western fenceings history.

    Today you match ONLY with the same weapon vs the same weapon.

    Where in current kenjutsu you are still training vs common Japense period weapons.

    So that goes my way--either way you cut it.

    More to the point my example of target area does apply to the foil.

    BUT, and this is a big one, each of the three weapons also has a very specific rules, everything I said about foil fits to the other two.

    Again, goes my way.

    Plus still think Dr. Bs quote needs more support, you and I still know nothing of the match.

    As I said, taking it as is, would be the logical equvilent of reporting a unkn match with unkn folks with ukwn rules with folks of unkn skill levels then claming it a "victory" for whatever style of swrod you practice.

    Simply does not pass the "sniff" test.


    Chris Thomas
    Last edited by cxt; 5th August 2004 at 22:32.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    126
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Chris,

    Originally posted by cxt
    Nanban

    Speaking personally I have not found that the modern/current methods of fenceing have much if any "carry over" to more robust combatives.

    Again I can only speak for myself, in the limited area of saber.

    But I have found that the methods, use of the blade, the footwork, the body mech, etc.

    Simply did not allow me ( or anyone else in the classes) to effecively use a "real" saber.

    In fact I would go so far as to say that it was harmful--all the 1000s of hours or work on the "sport" appraoch had established patterns of response and "reflex" (for lack of a better term) that proved disasterious when "real" (blunted but of real weight and handleing) weapons and far less "sport" based level of play was undertaken.

    Can't speak for everyone, just for me--and for me, that experiment left a deep distrust of modern "free play" as being at all useful for "real" fights.

    But a concussion and some stichs would tend to do that to you.

    So no, I don't agree with you on that score.


    That's fine. They have worked very well for me, as well as for many other folks.

    Just so you know, I have not had the same set of problems with the JMA methods.

    But I am perfectly willing to concede that others have.

    Like I said no method is perfect, each has its strengths and its weakness.


    No doubt.

    Again your mudding the waters.

    You have a single example of a rapier vs flail--from one author--that does not an argument make.


    I'm not "mudding" anything, Chris--you claimed that:

    Originally posted by cxt
    More to that point, you didn't have classical rapier guys training vs the flail either.
    And I provided a period example that shows otherwise. The use of the flail was not restricted to Asia. I went on to give 4 more period examples of the rapier being used against other weapons.

    Since you used the examples of a Chines Dao, in your question ertaining to katana--do YOU have an example of rapier vs Chinese Dao?


    No, I don't--and that wasn't my point anyway (see below).

    The examples of rapier vs 2 handed sword and saber and scimter only reinforce my orignal point that you train vs weapons your likly to encounter


    And that is precisely why I brought up the Korean flail, and the Chinese dao-and-rattan-shield combo--they are weapons that the samurai had to face from time to time. Expecially in the case of the latter, one would think that some sort of kata would have been developed (assuming that kata was--as is generally believed--the primary method of training), in order to teach Japanese warriors how to cope with a shield (since the Japanese generally didn't use such implements themselves).

    --and even that is far, far, far back in current western fenceings history.


    Considering the long history of European swordplay, the smallsword examples I gave aren't all that old. In addition, folks were still fighting saber vs. bayonet until only 130 years ago--perhaps even more recently.

    Today you match ONLY with the same weapon vs the same weapon.

    Where in current kenjutsu you are still training vs common Japense period weapons.

    So that goes my way--either way you cut it.


    Not really, since in fencing one is still using a comparatively free form of play.

    More to the point my example of target area does apply to the foil.

    BUT, and this is a big one, each of the three weapons also has a very specific rules, everything I said about foil fits to the other two.

    Again, goes my way.


    On the contrary, sir, everything you said about foil does not fit the other two, because of those "very specific rules".

    So no, it does not go your way.

    Look at the very first thing you mentioned:

    Originally posted by cxt
    Or would it more accurate to say that I know for a fact that ther are any number of things he WON'T DO.

    He is NOT going to stab me in the face.
    That only applies to foil, as the target is everything from the waist up in saber, and the entire body in epee.

    In addition, we have your statement:

    Originally posted by cxt

    I know he is NOT going to stab me in the calf or the groin.
    The issue of not getting hit in the calf applies to foil and saber, but not to epee. The issue of not getting hit in the groin applies only to saber.

    Plus still think Dr. Bs quote needs more support, you and I still know nothing of the match.

    As I said, taking it as is, would be the logical equvilent of reporting a unkn match with unkn folks with ukwn rules with folks of unkn skill levels then claming it a "victory" for whatever style of swrod you practice.

    Simply does not pass the "sniff" test.
    The info is apparently available:

    "The basic data on which this assertion rests, was first published by Prof. Watanabe Ichiro, in his book: Bakumatsu Kanto Kenjutsu Eimeiroku no Kenkyu (Investigations of Kenjutsu Rosters in Eastern Japan at the End of the Tokugawa Period, 1967). This book contains detailed lists of competitions: dates, names, schools, styles, who won, who lost, etc."

    Peace,

    David

    P.S. Everyone else--I want to address many of the other recent posts, and I will get to them as soon as I can. Limits on time have been the main factor here. Thanks.
    Last edited by Nanban Bushi; 6th August 2004 at 11:47.
    David Black Mastro


    "The Japanese are the most warlike people in this part of the world. They have artillery and many arquebuses and lances. They use defensive armor for the body, made of iron, which they have owing to the subtlety of the Portuguese, who have displayed that trait to the injury of their own souls." --Gonzalo Ronquillo de Penalosa, commenting on well-equipped wako in the Philippines, 1582.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    126
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default Re: Tanomo, Tanomo - - -

    Originally posted by Ellis Amdur
    There is no ryu that did not have kata as the primary training base. Some included sparring components - but kata was still the gold standard (Renfield K.'s post describes kata training at the higher levels wonderfully well).

    Free-style training was endemic. It was called shiai/dojo-arashi/dojo-yaburi/as well as vendetta, duels, etc. When young bushi wanted to test themselves they "free-sparred" with opponents from OTHER schools. This was regulated by many laws, but much as France several hundred years ago, the regulation controlled chaos rather than eliminated the practice.

    Best
    Interesting post, Ellis. Perhaps you could answer my question regarding the introduction of the practice yari--ie., when was it introduced?

    Thanks,

    David
    David Black Mastro


    "The Japanese are the most warlike people in this part of the world. They have artillery and many arquebuses and lances. They use defensive armor for the body, made of iron, which they have owing to the subtlety of the Portuguese, who have displayed that trait to the injury of their own souls." --Gonzalo Ronquillo de Penalosa, commenting on well-equipped wako in the Philippines, 1582.

  15. #75
    Mekugi Guest

    Default

    Not really his first. Mister Kano was a member of Kito ryu before TSR and I do believe he recieved his Menkyo in TSR after he formed Judo. Perhaps an anal retentive point, but there is a difference in the timeline.

    Originally posted by Nanban Bushi
    Mekugi,

    The Tenjin Shinyo Ryu was Kano's original jujutsu style, so there was certainly an influence on judo there.

    Peace,

    David

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •