Does adding other styles to a traditional one improve or contaminate ?

[Dick Mineo]

Here is another that I have trouble finding the right way to ask the question.

If one is based in a Traditional Style, and studies other styles - he/she will find there are many similarities and many differences. That is - similaraties in movements and angles and differences in interpertation and application.

What I am trying to get at is - GoJu kata and sparing (in general) consists of many of the same movements as some other styles. The emphasis is on
- zone 2 distance (close enough to reach the opponent from a natural stance, without turning shoulders beyond 45 degrees or leaning forward).
- straight forward or what ever is the most direct power delivery.
- hard to soft transitions.
- breath.
Every GoJu teacher I have had, made mention of other possabilities, found in the kata or in a basic block or strike. They only discuss and train with 1 to 3 different applications for a particular move's bunkai.
Obviously it would be difficult to keep the students in line or teach too many possabilities for each move, because it would be confusing and there are so many things already in each style to work with, there just is not enough time. Maybe there are no mats or safety gear, to go that far with multiple definition of a move as well.

So - here is my quesion.
Can one still considder himself as traditional GoJu if he has taken other classes and learned (some of the only slightly mentioned) techniques that can come from a move ?

Example 1 - Goju kata - Shisochin.
The straight forward, fast, hard to soft, #2 zone techinque consists of - block an incomming strike, then immediately circle around the opponents wrist and hold it just long enough to come in with the other arm and forearm smash at or below the opponents elbow. In GoJu ryu this bunkai is intended to break the opponents arm or dislocate the elbow or shoulder.
There are a couple more bunkai for this 3 move piece but they are all quick and the opponents usually remain standing.

Example 2 - Aikido with this same basic move.
Now the distance of starting the manuver is from zone 4 (a long step forward to reach out to the opponents extended arm and/or body.
ENTERING here is the emphasis - That is - reading the opponents intent and moving in before he begins his attack. Next comes blending in with the opponents direction of movement and intent. Then the basic block movement (same as in Shisochin) becomes a pressure point or wrist locking technique that takes the opponents mind away from his attack and toward his wrist. After this the forearm smash (same as Shisochin) becomes a light contact below the opponents elbow area, with an upward sliding motion (which causes the opponent to bend the elbow for protection), then a full body involved force, delivered to that forearm smash move, which drives the opponent, face forward to the mat or takes control of the opponents balance to a point of directing his movement in any direction desired.

Is ones ability to change additudes as needed for the circumstance also something that should never be taught in a Traditional class ?

[Moenstah]

I've learned examples 1 and 2 as bunkai. I was told to do whatever I liked best/fit me best. It just depends how 'go' or 'ju' you want to make your goju. So it isn't a change of the traditional system, since it already is part of the system.

[TonyU]

I always tell our students not to be afraid to try and analyze other styles. Sometimes what they have to offer can give you an insight to your style.

There is no one stead fast bunkai. Also one sensei interpretation to a particular move may not be another's.

So in that case, no, I don't think your corrupting or contaminating your traditional style.

[trevorg]

I always tell our students not to be afraid to try and analyze other styles. Sometimes what they have to offer can give you an insight to your style.

There is no one stead fast bunkai. Also one sensei interpretation to a particular move may not be another's.

So in that case, no, I don't think your corrupting or contaminating your traditional style.

Tony

You should drop over to the kata bunkai thread given your thoughts here.

osu
Trevor

[TonyU]

Tony

You should drop over to the kata bunkai thread given your thoughts here.

osu
Trevor

Thank you sir for the invite. I did see and did respond to a particular post, albeit not the subject at hand.
As it's a multiple page thread I'm still digesting all the posts.

[Dick Mineo]

I've learned examples 1 and 2 as bunkai. I was told to do whatever I liked best/fit me best. It just depends how 'go' or 'ju' you want to make your goju. So it isn't a change of the traditional system, since it already is part of the system.

This is the way I see it too. Working with the hard side of a kata's usefulness is emphasized more in GoJu.....and......working the Ju side of useful adaptations of the same move is more the Aikido side.

So we agree that one - CAN - work any of the multitude of possibleies contained in a GoJu move and still consider himself as Traditional.

NOTE - I emphasized the word CAN back there because one CAN also make a mess of his traditional style, by altering the basics taught by tradition.

I just find myself wishing that I took JuJitsu during my younger training days.

Another quick point just to round my training a bit more. What I picked up in Aikido helped my Goju in more ways than anything else. I also had 3 years of Shotokan (considder Bending of Trees) as their emphasis. Plus some time here and there = 2 years of TaiChi added (balance and centering).

I believe all are mixed and the only way to seperate them is to only teach the traditonal style with emphasis on only a few aspects of its possabilities.
This much training - absorbed - gives one a black belt.
After that the journey into every other possability is necessasary to improve.

[ZachZinn]

There are some things i've learned which I cant even keep straight anymore as to who taught what.

And that's just my experiences which are limited to Goju, Shorin a long time ago, and for the last year or so a little Danzan Ryu jujitsu.

I imagine that any cross-training affects your original art in some way.

I guess as long as you give credit where it's due to the respective styles then it's a very positive thing to cross train.

I have seen enough different bunkai in Goju that I personally would find it questionable if someone had "the original" one, mostly what i've seen is variations on a theme like Dick described, and personally i'm all for that.

Now, one thing I will say from my own cross training experiences is that you shouldn't try to turn Goju into Jutjitsu or Aikido, Goju is after all Karate, and I think it's good to keep in mind that the strategic framework of Karate and grappling arts is very different.

So, if you're practicing rear naked chokes on the ground or something i'd say it's gone beyond Karate proper, not neccessarily a bad thing but that's where I would draw the line personally between what is Karate and what is something else.

It's really enjoyable to me doing the Jujitsu, but while some things overlap it is very different from Karate, even when we do a technique that I learned in Goju, the intent and execution is usually different enough to warrant thinking about in it's own context.

Good thread.

[gmanry]

Wow,

If you look at my MA vita, it is all over the map. Again I think it comes down to what you want and how well a particular school can answer the questions you have. When a school stopped answering my questions, for one reason or another, then I was compelled to move to something else.

To some this almost amounts to blasphemy, that can't be helped. I have found my understanding of karate increased quite a bit when I encountered taichi and the presence of a world class judoka and sambo artist certainly was informative.

When you find the school that is a good fit, then you should do everything you can to learn about it and be the best you can be. I can never, ever see putting on blinders as being a part of that process.

[Dick Mineo]

There are some things i've learned which I cant even keep straight anymore as to who taught what.

I imagine that any cross-training affects your original art in some way.

I have seen enough different bunkai in Goju that I personally would find it questionable if someone had "the original" one, mostly what i've seen is variations on a theme like Dick described, and personally i'm all for that.

Now, one thing I will say from my own cross training experiences is that you shouldn't try to turn Goju into Jutjitsu or Aikido, Goju is after all Karate, and I think it's good to keep in mind that the strategic framework of Karate and grappling arts is very different.

So, if you're practicing rear naked chokes on the ground or something i'd say it's gone beyond Karate proper, not neccessarily a bad thing but that's where I would draw the line personally between what is Karate and what is something else.


Good thread.

Yes it does get a bit confusing at times - trying to remember just who it was that added a new twist to a technique. In Goju I had atleast 4 different teachers as well as many advanced students that helped me along the way.

Cross training definately makes differences in ones normal or mostly used style.

Goju itself actually has so many adaptations to bunkai it is overwhelming. Mr. Higaonna over the years has demonstrated so many and some are quite realted to jujitsu as well as other styles. These things were never demonstrated as basics however.

When I said something about Aikido influencing my goju more than the other styles I practiced....I meant their basics more than the complete moves from beginning to end. That is - Entering was explained in great detail with Aikido and only mentioned in Goju. This entering really helped me (a fairly small person) with taking advantage of larger people by off balancing them or interrupting their attack as soon as they began their attack. Another thing that was improved with my Aikido training is - Joining with the direction of the opponents attack. Again for a smaller person, it really helps to use their already started momentium and help them (not block or resist) to move just a little bit farther than they wanted to. Fir that split second they are yours for directing. Then their resistance to your direction gets it going again in another direction. These things were not discussed much in Goju but were definately mentioned.
So my feeling is. One is not really changing from Goju to Aikido or what ever other style, as much as one is just going deeper into the less defined possabilities of their original style.
It is almost inevetable if there is a fight - it will wind up on the ground. If one only trains in karate he is in deep trouble.
As I mentioned earlier - I do think I can throw someone better than most Goju people (espedially considdering my size) but since I have no Jujitsu experience....if we both go down I am in trouble.
Mr Higaonna would not be in this trouble but he has worked with ground techniques. None of my goju classes worked on ground techniques. Jujitsu would have gone deep into what most Goju classes only elude to.

[Dick Mineo]

Wow,

If you look at my MA vita, it is all over the map. Again I think it comes down to what you want and how well a particular school can answer the questions you have. When a school stopped answering my questions, for one reason or another, then I was compelled to move to something else.

To some this almost amounts to blasphemy, that can't be helped. I have found my understanding of karate increased quite a bit when I encountered taichi and the presence of a world class judoka and sambo artist certainly was informative.

When you find the school that is a good fit, then you should do everything you can to learn about it and be the best you can be. I can never, ever see putting on blinders as being a part of that process.

I agree.
Blasphemy is what it was considdered back when I started MA training. Everyone seemed to agree then, that you did not mix styles. My first two teachers were definate about that.
Still though - for me - some of the most powerful techniques they used were out of my reach. I never could get flexable in the hip area, especially to the sides. I even think that my trying so hard to get that movement is why I need to have both hip joints replaced now.
The entering portion of Aikido again was my answer to this problem.
I did learn how to read for high kicks or set up my opponent to want to give me a high roundhouse kick. I just plane loved it, because they would be on their backs before they got half way there. The upward momentium of that kick is so readable and if one moves into it and helps them kick up over ones head, it is so easy to push just a little bit to get their lower foot off of the ground.

So far I am happy to see that some people agree - it is better to keep those blinders off and consider every possibility that fits ones personal abilities.

[ZachZinn]

It seems to me that a big part of training martial arts in today's world is learning to strike a balance between maintaining tradition and still allowing it to grow, the most active threads on E-budo lately seem to be in this vein.

[Mitch Saret]

What makes an art unique would be it's set of principles, whether fighting or other. Training systems end up merging aas do techniques. After all, a block is a block, a parry a parry, a punch a punch, a kick a kick, and so on. The princples used to execute these techniques are what make an art unique, as well as the emphasis on which particular techinques.

I think the goal of martial arts is to guide you to your own way of personal combat as well as personal development. After all, not everyone is the same size or shape, or is equally flexible or equally strong. Cookie cutter techniqus cannot work for everyone, but principles do.

[gmanry]

I agree.
Blasphemy is what it was considdered back when I started MA training. Everyone seemed to agree then, that you did not mix styles. My first two teachers were definate about that.
Still though - for me - some of the most powerful techniques they used were out of my reach. I never could get flexable in the hip area, especially to the sides. I even think that my trying so hard to get that movement is why I need to have both hip joints replaced now.
The entering portion of Aikido again was my answer to this problem.
I did learn how to read for high kicks or set up my opponent to want to give me a high roundhouse kick. I just plane loved it, because they would be on their backs before they got half way there. The upward momentium of that kick is so readable and if one moves into it and helps them kick up over ones head, it is so easy to push just a little bit to get their lower foot off of the ground.

So far I am happy to see that some people agree - it is better to keep those blinders off and consider every possibility that fits ones personal abilities.

I think it is always important to be respectful of traditions. For example, when I practice iaido, I do so as expected and do not inject Bujinkan, karate, etc. purposeully into my practice (of course, I am always catching those habits). The same goes for the other arts.

It seems the greatest budoka were always those who looked around from time to time.

Dojo hopping is bad. One should intend to study an art for as long as it is possible, given that the art is useful for their study and they are useful for the art. It is always an exchange and a relationship.

It is my understanding that in Japan, Okinawa, and China many exchanges of information were made. Some schools did maintain a very strict rule of exclusivity until one obtained sufficient license. This is not unreasonable.

Much of the parroting of such traditions as these arts meandered to the US led to some misinterpretation, I believe. I was told by my TKD and karate teachers that other arts had nothing of worth, right up until they did. This was fear and insecurity on their part.

Someone who has confidence in their training is not afraid to see other things. This doesn't mean you have to chase everything that comes by either.

[Dick Mineo]

More very nicely put comments from all 3 of you.
---------------------------
Balance in mixing tradition and ones needs or abilities is key. In this traditional section of e-budo - the question of how far to go is a delicate one.
---------------------------
To me the goal of martial arts is for personal development every bit as much as self defense. The deeper principles of martial arts basics (at least the way my sensais explained) is more than fighting technique it is a complete system of self inprovment and diciplin.
This too (I believe) is part of what keeps it traditional, maybe even more than mixing techniques for self defense.

Most definately - when ever I was in a class, I kept to that style compeltely. It was difficult at times in Aikido to keep from demonstrating what karate techniques could be used inbetween the moves of aikido take downs or what ever. Still though working through with their methods taught me many things that could be added to my Goju.

Dojo hopping ? Bad ? I thought we were agreeing that it is good to look into other arts. For me Goju was #1 and the rest were added to it. but it did take many years of "hopping" to accomplish some better definitions of what my Goju instructors had only lightly touched upon in class.

Agreed - one should have a solid background of a style before going into others. That is - if one is lucky enough to choose the right one the first time. Maybe the first one or two styles one joins were not what they expected or enjoyed.

I had some trouble figuring out why I too was told - one should not mix styles. Maybe this is because the deeper training of most styles will (at some time) get to the more detailed possabilities that were not gone into until the student has mastered the basics of that style (which can take decades).
Maybe my impatience is what drove me to moving around.
Maybe the instructors I had were limited to only what they knew and could not go into the deeper aspects.
It is very rare to find a Master instructor these days. One that knows enough to be able to train at any level, depending on the students capabilities.

In my view - there are so few in Masters within reach for the average person to learn from.
Maybe doing it the way I did is best. That is - having a base style with 6+ years of experience, then going to other classes (still keeping up with the original style) to expand on what was not particularly a strong point for my original teachers.
Chasing everything that comes by would be a disaster for sure. In my case - I felt a need for deeper explinations in certain areas and looked for particular styles to fill that need.
As I mentioned before too. There just plane was not so many choices 30 years ago.

-----------------
Please note - I will be formating my computer so I might be out of comission for a couple of days.
Something has gone wrong with it and the installer keeps giving me error messages. Been working with it for a month now with no luck. Time to do the big dump and re-install the whole system.
Later,
D.

[Jay Vail]

Like Dick, I personally can't see any reason why anyone should limit themselves to one style. In fact there is good reason to explore them.

A style is nothing more than some guy's idea on how to fight and what techniques and strategies to bring to the fight. Those techniques and strategies will not work for everyone. Not all do. People differ in disposition, skill, raw ability and body type. What they must rely on will vary according to their personal circumstances. Moreover, a style will not contain all possible techniques and some of those found in other styles will work better for you than the ones you are presented in the arsenal of your present style.

Ultimately, martial arts are personal and everyone whether they know it or not is in the process of creating their own personal style that suits them and addresses the combatives problems they are most likely to face.

So, yeah, most definitely. Check out the other systems.

Besides, in doing so, you might get rid of some of that stifling style chauvanism that's so present and so toxic.