Likes Likes:  0
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 94

Thread: Free practice in koryu: is it possible?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Quebec
    Posts
    91
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Just finished this book. A great read and I guarantee it will shatter many of your preconceptions about the Edo period. I had tons of "No Way!" and "Haha! Knew it!" moments while reading. This character is of course far from the norm, but all I can say is we are miles away from Hagakure there.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    6
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Luca Idolazzi,


    Personally I find your question quite interesting, especially since I have been learning a different schools of Koryu Bujutsu and Koryu Budo since my early childhood and I am now running my own school which is dedicated to Koryu Bujutsu and Koryu Budo. First of all I would like to say that there are quite a lot of differences between Koryu Bujutsu and Koryu Budo and even between different schools or styles within Koryu Bujutsu and Koryu Budo which cannot be neglected.

    So far as I had read your thread there was a lot of talking concerning mainly Koryu Budo to which I have no objections at all. But there were a few mentions about subjects that concerns Koryu Bujutsu which were mixed with Koryu Budo concepts and with which I cannot agree, with all due respect to all my fellow budoka. At this point I would only like to mention that Koryu Bujutsu and Koryu Budo are not easily to distiguish even for us who are studying them professionaly. But why is that so is quite another theme reserved for some other future thread.

    While I was reading posts in this thread I noticed that there was quite some talk about what Koryu was designed for and for what not. Which is quite an often theme whenever we talk about Koryu in general. Some will believe that Koryu was designed for a battlefield, for a professional men at arms... while others will believe that Koryu was designed for a quite other purposes. Who is right and who is wrong? All of them are right and none of them is wrong. Why? Because whenever we are talking about Koryu we are dealing with two quite different things which were designed for a quite different purposes and developed in quite different times. First of them is Koryu Bujutsu and the second is Koryu Budo. Koryu Bujutsu was indeed designed for military purposes only, for a battlefield use and in some smaller regard even for a dueling. While on the other hand Koryu Budo was designed mostly for a quite a different uses and purposes. As had someone already correctly pointed out before me in this thread Koryu Budo has not evolved overnight and has been evolved from an older system and that system was Koryu Bujutsu. But the evolution of Koryu Budo has been a very long process which has actually started soon after the end of Sengoku jidai and has gained it's momentum during Tokugawa bakufu and is still evolving. Which encompasses aproximately 400 years of continuing evolution. While during this period Koryu Budo was gaining it's momentum, Koryu Bujutsu was loosing it's strength as a movement, if we can even speak of such a thing. What I want to say here is that a true schools of Koryu Bujutsu are nowdays very rare even in Japan and most of it's traditions and teachings have been moved back into semi-esoterical or semi-hermetical circles of martial arts. But nonetheless there are still schools and instructors and of course teachers who still teach Koryu Bujutsu. Though I have to say that Koryu Bujutsu has never been meant to be taught to masses. Simply because it is not suited to be taught on a mass scale. While on the other hand Koryu Budo has been designed from it's very beginning to be taught on a mass scale and therefore it is not surprising that it was Koryu Budo who gave birth to Gendai Budo. Personally I like to believe that Gendai Budo is actually an offspring of Koryu Budo, a logical step in an evolution of Koryu Budo due past changes; just like it was Koryu Budo an offspring of Koryu Bujutsu. But they all evolved in a quite different systems which have very little in common regarthless of nowdays mainstream believes. Which brings me back to your opening question in this thread.


    Does Koryu practice a free sparring?


    Since I do not know how well you are familiar with Koryu Bujutstu and Koryu Budo nomenclature, since there are many different nomenclatures circulating in Koryu Bujutsu and Koryu Budo - varying from ryuha to ryuha, I will be using generaly known and accepted terms of Koryu Budo.

    If you were asking if Koryu Budo practices a free sparring then the answer is no, not even at advanced levels. That is one of the main differences between Koryu Budo and Koryu Bujutsu. Every single Koryu Budo ryuha at one hand practice some kind of more or less strict safety regulations and on the other tends to teach uniform forms to all of it's students which a priori do not allow any form of free sparring. Though they do practice more or less good approximations of free sparring. But they are still just an approximations of free sparring and not a free sparring. Any form of free sparring is against the very fundamental teachings of Koryu Budo. Therefore you will not be able to find such a thing at any Koryu Budo ryuha.

    But on the other hand if you were asking if Koryu Bujutsu practices free sparring then the answer is more complex. The correct answer it would be yes and no. Any Koryu Bujutsu ryuha still practice next free systems in their curriculum:

    - bunkai,
    - oyo,
    - kumite


    Each of above mentioned systems has three fundamental levels: Go, Chu and Jo and two additional levels: Omote and Ura.

    At the beginning a new student of any Koryu Bujutsu ryuha will be shown for at least a period of one to three years only a fundamental levels of bunkai of particular family or set of techniques and/or movements. At this point I would like to mention that Jo level of Bunkai will look very similar to Go level of oyo and Jo level of oyo will look very similar to Go level of kumite to an unexperienced eye. But to most people who have never practiced some Koryu Bujutsu or Koryu Budo ryuha it will look even a Chu level of bunkai more or less as some kind of free sparring - kumite, though it is very far from it. To most people who have some experiences or have even studied one of many Koryu Budo ryuha it will look a Chu or Jo level of oyo more or less as some kind of kumite, though it is still just an oyo and still far away from kumite. At this point it would be appropriate if I also mention that there are very few outsiders who will actually see any level of bunkai past Chu level and even rarer are those who will actually see some level of oyo of some set or family of techniques and/or movement. But none of them will ever see any level of kumite. Actually there will be very few students who will actually see any form of kumite within one Koryu Bujutsu ryuha itself. Simply because this kind of practice demands a lot of experiences and knowledge if we want to practice it safetly and not to kill each other while practicing it. But what are bunkai, oyo and kumite?

    Bunkai

    Basicaly bunkai is made for teaching and practincing of different kata (forms), which are always two persons kata. The main goal of any fundamental level of bunkai is to teach a student some new kata, technique and/or form of movement and achieve one's basic understanding and proficiency of it.

    Oyo

    Basicaly oyo's main goal is to achieve student's fluency, proficiency and mastering of particular kata, technique and/or movement. But oyo also allows a student for a very first time an opportunity to start exploring a specific kata, technique and/or movement so that one can apply it to one's own movement and understanding of broader teachings of Koryu Bujutsu. We could say that at this point instructors and teachers of Koryu Bujutsu start preparing a student for one's breaking out from all kata and prearranged movements that one has been taught during bunkai levels.

    Kumite

    Kumite's main goal is to offer a student a possibility, a way how to break free from all restrictions of a specific kata, technique and/or movements and to develop one's own personal style within a broader scheme of a curriculum of a particular Koryu Bujutsu ryuha. To achieve ability how one can fully express oneself in any time, state of mind or circumstances while still using teachings of a particular Koryu Bujutsu ryuha. To be able to freely interpret and adapt any technique, kata and/or movement to any possible situation or circumstance imaginable. To find one's freedom within teachings of a particular Koryu Bujutsu ryuha. At this point I would also like to add that only Jo level of kumite actually equals to the modern concept of a free sparring. But we may not forget that it might pass 20 years or even more before a student will be allowed to start practice at this level of kumite and most of students will never reach this kind of advanced level of practice.

    At the end I would only like to say a word or two about omote and ura level of each of these three systems. Any student of Koryu Bujutsu is learning omote level of each of mentioned systems from the very beginning. And once one masters all fundamental levels of bunkai and oyo of a particular kata, technique and/or movement, which are actually also an omote. One will return once again at Go level of bunkai of the very same kata, technique and/or movement. But this time one will start studying an ura level of it and one will once again go through all fundamental levels of bunkai and oyo. And only when one will master both omote and ura levels of both bunkai and oyo of a particular kata, technique and/or movement one will be gradually introduced to omote level of fundamental levels of kumite. And after one will master all three fundamental levels of omote kumite, one will once again return at the beginning of kumite with this difference that now one will start studying an ura level of all three fundamental levels of kumite for a particular kata, technique and/or movement. And only when a student will reach an ura level of Jo level of kumite one will actually start practicing what is now commonly understood under a term: free sparring. Therefore was my answer at the beginning to your openining question: yes and no.



    Chris Parker,

    Since I am a practioner and also a qualified instructor of Hyoho Niten Ichi ryu I can inform you that you were correctly led to believe that Hyoho Niten Ichi ryu practices a free sparring. But I have to mention that Hyoho Niten Ichi ryu is devided in two sections. First one is dedicated to teachings of Koryu Budo and this section does not practice a free sparring. While the second is dedicated to teachings of Koryu Bujutsu and this one does practice a free sparring by a method that I described above.



    Sincerely,
    Vodopivc Grega

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    9
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KoryuBudo View Post
    Since I am a practioner and also a qualified instructor of Hyoho Niten Ichi ryu I can inform you that you were correctly led to believe that Hyoho Niten Ichi ryu practices a free sparring. But I have to mention that Hyoho Niten Ichi ryu is devided in two sections. First one is dedicated to teachings of Koryu Budo and this section does not practice a free sparring. While the second is dedicated to teachings of Koryu Bujutsu and this one does practice a free sparring by a method that I described above.



    Sincerely,
    Vodopivc Grega

    I'm sorry Vodopivc, but I am a little confused by your post. My understanding is that Koryu Budo and Koryu Bujutsu pertain to definitions of ryuha(s). Yet here you state that these terms (or concepts) are interchangeable within one school. Could you further elaborate on this please?
    Nathan Morrison

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    42
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    Hi Grega,

    Interesting post! I've come across a few others that have similar ideas (separating out "Koryu Bujutsu" and "Koryu Budo"), although I haven't come across any Japanese instructors or Soke (or similar) that do. Where did you get your distinction from?

    Oh, and on the topic of HNIR, you state you're an authorized instructor? Cool! Which line are you a member of, the mainline under Iwami Soke, the Gosho-ha, or another one? I thought I kept up to date with most of the HNIR groups around (I have a particular fascination with Musashi's Ryu-ha, I must admit), but couldn't remember one in Slovenia. And, just while I've got you here, you mention that you've been training in Koryu since you were young, and seem to indicate a number of different Ryu that you've trained in. Which ones? This is, of course, just me being nosy, but I am genuinely interested in how each different Ryu is approached... and how you manage to train a number of them and keep them separate. Sounds like quite a challenge.
    With Respect,
    Chris Parker.

    兵法二天一流剣術 Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu Kenjutsu (https://www.facebook.com/MelbKoryuKenjutsuKeikoKai/)
    天真正伝香取神道流兵法 Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu (https://www.facebook.com/MelbKoryuKenjutsuKeikoKai/)
    熟練道場武道兵法 Jukuren Dojo Budo Heiho (www.budomelbourne.com)

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    511
    Likes (received)
    3

    Default

    This is an interesting question indeed.
    Maybe the koryu (or at least the koryu where the main subject was weapons) did not really need a free training component.
    Why this thought?

    Recently I was watching a training of a friend of mine who is the head of a dojo in my country. They train Katori Shinto ryu, he is a student of Otake sensei. Now all his students ( a small group) are young men, physically fit and eager.
    The speed and ferocity of the (kata) training was amazing and I recall while watching it thinking by myself ' these guys don't need any free training when they train like this '.

    In all honesty - I have been around and am not easily impressed, but I was with this.

    fwiw

    Happy landings.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,190
    Likes (received)
    350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johan smits View Post
    This is an interesting question indeed.
    Maybe the koryu (or at least the koryu where the main subject was weapons) did not really need a free training component.
    Why this thought?
    Note: the tone below is not meant to be challenging in a snarky way, but certainly in a way asking that we re-examine the default response to stuff like this - some people sensitive about these things will not like what is written below:


    Maybe they mostly HAD it, but it went away?

    Not "free training" in the way we think of it in modern sport terms, which most people seem to limit themselves to when envisioning this kind of training, but in a "force on force" manner that gets progressively more open ended and challenging, while still maintaining the combative form.

    Or, maybe the schools that remained vital and viable maintained it, but others didn't keep up - the Kobusho seems to have thought so according to Dr. Bodiford's research.

    It only really appears to be post Edo and modern practitioners that have taken the fighting part out: either actual combat, or pre-arranged combat (duels; challenges and musha shugyo - both considered a vital part of training), or "free training."

    You can't learn to fight without.....fighting.


    I think historically we see that ryuha knew that back when they weren't koryu. It seems that they lost it when they became organizations perpetuating themselves versus organizations perpetuating a warrior ethos conditioned by actual combative preparation.

    Following the twists and turns in the aiki-community these days it is fascinating to see that process in action from Takeda to Ueshiba and so on down to the modern form. What makes us think that koryu did not follow the exact same process? Indeed research suggests that this is exactly what happened.

    Heck, even Musashi hinted at the beginnings of that process - and the Edo period had just started!

    Interesting also to see that reality is being re-discovered in the aiki-world mainly because people started to ask questions. Really fascinating when you consider how long some people have been at it and not been asking those questions or had that realization. A product of the environment, no doubt.

    Just something to consider.

    Is kenjutsu next? Probably not, as there really isn't a practical need, and it appears people would rather remain mired in arguing definitions, lineages, "paper" and the like.

    Is that not a rather dramatic departure from what these things were in the past? When it was hang out a sign board, or walk into town with a flag on your back or kanji embroidered on you clothes calling yourself No Equal Under Heaven (didn't one guy wear wings or a wing pattern to give the impression he was a tengu?? And people say BJJ is aggressive and flamboyant!), issuing a direct challenge to anyone to "try conclusions." Then break out the bokuto and bang, at times in public, in front of peers and others, to leave no doubt as to who had "it" and who didn't.

    Who does that today? Even with shinai (developed specifically as a force on force tool for more realism in training....hmmmmm)

    If not, are you really practicing anything close to what 'they' practiced, developing the mindset 'they' had, when you don't know you will some day stand across from another practitioner with a threat of serious injury and your livlihood going down the tubes?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Itzehoe, Germany
    Posts
    12
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Hi everybody
    Maybe it was just not formulated into a set of kata. Because it just was not necessary.
    We have some forms of free training in Moto-ha yôshinryu Jûjutsu, but it is not mentioned in the densho at all.
    Maybe the warriors just grab a bokuto and whatever safety equipment was at hand for some rounds of "sparring" after they finished the kata-training for the day?!
    The "rules" for the free training maybe differ from day to day, regarding the circumstances and the partner of the day.
    Maybe in some ryu that was the basic for the development of more formulated training of free fight (Maniva nen ryu...) Maybe other ryu just not find it necessary to "write it down" because it is easy to grab a sword and hit each other free or nearly free. And some ryu (Tsksr) maybe made some unique experience to expressly forbade free sparring.

    kind regards
    Tim

    Moto-ha yoshinryu hombucho germany
    www.yoshinkan-dojo.de

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    511
    Likes (received)
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hissho View Post
    Note: the tone below is not meant to be challenging in a snarky way, but certainly in a way asking that we re-examine the default response to stuff like this - some people sensitive about these things will not like what is written below:


    Maybe they mostly HAD it, but it went away?

    Not "free training" in the way we think of it in modern sport terms, which most people seem to limit themselves to when envisioning this kind of training, but in a "force on force" manner that gets progressively more open ended and challenging, while still maintaining the combative form.

    Or, maybe the schools that remained vital and viable maintained it, but others didn't keep up - the Kobusho seems to have thought so according to Dr. Bodiford's research.

    It only really appears to be post Edo and modern practitioners that have taken the fighting part out: either actual combat, or pre-arranged combat (duels; challenges and musha shugyo - both considered a vital part of training), or "free training."

    You can't learn to fight without.....fighting.


    I think historically we see that ryuha knew that back when they weren't koryu. It seems that they lost it when they became organizations perpetuating themselves versus organizations perpetuating a warrior ethos conditioned by actual combative preparation.

    Following the twists and turns in the aiki-community these days it is fascinating to see that process in action from Takeda to Ueshiba and so on down to the modern form. What makes us think that koryu did not follow the exact same process? Indeed research suggests that this is exactly what happened.

    Heck, even Musashi hinted at the beginnings of that process - and the Edo period had just started!

    Interesting also to see that reality is being re-discovered in the aiki-world mainly because people started to ask questions. Really fascinating when you consider how long some people have been at it and not been asking those questions or had that realization. A product of the environment, no doubt.

    Just something to consider.

    Is kenjutsu next? Probably not, as there really isn't a practical need, and it appears people would rather remain mired in arguing definitions, lineages, "paper" and the like.

    Is that not a rather dramatic departure from what these things were in the past? When it was hang out a sign board, or walk into town with a flag on your back or kanji embroidered on you clothes calling yourself No Equal Under Heaven (didn't one guy wear wings or a wing pattern to give the impression he was a tengu?? And people say BJJ is aggressive and flamboyant!), issuing a direct challenge to anyone to "try conclusions." Then break out the bokuto and bang, at times in public, in front of peers and others, to leave no doubt as to who had "it" and who didn't.

    Who does that today? Even with shinai (developed specifically as a force on force tool for more realism in training....hmmmmm)

    If not, are you really practicing anything close to what 'they' practiced, developing the mindset 'they' had, when you don't know you will some day stand across from another practitioner with a threat of serious injury and your livlihood going down the tubes?
    Hi Kit,

    You answered the question;

    "Maybe they mostly HAD it, but it went away?"

    Free training as you mention in the form of duels, challenges, etc.
    In a sense you can't compare the koryu {when they were not ko but just ryu}of old with the koryu of today.
    It is as you say essential elements are missing. But not for all of us.
    In a way you could say that those people who are professionally involved in martial arts are very close to the original koryu.
    Those of us who are not profesionally involved in martial arts, for example civilians, medics, shopkeepers, etc are not that close,

    Happy landings,

    Johan Smits

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Blue Ridge, Texas
    Posts
    2,000
    Likes (received)
    125

    Default

    In a way you could say that those people who are professionally involved in martial arts are very close to the original koryu.
    I believe that is an incorrect sentiment.

    We can only approximate the training of past ages, since we will never have the same opportunity to actually use the weapons training we have practiced in a life or death combative manner. Under certain unusual circumstances we may be called upon to utilize some facet of our training, but never in the way that it was used back when it was originally created. We live in a different society today.
    Paul Smith
    "Always keep the sharp side and the pointy end between you and your opponent"

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,190
    Likes (received)
    350

    Default

    Paul

    I just don't believe that is true. Indeed I think that the fact this is not conceptualized is the very root of the problem here.

    Now, if you parse it to say you will never be able to use a sword in a life or death combat, the reality of that is admittedly incredibly slim.... it happens - I have engaged sword wielding suspects more than once, though thankfully it never got to the point of lethal force. But that potential was very much part of that equation..

    Of course I was not also armed with a sword,but... ....aren't "all the principles the same" in a coherent heiho - integrated, intended to train the psycho-physical organization of its trainees to the point that it is embedded in their use of every weapon in their ryu, under a variety of circumstances??

    Could not someone draw valid conclusions and comparisons with still other elements of their training? If the koryu are doing what they say they are doing this goes without saying, no?

    With the exception of a lot of elements of combat becoming "virtualized" today, in ways to gain greater and greater distance (I think close combat is indeed a visceral fear and the main bugaboo for lots of people, it is what underlies the reason many folks don't like contested training, competition, or actual combat), the fact of the matter is men in combat still need to close with the enemy, many DO engage in hand to hand battles even at times in the military, and for law enforcement more than half of their armed encounters occur under five feet, almost three quarters within ten feet, and most of these either during or immediately after a physical altercation......you are talking a maai that is entirely consistent with classical training.

    Certainly a gun is not a sword, and I take people who blithely make that statement to taks on that comment: but to say that the fundamental nature of battle at close quarters is different simply isn't true. We have not evolved to be a different species in the past 500 years so the stressors we experience at the crossroads of life and death at the hands of another human are the same. We have the same bodies, the same brains, at the same distance, with mainly adjustments made for weapon type and characteristics. I have often compared Iai to modern ambush response: completely different technically (a sword is not a gun and deploying it is completely different), but almost completely the same in terms of distance, timing, time-competitiveness/ initiative, manuever, positional factors, and mindset.

    Over the years I have spoken with a number of senior budoka, to include shihan and even the soke of one system, and when this linkage and its comparisons are drawn they have been in agreement, and sometimes surprised at the crossover, in particular when they begin learning more tactical aspects specifically akin to LE or military - i.e. armed professionals.

    This is not a new concept and has been discussed many times and proposed ever since Draeger was writing, the IHS, and so on.

    It is surprising how few people with serious credentials in koryu (which admittedly I am NOT!!!) delve into these connections or see this as a possible route for one way of maintaining a ryu in a way that is still living, still fosters the safety of the group and its protectors, while directly engaging the very raison d'etre of these arts.

    Instead, there seems to be a continuation of what Dr. Bodiford has written about: a citified and enervated warrior class engaged in an increasingly Neo-Confucian practice to make them better servants to a social order with a master at its head;

    And who avoided engaging in duels or matches with "country bumpkin" samurai and commoners who fought each other in matches on a regular basis and handed them their asses whenever they met.

    The one side seems to have basically begun writing treatises and arguments about how "that wasn't real martial arts" and oaths to prevent their folks from fighting, one reason was to no doubt avoid being embarrassed....

    ...while the other continued to develop their fighting skills and ultimately even the Shogunate had to admit that when looking for combat instructors they needed people who were doing live fighting in their practice and did not want to hear from people talking about their masters learning the Mysteries of Battle from tengu.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    520
    Likes (received)
    72

    Default

    My experience is very limited compared to Kit's in this field but I do think some outlet to actually fight is very helpful for someone who uses this stuff for real. I do not think it should be the sole focus but it is very important. I've come to realize that what we do in the dojo is filled with feedback messages, be it free rolling or kata, that we learn from each class. If we can learn to better understand those messages our ability grows much faster. Both training methods offer different sorts of feed back so they are each very valuable. Both also have some serious flaws as well. Again why they are both important. I came from a very judo heavy background. Judo allowed me to go head to head against someone who is trying with all their might to throw me and not get thrown themselves (and vice versa). It is very difficult to replicate that in kata without someone getting seriously injured. The problem I found is that the free rolling limited me to what works in that sporting environment. I would do what would win and not venture outside of the box very far thus limiting me to what I am good at. On the other hand kata practice forces me to learn and master things that I'm not so good at and offers me a much greater number of techniques that I might never have been able to see with my sport judo eyes (either because it wasn't something I was good at or it was illegal in the sport so I never even looked for it). What this combo has given me is the ability to understand strong resistance and to see tons of openings that would have been invisible otherwise. Tough to get this from just kata or just free rolling. That also doesn't even cover some of the less hands on skills like understanding "approach, close, entry" or "timing, target, distance" or zanshin, metsuke, mushin, etc. I do think koryu was made for use and some people use it (maybe modified to some degree) in their job every day. Koryu aren't some living history study but real tools for our jobs.

    BTW, I don't think everyone has to do full on judo, BJJ, sumo, etc. either. I think you can make some other games or sports up (some sort of dojo made folk wrestling or boxing or even strong resistance drills) to train this sort of thing. I'm a big fan of knee sumo when we do idori kata or just oshi-zumo (pushing techniques only sumo) when we do tachiai. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsaKq...eature=related)
    Christopher Covington

    Daito-ryu aikijujutsu
    Kashima Shinden Jikishinkage-ryu heiho

    All views expressed here are my own and don't necessarily represent the views of the arts I practice, the teachers and people I train with or any dojo I train in.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,190
    Likes (received)
    350

    Default

    Chris and I have discussed this a lot off line from both training and professional perspectives. But I want to clarify some things that tend to come up in reaction to this line of discussion:

    The "Sparring Only" fallacy:

    Any sport/competitive club that does only sparring seriously limits its potential for technical growth even within the sport in question. The best judoka, boxers, MMA-er, BJJ-ers do extensive drilling for the bulk of their training, ranging from totally compliant to cooperative resistance to targeting resistance drills.

    People that think that full out sparring is all sport training does do not have enough experience with good trainers.

    The Free Fighting has to be Sportive fallacy:

    This simply is not true. This is what is intended through force on force training, though the latter term has a great deal more latitude when conducted professionally than plain old randori or rolling does.

    Now - a critical clarification that gets glossed in this discussion:

    There is a strong tendency for free fighting to DEVOLVE to "gaming" due to the competitive nature that it instils, in particular in cases where people have competitive background. Combative realism can go out the window when people begin to default to their sport backgrounds, or to things that they "would not do in real life" because they can based on the artificial training environment.

    The end result of this, folks, is the history of Kendo and the history of Judo. The gaming became the thing itself, especially as fewer and fewer people had any need for practical combat training.

    How do you guard against that? Well lets look to the koryu: you put the SENIOR in the position of uke. When you have a senior, especially the instructor, in that position he can guard against the gaming tendencies that can occur as training opens up and becomes more oppositional.

    The uke "keeps it real" based on his actual combat experience (he knows what is valid under true combat stress) and his training experience (staying just ahead of the student or checking the student when gaming starts to occur). He can only do this if he is a senior, or if a senior strongly controls the nature of these kinds of engagements. This latter is exactly what happens in modern force on force training: you need a strong moderator of the drills to keep it from devolving into glorified paintball if you happen to be using simunition marking rounds or airsoft or something. Ideally you have very experienced role players as well - once again, experienced uke who know what proper behaviors the training is intended to elicit.


    I have been doing this kind of training professionally for many years, as a student, as a role player, and as a lead. I see a great deal of commonality with how proper koryu is described by many people in terms of "breaking" kata at higher levels, of henka waza or even variants within kata that are allowed as a proper expression of the kata, and so on, and what has been shared with me as to what happens in-house with senior exponents of ryu when instructors want to train more realistically. I have also seen the absolute necessity for the senior in a controlling role because I have watched gaming just happen naturally with cops being trained for gunfights and combative violence. Too much for it to just be a coincidence.


    The Kata is Worthless fallacy:


    The flip side is this idea, one that I believe gets unfairly assigned to free fighting proponents by kata-only proponents out of insecurity or just plain lack of knowledge more than anything else.

    Kata is an absolute necessity, and is the mark of fundamental training in ALL disciplines from the most sportive to the most combative. You can't learn a proper armbar without doing kata. You can't learn to refine it and hone it in between sparring sessions without kata.

    There are also a lot of combative things that you can only do in kata because, yes, it is too dangerous to do full out in actual practice without injuring a partner.

    Many systems modern and traditional have thrown the baby out with the bathwater with this idea, however, and in attempting to retain their combative focus have completely turned away from the free fighting aspect as not being what they focus on.

    They are two sides of the same coin, as Chris has noted. In traditional times those training in these ryu came up with wrestling as the basis of their physical development, long before they probably began formally training in combat skills. The sparring/kata divide was natural: one is something you do, and have always done, to develop the "body" and the mind both in terms of physical exercise as well as physical organization - having an extensive grappling background trains the body in ways that cannot be replicated in other, solo training exercises.

    It also has the tremendous advantage of being a way to inculcate the fundamental fighting platform (what they may call today the "delivery system") without undue injury to the participants. This delivery system could be trained anywhere, anytime, and without equipment. That it also had folk and religious significance in the case of the classical warrior (sumo) is only icing on the cake.

    Then - on top of that you also practice actual combat manuevers and skills - the things you don't do full out to your friends and fellow warriors, but that you want to do to your enemies.

    But these are done on top of that platform of fundamental body skills, understanding of violent movement dynamics, and simply how to move under the kinds of pressures they would be facing when armored foes clashed against one another in violent struggle.

    Teach a man how to do the one without the other and you have a man who is only halfway prepared.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    511
    Likes (received)
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pgsmith View Post
    I believe that is an incorrect sentiment.

    We can only approximate the training of past ages, since we will never have the same opportunity to actually use the weapons training we have practiced in a life or death combative manner. Under certain unusual circumstances we may be called upon to utilize some facet of our training, but never in the way that it was used back when it was originally created. We live in a different society today.
    Paul,

    We do live in a different society today that is correct. But koryu were originally created for professional warriors. (true not all of them, tenjin shinyo ryu jujutsu, Fusen ryu, etc) but the oldest (ko)ryu were.
    the closest thing to warriors we have today are I believe, soldiers, special forces, police etc.
    Maybe a better definition is " those who are legitimized to carry weapons and use force.."
    The mindset of these men and women is probably a lot closer to the warriors of old than let's say the mindset of a car sales man, a civil servant or an office employee. Why? Because the first group is regularly in danger due to their jobs, compare the duels, challenges, etc.

    On that level I feel you can compare the professions (bushi/soldier,etc).
    Let them train in kata and use their skills in real situations and then (I feel) maybe they have less use for (or need) for free training.

    The civilians on the other hand (who if all goes well are not normally in danger) they need some sort of outlet or testing grounds.
    For them, free training may be a necessary part of their training if they want to get as near to the " real " thing as possible.
    The "other" guys and girls, live the real thing, despite differences in culture, time, etc.

    Happy landings,

    Johan Smits

  14. #44
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Blue Ridge, Texas
    Posts
    2,000
    Likes (received)
    125

    Default

    Johan,
    Ah, mea culpa. I misinterpreted your statement.
    I agree that those that are still professional warriors are most aligned with the methods and ideas of the koryu. My objection to your statement was that the koryu train in outdated weapons. While it is entirely possible to transfer that training to modern weaponry and tactics, I don't think that you could then still call the resultant training koryu.

    Kit,
    You did a very nice job of putting down your thoughts. I am going to bookmark that particular post to refer to later as this topic rears its head on a semi-regular basis, and your post sums up the whole debate in a single cogent essay. Thanks for that!
    Paul Smith
    "Always keep the sharp side and the pointy end between you and your opponent"

  15. #45
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,190
    Likes (received)
    350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johan smits View Post
    Paul,


    On that level I feel you can compare the professions (bushi/soldier,etc).
    Let them train in kata and use their skills in real situations and then (I feel) maybe they have less use for (or need) for free training.
    Although it can be argued that due to the needs of the profession, the need for more dynamic training is actually greater. I note again the Kobusho's seeking instructors trained in free-fighting traditions.

    Bringing it forward with scientific research from the Force Science Research Center showing that heart rate spikes and stress reactions in force on force training closely mimic real world situations: thereby providing a "stress inoculation" for the performer and thus a more effective training methodology. I have personally seen this work in the real world. With the caveat of guarding against gaming still applying.

    Jujutsu has I think most radically changed with the dropping of randori. Reading through Kano's biography it is plain that when he was training in classical ryuha, randori was a regular and vibrant part of practice. He of course trained mainly with former Kobusho instructors - but he makes no mention of how "unusual" it is that all these people in various traditions regularly do randori, regularly engage in inter-school matches, and even show up at each other's dojo and challenge each other. Then he describes in some cases absolutely thuggish behavior on the part of some, or things like one guy getting beat up and the rest of his dojo mates scouring the pleasure quarters looking for the culprits and a mass melee happening.

    Imagine that happening with students of Tenjin Shinyo ryu and Yoshin-ryu today?? It doesn't. It is one reason that I have made the statement that gets people's hakama in a bunch: Brazilian Jiujitsu's machismo culture is probably far closer to the way things were in terms of social and training dynamics to old school jujutsu than koryu jujutsu is....because those things still happen in that community.

    The point is the guys training were young, strong, athletic, highly competitive individuals who liked to smash people. The same kind of guys you get into fights with in real life....

    (flame retardant coat on....)

    Even post 1900 E J Harrison is training in schools that do a lot of randori. Yet fast forward just a few generations and we are informed that "Kano invented Randori" and that the "Old Schools just trained in kata." Come again?



    That there has been a change in other traditions is also obvious.

    Didn't Otake Riisuke write that he started Katori Shinto ryu to prepare himself for the possibility of combat in WWII?? I don't know if he repudiated that reasoning based on the training itself in later years, but the voluminous writing of his student, Donn Draeger, with extensive appeals to combative realism and a strong flavor toward military and law enforcement tends toward that fact that he did not.

    Draeger clearly passed this frame of reference vis-a-vis koryu on to his students: whether an actual practical adaptation of the mindset and skills of the koryu to modern applications occurred or can occur remains to be seen: those most obviously "koryu" in approach have I think missed the mark a bit in terms of the physical skills portion of training.

    With the change in viewing it as potentially practical, it is perhaps natural that any need for "testing" skills either in the dojo amongst students themselves, or in challenge matches or duels dissipated. This in turn would lead to the types of people that wanted to do that kind of thing as their main practice fulfilling that interest elsewhere: Judo, Kendo, Karatedo, etc.

    Now this is not at all to say that a "sportive" element is necessary. Draeger was pretty direct that true combative schools had "no sportive application." How this gets turned around to mean that there "is not antagonistic training" is the question.

    To some extent, from descriptions of classical training, I think they probably did kata in a manner very different than today. The simple brutality you see toward students even in some modern Japanese martial arts (even modern grappling!) and budo clubs and sumo is probably a pale shadow of what used to occur.

    Of course they were also free of the issues of civil and even criminal legal liability that modern day instructors are faced with. While not exactly the best training method for the majority of people, those that survive that become tough mothers who aren't too concerned about hurting other people....

    This is to say nothing of the parallel tradition of testing and challenge matches within the realm of swordsmanship and other weapons. The life of Takeda Sokaku is a wonderful example of this, as were those of his predecessors and even some earlier modern practitioners of just a generation or two ago. Wasn't the current Kashima Shinryu headmaster required to fight challenge matches by his teacher?

    But seemingly not the subsequent generations?

    As noted - the current stuff happening in the aikido community in terms of watching history get erased, revised, and adapted to fit political and personal needs may be a clue here. Already before the modern era they had to put a stop to all the dueling with injurious weapons like bokuto. But the fighting was still there and viewed as combative, or at least dueling.

    We know WWII had a TREMENDOUS effect on how budo/bujutsu was perceived by Japanese themselves and how it was served up to the world.

    Martial arts can't train like that, because it is too real, too much a reminder of the modern bushido culture that was so horrific.....but sports, yes, yes! Just like your American culture (at the time) sports make for strong minds and wholesome morality! And we'll just erase this combat practicality thing from it altogether, or maybe just ferret it away in a hole for a while.

    The whole Pre-War label comes to mind; budo-speak for "back when things were more combative."
    Last edited by Hissho; 2nd February 2012 at 17:57.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 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
  •