This “Blog” will discuss various techniques (from my own “point of view”), training methodologies, and applications used and taught by myself in the art of “Te”. It will often focus upon the instructed art of “Tuite”, as taught to me by Taika Seiyu Oyata.
Pages
Search This Blog
Monday, December 22, 2014
How to be a Productive Student
When learning a particular skill set, it's usually necessary to be shown the individual pieces of that skill slowly (at least in the beginning of the learning process). When attempting to reproduce that motion, a greatly reduced speed of execution is necessary. To do so otherwise, amounts to having a “sink or swim” attitude about the instructional process. It would appear to be that this is the very attitude being put forth for the learning, and the instruction of Tuite (regardless of who's version one is attempting to learn).
Oyata repeatedly emphasized that tuite should be practiced slowly. Despite that fact, the vast majority of practitioner's attempt to perform tuite motions with speed during their practice of it. Most often (from my own experience) this comes from a lack of ability to do so otherwise (and/or achieve any positive results without doing so).
When I first began my studies with Oyata's method of Tuite, it was commonly being done with speed (and power). This was not a mandate presented by Oyata (himself), but was being promoted by (supposed) “students” of Oyata (or at least by “seminar attendee's”).
Once I began working with Oyata (himself), the preferred (ie. “his”) manner of tuite practice, was to do so slowly and incrementally. This meant that you would take (any) particular Tuite application, and divide it into “pieces”. Each piece would then be studied, understood and then practiced. Once that piece could be performed correctly, you would work on the “next” piece. This continued until the entire technique was (actually) understood (which is reminiscent of his “kata” training method). When the (basic) application of the technique was understood, potential weaknesses would be identified, and the prevention of those flaws from being exploited would be practiced.
This was a fairly long (involved) process. There are numerous factors that could cause/create certain weaknesses in an applications ability to create the desired results. This could involve a great amount of time (per technique), and there are numerous variables that could be included in determining those factors as well.
Numerous systems have attempted to alleviate their student's concerns (regarding those factors) when having them attempt to utilize the (sophomoric) “10 Principles” that are being peddled by numerous groups. The problem with that list, is that it doesn't address the “main” problem (that the student hasn't learned the required individual segments of how/why the technique will or won't work). It attempts to make “additions” to something that isn't understood by the student to begin with.
The most commonly (recommended) “corrections” (by these individual's) are to go faster, and/or more powerfully. Neither of which address the (real) problem, nor are they relevant to the techniques ability to work (as desired). I have to blame that belief on the fact that the majority of “instructors” are male. Males are (commonly) raised to believe that strength and/or speed are the answers, or they are the means to accomplishing the desired result (to most anything). This is not an accurate belief, especially in regards to the application of Oyata's style of Tuite.
One of our students recently attended a seminar that included a “Tuite learning/practice session”. That student was amazed (or horrified, depending on your perspective) at what was being emphasized/believed as being “correct” by the majority of the participants that were practicing the shown applications. These were not (all) “new” students, but included numerous Yudansha as well, who were (supposedly) “experienced” with the application of these types of techniques. That student now understands why we have stated that the majority of tuite practitioner's/styles haven't attempted to understand the techniques (meaning how/why those techniques do/don't work, or what results should be expected from their application).
It would seem that the “Training” aspect of attending a seminar, doesn't necessarily always include the concept of “Mutual Understanding” for what was shown (much less individual understanding). But to be fair, the majority of the individual's attending that seminar had little to no experience with the application of Tuite. The attendee's were instructed to apply the shown motions slowly, but the majority were unable to understand how that concept would or even could work. Students (regardless of their experience level) too often focus on the “results” that are/aren't achieved when applying the shown technique (as opposed to understanding how the technique should be applied to achieve the desired results).
It's also become “popular” for the (designated) “uke” to counter the other students training motions(?) before either of them actually understands the practiced technique. Because of this all too common trend, students (both uke and tori) are more often beginning to speed-up their training motions (thereby nullifying any of the “training/research” that could have been achieved through the original form of the exercise). Those students who don't understand why the motions should be performed slowly, are the one's who are in greatest need of that (slow) training.
“Training” is initially (only) for the familiarization of specific motions and reactions that are intended to produce (equally) specific responses to specific actions made by an aggressor.
(Commonly) Once those motions are learned and understood, the practiced motions are then expanded upon, to understand the possible variables to/from the initially practiced motion.
The (recent?) "Live" (practice) myth is based upon an individual's imagination. Nothing about this practice is similar to a physical confrontation, nor is it an applicable training method when initially learning a (new) technique. This tendency, along with the “Learning to take a hit” mantra are bogus beliefs as well. Wearing a full complement of protective equipment is the modern equivalent to signing a waiver. Neither actually prevent injury or teach (sic) someone to "take" a strike, but they pacify the unknowing. The only “hit” that will matter, is going to be the one you never see coming.
Students should remember that "class/practice" time, is for understanding the instructed motions. Only once that is accomplished, can practical "use" be worked on.
Labels:
atemi,
jujutsu,
jutsu,
Kansas City Missouri,
karate,
kempo,
Kyusho,
Life Protection art,
Oyata,
ryukyu,
Ryute,
Seminars,
shodo,
Taika Seiyu Oyata,
te,
Tuite,
Tuite book
Thursday, December 18, 2014
Continuous Motion Does Not Equate to Fluidity...
I'm seeing a number of instructors pushing the idea that being “fluid” in one's application of multiple techniques and/or motions, means to (rapidly) apply them in a continuous barrage. Though (possibly?) “looking” very impressive (to the average on looker), more often these examples are totally impractical to apply (in an actual defensive situation). The majority that I've seen, have been exampled by the aggressor beginning an attack, then (once the “exampled” motion begins) they will “freeze” usually without any manor of counter or response to the attempted defense.
These “defenses” will often include numerous (IMO) irrelevant “strikes” and motions after the aggressor's attempted strike has been neutralized. Perfectly valid (and effective) neutralization techniques are by-passed (or ignored) in order to include numerous (additional) unnecessary strikes. In the examples I observed, perfectly good (effective) neutralization applications were by-passed in favor of being able to continue the confrontation (through the use of repeated strikes being applied).
The only (valid) reasoning that I can see, is that these individuals don't have adequate applications to effectively neutralize an aggressor (when being in an “obvious” position to do so). What “appears” to be the (their) most utilized method for doing so, is beating the aggressor into submission. For the physically large student, this could (might) suffice as a plausible tactic, for the average student though...not so much. It is rare that a (random) aggressor will attack a Larger opponent. The average (criminal) aggressor will more often choose to attack an “easy” and smaller target/victim.
It is this “larger” opponent/aggressor that (most) defensive systems train to defend against. The purpose of one's training is not to be able to (physically) “beat” an aggressor into ceasing their behavior. It is only to negate their ability to continue that behavior. That can be accomplished via several avenues of response, the most legally defensible choice, being to immobilize the aggressor (while either suffering and/or inflicting the least amount of physical injury).
Oyata taught that when delivering a strike (to an opponent) we provide the opportunity to be struck (ourselves). This is why (arguably) the majority of what is taught, is in response to an aggressor's actions. Every motion performed (whether a “strike” or a manipulation) is done in response to an aggressor's motion(s) and/or reaction.
What is (commonly) being displayed as “Fluidity”, are a continuous (“flurry” IMO) of repeated actions (most often being “strikes”) that depend upon the Blitz theory of over-powering an aggressor. Though legitimate in certain (limited) circumstances (ie. When the defender is large/strong enough to accomplish the action), unless those requirements are preexisting, they are most often pointless, and accomplish nothing.
The goal of one's training should be in regards to circumventing any (obvious) physical discrepancy's, and become proficient in the application of those ability's that the defender can effectively utilize. In the aforementioned examples, I watched the person apply an “arm-bar”, then (promptly) discard it, only so they could “strike” the aggressor several times (using what I felt were completely pointless/ineffective strikes). In any of those videos, I observed no use of a “simple” immobilization of the aggressor. There were numerous examples of (bizarre, IMO) rolling around on the ground, and elaborate applications that left (both) participants vulnerable to attacks (from 3rd parties). This manor of “submission” is both pointless, and dangerous.
What Oyata taught as being fluid, was having the ability to react to an aggressor's actions, as they occurred. Though being possible to predict many of those responses, through correct application of the instructed defensive motions those “responses” would be limited in their (available/required) variance.
There were also provided examples of “drills” (in the video montage). These routines had either/both parties (tori/uke) going “back and forth” with identical motions. I understood the intent was to practice the motion, but if/when either would “break” order/routine the motion would collapse(? Thus calling into question the purpose of the exercise).
Continuous motion is a valid concept, the intent is (or should be) the “efficiency” (of motion). Efficiency implies productive results from the performed actions. If/when there is no productive result, then the motion was wasted. “Fluidity”, is the continuous transition between multiple motions, that produce an efficient result. In the case of defensive applications, that equates to the neutralization of an aggressor's actions. This can be (either) from their “choice” to desist, or because of an inability to continue that aggression (whether by submission or physical inability/injury).
Oyata taught that his methodology was for “Life Protection”. This implies the life of both the practitioner and that of the aggressor.
Labels:
6 principles of tuite,
atemi,
book,
jitsu,
karate,
kempo,
Kyusho,
Oyata,
Ryukyu kenpo,
Ryute,
Taika Seiyu,
te,
technique,
torite,
training manual,
Tuite jutsu,
tuite principles
Saturday, December 6, 2014
6 Principles of Tuite Book and Seminars Now Available to the Public
The Wait is Over!
I
am happy to announce that our 6 Principles of Tuite book is now
(finally) available to any/all interested party's. This book is designed
for use and reference by both the beginning and experienced
practitioner of Tuite Jutsu (as taught by Taika Seiyu Oyata). The
authors have been students of Taika Seiyu Oyata over the
past 30+ years (directly, until his death in 2012).
This
book lists, illustrates and explains the 6 (primary) Principles for the
application of Oyata's foundational Tuite Jutsu techniques as well as
illustrates and explains those beginning Tuite applications as taught to
our students. These
principles can be applied to any type of Tuite "like" application as well (whether
it is one taught within Oyata's system or not). They can also be used to validate the
usability and weaknesses of any newly learned/developed techniques (when researching technique validity/practicality).
This clearly written manual explains each of the 6 basic principles in an easy to understand
format so the reader can readily understand how to utilize each of
them regardless of the technique to which it is being applied. The included techniques
are divided into easy to understand category's, including some that
would be considered “non”-standard technique's. These can aid
practitioner's in both new technique development and with that technique's validation.
This text
discounts the pointless inclusion of "Traditional Chinese Medicine"
(TCM) in regards to the use or application of these techniques. Oyata never taught, endorsed or condoned the ridiculous practice of "TCM" or acupuncture "meridians" in regards to anything that he taught. Those pointless studies have never had any relationship to any of Oyata's Life Protection teachings.
To
acquire a copy of this book for your own study/class, go to the following url (http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/tuite )
and click the “Add to cart” button/link. It's available in both
hardback and paperback. Interested parties can also contact me here if
you have any questions regarding the books or in regards to acquiring a
copy for yourself.
Also
available is our “Pocket Reference” book, which lists pictures of all of the
technique's illustrated and described in the 6 Principles Manual.
This text is designed to be used for quick referral in/during a
practice/research class.
If your school/dojo is interested in hosting a Tuite seminar (explaining and demonstrating the included information in detail), contact us at this e-mail (tuite1@kc.rr.com) for availability, scheduling and prices.
Labels:
6 principles of tuite,
book,
jitsu,
karate,
kempo,
Oyata,
Ryukyu kenpo,
Ryute,
Taika Seiyu,
te,
torite,
training manual,
Tuite jutsu,
tuite principles
Location:
Missouri, USA
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
Ingredients of a Defensive Response
The
majority of confrontations are initiated via one of three
methods. The most common is through an attempt at striking the
defenders face/head. The second is started through a grab or shove,
and the third is through the use of a kick. Though several other
methods are possible, these are the most common. Many
confrontations will consist of varying instances of each of those
situations.
Though
many systems teach their student's to defend against the type/manner
of (arm)strikes that the student practices to perform (in their
class), the majority of people do not perform those attempts
in an equivalent manor. The most common (initially used) assault
method used, is the “head punch”. The “reasons” are debatable
(attempting a knock-out, or just making an attempt to shut
the mouth that said the offending statement), but reports (both police and personal) have
documented that this is the most popular opening (offensive)
action.
“Grabs”,
run a close second. These can be performed in the attempt to
immobilize an individual (while attempting to strike them),
or to cause them to fall, or with the intention of moving
them to another location.
Lastly,
are the attempts made at kicking the defender. The majority of
people are not skilled at delivering an effective kick (and
are equally aware of that fact), so they are rarely
utilized (except as a distraction/feint).
Oyata
taught that students should practice to deal with an aggressor who is
at “arm's length”(distance) from them. This is the most common
distance that verbal confrontations take place. Those interactions
may (initially) take place at greater distances, but the
situation is only considered to become serious when that
distance (arm's length) is achieved.
Much
angst has been made in regards to the reaction time required
to respond to a strike delivered at this distance. That ability is
determined by the amount of time that has been spent practicing the
required motions. This practice is based on learning (and improving)
the necessary factors to increase the students reaction time.When this is accomplished, reacting to physical assault attempts will become easier (with both time, and practice).
Most
importantly, the student is shown how, and what to watch for
when involved in a confrontational situation. New students (often) only watch
the hands or the face of an aggressor. The hands are the last
part of the arm to exhibit motion if/when delivering a strike. Though
the eyes may indicate some intention of use, that will vary
between individual's and their experience with performing the
particular action.
The
defensive imperative, becomes seeing/noting when the aggressor's arm
is being motioned. The hand is the last part of that arm
to move. It is more important to watch the shoulder for
indication of motion (This can be illustrated through numerous simple
example/exercises).
Once
the student understands this, their attention can remain higher on
the aggressor. This is (usually) taught to students as being done
though watching the chest, or the cheek (region) of the aggressor.
Persons are inclined to “face” the direction of any action they
may perform (therefore, watching the eyes can be
misleading, and is often practiced as a distraction/feint by
experienced fighters).
The
students use of their peripheral
vision is stressed and practiced during class. Although common
to watch the eyes of someone when engaged in conversation with
them, that behavior is discouraged (when practicing the instructed
defensive actions). Focusing upon the eyes (of an aggressor) can
create the problem of “tunnel vision” (thus limiting the
defender's ability to see the more important indications that
would demonstrate the initiation of an aggressive motion).
The
delivery of a head strike (using the arms) is the fastest of these
three possibility's. A strike (attempt) can be delivered in (only)
4 ways (via either arm). Those are the Upper-cut, the (from the) Waist
Punch, the Straight Punch (shoulder/jab) and the
Roundhouse Punch. Any of these may be known by various names,
but these are the most commonly recognized (general) motions. The particular method
most likely to be utilized in a situation, is dependent upon the
aggressor's (initial) hand position.
When
the aggressor initially instigates a confrontation, and their intent
is to make that confrontation physical, they will often begin
with their hands raised (most often with both hands raised and “cocked”
in front of them). This has both of their arms bent (coiled),
and in front of them (allowing for either arm to be rapidly
extended as strikes).
When
an aggressor approaches the defender in this manner, they are
displaying an intent to do injury (or at the very least, to intimidate). This provides the defender
with an initial reason to expect (and be concerned for) bodily harm. The
defender should raise their own arms (with open hands) in a
defensive manner. The defender's hand's should be extended slightly
(towards the aggressor) to provide (and demonstrate) a defensive
position and attitude. This is important for both one's initial defense, and for
exhibiting a non-aggressive intent (for any possible legal
defenses including the statements of witnesses).
When
an aggressor approaches the defender (with both of their hands
raised) with their hands open or closed, it is accepted that
one can presume a hostile intent. Defensively, when the
aggressor's hands are both raised, it (actually) limits the
possible actions that they are capable of doing, or at least the
number of ways that they can perform those actions quickly
(without being perceived by the defender).
A
students training, should include research regarding how any
aggressive strike is able to be delivered through these (various)
positions. When either of these positions are utilized, it will
directly effect how any (type of) strike can/will be delivered
(as well as the defensive requirements to avert them).
Very
few aggressor's can deliver a (true) “jab” (punch) effectively.
The majority will “cock” their strike (before delivering it).
That may only amount to an increase in the bend of the
striking arms elbow, or it may include a rapid retraction of
the hand (before extending that hand as a strike). Either of these
motions are an indication of an impending strike. The ability to
recognize these motions (which are done very quickly) requires
practice that (specifically) focuses on detecting those motions.
In
a class-room environment, it is common for (fellow “uke”)
students to attempt to mask the shown actions (ie. shoulder
movements). Though possible (to a very limited extent), this is
rarely (if ever) done in actual confrontational situations (an aggressor's primary goal is usually speed).
This
practice is began at an arm's length distance (between the two
students). This is later modified to include a distanced
approach. This is practiced by the students beginning (approx.) 8 feet
apart, and the aggressor (uke) rapidly approaching the tori (to
deliver their strike).
Though
the visual impression is that the situation is different
(from being practicing at “arm's length”), the physical situation remains the same. The aggressor still must move to an arm's length
distance to deliver their strike. For the defender, the situation
remains the same (as when beginning close to the aggressor). This situation additionally provides the
opportunity to (further) disrupt the aggressor as/before they are
able to deliver their strike.
Persons
in motion make the assumption, that they have created an
advantage to their tactics. This is only true to a limited extent.
They have additionally created weaknesses that can be (more
easily) exploited by the defender as well. It is the study of those weaknesses that the student should focus their defenses upon.
By
moving forward, the aggressor has created momentum (making it more
difficult for them to change the direction of that motion).
This additionally makes it easier to predict the aggressor's
subsequent position (which will include leg/body position and
placement).
This
forward movement requires that the aggressor place one leg forward
(with each step) to move closer to the defender. Each step provides
the opportunity (for the defender) to (both) predict subsequent
positions and the ability to strike (kick) one of those legs. With
the aggressor moving forward, the forward leg will be carrying the
(full) body-weight of the aggressor with each step (including any
additional strike attempt). This creates additional susceptibility to the tori's defensive actions.
If/when
the aggressor attempts to include a kick with that motion, students
will commonly retreat, or focus upon the impending “kick”. Either of these choices are flawed
tactics (on their part). It is more practical/effective to deliver a
(defensive) “kick” to the aggressor's support leg. New student's
are often hesitant to make this attempt (at kicking the
aggressor's support leg).
If/when
an aggressor attempts a (serious) “kick”, they will commonly
focus (only) upon delivering that kick (making it easier to deliver a
defensive kick to their support leg).
Students
often (mistakenly) assume that a “leg strike” must be performed
with force. When the leg is weight bearing, even a
moderate/light strike will provide substantial results (and
thus nullifying any arm motions/strikes also being attempted at the
time).
It
is additionally common (when a leg strike is performed) for
the recipient of that strike (kick), to fall/stumble. The most
common response (when that person is falling), is for them to reach
out and grab (at something) for support. Very often, that
“support” can/will be the defender (tori). If/when
that situation occurs, it is important that the defender be versed in
the various “simplistic/common” Tuite responses. Tuite skills are
(very often) side-lined (by many schools) as being for
“non-threatening” situations (only). Students (and schools) that
endorse this belief are dismissing a major/common occurrence
during a physical confrontation. Focusing only upon the possible
“striking” actions, is restricting the students ability to
effectively end a confrontation.
In
30+ years of experience with physical confrontations, I have never
had one ended with the use of “strikes” alone.
Labels:
6 principles,
book,
jitsu,
karate,
kempo,
Oyata,
Ryukyu kenpo,
Ryute,
Taika Seiyu,
te,
torite,
training manual,
Tuite jutsu
Saturday, November 8, 2014
Tuite Pocket Reference
Tuite Pocket Reference
A Pocket Reference book of start positions of Tuite for use in picking through training topics in the dojo. There are NO explanations for these techniques, see larger book "The Six Basic Principle of Tuite".
This book is only for quick reference of the basic techniques during a Practice session. This book lists all of the (initially shown) basic Tuite techniques as were taught by Taika Seiyu Oyata. Full descriptions of the techniques with photographs and explanations of the 6 Basic Tuite Principles is found in our Training/Instruction manual "The 6 Basic Principles of Tuite" (available soon).
Use this "link" to connect directly to the Tuite Pocket Reference,
http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/tuite
Available Titles, Tuite Pocket Reference
Available Soon The Six Principles of Tuite
Titles coming soon, Advanced Tuite Principles
"Stepping Stones of Kyu Rank" Kenshukai-Ryushinkan Student Primer
Women's Self-Defence
Handgun Retention
Kyusho Pocket Guide | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Labels:
6 principles,
book,
jitsu,
karate,
kempo,
Oyata,
Ryukyu kenpo,
Ryute,
Taika Seiyu,
te,
torite,
training manual,
Tuite jutsu
Sunday, November 2, 2014
Practice is Research
When learning a particular skill set, it's usually necessary to be shown the individual pieces of that skill slowly (at least in the beginning of the learning process). When attempting to reproduce that motion, a greatly reduced speed of execution is necessary. To do so otherwise, amounts to having a “sink or swim” attitude about the instructional process. It would appear to me that this is the very attitude being put forth for the learning, and the instruction of Tuite (regardless of who's version one is attempting to learn).
Oyata repeatedly emphasized that Tuite should be practiced slowly. Despite that fact, the vast majority of practitioner's attempt to perform Tuite motions with speed. Most often (from my own experience) this comes from a lack of ability to do so otherwise (and/or achieve any positive results without doing so).
When I first began my studies with Oyata's method of Tuite, it was commonly being done with speed (and power). This was not a mandate presented by Oyata (himself), but was being promoted by (supposed) “students” of Oyata (or at least by numerous “seminar attendee's”).
Once I began working with Oyata (himself), the preferred (ie. “his”) manner of Tuite practice, was to do so slowly and incrementally. This meant that you would take (any) particular Tuite application, and divide it into “pieces”. Each piece would then be studied, understood and then practiced. Once that piece could be performed correctly, you would work on the “next” piece. This continued until the entire technique was (actually) understood (which is reminiscent of his “kata” training method). When the (basic) application of the technique was understood, potential weaknesses would be identified, and the prevention of those flaws from being exploited would be practiced.
This was a fairly long (involved) process. There are numerous factors that could cause/create certain weaknesses in an applications ability to create the desired results. This could involve a great amount of time (per technique), and there are numerous variables that could be included in determining those factors as well.
Any (if not All) of Oyata's Tuite applications can be applied slowly (and continue to achieve the desired results). When they are applied quickly (even if/when done so "sloppily") they will produce those results faster (obviously). The "difference" is in whether the student is intending their study to provide them with Knowledge (regarding the technique), or the more simplistic "results". Either, can provide the student with information on "basic" defensive motions.
Oyata didn't teach "generic" applications, He taught his techniques. His instruction was intended to produce knowledgeable students (and instructors). Oyata would (often) describe some schools as teaching "Monkey see, Monkey do" techniques (and thereby, students). When something didn't occur (exactly) as those students had learned them, they didn't know what to do (to fix their technique).
Numerous systems have attempted to alleviate their student's concerns (regarding those factors) by having them attempt to utilize the (sophomoric) “10 Principles” that are being peddled by numerous groups. The problem with that list, is that it doesn't address the “main” problem (that the student hasn't learned the required individual segments of how/why the technique will or won't work). It attempts to make “additions” to something that isn't understood by the student to begin with (something about "no matter how much paint you put on a turd, it's still just shit").
The most commonly (recommended) “corrections” (by these individual's) are to go faster, and/or more powerfully. Neither of which address the (real) problem, nor are they relevant to the techniques ability to work (as desired). I have to blame that belief on the fact that the majority of “instructors” are male. Males are (commonly) raised to believe that strength and/or speed are "the" answers, or that they are the means to accomplishing the desired result (to most anything). This is not an accurate belief, especially in regards to the application of Oyata's style of Tuite.
There's also a (completely False) belief that the inclusion of a "Kyusho" (type of) strike is required to "allow" the shown Tuite technique to work. This Fallacy is being promoted by individuals who have no idea how the techniques (should) work to begin with, nor how to (correctly) apply them to begin with.
It would seem that the “Training” aspect of attending a seminar, doesn't necessarily always include the concept of “Mutual Understanding” for what was shown (much less individual understanding). But to be fair, the majority of the individual's attending seminars have had little to no experience with the application of Tuite during an (actual) defensive situation. The attendee's are instructed to apply the shown motions slowly, but the majority are unable to understand how that concept would or even could work. Training isn't (initially) intended to duplicate actual usage. Students (regardless of their experience level) too often focus on the (end) “results” that are/aren't achieved when applying the shown technique (as opposed to understanding how the technique should be applied to achieve those desired results).
It's also become “popular” for the (designated) “uke” to attempt to counter the other students training motions(?) before either of them actually understands the technique. Because of this all too common trend, students (both uke and tori) are more often beginning to speed-up their training motions (thereby nullifying any of the “training/research” that could have been achieved through the original/intended manner of the practice). Those students who don't understand why the motions should be performed slowly, are the one's who are in greatest need of that (slow) training.
"Training” is (only) the familiarization of specific motions and reactions that are intended to produce (equally) specific responses to those actions made by an aggressor. Once those motions are learned and understood, the practiced motions are then expanded upon, to understand the possible variables to/from the initially practiced motion.
The ability to "counter" those applications (if even possible) is usually only possible when the tori has applied the technique incorrectly. When performed correctly, the ability of the uke to apply those "counters", is practically non-existent.
Labels:
atemi,
jujutsu,
jutsu,
Kansas City Missouri,
karate,
kempo,
Kyusho,
Life Protection art,
Oyata,
ryukyu,
Ryute,
Seminars,
shodo,
Taika Seiyu Oyata,
te,
Tuite,
Tuite book
Head Hunting
When I practiced
Shito-Ryu (38yrs ago, AAAKK!), we used to do a lot of “sparring”.
For what was being taught at the time, it made sense. With what I've
studied and learned over the years since then (in following Oyata's
methodology), I haven't participated in that exercise more than a
handful of times (and only for amusement purposes) since.
When I was active
in that practice, it was then (as now) popular to strive for
“head-shots” (strikes to the opponent's head). The intent
(naturally) at that time, was to try for the ever popular
“knock-out”. This was pretty much mandated by the fact that the
“rules” for sparring (so we didn't cause serious harm to one
another) didn't allow for “leg” strikes. We had to utilize
gloves, foot pads, chest protector and headgear.
We had the option to use shin guards and/or forearm
guards (though most didn't).
With Leg strikes removed
from the target options, head strikes were a popular target to
try for (and it just Looked cool to do so).
This manor of practice emphasized speed and power, Oyata's instruction didn't. Though important, they held less relevance in his methodology. Sparring asserted that those traits could (or should) assure one's ability to triumph in a confrontational situation. In fact, this manner of practice instilled more bad habits than usable traits.
With the included “padding”, strikes that would (normally) produce cumulative (if not immediate) effects, became pointless to even attempt. Those strikes that were less effective (in an actual confrontation) were commonly implemented in the “sparring” arena. Though commonly argued that sparring is the “closest” way to practice for a confrontation, it is (actually) the best way to instill bad (ie. Non-productive) habits (at least when compared to Oyata's normal training methodology).
This manor of practice emphasized speed and power, Oyata's instruction didn't. Though important, they held less relevance in his methodology. Sparring asserted that those traits could (or should) assure one's ability to triumph in a confrontational situation. In fact, this manner of practice instilled more bad habits than usable traits.
With the included “padding”, strikes that would (normally) produce cumulative (if not immediate) effects, became pointless to even attempt. Those strikes that were less effective (in an actual confrontation) were commonly implemented in the “sparring” arena. Though commonly argued that sparring is the “closest” way to practice for a confrontation, it is (actually) the best way to instill bad (ie. Non-productive) habits (at least when compared to Oyata's normal training methodology).
At one time (back in the
late 70's, early 80's) Oyata used to demonstrate what he was teaching (at
the time, Ryukyu Kenpo) during the “half-time” at tournaments
that his student's schools sponsored. In those early years (while he
was still “recruiting” students for his association) he used
these events for publicity.
After the mid-eighty's, sparring was never addressed (at his dojo, nor in the Yudansha classes that he taught). It was Oyata that initially emphasized the inherent drawbacks to participation in this practice.
After the mid-eighty's, sparring was never addressed (at his dojo, nor in the Yudansha classes that he taught). It was Oyata that initially emphasized the inherent drawbacks to participation in this practice.
In Oyata's methodology,
one's defense begins when the eminent threat is initially perceived.
This is commonly when the student is first confronted by an aggressor
(before it becomes “physical”). Oyata's training encompasses the
identification of “tell-tale” signs (from the aggressor) that can
provide the student with information that can assist in their pending
defense. Though not (exactly) being a “list” that one can
reference before a fight begins, there are commonalty's that can be
used to assist in identifying traits that provide the student with
applicable (defensive) information.
This (piece) of Oyata's
defensive methodology is but one of the reasons we have students
begin their practice (of Tuite, defensive motions, striking methods
etc.) from a static (face to face), arm's length distance from one
another. Critics often choose to highlight this method as being
“unrealistic” (as both persons would more often have their hands
up, and possibly will have already assumed a “fighting” stance).
Surprisingly (to some), this training method is done to illustrate
and identify the common body motions made by the aggressor (uke) when
beginning an assault. Although the average student will attempt to
conceal these motions (in a class environment), the identified
motions are still being made when the aggressive method is attempted.
When these motions occur in an actual confrontation, they are far
more pronounced (and thus more easily identified).
Oyata taught that the
head, and the groin (though both being regularly targeted) are both
popular targets, neither can (actually) easily be struck, nor
will doing so (easily) cause sufficient injury to the aggressor during a
confrontation. Therefor, neither is an efficient location to
perform a strike upon (for defensive purposes). Regardless of how unpleasant someone looks, nor how ever large their testicles, they are extremely unlikely to strike you with either (and/or cause damage to you with them). Defensive strikes are
taught to be directed upon an opponent's arms, legs and
the side of their neck (not the throat, learn the
difference, LOL). Body strikes are commonly applied (if still
required) once the arm's and/or legs have been neutralized.
These types of strikes
have paramount importance (in regards to Life-Protection training).
The practice of “sparring” negates (through the imposed “rules”
of it's practice) for neutralizing those areas. Additionally, this
practice is particularly favorable to the young, strong and male
student. These should not be priority's for learning to protect one's
self. These are (in fact) the traits of the most commonly encountered
aggressor. Defensive training should be designed to negate any
advantage that is held in those regards.
Oyata's methodology was
intended to do that. His methodology does not depend upon any of
those traits for his techniques to remain effective. It is designed
to exploit the common physical weaknesses that are present in any
physical confrontation (by male or female aggressor's). Training
should dictate how those applications should be used.
The instructed techniques
can be applied and escalated (if/when necessary) to meet the
defensive requirements of the situation. Not all situations or
aggressive actions mandate that the defender cause debilitating
injury (to an aggressor). Students are provided with defensive
actions, which they can escalate or reduce as the situation requires.
Arguments can (often)
escalate beyond their original intent, but they can subside as
well. Students should have the available repertoire to respond to
either situation (as it occurs). The most common physical
altercations, arise from verbal disputes. Learning to diffuse
these situations can negate many confrontations that (otherwise)
might become physical.
The practice of
“sparring” (among it's many downfalls) does nothing to
train a student in how to defuse these situations that might
otherwise become physical, or when they do. Training only for the last resort
situation, is not the only (or best) way to practice true
“Life-Protection”. Though important, it only deals with a (very)
small number of regularly encountered situations.
Labels:
atemi,
jujutsu,
jutsu,
Kansas City Missouri,
karate,
kempo,
Kyusho,
Life Protection art,
Oyata,
ryukyu,
Ryute,
Seminars,
shodo,
Taika Seiyu Oyata,
te,
Tuite,
Tuite book
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Tuite Failures
The failure of a Tuite
application can occur because of numerous reasons. The most common
reason is from miss-application. The
ability to apply this type of technique requires a good deal of
practice to utilize it correctly. The most common “remedy” (for
most systems) is the inclusion of a strike.
This doesn't fix the
Tuite technique, but it provides time to (either) correct the
application, or change
to one that would then work.
Unfortunately
for many students, the inclusion of a strike (or what appears
to be) has become the only
way that they can use the Tuite (like) applications that they
utilize. Most often this is because they aren't aware
of what (exactly) it is that they are doing incorrectly
with the (Tuite) application.
Numerous
systems have delegated the role of Tuite applications to a third or
even fourth grade/level (priority?) of technique usage/application.
This is usually because the systems priority, is how/when to utilize
the instructed “strikes”. The majority of this (IMO) is the
general belief that a “martial”art is a (yet another)
method of “striking” an aggressor. The majority of time spent in
training, is in relation to learning how to strike an aggressor. This
obviously is a part of learning how to defend one's self, but
depending on how one trains this (striking) is only a small part of
that (any) defensive method.
Being
the most dramatic, and the fact that it is the easiest for (new)
students to understand, it is what most students spent the most time
working on. Most any (new) student knows some way to “hit”
someone. It (usually) isn't the most efficient, but they are able to
deliver some manner of
a punch. This means the instructor only has to “modify” the manor
that the student is presently using (to reflect the manor that the
system prefers a
strike to be delivered). The ability to apply a Tuite technique
requires a great deal more practice. The motions are not commonly as
natural as student's expect(?)
them to be.
The
manor that many systems teach (their) Tuite (types of) techniques
varies. The most common is that they are practiced quickly,
and applied with force.
In (actual) use, that would be fine, but for the purpose of practice
it is counter-productive. Class-time practice is intended to learn
and understand how and
why those applications work. Just as with practicing a kata,
Oyata would commonly tell us to slow down
(when practicing Tuite applications).
I
believe much of the confusion came about because Oyata would
demonstrate the techniques (for us) quickly
(so that we would see what it would look
like when utilized). This is not
how he intended us to practice them (and clearly said
so every time we were working on them). You don't get into a car
(when first learning how to drive) and “floor” the accelerator
until you arrive at your destination.
Students
tend to view a Tuite application as a whole.
Just as when studying/practicing a kata,
you break the technique down
into individual pieces. Every Tuite application has a set-up
stage, an engagement
stage and an application
stage. If/When these three stages are completed (correctly) the
student can then apply a variety of Follow-up
applications (dependent upon the situation).
Although it is possible to blur (or even screw-up) individual sections of an application (and still have it “work”). Not until those sections are successfully completed, can the control and/or neutralization of the uke be secured.
Although it is possible to blur (or even screw-up) individual sections of an application (and still have it “work”). Not until those sections are successfully completed, can the control and/or neutralization of the uke be secured.
I've
read numerous articles from “instructors” that proclaim that
without striking (the uke) in conjunction with a (any) Tuite
application, it will likely fail. Aside from being a very pessimistic
view, it excuses the premiss that the student/tori failed
to initially apply the Tuite application correctly.
It's
equally popular for instructor's (when a technique repeatedly fails)
to not accept that “they” applied the technique incorrectly.
It's more common for them to blame
the uke (?) and they will make the claim that the uke, is an
“anomaly”. I've
had numerous students (and others) who have made this “claim” (to
me), stating that Tuite doesn't work on them. After eliminating the
unrealistic scenarios
(that would never occur,
or that wouldn't require a defensive response anyhow), I would ask to
see their “anomaly” in response to me applying the technique. I
have never had an application fail
to function as expected. There have been situations where those
applications were (slightly) modified (which isn't unusual for any
technique), but I have always
elicited the response I desired. I have also (always) applied the
technique in a slow,
controlled manor (it
was not my desire to cause injury). If they had actually been an
“anomaly”, it would of made no difference what speed I applied
the technique. Tuite techniques (at least Oyata's) are not dependent
upon speed (or power)
for their successful application.
I
think some of this misunderstanding is the result of referencing Jim Logue's
“Blue” book. Within that book is a “chart”, illustrating the
“required” factor's of a techniques application. This chart has
little (to nothing) to
do with the application of Oyata's Tuite Techniques.
When
I see these “seminar master's” (literally) slamming
their students to the ground, I am appalled
(as an instructor). This is not
“instruction”, it is (only) abuse
and/or for feeding the Ego
of the instructor.
Many (if not most)
schools that teach some manner of Tuite (whether Oyata's or not) have
their students practice those applications quickly
(and even emphasize the need
for that speed). When doing so, this reduces the amount of time that
can be devoted to that study. It additionally ignores
the student's understanding of the individual
pieces of the techniques being practiced.
When correctly applied, (Oyata's) Tuite techniques should not have the ability to be countered. When shown (various) "counters", they inevitably are only available because of a misapplication of the technique. That shouldn't imply that there isn't any that aren't susceptible to being "countered", only that those counters can be avoided with proper technique application.
When correctly applied, (Oyata's) Tuite techniques should not have the ability to be countered. When shown (various) "counters", they inevitably are only available because of a misapplication of the technique. That shouldn't imply that there isn't any that aren't susceptible to being "countered", only that those counters can be avoided with proper technique application.
Labels:
atemi,
jujutsu,
jutsu,
Kansas City Missouri,
karate,
kempo,
Kyusho,
Life Protection art,
Oyata,
ryukyu,
Ryute,
Seminars,
shodo,
Taika Seiyu Oyata,
te,
Tuite,
Tuite book
Friday, October 3, 2014
Bad Teachers? or Bad Students?
I like to peruse the internet and "see" what the latest trends are, and I'm usually (quite) disappointed with what I discover. With my latest venture into the cyber-world, I was taken aback by how it is, that many people/systems perform the "Arm-Bar". I realize that "Logic" doesn't always apply to the martial arts, but many of the examples I found were,...exhausting (just to watch). This altered my search into seeking examples of "any" form of tuite (being applied). Surprisingly, there were few "still-shot" examples (most were really sad videos). Most all of the examples came from persons who claimed to have some manor of connection to Oyata (oh reeaally?).
Oyata's
defensive methodology isn't based upon size or strength for the
implementation of the instructed techniques. His previously
taught method wasn't either (though many of the prior instructors
emphasized those traits, hence the advocacy they still show for
“sparring”).
The
distinction between what/how Oyata taught applications to be
implemented could seem minor to many, but the distinction is
important when utilizing those applications in actual Life Protection
situations. (as an example) the following technique (usually being
referred to as an “Arm-Bar”, is commonly being taught incorrectly
(as illustrated in the included examples).
I
copied all of the included pictures from numerous locations on the internet (for example purposes),
identities were obscured to deter direct ridicule.
The first detail that should be noted is that in every instance, the “uke” is still standing (yet their arm has been placed at a 90º relationship to the ground (and some even further). Most all are pressing down upon the upper arm, close to (if not directly upon) the shoulder to achieve submission. This amounts to being a “reversed” lever, a much more difficult, and less efficient leverage method.
The first detail that should be noted is that in every instance, the “uke” is still standing (yet their arm has been placed at a 90º relationship to the ground (and some even further). Most all are pressing down upon the upper arm, close to (if not directly upon) the shoulder to achieve submission. This amounts to being a “reversed” lever, a much more difficult, and less efficient leverage method.
This
shouldn't imply that one couldn't make
(force) these to work, only that they are not using the most
efficient means to accomplish the motion, most ALL of these examples
are emphasizing strength/size to achieve a (if any) submission.
The
following are examples of what is being taught when people have
“seen” one of Oyata's techniques (but have never learned how to do it correctly).
These pictures are used by our students as examples of (what we would categorize as being) “botched”
technique applications . We have our students “list” the mistakes
that are being made in each.
Labels:
atemi,
jujutsu,
jutsu,
Kansas City Missouri,
karate,
kempo,
Kyusho,
Life Protection art,
Oyata,
ryukyu,
Ryute,
Seminars,
shodo,
Taika Seiyu Oyata,
te,
Tuite,
Tuite book
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Voodoo “Martial Arts”
As if the martial arts industry wasn't
potentially “unsafe” (enough) with many of the practices being
taught today, the obsession with achieving “Knock-out”
strikes has become ridiculous. Persons entering the market (whether
to learn a means of self-defense, personal enrichment or even for
“sporting” purposes), are inundated with tales of minimal contact
(or even “non-contact”) “knock-outs”.
Much of this nonsense has been built
around the “death touch” mythology, as well as the clearly
demonstrated kyusho applications/examples performed by Taika Seiyu
Oyata.
In the early “80's”, the only
person demonstrating these types of techniques was Oyata. Since then
numerous individual's have begun “teaching” (their version
of) these types of strikes. Many are no more than blunt trauma
impacts, and demonstrate no more “skill” than pummeling someone
with their hands/arms. When viewing examples of these... master's?
Demonstrating their techniques, I'm usually unimpressed.
Having both witnessed (first hand) and experienced Oyata's
application of this (his) manner of technique application, I can
(easily) state that there is a world of difference between the
two.
Cynics of (anyone) even having the
ability to achieve one of these “knock-out” (results) in a
confrontational situation are (more often than not) basing that
summation upon their own “sparring” experiences. “Sparring”
is a controlled and regulated “dual”. It has as much correlation
to a physical confrontation as playing a game of (contact)
“football”.
When I initially had this manor of
“neck-strike” technique applied upon myself (by Oyata), there was
no “stand here, while I hit you” sort of demonstration
(That only came about “later” when he did so at his “recruiting”
seminars). He would tell you to “hit” him (anywhere), and he
waited until you swung at
him, only
then
did he strike you (with the fore mentioned “knock out” strike).
Those that didn't know any better (myself
included
at the time, LOL) were very
impressed by this (as well as the results). Only later did I learn
that this made the entire strike (on his
part) much
easier to accomplish. There was no “standing there” while he hit
you (during that time), he wanted you to understand what effect the
strike would cause/create (when utilized in an actual defensive
situation). Though often causing the person to lose consciousness,
that was not considered a “requirement” for the strike to be
considered effective.
Whether the subject lost consciousness or not, the (additional)
“body” responses were far more “dramatic”. These responses
varied, but would commonly result in the striking arm retracting
and the subject “spinning” around (away from) the intended
“target/victim” (of their strike). Although not having been
struck in the abdomen,
retreating into a “fetal” position (kneeling on the ground) was
very common.
When he began doing “public” demonstrations of this, he had the
persons “stand there” (relaxed). This was considered to be for
demonstration
purposes (not as an “example” of application). Though his strikes
were “solid”, they were by no means extreme
in the level of force utilized. He (Oyata) also performed “temple”
strikes (performed using the “pads” of the fingertips) that
resembled “taps”. These utilized minimal force, but attained
equal results. These were also being shown as “examples” (and I
never saw or heard of him teaching them to be utilized in a defensive
situation).
The use of these (types of) strikes on compliant/passive subjects,
was done to allow the subject to (somewhat) experience what an
aggressor would feel if/when the strike were used upon them during an
altercation. Though startling and sometimes painful, these strikes
would (at the very least)
demonstrate that they could grant the user
time to apply a
variety of other
possible applications (arm manipulations, strikes, immobilization
techniques, etc.) whether the individual was rendered “unconscious”
or not.
One of the things I (regularly) observe and detest,
is the whole “recovery”(?) routine/act that many (if not by most
All of
these clowns)
of the “kyusho-expert” category utilize (at their “shows”).
This (IMO) is one of the biggest “Snake
oil” acts that I've
ever witnessed. The entire performance
(that they go through) is both ignorant,
and pointless
(and no one calls
them out
on it, WTF!?) .
These people make endless “claims” of having done medical
research (in regards to these types of strikes and their effect).
Yet, ALL of them utilize a “Resuscitation/Recovery” routine (that
they
created, and then require their students to learn) and it serves NO
PURPOSE what so ever
(other than “showmanship”).
(Obviously) None of these people have ever taken a basic “First-Aid”
course. What these “kyusho” people teach (to do) is exactly
opposite
of what (medically) should
be done to aid an unconscious person (and it could be argued that
what they are teaching
is dangerous
to do as well).
It
could also be argued
that their “victims”, never lose
consciousness?,..(which would absolve
them from any concern
about their questionable, if not pointless “resuscitation”
methods).
(I
located the following information on the Internet, Several sources
provided similar information. I encourage any/all students and
instructors to become First Aid/CPR certified, You never know
if/when/where it can prove helpful and/or save a life)
Unconsciousness - First Aid
Unconsciousness is when a person is unable to respond to people and activities. Often, this is called a coma or being in a comatose state.Other changes in awareness can occur without becoming unconscious. Medically, these are called "altered mental status" or "changed mental status." They include sudden confusion, disorientation, or stupor.
Unconsciousness or any other sudden change in mental status must be treated as a medical emergency.
If someone is awake but less alert than usual, ask a few simple questions, such as:
- What is your name?
- What is the date?
- How old are you?
Wrong answers or an inability to answer
the question suggest a change in mental status.
Considerations
Being asleep is not the same thing as being unconscious. A sleeping person will respond to loud noises or gentle shaking -- an unconscious person will not.
**An
unconscious person cannot cough or clear his or her throat. This
can lead to death if the airway becomes blocked.**
Causes
Unconsciousness can be caused by nearly any major illness or injury, as well as substance abuse and alcohol use.Brief unconsciousness (or fainting) is often caused by dehydration, low blood sugar, or temporary low blood pressure. However, it can also be caused by serious heart or nervous system problems. Your doctor will determine if you need tests.
Other causes of fainting include
straining during a bowel movement (vasovagal syncope), coughing very
hard, or breathing very fast (hyperventilating).
Symptoms
The person will be unresponsive (does not respond to activity, touch, sound, or other stimulation).The following symptoms may occur after a person has been unconscious:
- Amnesia for events prior to, during, and even after the period of unconsciousness
- Confusion
- Drowsiness
- Headache
- Inability to speak or move parts of his or her body (see stroke symptoms)
- Lightheadedness
- Loss of bowel or bladder control (incontinence)
- Rapid heartbeat (palpitations)
- Stupor (profound confusion and weakness)
First Aid
- Call or tell someone to call 911.
- Check the person's airway, breathing, and pulse frequently. If necessary, begin rescue breathing and CPR.
- If the person is breathing and lying on the back, and you do not think there is a spinal injury, carefully roll the person toward you onto their side. Bend the top leg so both hip and knee are at right angles. Gently tilt the head back to keep the airway open. If breathing or pulse stops at any time, roll the person on to their back and begin CPR.
- If you think there is a spinal injury, leave the person where you found them (as long as breathing continues). If the person vomits, roll the entire body at one time to the side. Support the neck and back to keep the head and body in the same position while you roll.
- Keep the person warm until medical help arrives.
- If you see a person fainting, try to prevent a fall. Lay the person flat on the floor and raise the feet about 12 inches.
- If fainting is likely due to low blood sugar, give the person
something sweet to eat or drink when they become conscious.
DO NOT
- Do NOT give an unconscious person any food or drink.
- Do NOT leave the person alone.
- Do NOT place a pillow under the head of an unconscious person.
- Do NOT slap an
unconscious person's face or splash water on the face to try to
revive him.
Labels:
atemi,
jujutsu,
jutsu,
Kansas City Missouri,
karate,
kempo,
Kyusho,
Life Protection art,
Oyata,
ryukyu,
Ryute,
Seminars,
shodo,
Taika Seiyu Oyata,
te,
Tuite,
Tuite book
Thursday, August 14, 2014
Process for developing a practice method
It's an established fact, that the
majority of (though certainly not all) opening/first
strikes, in a “face to face” confrontation, are made with the
intent of that strike impacting the face/head/mouth of their victim.
This is commonly assumed to be for the intent of effecting a
“knock-out” (of the struck individual). This rarely
occurs, but it still remains an Icon of one supposedly being a
superior fighter (and of course demonstrating one's skill/ability
level in the art of fisticuffs).
It's a very “macho” (type of) thing...
Regardless of the reasons it is
(the most common initial action), knowing this allows a
student to pre-plan their own defense against it. One
(obviously) can't know what way that an aggressor will attempt
to hit them, but it can be known how it is possible for them
to do so.
If one first eliminates all the slow,
awkward and (honestly) impractical ways that someone
could strike you in the head using their hands (which
are used more often than anything else), your left with only 4
possibilities being available (used by either arm of an
aggressor, this creates the possibility for 8 ways that one could be
struck).
Listing them in the order of their
“popularity” (of use), the most popular is the “Hay-Maker”
(punch). It goes by a variety of names,
but for now, we'll use the most popular name for it here (in the
mid-west). This punch is really an (often overly) exaggerated
“Hook-Punch”. Used by both amateurs and professional's alike,
this strike is popular because of it's simplicity, as well as
the amount of momentum (force) that can be delivered, with only
minimal experience in it's use.
The aggressor's arm is (commonly)
pulled-back, often behind
the user (in order to create as much travel-time
for the momentum of the arm to build-up before
impact). As the aggressor's fist is propelled forward, it is commonly
delivered in a Hooking
motion, that will impact the intended targets jaw/face from the side.
This strike can be delivered using only the momentum of the arm,
or the user can incorporate their entire body-weight
into the strike. Though comparatively slower
than the other options, this strike has the highest
potential impact force available (which probably accounts for the
popularity and frequency
of it's use).
The second most popular method,
is via the “Upper-cut” punch. This striking method is very
popular amongst those who choose to keep their hands at their waist
during the initial “verbal-sex” exchange before any exchange of
blows. This is a common strike from individuals who have kept their
hands down (near their waist level) prior to the “physical”
part of the altercation beginning.
The intent of this strike is to
sneak-up/in, and strike their victim under their chin
(in what often appears to be an effort to “bounce” the back of
their head off of their own spinal column). Though it is
possible to wind-up this strike, it's more common for the
aggressor to simply buckle their knees (during the initial
stages of the strike), then extend them as their fist impacts
the bottom of the defender's chin. The
strike can be made from either side as
well, but is more commonly performed directly up the middle
of the intended victims body
(making it slightly more difficult to be noticed
by
the victim before impact).
The
third
most popular, is the “Straight punch” (delivered from the waist).
This can be a fairly quick
punch,
but it lacks
most of the power
that's available to the previously listed punching methods. To amend
for it's lack of momentum (power), a user will often exaggerate their
own body motion (to increase that momentum potential). This (of
course) is dependent upon how much of a “surprise factor” that
they want (while delivering this strike). The more “power”(momentum)
they want in the strike, the more they will have to exaggerate their
own motion to develop it (and there by forewarn
their victim of their intentions, also known as “telegraphing”
their motions).
The fourth most
popular method used, is the “Shoulder punch” (also referred to as
a “piston punch” or “straight-punch”). This strike is
utilized when the arm/elbow of a striking fist is pulled-back to the
shoulder (as when “cocking” a gun hammer) before motioning
directly forward to impact the victim. It is very popular.
When using this method of striking, the aggressor will commonly
deliver multiple strikes (This striking method is very popular
amongst individual's who “pump-iron” (lift weights). This manner
of punch is often preceded by the aggressor grabbing the victims
(opposite) arm/shoulder/chest (often via a “jacket/shirt”) in
order to “hold” them and prevent their escape while delivering
their strikes.
It should be noted, that any of
these striking methods could be used by an aggressor, they are all
equally popular in their use. They are listed here only in the
most reported order of probable use. Because of this vagueness,
ALL must be considered to be equally possible. Though each are
possible, for the purposes of practicing for defending against them,
they are listed in the presented order only for those purposes (and
are based upon witness reports of those circumstances).
Even when those accounts are
considered, the utilized practice “order” of defensive motions is
irrelevant. None the less an order needed to be established (though
honestly, any order would be acceptable as long as each
are included equally) in the
practice routine. For our students, the order of the students
exposure to those methods are based upon witness accounts, and our
students have expressed comfort
with that decision. That level of comfort is a necessary factor when
determining how students will devote their level of commitment to the
practice.
For our classes, that order is began
with the aggressor using a “Hay-Maker” punch, followed by an
“Upper-cut”, then a punch delivered from the “Waist”, and
finally defending against a “Shoulder-Punch”.
Though the most probable means of
aggression have been demonstrated, whether the aggressor uses their
right or left hand/arm to deliver it remains an unknown.
For that reason, when any singular defensive motion that is being
utilized, it must be able to be used (effectively) in any of
the presented instances. This dismisses the Right/Left (only)
defensive methods that are commonly being taught (by the majority of
systems).
The defensive motion that will be described
here, utilizes both of the defender's arms and one leg (or
“foot” depending on one's perspective). This is one of Oyata's
trademark principles (and is utilized within this defensive
motion practice). The premiss of it's use is that the practiced
motions can be utilized regardless of the aggressor's chosen manner
of assault.
The student will first practice the
individual defensive arm motions, beginning with the left, then with
the right arm. It's understood that the majority of people are
right-handed, thus are inclined to utilize that arm more often as the
initial striking limb.
Practice is done with the students
arms at either side of their body. Though a student's arms may be
raised (already) during a confrontation, practice should be done with
the arms at the students sides (to acquire a level of comfort if/when
the student should be in a “non-combative” attitude when the
confrontation begins).
The student will work with their left
arm initially (being that an aggressor's right-hand is more commonly
the initially striking arm). That practice begins with the student
raising their left arm directly upward, pivoting at the elbow until
the arm is horizontal to the ground. The hand is then extended
forward as the arm is raised (palm-up). When that hand reaches the
height of the aggressor's shoulder, it will rotate medially, and
towards the uke's center-line. It then rotates again, and motions
downwards (following the aggressor's center-line). It will
continue until reaching the aggressor's waist height.
This motion can be “modified”
depending on the aggressor's actions. If the aggressor's (right) arm
is perceived as having motioned forward, and upward (as if performing
an “Upper-Cut”), the defender's arm can motion more forward and medially instead
of raising as originally described. By motioning medially the
arm can then “block” the aggressor's attempted (Upper-Cut)
strike.
Should the aggressor's arm be
retracted (behind and upward, as when performing a “Shoulder Punch”
or a “Haymaker”), when the defender's hand reaches the
aggressor's shoulder height it will remain on the inner-side
of the aggressor's arm (as that arm motions forward), without moving
medially. This will allow that arm to divert (parry) the striking arm
outward, preventing it from reaching it's intended target (the
student's face).
Should the aggressor of attempted to
strike using a punch directly from their waist, the left arm will
continue with the original motion to the aggressor's shoulder and
then medially (as originally practiced/described) and downward.
When the arm performs it's complete
motion (and the aggressor's Left arm is used to strike with), it can
also be used to strike the aggressor's abdominal region
(approximately in the area of the solar-plexus). This is commonly
only applicable if/when the aggressor uses their left arm (for their
initial strike). When the aggressor's left hand is used (for an
initial strike), the general motion being practiced will remain the
same in any of the described situations. The defender is allowed
various “options” that can be utilized in those instances. They
have the option of striking the (right) side of the aggressor's neck,
or the described abdominal strike. These “options” are practiced
individually (for the student's familiarity with them).
In any of these situations the
aggressor's (attempted) striking arm is parried (commonly into an
arm-bar). This will be the common situation regardless of which arm
the aggressor uses to strike with. We teach our students to utilize a
3-point arm-bar which is instructed separately.
Practice of the defender's right hand
motions is began with the arm first crossing (in front of) the
defender's groin. It then raises, pivoting at the elbow and raising
close to the defender's chest until vertical.
The arm then motions
forward (extending the elbow towards the aggressor). Depending upon
the aggressor's actions, that arm will motion medially (if the
aggressor is attempting an Upper-Cut, or a strike thrown from the
waist). Either of these actions will generally place the defender's
right arm on top of the aggressor's left arm.
Should the aggressor's
arm be “cocked” (as when performing “Straight punch”) or when
retracted/swung outward (as with a “Roundhouse” punch), the
defender's right forearm will (either) perform a (hand) strike
against the inner-side of the aggressor's bicep or will land on-top
of the striking arm (upon instructed locations) using the fore-arm to
impact it with. Either situation (on top, or on the inner side of the
aggressor's arm) can allow for a circular parry being
performed upon that arm.
Once the basic motion is understood,
the possible variables are shown and practiced. These include using
the right arm to strike the left side of the aggressor's neck (when
applicable). There are numerous options available to the defender
(depending upon the particular circumstances) with either arm. These
are all demonstrated once the basic motions are learned.
As the student gains proficiency with
these basic motions, they are instructed in rotating the body while
performing the instructed motions. In addition to simplifying the
performance of these motions, doing so will provide the student with
additional retaliatory and controlling options.
These Defensive Motions are practiced
in response to all 8 of the “Most Common” beginning assault
“punching” methods. This practice method forces the student to
focus on each (individual) defensive portion of the defensive
method. By including the individual “pieces” separately (in
progressive increments) the student becomes aware of the necessity
for the inclusion of each.
Defender's Left arm defensive
motion (only) with...
Aggressor Right
Arm Attack (Right hand “Roundhouse”)
Aggressor Right
Arm Attack (Right hand “Upper-cut”)
Aggressor Right
Arm Attack (Right hand “Punch From waist”)
Aggressor Right
Arm Attack (Right hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Defender's Right arm defensive
motion (only) with...
Aggressor Left
Arm Attack (Left hand “Roundhouse”)
Aggressor Left
Arm Attack (Left hand “Upper-cut”)
Aggressor Left
Arm Attack (Left hand “Punch From waist”)
Aggressor Left
Arm Attack (Left hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Combined Defender's arm motions
used against...:
Aggressor Right
Arm Attack (Right hand “Roundhouse”)
Aggressor Left
Arm Attack (Left hand “Roundhouse”)
Aggressor Right
Arm Attack (Right hand “Upper-cut”)
Aggressor Left
Arm Attack (Left hand “Upper-cut”)
Aggressor Right
Arm Attack (Right hand “Punch From waist”)
Aggressor Left
Arm Attack (Left hand “Punch From waist”)
Aggressor Right
Arm Attack (Right hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Aggressor Left
Arm Attack (Left hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Combined arm
motions with with a Body Rotation...:
Defender
Body Rotation to Left (Aggressor Right hand “Roundhouse”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Right (Aggressor Right Hand “Roundhouse”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Left (Aggressor Left hand “Roundhouse”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Right (Aggressor Left Hand “Roundhouse”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Left (Aggressor Right hand “Upper-cut”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Right (Aggressor Right Hand “Upper-cut”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Left (Aggressor Left hand “Upper-cut”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Right (Aggressor Left Hand “Upper-cut”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Left (Aggressor Right hand “Punch From waist”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Right (Aggressor Right Hand “Punch From waist”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Left (Aggressor Left hand “Punch From waist”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Right (Aggressor Left Hand “Punch From waist”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Left (Aggressor Right hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Right (Aggressor Right Hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Left (Aggressor Left hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Defender
Body Rotation to Right (Aggressor Left Hand “Shoulder
Punch”)
Combined arm
motions,Body Rotation and Straight kick...:
Defender Body
Rotation to Left W/Kick (Aggressor Right hand “Roundhouse”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Right W/Kick (Aggressor Right Hand “Roundhouse”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Left W/Kick (Aggressor Left hand “Roundhouse”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Right W/Kick (Aggressor Left Hand “Roundhouse”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Left W/Kick (Aggressor Right hand “Upper-cut”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Right W/Kick (Aggressor Right Hand “Upper-cut”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Left W/Kick (Aggressor Left hand “Upper-cut”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Right W/Kick (Aggressor Left Hand “Upper-cut”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Left W/Kick (Aggressor Right hand “Punch From
waist”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Right W/Kick (Aggressor Right Hand “Punch From waist”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Left W/Kick (Aggressor Left hand “Punch From waist”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Right W/Kick (Aggressor Left Hand “Punch From waist”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Left W/Kick (Aggressor Right hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Right W/Kick (Aggressor Right Hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Left W/Kick (Aggressor Left hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Defender Body
Rotation to Right W/Kick (Aggressor Left hand “Shoulder Punch”)
Once these
motions are understood by the student, additional options are
included and practiced. It should be understood that any of the
instructed motions are optional defensive considerations.
Through the practice of these motions students will determine which
work most efficiently for themselves. Oyata taught several (similar)
defensive motions, some were more complex and some more simplistic
(than the once just described).
The instructed
“follow-up” motions can be modified to what will work best for
each individual student. These may very well change as the student
advances in their individual abilities.
Oyata's
methodology was a constantly evolving defensive method, often shaped
to the individual students abilities, and requirements. What works
well for one student, should not be confused as representing what
will work for all students, and for every situation.
Though pictures would obviously make these motions more easily understood, I've chosen to leave those for our next book, which is for our Beginning Defensive Applications (still being assembled).
Labels:
atemi,
jujutsu,
jutsu,
Kansas City Missouri,
karate,
kempo,
Kyusho,
Life Protection art,
Oyata,
ryukyu,
Ryute,
Seminars,
shodo,
Taika Seiyu Oyata,
te,
Tuite,
Tuite book
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)