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.

 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. 






 

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.

  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.

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

1. Call or tell someone to call 911.
2. Check the person's airway, breathing, and pulse frequently. If necessary, begin rescue breathing and CPR.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Keep the person warm until medical help arrives.
6. 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.
7. 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.