Principle Driven Kata - Part 2

Part 2 of this article from Shinseido: Practical Karate For Self Defence.  The original article is at:  http://www.headingleykarate.org/article9.htm

 

 

 

In the first part of this article I explored principles that I believe are inherent in kata. These fall into two categories: (i) principles of power generation, and (ii) tactical principles. I also gave some examples to show how each and every movement in kata can be consistently explained using these principles. But that is only half the story. The next task is to work out how to apply these principles to real life situations. In other words, to generate applications (bunkai) for the kata. Many people have already been down this path and there are many published works which explore the subject. And of course, many practitioners also find value in the process of working out their own applications. So my intent here is not to add to that body of knowledge. Instead, I wish to suggest a way of working out whether any of these possible applications actually have any real value.

To answer this question requires a two pronged approach. The first task is to determine whether a given technique really is an application of the kata movement(s) in question. This may seem obvious, but it does require a little thought. A particular technique might be brilliant, but that in itself doesn't make it an application of the kata. I suggest that it is only an application of a particular kata movement if it demonstrates the principles embodied in that movement. Again this may seem obvious but it has a couple of important implications.

Many techniques are clearly kata applications, simply on the basis that they look so much like the kata. But what if a technique doesn't look like (or only 'sort of' looks like) the kata? What if it only feels like the kata? Or what if just one bit of it feels like one bit of the kata movement? My view is that this part of the technique it is still an application of the kata – because it is using the principle taught by the kata. This idea also has consequences when analysing sequences of kata. Some practitioners put value on applications that match a whole sequence of several moves from the kata. This may well be valid in some cases. But if we think of the kata as a catalogue of principles it becomes clear that it is not necessary to apply those principles in any particular order. They are simply there for us to dip in to and select them as appropriate to the situation. We can begin to look at little snippets of kata and combine them together in many different ways. Of course, there are examples of kata sequences that have been preserved across generations and across kata. In such cases it seems sensible to believe that a sequence has been preserved intact for a good reason, so it may indeed have value above and beyond that of its component parts.

Let us assume that we have examined a technique and decided that it does indeed demonstrate the principles embodied in the kata – it is an application. The next step is test the technique against a set of criteria that all good techniques should adhere to. These criteria I call the 'Principles of Combat'. Unlike the tactical principles discussed in Part 1 of this article these Principles of Combat apply to all (or at least most) techniques in Karate. The tactical principles, on the other hand, are each specific to individual movements in the kata.

Any technique I use must satisfy at least the majority of the Principles of Combat and, in cases where it doesn't satisfy all of them, I must be able to justify why I am prepared to relax one of my criteria. It is worth noting that these principles aren't necessarily the only factors in making a technique successful but, in my opinion, they are the deciding factors in whether a technique can and will work. For example, I consider it extremely important to use methods of distraction. But you can add distractions to almost any technique so they are not much use in determining whether the core technique is valid in itself. So I do not include the use of distractions as one of my core Principles of Combat.

It should also be noted that I am not attempting to convince you which principles you should adopt. I have my viewpoint about what works, but it is up to you to decide which principles are important to you and to train accordingly. However, to give some insight into the process, I shall explore what I consider to be the core Principles of Combat.

Muchimi

Muchimi is an Okinawan word which means 'sticking', ie. sticking to the enemy. This concept relies on two in-built human skills that we use all of the time but rarely think about. The first of these is known as proprioception. This refers to our awareness of the precise location of every part of the body in relation to the rest of the body. Without it, life would be possible, but any physical action would be awkward and require conscious control. Fortunately, this ability is hard-wired into our nervous systems, so we don't have to think about it. The second in-built skill is our ability to rapidly and accurately interpret our sense of touch. It has been shown that humans can react to 'tactile stimulus' (ie. being touched) somewhat faster and more appropriately than we can to input from our other senses (Schrope 2001). How do these skills help us as martial artists? Think of a simple example in which an attacker attempts to punch you in the face. If your arm is in contact with their arm as they begin to punch then you will be able to react more rapidly and potentially more appropriately than if you had to rely on sight. Your proprioceptive skills would give you moment by moment feedback on whether you were successfully guiding the limb away from your head. This innate ability is so refined that it even works with your eyes shut. In fact it usually works better that way when you first try it, as you're forced to ignore your sense of vision and rely on touch instead. In our dojo we practice a number of partner exercises that teach students how to use these skills, including a form of 'tactile sparring'. It is rare that that anyone actually lands a strike in this drill as it is so easy to develop an ability to redirect and control an attacker's incoming force – as long as you're in physical contact with them! Of course, many martial artists have already realised this and so it has given rise to a variety of 'sticking hands' and 'pushing hands' drills, particularly in Chinese arts. What is unfortunate is that these skills seem to have generally been ignored in the world of modern Karate as the emphasis shifted towards the long range techniques of the sporting arena.

Kuzushi

Balance – or more specifically, keeping yours whilst destroying the enemy's. I think most martial artists would agree that being balanced is important in order to generate power. That said, there are some methods of striking that actually use a loss of balance to add to the power generated. But even these require the person striking to have started from a position of balance. So it seems obvious that keeping your own balance whilst destroying the attacker's will enable you to strike with power but deny them the same opportunity. The importance of balance goes beyond this though. When the human body is unbalanced in any way, one or more of a range of self-righting reflexes come into play (Howe & Oldham 2001). The important thing to understand about these reflexes is that they are automatic. Your body will try to right itself whether you wish it to or not. You can consciously over-ride these reflexes, but only if you know beforehand that you're going to be off-balanced and in what way it will occur. You can also train in conditioned reflexes (with a lot of training) that can override automatic reflexes, such as choosing to roll forwards if pushed from behind. But even these will only usually occur after the body has already tried to self-right. So if you manage to unbalance the attacker, just for a moment their brain and body will be absorbed with the task of regaining balance – rather than the task of hurting you! If you can go one step further, and keep them continually off-balance until you have disabled or restrained them, they will not have been able to mount a useful defence, let alone take the offensive.

Tai-Sabaki

Body movement or body positioning. I use this as a shorthand phrase for 'moving to a position of advantage'. This is an idea that is central to Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (Gracie & Gracie 2001). In Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (BJJ) whether standing in a clinch or on the ground, players generally seek to achieve positional dominance before attempting to apply a winning technique. There is even a form of BJJ sparring in which players are awarded points not for applying locks or chokes, but for achieving various positions which are regarded as more dominant. A small amount of practice in these scenarios demonstrates the value in this approach. Without having achieved positional dominance it is quite difficult to apply any lock or choke. Having achieved dominance the techniques become much easier to apply. The same can also be said of striking in these situations. I believe the same rationale is valid in any stand-up scenario too. If you can get to a position where you are stood behind your opponent, but facing them, you clearly have a momentary advantage. Better that than to stand slugging it out with them, face to face. A number of arts recognise the value in this approach and so teach techniques designed to place the practitioner at the attacker's 'blind-side'.

Ki

This is a concept that could take up a whole series of articles in itself - it is beyond the scope of this article to fully explore the subject. However, if we look at the term in the way it is used in the oriental culture it quickly becomes clear that it is used in many different contexts. I believe that this is because it is actually a catch-all term that describes a range of different phenomena. At least in martial terms I do not believe it is necessary or helpful to think of ki as some sort of mystical energy, outside of the realms of modern physics. For our purposes, I consider ki to be the synergistic use of body-weight and muscular strength. Or to put it simply, when generating power use all of the right muscles, none of the wrong ones and coordinate this with the movement of the body. Of course, this sounds easy but the reality is that many martial artists fail to achieve it.

Gross motor skills

Unfortunately I don't have a one word shorthand for this concept, any ideas would be gratefully appreciated! Gross motor skills are defined as those skills that control large scale movements of the trunk and limbs. Fine motor skills on the other hand are necessary to perform small movements, in particular tasks performed by the hands and fingers. There is a wealth of evidence that fine motor skills deteriorate under stress (Morris 2000). We can see this effect in action when watching high level sports. Professional snooker players can pot balls and control the cue ball with astonishing accuracy.

 But put them in a championship final, with an audience, TV cameras and a large cash prize to be won and their performance can deteriorate dramatically. In these situations the winner is often the person who is better at dealing with the stress of the situation, rather than the one who is the better technician. It doesn't seem to matter what sort of stress a person is placed under, fine motor skills deteriorate just the same. It could be psychological stress such as fear, or it could be physical, such as exhaustion. We can see the same effect in the dojo. During a grading its quite typical for students to perform poorly compared to their usual level of ability – usually due to a mixture of nervousness and physical tiredness. Gross motor skills on the other hand do not deteriorate due to stress. There have even been suggestions that they can actually improve under some types of stress. Does this mean that we should throw out all of the techniques that require fine motor skills, such as many joint locks? I don't believe so, but I do think this knowledge should influence the way we train. Many martial arts do indeed enable practitioners with many years practice behind them to better control their reactions to stressful situations. Also with many years of training techniques can become so ingrained that they simply become less prone to deterioration. Inevitably, if you have tested your techniques under stress in the dojo you will be more likely to be able to apply them in the stress of being assaulted. That said, it is likely that you will experience some degree of degradation in fine motor skills, no matter how good your training. So I prefer to emphasise gross motor skills, at least in the initial stages of an assault. It does not mean that the initial techniques used cannot be sophisticated, but they should not be complicated and should not require tremendous manual dexterity. Once the other principles listed above have been applied then it may be appropriate to apply a joint-lock or vital point strike that requires finer control. For example, once I have broken the attacker's balance and brought them to a well-controlled prone position, it will be much easier for me to apply a joint-lock of my choosing.

Putting it All Together

 We now have a two pronged approach to understanding kata and its application.

In the first instance we must look at a kata movement and decide for ourselves what principles it is teaching us. Undoubtedly there will be a number of power generation principles to be found in the movement, there may also be some tactical principles that can be identified. So now we can look at any proposed application for a particular kata movement and decide for ourselves whether it really is an application of that movement – we simply check whether the technique applies the principles found in the movement.

If we decide that the technique really is an application of the kata movement we then need to check whether its one that is worth practising, or is impractical and should therefore be consigned to the bin (no matter how clever it looks or how well it appears to match the kata). To do so we start by testing it against our core Principles of Combat. It may not score highly against every principle, but we should be able to either:

1. modify the technique so that it does utilise all the core principles, or
2. justify in what circumstances we might be allowed to relax a principle and use this particular technique.

If neither can be achieved then the application should be binned.

So we have two sets of principles to consider – those found in the particular movement itself and those that apply across the whole of our martial art.

Summary

In my view the primary purpose of training in kata is to practice various powerful and stable ways of moving the human body, in other words to learn to apply the principles of power generation. Secondary to that, kata also embodies a number of tactical principles (which themselves can provide inspiration for the development of practical applications). To be able to apply the lessons of the kata the student needs to practice appropriate applications with a partner. Any such applications should satisfy a consistent set of criteria that apply across the whole system, ie. that system's Principles of Combat. Not all arts will use the same principles but practitioners should be able to justify those principles considered important within their system. Using this approach the practice of kata can become a focussed and effective self-defence tool, rather than the martial dance it so often is.

Further Reading

Readers may see some similarities between ideas expressed in this article and ideas expressed in the writings of Senseis Bill Burgar and Vince Morris. These two teachers and authors have undeniably had a significant impact on my own thought processes. For a more in-depth exploration of the Principles of Combat see Vince Morris' Rules of Combat, The Development of Warrior Tactics. For more ideas on a systematic approach to testing kata applications see Bill Burgar's Five Years One Kata.

---

References

• Schrope M 2001 Simply Sensational. New Scientist Issue 2293
• Howe T, Oldham J 2001 Posture and Balance. In: Everett T, Trew M (Eds) Human Movement. An Introductory Text, 4th edn. Harcourt Publishers, London
• Gracie R, Gracie R 2001 Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. Theory and Technique. Invisible Cities Press, Montpelier
• Morris V 2000 Rules of Combat. The Development of Warrior Tactics. PBS, Nottingham

Principle Driven Kata: Part 1

The following is taken form the Shinseido:Practical Karate For Self Defence Website.

You can find the original article here:-  http://www.headingleykarate.org/article8.htm

 

What is the purpose of kata? A simple question, but a quick trawl through various books on Karate shows that few authors or teachers actually attempt to provide an answer. Most will stress the importance of kata, calling it the 'soul of Karate' but don't say why or how. Where a purpose is given it is usually that kata is simply an opportunity to practice a sequence "combining the attacking and blocking techniques of Karate" (Suzuki 1967). To me this makes little sense, we can just practice our basics, we can even put the basics together in endless combinations. Its not at all clear what kata practice can add to this.

I propose looking at kata in a rather different way - a way that consistently explains the purpose of each and every move. My view is simply that the purpose of kata is to enable us to practice not techniques, but principles. This is not a new idea. But where this approach differs from many others is that

• it explains every single kata movement, and
• all of the explanations for all of the movements are consistent with each other.

The principles themselves fall into two categories:

• principles of power generation – how to use the human body to generate maximum power whilst maintaining stability.
• tactical principles – how to use that power to attack and defend against an assailant

Before looking at these principles in detail I would like to contrast this approach with other ways of understanding kata and, in particular, applying the kata to real life situations (ie. bunkai). Over the years I have come across many different ideas for applications of Karate kata, ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous. Most practitioners nowadays appear to have acknowledged that the applications taught by the traditional Japanese Karate systems are unrealistic and severely lacking. The same appears to be true in many Korean and Chinese arts. But if we throw out the so-called traditional applications, what do we replace them with? It seems there are more different theories than there are students of Karate. One difficulty I've found is that some ideas seem to work well for one movement of a kata, but don't tell us anything useful about the rest of the kata. For example, there is the theory that a particular move in a kata can be used as a counter to the previous movement. Certainly it is possible to find examples where this idea can be applied to produce a workable application. But it only ever works well for the odd move here or there. Similarly with other approaches, each one only seems to explain the minority of the movements in kata.

To further compound the problem, there are all the variations in kata to be considered. In my own training I've attempted to examine older versions of the kata, in order to see past the modern changes that occurred during the 20th century. This has been a rewarding process, but also at times a frustrating one. Looking at just one kata it is possible to find a myriad of variations in performance between the different styles. In some of the older Okinawan systems it seems that almost every practitioner has their own unique version of each kata. But which version is correct? Which one shows the real applications? They can't all be right, can they?

I believe that all of these questions can be answered by looking at the kata in terms of their power generation and tactical principles, as follows.

Principles of Power Generation

It has been stated by several authors that there are "no blocks in kata" (Dillman & Thomas 1994). I will go one step further. There aren't any kicks, punches or strikes either. There are only methods of moving the human body in a powerful and stable way. What you then choose to do with those movements – or rather, how you apply the principles - is up to you. The purpose of practising kata is simply to enable you to practice and internalise those principles.

To illustrate this approach I will look at a kata familiar to many Karate practitioners, regardless of style. That is Pinan Nidan, or Heian Shodan as it is known in the Shotokan tradition. It is frequently the first kata that new students are required to learn. Practitioners of other arts may not recognise the name but would probably recognise the kata, or at least most of the movements it contains (for example, practitioners of Taekwondo and Tang Soo Do will recognise Pinan Nidan as the kata that gave birth to the forms Chon-Ji, Taegeuk II Jang, Palqwe II Jang and Pyung-An Cho-Dan). There are many variations of the kata but they almost all revolve around the following movements:

1. Lunge punch (oi-zuki / jun-zuki)
2. Rising block (age-uke / jodan-uke)
3. Downward sweep (gedan-barai / gedan-uke)

There are usually a couple of other movements in most versions but as these can vary from style to style I will concentrate on the above.

Before continuing, it is worth noting one significant difference between the way that I am considering power generation and the way it is usually thought of in striking arts. I am not only concerned with how much power is delivered at the end of each movement, but also how much power can be applied during the whole movement. The reason for this will become clear when we look at some examples.

1. Lunge punch

This movement is common to many traditional arts, it consists of simply stepping forwards and punching with the lead hand. At the same time the rear hand is drawn back to the side of the body.

There are a number of principles of power development embodied within this movement:

• Pushing and pulling – pushing with one hand while pulling with the other (ie. moving the hands in opposite directions) must be stronger than pushing with one hand alone. Note though that for this to work both hands must be in contact with the enemy, not just the pushing hand.
• Forearm rotation – Almost all arm movements can made more forceful if combined with forearm rotation. A full exploration of this subject would require an in-depth examination of both the anatomy and neurology involved. It must suffice here to note that:
  • Elbow flexion (bending) and supination (rotating the forearm to be palm up) are generally mutually supportive, ie. each movement becomes stronger if you perform them simultaneously.
  • Elbow extension (straightening) and pronation (rotating the forearm to be palm down) can be mutually supportive in the same way.
  So, generally speaking, if you want to increase power when pushing, pronate your forearms at the same time. Similarly to increase power when pulling, supinate. And this is exactly what we find in the vast majority of karate techniques. Punching is the classic example, the typical karate punch pronates the forearm as the arm extends, and the retracting hand supinates as it returns to the hip.
• Use a forward stance to act as a stable platform when pushing forwards. I'm sure this is obvious to most martial artists so it warrants no further explanation here.
• Step forwards to add bodyweight to pushing movements. Although there are various ways of stepping used in different styles, a fairly obvious one is to throw or drive the bodyweight forwards to add power to a technique.
• Keep your hips low while stepping forwards. For many years it was far from obvious to me why this should be stronger than allowing your hips to bob up and down as you step. And I'm certainly not the only one to be unconvinced. The top people in Taekwondo evidently questioned this dogma at some point, as it's a characteristic of Taekwondo techniques to deliberately move up and down as you step forward in stance (what they call 'sine wave'). Their rationale is to add bodyweight into the strike at the end of the movement. Clearly there are differing views on this subject, but it's not just the end-point of the movement that I'm concerned about here. My concern is being stable and being able to apply power not only at the end point, but also while you are stepping. Rather than explore the mechanics of this situation it is easier to carry out a simple test to see which way works best. Have a training partner who is roughly your own weight resist your push while you press on their chest with your lead hand. Now step forwards keeping your arm extended, continually pressing on your partner's torso. The first time allow, encourage even, your hips to rise and fall as you step. You will find you just bounce off your partner's chest and lose your balance. Now try again but this time keeping your hips low. You should now have no difficulty stepping through and pushing your partner off balance.

I could go on. There are certainly other principles embodied in this movement (keeping the elbows close to the body, the shoulders relaxed etc.) but these are common to just about all Karate movements so I shall leave the list there.

2. Rising Block

As with the lunge punch, the rising blocks in this kata are all done whilst stepping forwards. It is essentially the same rising block as is found in many striking arts. Many of the same principles of power generation that applied to the lunge punch apply here also, but there are several specific principles that are worth mentioning:

• Pushing and pulling – this is basically the same idea as with the lunge punch but, where the punch emphasises pushing/pulling more or less horizontally forwards the power in the rising block is directed more vertically. In other words, push up with one arm and pull down (to the hip) with the other.
• Pushing and pulling sideways – secondary to pushing/pulling vertically there is an additional direction to consider. The rising arm pushes out from the centreline across the body and the descending arm pulls out across the body to the hip.
• Two other principles already noted are (i) keeping the elbow down and close to the body and (ii) pronating the 'blocking' arm. It is essential to coordinate these two movements with the pushing and pulling mentioned above in order to develop a powerful movement. When observing students practising rising block incorrectly, it generally seems to be these two aspects where the problems lie.

From a power generation point of view the chambering movement for rising block could be interpreted simply as getting your arms into place for the rest of the movement. It could also be considered from a power generation point of view in its own right but for the sake of brevity I shall leave this unexplored for now.

3. Downward Sweep

This is another movement that can be found in many different arts. In the chamber position the 'blocking' arm is first brought to the opposite shoulder while the other arm is extended in front of the body. Then the 'blocking' arm sweeps down and across the body while the other hand retracts. As with rising block I shall not consider the chambering movement for the time being and just focus on the second part of the technique. In the kata this movement occurs several times, each time being combined with turning the body to face a new direction. As before, there are a number of principles in common with other movements. In particular, note the consistent way in which forearm rotation is used - the sweeping arm pronating as it extends and sweeps down, the retracting hand supinating. The principles of power generation specific to the downward sweep are:

• Pushing and pulling – but this time it is the push that is directed downwards and the pull upwards (to the hip). In addition, note how there is the same lateral pushing and pulling as found in rising block.
• Turning the body – the whole body can be rotated in order to add bodyweight to the sweeping movement. As the kata shows, the body can be rotated through a range of different angle for essentially the same effect. It also shows that the turn can be executed in more than one way. For example, in the first downward sweep of the kata, you step backwards and turn after having punched. This demonstrates the principle of using the bodyweight to pull back before sweeping down.

Comparing the three movements discussed above it is clear that there are one or more themes in the principles occurring throughout this kata. Pinan Nidan introduces a number of ubiquitous principles – those that run through all Karate techniques. But in this kata we also see particular emphasis on the principle of pushing and pulling, not just horizontally but also vertically. I believe that this is one of the main purposes of this kata. It is well placed to enable new students in particular to practice a relatively simple but highly effective principle of power generation.

Tactical Principles

These are simply tactics that are suggested by (and specific to) the movements of the kata. By contrast, there are other combat effective tactics that are not specific to particular movements. For example, using distraction to set up a technique is a very valuable tactic but it is certainly not specific to any one kata movement. So it is only those tactics suggested by the movements themselves that I am interested in here.

I believe that the above movements from Pinan Nidan do demonstrate tactical principles, but I shall examine one movement which is perhaps a more obvious example. That is the opening movement from Pinan Shodan (aka Heian Nidan). This involves raising both hands above the shoulders. One hand performs a rising block, the other hand performs either an outward block or uppercut depending on which style the kata comes from. Again, depending on style, there are different ways of practising the outward block – some do it with the knuckles facing outwards, some with the thumb facing outwards. There are even different ways of getting the outward block to its final position.

I have already discussed the power generation principles embodied in the rising block. Each method of getting the other hand into place has its own particular power generation principles. But why the differences in the actual technique? Why did one person think that they needed to practice one principle, and someone else another? What is the common thread that binds them together? My view is that this is where tactical principles provide an explanation. The important tactical principles I believe are inherent in this kata movement are:

• Get both hands up to protect your head – humans have an in-built flinch reflex when they see something rapidly approaching the head. This reflex consists of raising both arms towards or even to cover the head. If the reflex is strong enough it can also include hunching the shoulders and dropping the head down, away from danger. Even stronger and the legs will bend to remove the whole torso and head away from danger. Rather than try to deny this reflex it is better to build on it – ie. to build it into the way you respond.
• Attack and defend simultaneously – this builds upon the above flinch reflex but this time instead of passively defending, one hand can be used to go on the offensive. Either the attacking limb can be struck (eg. striking the bicep) as part of the 'blocking' action, or the head or torso can be struck.

 As long as you follow these tactical principles (and the relevant power generation principles) then you could perform the kata movement in a number of different but equally correct ways. So it is no surprise that we can see a multitude of different versions of the same kata – not even counting those that have been modified for purely aesthetic reasons in modern times.

What next?

As we have seen, it is possible to examine any kata and break down the movements to discover what principles of power generation they demonstrate. We may even be able to go further and identify tactical principles which the kata embodies. But what do we do with this knowledge? So far all we have are methods of generating power and a few tactics that may be of use in combat. This is only part of the picture. We now need to find a way to apply these principles in actual combat, ie. bunkai (and oyo). In the second part of this article I will explore not so much the different ideas for bunkai – other authors have addressed this at length – but rather how to test whether any bunkai is really of practical value.

Click here for the second part of this article

Finally, the Differences Between Strategy and Tactics Explained

The following insightful article is from LowTechCombat.com:-

Too many people use the terms 'strategy' and 'tactics' incorrectly or even talk about a particular 'thing' or topic as being both a good strategy and tactic. Usually, this is actually referring to a tactic but the person likes to throw in the word strategy because it sounds cool, they don't know better or believe it somehow implies a deeper thought process and means more...

Not any more. No more excuses.

There are unquestionable and very fundamental differences between strategy and tactics and these will be clearly detailed in this article. Not only are these words used poorly and often interchangeably, but a poor understanding of the meaning of the words can inhibit or mislead a persons overall training outcomes and objectives. It can muddy a persons goals and lead people down the wrong path. Sometimes, years can be spent training a certain way or in a certain system that is not really in line with their long term overall goals, purely because the meaning of 'strategy' and 'tactics' is not clearly understood. 

These matters and more will now be discussed in detail.

What are Tactics?

Traditional definition:

...the art of disposing armed forces in order of battle and of organising operations, especially during contact with an enemy.

Simply, it is the art of disposing armed forces, especially during contact. 

Tactics are those short term decisions and actions that give a combatant an advantage during combat or that time immediately prior. 

Tactics include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Counter fighting
• Drawing an opponent to use a desired attack in order to present an opening to attack
• Feinting to determine likely responses
• Stop hitting
• Using set up questions
• Using non aggressive stances and posture to mentally disarm an aggressor
• Telling an angry male that you thought you knew their girlfriend from school, that is why you were staring
• Appearing crazier than the aggressor in order to prevent a possible encounter going physical
• Repeating the same technique in order to prompt the defender to expect it again and then do something else
• Go low then high, high then low, left then right, right then left etc.
• Deciding not to argue with the drunk male who said you were a pathetic moron and told your girlfriend she could do better
• Identifying that guy across the room who is pissed at you for some reason so you decide to leave that room or establishment prior to violence kicking off
• Crossing the road or turning around when you see a dodgy person lingering near a driveway up ahead at night
• Deciding not to use that ATM because there are some people hanging around that do not appear quite right
• Buying that drunk guy a drink after his got spilt by you

This list is not exhaustive. Tactics are where the action is. Tactics are those actions and decisions taken with a short term focus. Tactics are right in the thick of an encounter or just prior to it happening or potentially happening. For many people, tactics are where the juice is. It is what they love. It is often quite enjoyable to watch a sport fighter fight who is a very good tactician. There is a lot going on. You can see them setting up their opponent. They are often referred to as smart fighters. They think. They utilise tactics and do it well.

Tactics and a 'game'

Of note, many sport fighters are certainly not good tacticians. Instead, they use their exceptional power or techniques. They have very good tools and they know how to use them. This could be in the form of combinations that work for them, superior quickness or an unstoppable takedown followed by submission or ground and pound. 

These combinations of moves that work well for them are a basic form of rigid tactics. As an example, they will punch high for a while and when the opportunity presents itself, they know they will go for the takedown. This rigid form of tactics is what is referred to as a fighters 'game'. They have a game plan they are going to follow. It is like a strict system of tactics that are tied together. Once a talented fighter with great tools has a good 'game' that works for them, watch out. They can be very hard to beat, even for a fighter who utilises a more fluid implementation of tactics.

Tactics are what most people focus on. It is what many people are good at. It probably makes up around 99% of a persons training time. It is what we do when we 'do' training. We drill, we spar, we roll, we compete etc. Most people have a pretty good appreciation of what tactics are and how to train in order to develop and enhance them. The mistake is, many people call some tactics, strategy. This is incorrect.

What is a Strategy?

Ok, we understand what tactics are now, so what is a strategy?

Traditional definition:

...a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.

Strategy happens away from the action. If you are involved in a violent encounter, you are not using strategy, you are using tactics. Hopefully good ones and hopefully to a good standard.

Strategy is big picture stuff. Strategy happens when you think about something deeply over a period of time and make a deliberate decision. This could be a goal or plan or whatever. These could be medium term but are generally long term. Even very long term. These deliberate decisions or goals are what drives everything else. Implementing a strategy often takes work and effort. It can require a detailed plan as to how you are going to reach your strategic goal. 

It is often hard work to make something achievable. That is one of the reasons few people engage in strategic thought and implement a strategic action plan to get things done in accordance with strategic aims. Its all too easy to place it in the too hard basket for a while and then go back to doing whatever you feel like on spur of the moment decisions or just follow what everyone else is doing. Following this pattern, it is very unlikely you will by accident end up where you want to be.

And then you are 80 years old and realise you havn't done what you truly wanted to do...

In a martial arts or self defence context, deciding you want to learn how to defend yourself is very much a strategic decision. And an important one at that! However, too many people leave the strategic thought there and simply begin doing whatever classes are close to them or what their friends do. The basic strategic intent is there, however the implementation of that desired end state is done poorly. The decision of what to learn can impact on a person for years to come. A person may begin going to a certain class for 4 to 10 years or even longer. We are talking about a long time. But is that class really well suited to the students desired end state? Their strategic aim?

 

The issue largely stems from a beginner not really understanding violence and violent crime, so any decision they make at this early stage is likely going to be ill informed. As time goes on and the new student learns more about that violence they have made a decision to prepare themselves for, better decisions can then be made. Improvements to previous decisions can be made. The implementation of that strategic aim can improve over time.

A persons overall goals can change, so their strategic direction will change accordingly. They may change from wanting to be able to defend against a real attack to wanting to understand a certain culture and art they have since fallen in love with. As strategic goals change, their plan as to how they want to achieve those goals needs to change as well.

Another persons overall goals may harden. They may be more interested in the area of human to human violence and may want to learn more and more and pursue the worlds best practises and concepts in that field. This persons overall strategic goals don't change, but their plans about how they are going to pursue them, will. It will become refined over time and more targeted and informed. The implementation of the strategic plan will improve as knowledge of the subject improves.

Strategic decisions drive activity through plans and routine. After identifying an overall strategic goal (and this may take some time to consider), a strategic plan is developed as to how that strategic goal is going to be realised. That plan is then implemented into ones life and is followed. This becomes a persons training routine. In that routine, classes and seminars are gone to, books are read and thought is undertaken. 

Lessons are learnt. Done properly, these lessons directly contribute to moving towards achieving those strategic goals.

One of those areas that are developed whilst actioning our strategic plan is tactics. We learn tactics at our classes and whilst studying. With a properly implemented strategic plan, these learnt tactics will be very relevant to our desired strategic goals.

Strategic decisions drives our learning of tactics.

This ensures what we learn is what we want to be learning. If we did not make well considered strategic decisions we will likely not come across those lessons that we desire which includes our understanding of tactics. What point is being the worlds best at performing a Wushu demonstration when what we really wanted to do was become a proficient boxer? This is just a simple example of how not making those important strategic decisions and sticking with the intent can lead one easily down some other path that seemed interesting enough at the time but became all consuming as friends were going there and the people were nice and friendly.

Along the path, knowledge can increase strategic understanding and provide direction as to how our routine will best facilitate learning. Here are some strategic issues and areas where knowledge can drive understanding and appropriate training which will likely lead to relevant tactics being learnt:

• Understand the real violent crime statistics for your own neighbourhood
• Understanding what form of violent crime YOU are most likely to encounter in your day to day life (fight at pub, mugging at car park etc.)
• Understand what weapons are most commonly used in real attacks
• Understanding that three or more attackers are much more likely than just two
• Understand that some people will harness social norms to gain an advantage over you non violently
• Understand how ego and face can become a core reason that violent encounters begin
• Understand that assault types of attack are much more likely (about 10 times more), than muggings and robbery
• Understand that about half of all assaults are between people who know each other (It may not be the stereotypical drunk guy you dont know in the pub)
• Understand where the primary danger zones are for you and when they are most dangerous

The above is not an exhaustive list. These are just some big picture considerations that could be seen to be useful in driving some training methodologies that would be most relevant to a person for THEM and not a one size fits all. Once knowledge is gained and strategic direction is followed, look out. Such a person would be well on their way along the path.

The importance of strategy does not only need to apply in the martial arts or self defence context. It can apply anywhere. Think of a long term goal and work towards what is truly important to you. That is strategic thinking and strategic action. Along the way, you will learn tactics that work for that particular strategic field.

This article has demonstrated some of the clear differences between strategy and tactics. The differences are obvious. When you hear people use the terms incorrectly now, it will be loud and obvious. Harnessing the power of strategy is the most important thing. Tactics follow strategy. Strategy drives a good understanding of tactics.

Strategic subjects are generally those which are written about on this site. Most articles here are about bigger picture areas of what we call Low Tech Combat. To us, this is the most appropriate use of the written word on the internet. Tactics are best learnt in person from another person. However, too many people are engaging in training that does not really follow their overall intent. And that is a shame. 

Strategy must come first in order to facilitate informed decisions and appropriate training.

Karate Bunkai Pressure Points - Do They Really Work Under Pressure?

This is another article that I wrote for EzineArticles.com about a year ago.  I hope you enjoy it:-

 

You will see debated from time to time about Karate bunkai (applications) containing pressure point strikes. Some claim that pressure points make your techniques ultra effective, whilst others claim that in the heat of the moment you will not have the accuracy to find the point whilst somebody is trying to hit you at the same time.

So who's right? Well in my humble opinion, the truth lies somewhere in the middle and it depends on the circumstances.

If you start a fight 6ft apart, close in, then exchanging blows with a capable opponent; I believe that it would be difficult (but not impossible) to find pressure point targets. Just think when you are sparring against somebody of equal skill, it can be difficult landing a blow on their torso (which is a large target), never mind finding a very small pressure point to hit. Furthermore, when you have just had an adrenalin dump, your fine motor skills do not work as efficiently. For this reason, many people advocate concentrating on developing your techniques (regardless of style) so that you are fast and powerful and you will hurt your opponent wherever you hit them.

On the other side of the coin though, very few fights start 6ft apart. They usually start much closer with the antagonist making impolite inquires as to "who the fornication are you visually observing"! Or words to that effect.

In this kind of scenario, if you are genuinely convinced that you are going to be attacked and you are not able talk sense into your assailant, at some point you may take the decision that you will have to beat some sense into him instead. I'm not talking about somebody calling you names or jumping a queue, but a real threat of imminent violence. In this scenario a pre-emptive strike to a pressure point will be much more likely to succeed. The opponent is still posturing, still psyching himself up; he's not actually going for it yet. You don't step back into a guard as that only warns him that you are a proficient martial artist and tips him off to attack you even more vigorously.

You are better off using what Geoff Thompson calls "the fence", with hand open and facing down in a universal position of neutrality, feet apart in a solid stance (but not a martial arts stance), engaging his brain with some dialogue (anything at all - "isn't it a shame about the polar bears"!), then hit him as fast and hard as you can on a vulnerable point.

Now some traditionalist may get a bit hung up on this, as Funikoshi (founder of Shotokan Karate) stated that in Karate their is no first attack. This has been interpreted by many as you need to stand there and wait for the other person to throw the first punch. This is obviously not very practical. What he really meant was that we should not go looking for a fight. In other places, Funikoshi has described how to deal with an assailant by showing no sign of fighting, using a pre-emptive strike then running away to get help.

And as I've heard Kevin O'Hagan say, "you don't really want a fair fight do you"? After all, he started it not you.

There are of course other considerations. Firstly, if your assailant is drunk or high on drugs, they may not even feel very much as there senses are dulled, yet their aggression can be heightened.

Secondly, if your assailant is fully hyped up and adrenalized, they will feel less. Have you ever cracked you shin against somebody elses in sparring? You think "ouch", give it a quick rub and carry on. But if you crack your shin on a coffee table when you are completely relaxed, it seems to hurt like mad.

Why did you not feel it very much in sparring? Its because you were fully warmed up and your adrenalin was flowing. However, if you (or you assailant) are squaring up for a real confrontation, you have an awful lot more adrenaline in your body than when you are sparring. You will absorb a lot more punishment without even thinking about it..... and so will he! Kevin O'Hagan reports of a case in America where a guy attacked a cop with a knife. The cop shot the guy 4 times, yet the assailant still managed to get to the cop and stab him before collapsing. How well do you think your pressure point strikes would work against a knife wielding assailant who keeps going with 4 bullets in him.

Boxers have been known to break bones in their hand early in a fight, yet still finish the fight.

I witnessed an incident in a pub many years ago where a confrontation broke out between two lads. One obviously wanted to fight and the other one did not. Very quickly a friend of mine, Daren, intervened to calm it down. Now Daren is a very large, solidly built guy, who whilst having a very friendly disposition is not the type of guy you would want to get on the wrong side of.

As Daren tried to calm the aggressor down, he was met with a complete lack of reason or logic. Daren lost his temper and went for the lad. It took 3 of us to hold Daren back, swearing and snarling in complete animal rage, with his sister trying to talk him out of it. The lad who had started it all turned white. My friend Keith (who you can see on my blog demonstrating bunkai with me) tried applying a pressure point to calm Daren down. Daren in his complete rage did not even seem to notice.

After a while Daren calmed down and the other lad made a hasty (and wise) exit. When Keith met Daren a few days later and asked him what all that had been about, Daren gave a cheeky smile and said, "6 months stress all out in a few minutes".

Human beings are capable of taking an awful lot punishment when in a rage, adrenalised, or just plain determined enough to finish the job; so it does suggest that pressure points can be limited when against somebody in a rage or fully adrenalised.

That said, there are some points that no matter how drunk, high or adrenalized a person is; cannot be resisted. An attack to the airways so that they cannot breath will almost always work, be it a strike or a choke. However, much of a rage someone might be in, if they can't breath, they can't fight.

Attacking the carotid sinus (side of the neck where you feel the pulse), causes the blood pressure to the brain to drop and hence the assailant passes out. This can be done with strikes (especially knife hand) or strangles.

Also an upward blow to the chin or the side of the lower jaw line causes the brain to "bounce" against the back of skull, causing un-conciousness.

These points (and a few others) should normally work under any conditions, though you are more likely to succeed with a pre-emptive strike than in an all out fight.

Whilst I believe that pressure points are valuable and have there place, they should not be treated as a short cut, or as a replacement for perfecting your technique. Whilst most people recognise that technique may only be 50% efficient when under pressure, 50% of a good technique is still much better than 50% of a bad technique. If you are not able to get in a pre-emptive strike, you may find yourself having to simply hit your assailant as hard as you can, wherever you can, until a good target becomes available. By then however, you may be too adrenalised to spot the opening, because a side effect of adrenalin is that blood goes from your brain to your muscles, slowing up your thought process.

Even if you are lucky enough to get in a good pre-emptive strike, that strike will need to fast, hard and often at a particular angle which brings us back to good technique.

Russell Stutely is recognised as Europe's number one leading expert on pressure point fighting. I recall one of his newsletters where people had been writing in asking him why he spends so much time doing pressure points. However, his response was that he only does a small amount of training on pressure points, with most of his personal training being basics and power development etc. When you look at Russell's franchise training program, he deals with balance points, power generation and other aspects before he starts on pressure points. So if Europe's number one expert on kata bunkai pressure points does not take short cuts and neglect his basics, neither should we.

Charlie Wildish is a 3rd Dan black belt at Karate, with a particular interest in kata bunkai. He has sort out good instructors who excel in Karate bunkai. He also cross-references with his best friend who is a Kung Fu practitioner to work out more bunkai as there is a lot of overlap between the 2 systems.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Charlie_D_Wildish

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/4902592

What Are The Differences Between Karate And Tae Kwon Do?

Below is an article that I wrote for EzineArticles.com.  I hope you enjoy it:-

 

Karate and Tae Kwon Do are a bit more intertwined than many people realise. Tae Kwon Do is largely derived from Shotokan Karate. Originally Karate had no high kicks, but when high kicks did eventually became more common in Karate, some Karate people turned to Tae Kwon Do to learn more.

Both styles have influenced the other, yet there are distinct differences and (unfortunately) often quite a bit of rivalry. So this article is designed to have an unbiased look at the main influences on each style and how this has caused them to develop in different ways.

This article is not written to show that either system is better than the other, it is simply an impartial comparison of the different strengths and approaches. I do come from a Karate background, so I am basing my opinions on Tae Kwon Do on my observations and conversations with Tae Kwon Do practitioners. Therefore I do not claim that my observations of Tae Kwon Do are absolutely 100% correct.

It should also be noted that there are many styles of Karate and Tae Kwon Do. For the sake of this article, my comments on Karate will primarily refer to Shotokan Karate. There are also a number of different versions of Tae Kwon Do, varying from being quite close to Karate, through to a much more Olympic sport oriented version. Therefore you have to accept that not all of these observations will apply to every Karate/Tae Kwon Do style and are quite general in nature.

So what has actually created most of the differences? I would say that the main driving factor is that Karate primarily focuses on hand techniques with legs as backup, whereas Tae Kwon Do is primarily a kicking style with hands as backup. This creates other changes as the two styles orientate themselves around these preferences.

Firstly, lets look at the stance. As Karateka focus on hands, the legs (especially the rear leg) are often more "coiled", ready to push into the floor and drive the body forward. Body weight is slightly lower, the knees are relaxed but more bent with a feeling of being "sprung-loaded". This makes sense for a puncher so that he can spring forward to cover distance to reach his target.

It's not so good however, if you are primarily a kicker. Tae Kwon Do fighters often like to kick of the front leg, which in turn requires the legs to be "looser", stance higher and legs straighter.

The reverse punch is probably most Karateka's favourite techniques, which requires a full hip rotation. To achieve this, your feet (when viewed from the front) must be about shoulder width apart with the weight evenly distributed between the feet.

But if you prefer a to use a leading leg kick, you are more inclined to fight with your feet in line to the opponent and most of weight on your back leg, allowing that front leg to come up very easily.

In fairness, these observations are based on sport fighting (especially regarding Tae Kwon Do) and will not necessarily apply to more street appropriate applications.

However, the sport versions do effect the punching techniques too. The Karate punch is powered by the hips with the shoulders relaxed and low. The "spring loaded" legs drive the hips rapidly around and forward.

In Tae Kwon Do, the punch is also powered mainly by the hips, but as the feet are in line (for front leg kicking), it is not so easy to get a full rotation of the hip. Furthermore, with the legs being almost straight the rotation of the hip will not push forward so much. Tae Kwon Do's solution is to commit the shoulders slightly more than a Karateka does. This is also in part due to Tae Kwon Do having some boxing/kickboxing influences which are not so prevalent in the older traditional styles of Karate.

When in a fighting posture, the arms are also held in different positions. Most Karateka hold the arms more forward in front of themselves as these are his main weapons and he wants them up front in order to engage the opponent. The forearm of the leading arm usually points straight at the opponents head. Should the opponent come too close, it just needs a relatively small extension to reach the head. The forearm of the rear arm usually points at the opponents stomach ready for a powerful finishing blow. The two arms being different heights also gives a good all round defensive coverage of the body.

Tae Kwon Do fighters however, expect to engage more with their legs. An attackers kick to their body is often intercepted with the defenders leg coming up as the defender will be looking for a chance to counter kick. Their arms are therefore are usually kept further back and higher to guard to head (as the legs already guard the body).

Claim a free 5 part video course on How To Become Good At Bunkai (realistic applications to traditional martial arts) plus mini ebook bonuses.
Then just browse the BunkaiJutsu website for articles on holistic martial arts including realistic self defence, combat psychology, health, philosophy, natural technique and much more.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Charlie_D_Wildish

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/6584455

3 Teaching Strategies: Do You Dictate, W&S, or Nudge?

The following is taken from my friend Matthew Apsokardu's (4th Dan Okinawa Kenpo Karate and Kobudo) website: http://www.ikigaiway.com/2011/3-strategies-when-teaching-a-martial-art-do-you-dictate-ws-or-nudge/.  Enjoy :-

 

Imagine the most boring class you had in high school or college. The teacher's droning probably made you itchy to escape the intellectual prison they called a classroom.

Now imagine the best class you had in high school or college. The impact of that instructor has probably lasted well beyond your school days.

Teaching a martial art is a rare gift and responsibility, one that has an amazing amount of freedom. In the public education system there are layers of governing boards and protocols to funnel what can be taught and how it can be transmitted. In the martial arts world, the possibilities are much more varied.

Sure, most martial art organizations have criteria for what it takes to advance in ranking...but are there guidelines for how that knowledge should be transmitted? Unlikely.

It's possible of course to try and perfectly mimic your instructor's style, but that's rarely attainable (or even desirable). Personal experience, talent level, intellectual capacity, and philosophical beliefs will flavor everything you do in a unique way.

Therefore it's wise to examine your own teaching methods and decide for yourself how you might best help your students. Consider the following three strategies for imparting a martial art:

DICTATE

Being a full-on dictator is bad...but sometimes dictating is good! Dictating refers to the act of instructing students in a very specific and structured manner. The teacher tells the student where to step, where to block, how to balance, what degree angle to turn, etc etc. Dictating is a powerful tool, especially in the early phases of a young martial artist's career as he/she tries desperately to adjust to the rigors of training.

The weakness of dictation is a lack of creativity. Students are so busy trying to fit into the structure of class while avoiding technical mistakes that they rarely engage in critical thinking. Toying with technique, trial and error, and big-picture contemplation is not on the to-do checklist.

Of course, giving specific advice has been around since one caveman taught another how to sharpen a stick; there's no question regarding the value of detail transmission. However, modern teaching has taken dictation to a high extreme, resulting in formalized classes filled with one-way information and strict regimentation. A lot of that can be attributed to military influence.

When military men first arrived in eastern countries and learned martial arts, they often integrated the material they learned with the military methods they had been molded in. They did so for purely practical reasons. The stakes were/are very high in military and law enforcement work. Following orders with precision saves lives while creating higher probability of success for an entire unit.

The west wasn't alone in their military intentions; eastern countries like Japan and even Okinawa began teaching martial arts in larger group settings for the purpose of crafting young men into resilient, obedient soldiers. Strong dictation was a natural evolution of teaching style.

WAIT AND SEE

Perhaps the diametric opposite of dictating is the 'wait and see' approach. W&S involves demonstrating technique, kata, etc while offering no breakdown or explanation. The instructor performs and the students must watch and gather what they can. Discussion is not a big part of W&S.

W&S has been the method of choice for centuries in many of the eastern koryu arts. Due to the influence of Confucianism, eastern philosophy enforces the idea of quiet obedience and attendance when being instructed. W&S does not require the instructor to hold a student's hand through every detail.

The strength of W&S lies in it's focus and range of possibilities. When learning in W&S style there is no spoon feeding of information, and going on mental 'cruise control' is a very quick way to fall behind and eventually wash out. Furthermore, interpretation of what a student sees an instructor do can be highly varied. Since there is no specific guidance, the student is left to his/her own experience and critical thinking in order to determine how to achieve the same skill level as the instructor. W&S also has the benefit of being able to transcend language barrier.

The weakness of W&S lies in it's roadblocks and time frame. If a student gets stuck and lacks understanding, they can find themselves in 'learning quicksand'. Even if they do eventually struggle their way through a problem, it may have taken years longer than was needed. A few pieces of wisdom from an experienced instructor could have reframed perspective and fixed a wayward path, but with W&S there can be a lack of active course correction.

Another weakness of W&S is organizational. When an instructor allows students to interpret the art for themselves, each student will naturally come to different conclusions. When the senior instructor is not present, or has passed away, the result is chaotic and often results in massive splintering among students.

NUDGE

Nudging is perhaps a middle ground of the previous two methods and involves monitoring a student's progress noninvasively, interjecting from time to time in order to enhance growth and understanding.

A nudge is not as concrete as dictation; if the instructor fixes the angle of a student's stance, that is a dictated correction. If on the other hand he/she asks the student why the angle of a stance might be better increased or decreased, that is a nudge toward understanding.

Nudging is a powerful tool, especially when instructing higher level students. Advanced martial artists can become stagnant and bored if they only receive dictated training year after year. That is why challenging them to draw their own conclusions and guiding them to their own level of higher understanding is so essential.

The problem with nudging is twofold: difficulty and structure. Students can become impatient and annoyed with a teacher who nudges all the time because they feel a simple straight answer would be a quicker solution to their needs. Furthermore, teaching in a nudge style can be extremely tricky. It's very easy to fall into a 'false philosopher' mode where the instructor simply projects student's questions back onto them without providing any real insight. For example:

"Sensei, what does this technique mean? I can't put it to any good use."

"My student, what do you think it means? Once you know that, you'll have your answer."

This exchange sounds wise and zen-like, but it doesn't provide any nudging.

The other difficulty is in structure. Instructors must navigate the complicated tapestry of tradition and ego. In some ways, it is an instructor's duty to pass along a style exactly as it was handed to him/her (best done through dictation). Meanwhile, the more students look exactly like the instructor, the better pleased the instructor will be due to subtle ego (since I know what I am doing, the students should look like me!). Thus, nudging requires a careful relaxing of those rules in order to let students find their own path to higher effectiveness.

How does an instructor maintain the integrity of a tradition while helping students explore their own path? That's the difficulty in nudging.

A Proper Mixture

I don't believe any one of the methods above is superior to the others. In fact, I think most good instructors find a mixture of all three with plenty of other tactics mixed in. A skilled instructor will observe what each individual needs on a case-by-case, day-by-day basis. In fact, teaching strategy can change in mid-class (or even mid-sentence).

The key, I think, is to recognize the tools available as a teacher and use them to their highest effect. Knowing when to take the reigns and when to loosen them is critical in helping students achieve that rare but essential goal of self actualization. Only then can a martial art start to grow into ikigai.

By Matthew Apsokardu  www.ikigaiway.com

What Are The Differences Between Kung Fu and Karate?

Although Karate is largely based on Kung Fu, there are distinct differences between the two.  Find out more at:  http://bunkaijutsu.com/2011/09/differences-kung-fu-karate/ 

Excerpt From My DVD: Inside Bassai Dai

Here's a new video that I've recently put on my BunkaiJutsu Youtube channel and on my website.  I hope you enjoy it.

 

Paul Mitchell's Karate Bunkai Jutsu Course

Times running out to book your place on Paul Mitchell's Bunkai Jutsu Karate course this coming weekend.

 

The following description is taken from the Wells Traditional Shotokan Karate Club website:-

 

Practical Karate for Beginner to Black Belt
2nd October 2011 11:00 – 2:30

This course takes the principles & techniques of  Karate and applies them to realistic self defence.

Locks, takedowns and throws are included in this traditional Martial Art alongside the more obvious strikes and kicks.  Sensei Mitchell will be teaching practical uses of the everyday moves within Karate from basic techniques through to the more complex kata moves.

Open to all Karateka from  Beginner to Black belt, all welcome.

Taught by Sensei Paul Mitchell 4th Dan,   Wells Traditional Shotokan Karate Group  Instructor.

Under 4th Kyu minimum age 12

Please bring a packed lunch

Adults £15.00, Juniors £12.00

 To book your place please e mail: shotokankaratewells@hotmail.co.uk or telephone 01749 670105

 

True Purpose Of Makawawa Training

The makawara has been a training tool in Okinawa for centuries, but is it's primary purpose misunderstood here in the West?

 

Actually, yes it usually is.  Find out more on the Bunkai Jutsu website.

Injuries: What A Pain: By Russell Stutely

Having been an admirer of Russell Stutely for a long time, I was interested in a recent posting about injuries and living with them as you get older in his newsletter.  I have therefore reproduced it onto my website.  It is well worth a read as Russell is very experienced and knowledgeable martial artist who has been at the top of the game for a very long time.