Wado Myths

[karateman7]

As in all cultures and subcultures, there are myths. I remember from the previous forums there was discussion on the teachings that were misinterpreted and passed down on the line (language?).

I thought it'd be interesting to list and talk about these. It's such a shame for people who are totally invested in learning an art and are stuck with a teach who, for any reason, adopted these "myths."

Two that come to mind are 1) in kata, you must start and end at the same place 2) one strike one kill (I think I heard this was mistranslated?)

I may be wrong (and I probably am) but it seems a lot of holes in understanding were filled with generic karate principles.

One that I'm unsure about is the keeping the body squared, which is seen a lot in shotokan. Whenever I saw Otskua II or Otsuka III, their bodies are 45 degrees.

[WadoAJ]

2) one strike one kill (I think I heard this was mistranslated?)

2: do you intend to strike insufficiently? of course there is atemi and kari ate.. As long as this concept is explained carefully and the teachings are well then there is no problem in my opinion. Ichi go Ichi e

One that I'm unsure about is the keeping the body squared, which is seen a lot in shotokan. Whenever I saw Otskua II or Otsuka III, their bodies are 45 degrees.

could you eleborate?

AJ

[jacob]

one punch one kill"

have a read of this....

http://www.markstraining.com/2008/12/on ... tical.html


Although I guess it depends on who is throwing the punch

[Tim49]

This is an interesting theme.

I think that we have to realise that we may all have fallen victim to martial arts myths, some of us may have even invented a few ourselves, but as in all learning scenarios your ideas and opinions should be open to change.

Instructors in particular are prone to what I call ‘captive audience syndrome’. This is a common condition found chiefly in education establishments, but in the Dojo it can be particularly problematic.

This happens when the person in charge gets a bit too carried away and climbs up on their soap box, I’ve probably done this myself.; but, in setting themselves up as the figure of authority they feel inclined to buy in to the idea that whatever the students throw at them they have all the answers. Luckily for me I am in a position of sometimes having to say that I don’t have the answer to a particular question, but I know a man who might do. Not everyone is in that position, so this is where they feel inclined to either create a smokescreen or just make it up.

Tim

[karateman7]

2) one strike one kill (I think I heard this was mistranslated?)

2: do you intend to strike insufficiently? of course there is atemi and kari ate.. As long as this concept is explained carefully and the teachings are well then there is no problem in my opinion. Ichi go Ichi e

Not so much insufficiently but more misguided. I think if one trains in their mind with the one strike one kill philosophy they may focus on that too much and not remember the process leading to the ability to perform that one strike. I understand the concept of training to take an opponent out with one strike (having the capability) but, from what I've experience, there is a process (kuzushi and other setups) before having the opportunity. Heck, if you can punch through an arm and take the person out, why not? haha

One that I'm unsure about is the keeping the body squared, which is seen a lot in shotokan. Whenever I saw Otskua II or Otsuka III, their bodies are 45 degrees.

could you eleborate?

AJ

Sure. I've been taught to keep the body squared, meaning both shoulders are facing the front (I thought this was a bad thing!). In order to transfer weight, shouldn't the shoulders be at an angle?

When we perform a junzuki, our bodies are at an angle, but when we are in junzuki dachi (no technique) we are taught to keep our bodies squared.

I've seen this taught in shotokan, so I wasn't sure if this leaked in to our dojo at some point.

[karateman7]

This is an interesting theme.

I think that we have to realise that we may all have fallen victim to martial arts myths, some of us may have even invented a few ourselves, but as in all learning scenarios your ideas and opinions should be open to change.

Instructors in particular are prone to what I call ‘captive audience syndrome’. This is a common condition found chiefly in education establishments, but in the Dojo it can be particularly problematic.

This happens when the person in charge gets a bit too carried away and climbs up on their soap box, I’ve probably done this myself.; but, in setting themselves up as the figure of authority they feel inclined to buy in to the idea that whatever the students throw at them they have all the answers. Luckily for me I am in a position of sometimes having to say that I don’t have the answer to a particular question, but I know a man who might do. Not everyone is in that position, so this is where they feel inclined to either create a smokescreen or just make it up.

Tim

This is really interesting, Tim. I've always wondered how much of these social phenomenas (captive audience syndrome) persists in the dojo. I guess this is why the Japanese are so structured with their training and teaching.

It seems like the best way to keep conformity. Coming from America, I know it's difficult to be that person who doesn't know everything. Everybody seems to want to be "that guy," the one who is looked upon highly.

[WadoAJ]

2) one strike one kill (I think I heard this was mistranslated?)

2: do you intend to strike insufficiently? of course there is atemi and kari ate.. As long as this concept is explained carefully and the teachings are well then there is no problem in my opinion. Ichi go Ichi e

Not so much insufficiently but more misguided. I think if one trains in their mind with the one strike one kill philosophy they may focus on that too much and not remember the process leading to the ability to perform that one strike. I understand the concept of training to take an opponent out with one strike (having the capability) but, from what I've experience, there is a process (kuzushi and other setups) before having the opportunity. Heck, if you can punch through an arm and take the person out, why not? haha

One that I'm unsure about is the keeping the body squared, which is seen a lot in shotokan. Whenever I saw Otskua II or Otsuka III, their bodies are 45 degrees.

could you eleborate?

AJ

Sure. I've been taught to keep the body squared, meaning both shoulders are facing the front (I thought this was a bad thing!). In order to transfer weight, shouldn't the shoulders be at an angle?

When we perform a junzuki, our bodies are at an angle, but when we are in junzuki dachi (no technique) we are taught to keep our bodies squared.

I've seen this taught in shotokan, so I wasn't sure if this leaked in to our dojo at some point.

Hi Karateman7,

RE ichigeki hissatsu.
I guess whe are sort of on the same page here. Your reference to kuzushi and setting up actual target are elements of my mentioning of "atemi, kari ate" and "and the teachings are well".

RE square
Going down another road when mentioning junzuki, I would say to my students to extend and use a 'snap' of the shoulderblade of the striking hand and do a sufficient hikite with the other, while not pulling that shoulder backwards. Verbalized differently, do not pull the upper body side of the hikite backwards, but not force it to stay squared either. Like my sensei always emphasized, "just natural".

function of Wado junzuki dachi VS Shotokan zenkutsu dachi is a different story all together.

AJ

[Tim49]

In Japanese training there seemed to be less reliance on verbal instruction. In the West there has been a need to have everything explained to us; this is logical as Japanese martial arts are outside of our culture, things that the Japanese take as given we find puzzling, hence the need to explain, but the linguistic barrier is a tough hurdle to get over and some Japanese concepts do not translate easily and Westerners misunderstand or over simplify (or over complicate).

Here lies the origin of numerous martial arts myths.

Add to that the unscrupulous activities of those who wish to deliberately mystify and promulgate pseudo-mystic mumbo jumbo and you get a veritable barrage of obfuscation and mythology.

Tim

[wadoka]

With regards to kata must start and finish on the same spot:

1) some may intrinsically do so, but without taking out my trigonometry set and drawing the live embusen for every kata I can't say if any absolutely fit the bill.

2) you only have to read Harry Cook's comments about the development by the JKA of the Shotokan kata called Chinte. It is said, that in order to fulfill the aim of starting and finishing on the same spot, ultimately for competition reasons, three hops were added on the end.

[claas]

Hi wadoka,

I remember kusotare saying at the previous forum, about what is called the positional coincidence in traditional karate, that we don't care where we end in Wado.



Hi karateman7,

Sure. I've been taught to keep the body squared, meaning both shoulders are facing the front (I thought this was a bad thing!). In order to transfer weight, shouldn't the shoulders be at an angle?

I think there is some truth in what you say, but also some times you can get more weight in a destructive way also by having the shoulders square.

If you dive against the wall with your fist leading the way like Superman flies, then your whole bodyweight will hit the wall with your fist if you are correctly alligned. If you extend your fist like in a basic punching stance and walk against the wall then your other shoulder would want to keep going if you have both shoulders square. If you have an angle, it will prevent this from happening and you could say that a bigger part of your weight is transfered. Then the best angle in this way is when your fist and both shoulders are on the same line. You collide completely sideways.

However then you lose the power from twisting the body. The power from twisting the body is the biggest at the moment when your shoulders are square. This is because at that point the shoulder rotating around your center line is moving forward.

I think both have value and the best result comes many times from something in between. More square is good for hitting hard and more of an angle is good so your body becomes better alligned to for example a push.