Let's discuss cooperative drills - II

[Van Canna]

And since you brought up Breyette sensei, Bill, I am happy to oblige

Dear Canna sensei…

In any prearranged set, there will be a tendency to place blocks and strikes
where they're "supposed to go" because each side "knows what comes next".

Perhaps a few folks don't get much beyond that stage of technical
proficiency.

I'm sure we all know (in various styles or systems)
practitioners -- some of them highly-ranked -- who fall apart in a real
situation because what's "supposed to come next"... doesn't...

The final goal to a prearranged set is a free-flowing
unchoreographed-looking fight sequence that acts with, not reacts to, the
"attacker".

Kicks and punches will, as an end result, come out with natural
unrestrained speed and fluidity, and the blocks and counters will flow
simultaneously, not placing before or reacting to the "attacks".

The theory
looks easy on paper, but in reality is quite difficult. The older-style
Renzoku Kumite is much beyond an elementary level. As soon as we think we've
"got it", we enter the next level of advancement!

Question: Gordi-san is renzoku done with tai-sabaki movements?

Answer

We don't use the term tai-sabaki, which means "body pivoting or turning".

We use "tai-kawashi" which means "move the body around" as in a circular
fashion around and away from the attacker.

The definitions seem to be the
same but they aren't. Tai-sabaki is used with intent to engage and is
devastating in sport fighting.

Tai-kawashi is used with intent to disengage
from an attack, countering only as a final option, and is unsuitable for
sport fighting.

I hope this helps.

[Bill Glasheen]

Before going further, I would like a clarification.

You weren’t there.

You keep repeating this line. What point are you trying to make?

Just experiencing a little déjà vu, my friend, from a different time and a different individual.

- Bill

[Van Canna]

You keep repeating this line. What point are you trying to make?

Well, it doesn’t take a UVA education to figure out it means in the context of the conversation you brought up about Breyette sensei’s words you posted. You weren’t there my friend. End of story

.

Just experiencing a little déjà vu, my friend, from a different time and a different individual.

Well, to use a ‘Billism’ _ it is what is, my friend, and maybe your déjà vu has nothing to do with the ‘conversation’ which is what is.


Now we have some very definite Uechi training concepts outlined on the page that go back to the ‘founding father’ of the system, and I know readers have a solid interest in it rather than listen to the frogs’ mating calls in the field.

Perhaps you can get back to what Breyette sensei wrote to me, if you can find the time…I know it is a lot of typing and you did indicate it might be interfering with your job, and for that I am sorry.

[Bill Glasheen]

Van

This discussion has taken an unpleasant turn.

I do not wish to draw other personalities into a discussion when the tenor isn't professional. Mr. Breyette has been more than kind to me and to my students. I do not wish to get into a "gotcha" dialogue that may sour a good and developing relationship. Such an important discussion should be about issues, and not about personalities.

I will bow out for now. We can resume this at another time.

- Bill

[Van Canna]

Yup, and so it has, my friend…look in your own mirror of unprofessionalism.

Such an important discussion should be about issues, and not about personalities.

And so it has been [issues] all along for me in a nice friendly way…but all we heard from you is ‘what you do’ better than anyone else as it mattered the most in a general discussion of concepts and principles, and along the way you have managed to get personal and insulting, something I have decided to overlook.

As to Breyette Sensei, and Master Toyama …I have a very close personal relationship that dates back ten years. I remind you that I was invited by Master Toyama and Breyette sensei to train with them in Okinawa.

I don’t have to remind you how you have comported with Mr. Breyette in the past.

In this discussion, I have outlined information from him that you never had with excellent concepts for discussion that need not antagonize him if you are careful.

But reading what you wrote, I now realize that you could not make this possible.

Thus since you have been avoiding the salient aspects of this earnest conversation it is, in fact, best to cut off the discussion all together, so we can all still remain friends.

And as for resuming it at another time, thanks but no thanks…

[Bill Glasheen]