"Worthless" kumite?

[Bill Glasheen]

I am extracting several valuable (but off topic) posts from a seisan kata and bunkai thread and putting them here. Hopefully this thread will have legs of its own.

[Bill Glasheen]

Laird wrote:

What if the candidate adds a step to a kata? I add little sliding steps sometimes a few to add a little extra spice to the strike in some kata.

Are we looking for robot ryu or understanding of the material? Do we want the candidates performance to display his interpretation of the material or do we want to him to parrot those who already have tested and now sit on the board?

I see Seisan as a kata that spends a great deal of time meeting or pre empting the attack. The kata has a lot of closing (shutting down power before it develops) and striking with full body weight behind the strike. E.g., the hammer fist.


So why do we then have the candidate perform Dan kumite in this test? This kumite has no link to the kata performed in the test. In fact the principles in the kumite are in direct opposition to the material in kata. Dan kumite discourages closing, sticking and shutting down power before it develops. And what kata did the roundhouse and back kick come from?

If your partner is not a willing participant this drill just doesn't work. Try drilling it with some one who continually closes and see how pretty it looks. How about if the participants just grab the first punch and don't let go. What is this display of Japanese sport karate choreography doing in a Uechi black belt test? I'm embarrassed doing this stuff. Actually I can't train it cause in my opinion it's not what Uechi is about if I wanted to learn to dance I would have went to dance class. I was thinking that I might test , my wearing a white belt confuses some people. But after looking at kumite again I think I'll just say the hell with it. I feel like a kid playing ninja turtles doing this crap.

I'm sure my anti dan kumite rant has pissed off a few folk. So be it, I'm just calling them like I see them. I do not believe this exercise has value. I do not beleve it belongs in a dan test. I do not understand why so much effort is wasted on a co-operative dance. The fact that these exercises remain requirements in a dan test have me pondering if I should continue to train in Uechi or if I should pursue a new path. I feel these drills degrade Uechi.

I think we have more than a missing or extra step to consider when thinking about testing. I think a test should demonstrate the ability to apply the principles. Why introduce a dance that does not use the principles, I'm confused by this and can not train or teach this pre arranged delusional dance.

[Bill Glasheen]

Van replied:

Laird

The kata has a lot of closing (shutting down power before it develops) and striking with full body weight behind the strike. E.g., the hammer fist.


So why do we then have the candidate perform Dan kumite in this test? This kumite has no link to the kata performed in the test. In fact the principles in the kumite are in direct opposition to the material in kata. Dan kumite discourages closing, sticking and shutting down power before it develops. And what kata did the roundhouse and back kick come from? But after looking at kumite again I think I'll just say the hell with it. I feel like a kid playing ninja turtles doing this crap. I do not believe this exercise has value. I do not believe it belongs in a Dan test. I do not understand why so much effort is wasted on a co-operative dance. The fact that these exercises remain requirements in a Dan test have me pondering if I should continue to train in Uechi or if I should pursue a new path. I feel these drills degrade Uechi.

I think we have more than a missing or extra step to consider when thinking about testing. I think a test should demonstrate the ability to apply the principles. Why introduce a dance that does not use the principles, I'm confused by this and can not train or teach this pre arranged delusional dance.

Ha…Laird, you make me smile. You may find this of interest: some hard hitting kumite discussions translated from the Italian site:

Shoshin Nagamine (who happens to be a master of a variant of
Shorin-ryu ) says in _”The_Essence_of_Okinawan_Karate_Do”_about the practice of kumite:

the more
you move away from the opponent's attacks, the more you will
be busy defending yourself from him.
Kumite in which with one hand, one-man
blocks the opponents attack and attacks him with the other.

Here ends kumite in spite of the fact that further movement
of the opponent is possible.

Carefully analyzing this type
of kumite, we can easily recognize that it
it is only, after all
an "artificial or “dead” kumite"

We should also, as part of our mental
attitude in practicing kumite, bear strongly in mind that
our opponent may vary his attack, and endeavor to be always
prepared to defend against such variations.

Motobu, my sensei, used to preach against "dead kumite.”

Craig [our forum]wrote

There is some relatively recent material on Motobu Choki and Motobu Chosei that is quite interesting. It appears that many of the past generations of Masters collaborated, intentionally or otherwise, on technique. Material from Motobu Sensei is certainly not alien to a practitioner of Uechi Ryu. He certainly seems to advocate a much more practical block and counter timing as is described here.

Steven

I'd like to more clearly
state why the way we were originally taught karate here in the West
really burns me up: To wit- how many people taught tournament style
kumite as self=defense have been killed in assaults and died thinking they
knew effective self-defense?

And how many Kyu and Dan ranked people alike
have endured needless poundings and sustained injuries in dojo and
tournament kumite, which would have been totally unnecessary if they had
been taught a few simple principles, such as:

Tai Sabaki Body Turning instead of standing there and going for a “block”

So how many unsuspecting people train with heart and soul and body in
these stupid nailed-to-the-floor Kumite and "self-defense" methods,
certain that their High Ranking Instructor would not lead them astray?

And die or get unnecessarily injured as a result?

Pretty sobering, I think, and giving insight as to why possibly Kanbun never taught “dead kumite”

In the original Wakayama Dojo, UECHI Kanbun Sensei had little room for more
than two practitioners at a time. There was just enough room for two
students to perform Seisan Bunkai, and Kanbun Sensei probably stayed off the
floor, directing from his one-tsubo living space. But there was not enough
room for Dantai no kata!

He conducted this outside, on the hard-packed
ground in front of the dojo. Of course, this was not for demonstration
purposes or public display, but to develop sensitivity of motion and
simultaneous action -- not reaction -- in the technique.

For that purpose,all timing had to match. The students learned to control their impulse to
make a technique faster or slower simply because "that feels better".
Timing had to match everyone within the field of vision -- those who had no
one in front to match, matched with those on their sides. All obeyed goorei[commands]
as given by Kanbun Sensei.

Such practice does take a long and dedicated time in study. Eventually,
after months or years of strict training in dantai no kata, movements and
timing match as perfectly as possible, with fewer commands given. The end
result is seen when the students match motion in bunkai and jiyu kobo!

One student attacks and the other moves spontaneously WITH -- not reacting, but
ACTING -- and not only do the movements harmonize beautifully but the
classically-performed blocks and counter-strikes are as powerful as in kata,
even more so because of the dynamics of interaction with a "live" partner.

Questions:
1.Do we believe or not believe that Kanbun was exposed to some variations of prearranged kumite in china?

2.If he was, then why did he not believe in teaching it?

3.If he was not, why did he not develop one when teaching later?

Kumites do help, primarily for sparring applications, but do have some serious defects if relied on to develop true street defense abilities. This, Laird, is lost on many excellent practitioners today.

[Van Canna]

Bill, how many times have we beaten this dead horse to death? Smile.

[Gene DeMambro]

Van-Sensei,

To add some historical and firm perspective on this topic, would it tbe possible for you to contact Mr. Breyette and elucidate from him Toyama Sensei's motivation and reasonings for the original Dan Kumite?

It'll help immensely, as we discuss this back and forth.

Gene

[Dana Sheets]

My understanding was that Master Kanei Uechi developed Dan Kumite to improve the point sparring skills of students. Competition sparring was on the rise and he wanted Uechi-ka to be competitive.

But that's just my brain remembering a story. Perhaps it is make-believe.

Dana

[Van Canna]

That's how it was Dana. Kanei Uechi never went on record to say that kumites were for self defense. This aberration came about by American interpretation of what self defense is, meaning they had no clue.

[Gene DeMambro]

So was the original, primordial Dan Kumite (called Renzoku Kumite and created by Mr, Toyama) a self-defense teaching tool or a sport exercise? This answer could lead to the heart of how Dan Kumite ought to be approached.

Gene

[Van Canna]

Gene,

We are not discussing what and why more "modern" masters had in mind when they created kumite. Every one argues their own beliefs.

The question on the thread is why did Kanbun not have anything to do with it?

Renzoku kumite uses the jiuy Kobo concept that people do not understand. Feel free to write to Breyette san directly.

[Gene DeMambro]

The question on the thread is why did Kanbun not have anything to do with it?

Perhaps, owing to his training, he subscribed to the "less is more" philosophy?

Much has been written regarding his training space (or rather, lack thereof) in the dojos he taught, so perhaps there was minimal space for such activities?

Maybe he himself didn't have the shoulders of the giants that his karate progeny had to stand on and his foundations weren't the foundations that we have today?

Maybe he used different exercises to get the same points across?

Perhaps there was no need, as sport karate wasn't in existance during his teaching years?

Maybe he would have approved of the exercise, as at it's genesis are fighting techniques taught by Kanbum himself?

Several possible reasons. But without more information, it's a stretch to say that he didn't do any pre-arranged work because he felt it useless. We just don't know.

Gene

[Guest]

Ha…Laird, you make me smile....

Hey Van! glad to make ya smile. I liked what Shoshin Nagamine had to say on this subject , I ordered a copy of the book from amazon, looked like some thing I'd enjoy.

So how many unsuspecting people train with heart and soul and body in
these stupid nailed-to-the-floor Kumite and "self-defense" methods,
certain that their High Ranking Instructor would not lead them astray?

And die or get unnecessarily injured as a result?

I'm sure their high ranking instructor just tells them they were not properly rooted to the floor and that's why they got hurt. Nothing a few weeks of hard sanchin testing won't cure.

Kumites do help, primarily for sparring applications, but do have some serious defects if relied on to develop true street defense abilities. This, Laird, is lost on many excellent practitioners today.[/quote]I see these drills as just that drills that were developed to teach point fighters. These drills were developed early in our exploration of karate as a sport. I'm sure that more effective methods for this venue have been developed in the last fourty years. I'll bet top tournament fighters don't spend most of their time training pre arranged drills.

It's my understanding that the parent organization has moved away from karate as a sport, I'm confused as to why we would keep the sports training drill as part of a test when we have moved away from the sports model.

I think free fighting and bunkai would be a more effective method of displaying knowledge and skill. I'd rather see a few extra fresh opponents in the fighting portion of the test.

Laird

[Van Canna]

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...

One of the reasons why Kanbun never indulged in the practice of prearranged kumite. He trained the jiuy Kobo concept which proved quite successful in his fights against the Wabodan, he was smart enough to subscribe to the theory of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Apparently, master Motobu, a living legend subscribed to the same theory.

but by all means, feel free to kumite yourselves to death.

[Gene DeMambro]

Is practicing pre-arranged kumite and learning jiyu kobo mutually exclusive?

Gene

[Rick Wilson]

I am with laird on this one, as anyone who has listened to me rant before knows. I do not see Dan Kumite as Uechi.

None of the prearranged Kumite are.

Is there anyone out there who has not described Uechi as an in close fighting style?

If so then how come the Uechi Kumtes are not in close fighting?

[Van Canna]

Much has been written regarding his training space (or rather, lack thereof) in the dojos he taught, so perhaps there was minimal space for such activities?

Not at all. As you read, Kanbun would use the space outside the dojo for Dantai no kata and other group activities.

The small space of the dojo was reserved for crowded "closet space" infighting, the trademark of Uechi-as Rick points out.

Spontaneous defensive counterattacks against unplanned close quarters attacks is the soul of Uechi, and master technicians, as we have read here, understand the concept well and endorse/teach it. The ones that don’t , Oh well..good luck in your dreams.