Uechi-Ryu.com

I went to a judo seminar last weekend with several members of my dojo and was witness to some extraordinary ability and budo. The Brazilian judoka (I can't remember his name) is a student of Meiji sensei of Brazil. He spoke very English very well and treated everyone in the dojo with a great deal of respect.

Anyway, after watching and participating in the drills and exercises, I got to watching how extremely easy this man manipulates his opponants and it got me wondering. Many of us consider Judo a sport. We are not wrong as it's major goal is to compete and win tournaments. Even rank is attained this way; however, it is not what Kano sensei intended it to be I'm sure.

With that in mind, I got to thinking how effective judo is to the "real" world. We all know the importance of grappling and ground fighting, but judoka really have an amazing edge I think on many of us Karate-ka who think we can stay away from anyone. Something to consider as we are sparring in our dojo.

mike

Judo is not just a sport, but also an effect means of self-defense.

Professor Jigoro Kano took the traditional ju-jitsu that he had learned and removed many of the joint-locks, bone-breaking techniques, and atemi-waza in order to create a sport where the moves could be done with full force in order to create a decisive victory without injury.

Sounds like a sport rather than a self-defense method... However, those removed techniques are gradually reintroduced in the mid-to-upper Dan ranks! (But are still not allowed in tournament)

When in Japan, I was invited into an informal workout with various budo-ka... At one point some of us started practicing joint-locks, grappling and atemi-waza. A japanese gentleman looked at me after a certain technique and told me that what I had just done was a Godan Judo technique... It was a requirement for Shodan/Nidan in my jujitsu training. When I told him the style of ju-jitsu I had studied, another gentleman came over and joined us... He informed me he was a practitioner of the same style and that the technique was really a Sandan technique in japan... So, we all started talking and comparing... Veeeeerrrrrry interesting.

One thing I can say for certain is that the judo-ka could manipulate you and throw you like nothing! (Yeeeeee-Ouch! Glad to have tatami and good break-fall technique! )

BTW, at 6'2", I was at least 6" taller than either one... Just practicing throws, I was flying, but when we went to allowing joint-locks and (very light) atemi-waza, I more than held my own. (whew! )

Rich and Panther:

It is good to see Rich (my bestest sempai) on the forum :-) Keep writing Rich, you have a lot to offer these forums.

Panther, what you say has some very valid points. It is obvious you have studied judo and take it very seriously. I have not. The judo I have seen is from some very credible masters; however, I would be foolish to think I understand all that they do. There is one point that I would contend with you. In all my reading, not once do I see written that Kano sensei wished to create a sport. Perhaps you could lead me to a publication where I could see that? It would be appreciated.

Rich, as you say, Judo offers a perspective that the empty hand arts do not. The randori is essential to learning where the openings are and how to exploit them in a much different way than karate. I wish I were younger with less injuries as I would have loved to study judo (back in my competitve days).

mike

I also attended the Judo seminar. It is always an honor to learn from people who have had many years of high-level experience. I believe his name was Sensei Ferrara (sp?).

As Sensei Mike has mentioned, judo is a sport. However, it is a sport with martial applications. A judoka trains to throw an opponent to win a match, yet those same skills can be applied in an actaul combat situation.

In addition, the ground-fighting techniques are invaluable. Having been choked, smothered, pinned, and locked on numerous occassions, I can attest to the credibility of those techniques. But it is more than the technique that is relevant; it is the ability to see the opening when it occurs. My experience is that it is necessary to have some "live-practice." You won't see the openings unless you practice seeing them.

Clearly, this can turn into a kata versus fighting issue. I don't see it that way. Kata can teach the exactness of the technique, but fighting (if you will) can teach the application and the ability to see the openings when they arise, especially in a grappling situation.

Rich



[This message has been edited by rich_simons (edited July 20, 2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mikemurphy:

Panther, what you say has some very valid points. It is obvious you have studied judo and take it very seriously. I have not. The judo I have seen is from some very credible masters; however, I would be foolish to think I understand all that they do. There is one point that I would contend with you. In all my reading, not once do I see written that Kano sensei wished to create a sport. Perhaps you could lead me to a publication where I could see that? It would be appreciated.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Murphy-sempai,

I never studied Judo as a martial art. Only as far as being from the same roots as the Ju-jitsu styles that I practice (studied). (Hakko-ryu mainly, but also Daito-ryu, Shin-Kage-ryu, and some limited Yoshi-tsune) I don't remember "off the top of my head" exactly where I read that little tidbit, but I can say that I remember that Jigoro Kano was in education (truly a university "professor") and was, in fact, the President of Tokyo University at one time. In his youth, Kano had studied (and mastered) a number of different styles of Ju-jitsu and then developed his own style using many modern sports principles. One of the results (that I've confirmed in workouts with Judo-kas) is that Kano eliminated some of the traditional jujutsu techniques and changed training methods so that most of the moves could be done with full force to create a decisive victory without injury. As an educator, Kano emphasised the larger educational value of the training so that it could be a way of life (Ju-"do"). Kano (IIRC) was a pacifist and when he formed his new system he withheld the most dangerous throws, joint-locks and strikes from all but his most advanced students. These later became taught only at the higher Dan levels. Some of his students debated this withholding of techniques and that was when Kano introduced the the principle of Jita Kyoei (the principle of mutual benefit and prosperity) into Judo. While it might not be completely accurate to say that he founded Judo as a sport, his teaching methods, curriculum layout, and "vision" (if you will) of having the "Do" moral philosophy replace the ancestral agressive "jitsu" style philosophy, had that effect. Sometime shortly after the turn of the century (IIRC), a number of the top Ju-jitsu practitioners (15-20? I don't remember, but it was over a dozen, I'm pretty sure) joined Kano's new system. That was basically the supplanting of ju-do for ju-jitsu as Jigoro Kano had wanted... Like I said, even though I can't remember the exact books (some of this came from sensei and judo-ka that I've worked out with), I do know that there are plenty of books with detailed Kodokan history. Somewhere, in my 20+ boxes of books, I have one that discusses Judo... Sorry I couldn't be more helpful...



[This message has been edited by Panther (edited July 21, 2000).]

Kano Sensei's reasons for creating Judo are stated in his book KODOKAN JUDO page 16:

"In my youth I studied jujitsu under many eminent masters. Their vast knowledge, the fruit of years of diligent research and rich experience, was of great value to me. At that time, each man presented his art as a collection of techniques. None perceived the guiding principal behind jujitsu. When I encountered differences in the teachings of techniques, I often found myself at a loss to know which was correct. This lead me to look for an underlying principle in jujitsu, one that applied when on hit an opponent as well as when one threw him. After a thorough study of the subject, I discerned an all-pervasive principle: to make the most efficient use of mental and physical energy. With this principle in mind, I again reviewed all the methods of attack and defense I had learned, retaining only those that were in accordance with the principle. Those not in accord with it I rejected, and in their place I substituted techniques in which the principle was correctly applied. The resulting body of technique, which I named judo to distinguish it from its predecessor, is what is taught at the Kodokan."

To review the question of creating a sport I would refer to Page 21:

"Kata, which means 'form,' is a system of prearranged movements that teach the fundamentals of attack and defense. In addition to throwing and holding (also practiced in randori), it includes hitting kicking, stabbing, slashing and a number of other techniques. These latter occur only in kata because it is only in kata that the movements are prearranged and each partner knows what the other will do.

Randori, means 'free match.' Partners pair off and vie with each other as they would in an actual match. They may throw, pin, choke and apply joint locks, but they may not hit, kick, or employ other techniques appropriate only to actual combat. The main conditions in randori are that participants take care not to injure each other and that they follow judo etiquette, which is mandatory if one is to derive the maximum benefit from randori."

We can see by Kano Sensei's own words that the construction of Judo was not to eliminate the dangerous moves but to find the true underlying principles.

However, Panther is correct in that Kano Sensei eliminated the dangerous moves for randori (the main sports aspect) in the interest of safety. Kano Sensei also used the sport or randori aspect to popularize his art, so this is what has become most popular and known to most of the world. I infer from his statements in his book that the kata were to continue to teach the other more dangerous techniques.


Rick

Rick and Panther,

Thanks for the information. I read the passage out of the Kodokan book and agree with Rick. After reading a little more I stand by my statement that Kano sensei never intended for judo to become a sport. Even now, in the way that judo has been popularized in competition, I don't think Kano sensei would be all that happy with it. I have spoken with several judo people and they have told me about the difference in the Kodokan in recent years away from the practice that Kano, Ito, Mifune and others espoused. I could be wrong, but if anyone has any comments about it, I'd love to hear them.

mike

I was a Judo competitor back in the Sixties lo these many years ago, and I also was taught Judo the martial art, the kata techniques as self defense.

All I ever need to know about self defense, I learned in basic Judo.

This although I am sixth dan in Okinawan shorin type karate.

When I learnt karate later, I had done self defense in Jiujitsu and Judo.

Nothinglike Judo, nothing like it at all.
Except Brazilian Jiujitsu of course.:-)

Judo is powerful.And it no joke.We were taught to turn the throws and holds and locks into devastating self defense maneuvers with a twist, a turn or a simple adjustment, back into jiujitsu with Judo body Dynamics behind it.

Until I learnt the TREMENdelly powerful kaRATE TORITE WAZA,I used Judo dynamics for all locks and hrows. Kote gaeshi really takes on authroity when you put Judo footwrok with it.:-)

Waki gatame and hara gatame can be resisted by no ne, done in Judo fashion.
You either get your arm bent and by your ribs fast, or down you go , maybe with a snap.

Good judoka can put you in kesa gatame such that you can not breathe, your ribs creak and gi marks appear on the chest.

You'd think you could get out of it but cannot. Heh heh- used to love that one.:-)

Aye, Judo. Not just a sport and not Kano's intent for sure, but a means of overall training using martial techniques as a vehicle, this was Kano's intent.

Hate what they've done to it thirty years later.

Kusanku

Kusanku,

Thank you for the very in depth insight to the Judo world of the 1960s. I agree with what you have to say whole-heartedly.

Please feel free to chirp in on the other conversations as well!!

mike

Thank you, MIke. I will.:-)

Enjoying this, I am.

Kusanku

I have done 12yrs. of Goju Ryu and Meibu-kan Goju Karate and now 2yrs.of pankration.

For those of you who don't know what pankration is,it's a martial arts that combines Muay Thai Kickboxing and Submission Wrestling.One in pankration uses jabs,right cross,hooks,uppercuts,elbows,knees,shin kicks etc., and for the wrestling part,elbow locks,knee locks,ankle locks,neck cranks,arm bars and chokes.

These moves are always practiced with a partner and not known as katas.

Submission wrestling is similar to jujitsu in many ways,it's a form of grappling.

My point is when you have a partner involved with your practicing techniques on one another it is not known as kata so therefore any one who says there is kata in judo or jujitsu is confused with what kata is.

Katas are pre-arranged forms involving punches,kicks and blocks going back and forth across the floor without a partner being involved.All techniques are done in the air and it's impossible to throw a person and claim to be doing kata,it makes absolutely no sense.

If a partner is involved it's called either practing techniques on each other or sparring depending on whether two people are fighting or just going over the moves being taught.

------------------
ASOKA

Asoka-

Almost all classical style of Japanese Martial Arts were taught primarily by practicing pre-arranged forms. In many styles (and all styles of ko-ryu JJ that I am aware of) the forms are two man, with an uke and tore and are properly called kata.

Rory

Judo of Kodokan contains in its syllabus eight kata, mostly practiced as two person forms.

While the kata of judo do include striking and kicking and punching, they contain no blocks as we today know them,they do not always move across the floor, and mostly the techniques utilized are throws, locks and holds, with some other very unusual movements that cannot be described readily, such as the Element Forms in Itsutsu No Kata, and some orf the two man Armor Fighting waza in Kohki No Kata.

Kata simply mean Formal Excercises or more exctly the way things are(to be ) done, in Japanese.

There is nothing that says kata EVEN HAVE TO DO WITH MARTIAL ARTS SPECIFICALLY, LET ALONE KARATE, LET ALONE PUNCHING OR KICKING.

And so,I think, we can definitely say that kata are the main training method not only of koryu arts(bugei) but of Gendai Budo, excepting sprts such as Muay Thai, Pankration and Shooto.

Greco Roman Wrestling even teaches linking drills that could be called two man kata.
In Japan I am sure that they are.

Kusanku

RA MILLER.

Well in karate kata is pre-arrange movements involving only one person.

I was always told by my sensei that's what you call kata.In my times as a martial artist,I have seen even in tournaments people always doing one man forms which they were calling katas.I've never heard of a two man kata.

If there are katas involving two people how come in the 12yrs. of my karate experience and going to tournaments,I have never seen a man do kata that was not done on his own.

While I do pankration at the moment where every thing involves two people practicing techniques (which are impossible to do without a partner )and putting them to use in sparring,no one ever calls them katas and if you asked my current school if they do forms they would say "No".

If you told them they did forms because the techniques look pre-arranged they would probably laugh and why?

Well our techniques can go from one movement and quickly changed into another technique right away(in whatever we think might work at that particular moment) when the first one doesn't work on some one,where as in each kata the techniques are always done in same order,never switching in to another movement that wasn't put there.Katas don't allow you to be creative they train you to act in the order you were taught.

A kata can be of some use to an extent if a person can be creative enough to think on his own how to go from one to another instead of going from moves to others in the order being taught.

Ex. punch to kick,who says it's always going to be in that order.

My point is not only are katas pre-arranged they do not use a partner to practice on which makes it difficult to be creative and understanding of how to change technique to technique without always having to rely on something happening the same way at same time.

If katas involved two people they can't possibly be pre-arranged at least not with contact anyways.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying you're ignorant of martial arts,all I am saying is that in my experience that is what I've been taught and seen and you have obviously been missinformed.

Don't take it personal.I'm not here to put anyone down just to give opinions and help people understand if necessary since I've studied two traditional arts and now one that's different from most traditional schools as we training specifically for self-defense or some may call street defense.

check out my style pankration at:
http://mypage.goplay.com/asoka4

------------------
ASOKA

Asoka-

I can, of course, only answer from my very limited experience. After all, the devestating knowledge that must have come from studying for twelve years is quite intimidating.

The Sosuishi-ryu has 48 jujutsu kata. Eight kneeling sword defenses, eight standing sword defenses, sixteen standing unarmed defenses, eight forms for wrestling in armor and eight "miscellaneous" kata. These katas are the ryu. The ryu has been passed from father to son since 1650. In other words, Sosuishi-ryu has been using kata for at least five times as long as goju has _existed_ and it is not the oldest of the Japanese ryu.

Rory A. Miller
Mokuroku, Sosuishi-ryu