"You keep saying that your Uechi is all you need"
did I say that Uechi is all I need. I'm arguing the statement that, "we can safely assume that the Uechi or whatever karate/emptyhand system that we study is pretty usless in a crowded area such as a plane".
My unabridged dictionary has 11 definitions of the word "justice". That same dictionary has three definitions of "integrity", with three synonyms to boot. Rather than use the narrow focus of the word(s), we can use any one definition, or all, or a combination of definitons to convey the meaning of the word(s) we use.
By analogy, rather than use one definition of "Uechi-Ryu", or "grappling", it becomes more preferable to use these arts in their broadest sense. Much more useful.
My grappling includes (not exhaustive) grabbing for control, limiting opponent's body motion, striking, throws, sweeps and trips, choking, joint locking, ground fighting and attacking vulnerable spots on his body.
My Uechi includes (not exhaustive) grabbing for control, limiting opponent's body motion, striking, sweeps and trips, joint locking and attacking vulnerable spots on his body.
Lots and lots of overlap.
"It's only one and the same when you have practiced long enough so that the arts have entertwined themselves within you to creat a 'new art' of sorts. But until then, you are only doing two arts."
Lots and lots of overlap, and the bridge isn't as long as is commonly thought, nor is the delineation so abrupt. Yes, I'm still doing two arts, but there is still much in common with them. They become wholly one in the same when a "new art" is created, but there is still some good intersection between them.
"How broad can I make them (techniques??). I guess as broad as you want so long as they work."
What I've being saying. I say they can (but not always) be very broad and still come under the prenumbra that is Uechi, or that which is grappling.
"I think you have still yet to prove that your Uechi can handle these types of situation adequately."
Let's hope, God willing, that I never
have to prove my Uechi can handle these types of situations adequetly. Let's also hope we never have to prove the equally unproven grappling either. But I'm still going to ride the T, and I'm still going to fly.
"So, are you ruling out throwing as a viable technique in the scenario given or not?? "
You can't rule anything out, neither Uechi-Ryu nor grappling. Many of the throws, however, do to space constraints, will fail. Some "recognized" Uechi techniques will also fail, but not necesarily for the same reason.
"You know old phrase that if it works, it's a great technique. If it doesn't, you'll be the first to know."
It's a hell of a time to find out something doesn't work. Let's find out before hand!
"What is your Plan B? Is it Uechi or grappling? "
It's definately Uechi-Ryu. I've got a hold of him, and I'm hitting him again, real hard. It's also definately grappling. I've got a hold of him, and I'm sweeping him on the ground.
But, hold on a minute. Hitting him real hard is also grappling. And sweeping him is also Uechi-Ryu. So, am I doing a "Uechi" strike, or am I doing a "grappling" strike? The answer, of course, is "yes".
"Where does you standing armlock fit in to the Uechi?"
That would be a bit of a stretch, so now we've left the realm of Uechi and moved almost exclusively into the realm of grappling, which I never said we couldn't.
"When you are on the floor, how are you using your Uechi instead of the grappling?"
Let's see. If I poke a finger in someome's eye, while we are on the ground, am I using grappling, or am I using Uechi? Both, for both arts teach that very same concept. If I happen to be on top of someone and I can hit him with an elbow across his face, am I using Uechi or grappling? Both, for both arts teach that very same concept. If I have my hand spread over his face, grabbing his head and pounding it into the floor, am I using Uechi or grappling? Both, for both arts teach that very same concept. If I find his testicles and squeeze, is that Uechi or grappling? Both, for both arts teach that very same concept.
Now, of course the majority of ground fighting is in the realm of grappling. Hence why we train for it (which I never said we shouldn't).
"Our Uechi kata was made with the premise of 'one strike one kill'."
Our Uechi kata also contains multiple attack assaults as well, possibly specifically for "the counter that doesn't work" scenario.
There never was any doubt in my mind that the aforementioned people would always help, if asked.
Of course, one can never grab someone in tight control and kick him.
"Care to expand on your 'limitations' comment?"
Yes, thank you.
On the mundane: Uechi-Ryu has kata, which are excellent training tools. But, kata has limitations. It lacks the tactile feedback that is touching and striking upon another. So, we add exercises like bunkai and prearranged kumite. However, even those excercises suffer from a limitation in that they do not allow free attacks and a bit of unpredictability that comes from having a opponent standing in front of you, with you unknowning as to from where or when he will launch the next attack. So, we have free-style fighting.
So, we identified some limitations to karate training, and then developed training to strenghten, and therefore lessen those limitations. Does Uechi-Ryu always work when someone is standing in front of you, with you unknowning as to from where or when he will launch the next attack? No. But, you can't completely discount its utility, either. Which is what we are both saying.
In my mind a big limitation in Uechi-Ryu is a failure in the training, both physical and mental.
When we train in Uechi-Ryu, we do these excercises that are kata, bunkai, kumites, sparring and a few other minor odds and ends thrown in for good measure. But as soon as we put a physical barrier on our training and say that knife defense or multiple attackers is not part of Uechi-Ryu, then we've also added a mental limitation also. Whenever we look at the Tueller drill, or the "night-of-the-living-dead" drill and say "That's not Uechi!", then we've further entrenched another limitation to our training. Whenever we discount the "1/4 second timing" drills, or the TC power-principles, or Dave Moy's flow drills, or the idea of bunkais with takedowns and finishes, then we've limited our training. The persons who espouse these training tools (you inclduded) recognized a limitation and seek to lessen it as much as possible. When we discount these training tools, we've physically limited our training, but we've also mentally limited our training. I find this sad, and extremely frustrating. One can study kata very deeply, and still only learn narrowly. However, one can study kata in a very deep fashion, and still end up with a very broad knowledge base. Training should not be limited to such a point that it becomes narrowly focused. Some training tools can be narrowly focused, but overall they must have an eye towards developing and maintaining broad, but very deep knowledge.
Uechi doesn't have all the answers, but when it does, it makes sense to use it.
[This message has been edited by Gene DeMambro (edited October 11, 2001).]