Uechi-Ryu.com

As people begin to investigate the world of grappling (not jujitsu) and how it pertains to the Uechi world, I hear people say as an aside or under their breath, "it's not Uechi." And of course they refuse to do the movement or do it half-heartedly.

So without the usual chastisment and coercing, let's see where some Uechi fits into the grappling scene (feel free to chirp in on this one Joe):

1. Elbows in to your body. That's where you strenth is. Don't let them fly out anywhere.

2. Grab/Control- Doesn't our Uechi teach this, and when you have someone in grappling, it would be ill-advised to let them go once you have the grab.

3. Conditioning- Face it, you may have to take a couple of shots in a grappling match, but hopefully, your Uechi condidtioning will see you through.

4. Balance, Eye-Distance, Mushin, etc., etc., etc.

Just some to think about,

mike

Mike-
Just a question in comparative strategy that might lead in the same direction. Grappling is all about controlling space. It doesn't matter whether you are grappling on the ground or infighting- you take up space to win, you create space to escape.

In my limited experience with karate, I see the same principles in kata and kihon: close and destroy. (The reverse punch timed with a fall into zanshen-dachi is a beautiful, brutal example).

Do you see this too? Ignoring the sparring- which looks to me like doing the exact opposite of all the hours of kihon and kata- karate seems to have the same fundamental attitude towards controlling violence as the combative grappling arts: Finish things up close and personal.

Rory

"As people begin to investigate the world of grappling (not jujitsu) and how it pertains to the Uechi world, I hear people say as an aside or under their breath, "it's not Uechi." And of course they refuse to do the movement or do it half-heartedly."

Hi Mike,

I ran into the same problem in Isshinryu ,and the best way to get through to traditional practitioners is to force a re-examination of the applications of traditional kata. In my experience kata bunkai does not exist in a vacume---a simple re-interpretation of the movements in light of grappling technique opens many eyes.

Does the Uechi-curriculum contain Naihanchi? If so, this kata is chocked full of grappling. Sanchin also. Just picture yourself doing the kata while lying on your back and re-interpret the movements. It also couldn't hurt to practice kumite with takedowns. A traditional karate-ka will eventually get tired of getting taken to the ground and choked-out, and will be forced to learn how to deal with the ground. Have fun and be careful.

Regards,
Mal Wagner

Joe Pomfret here,

In my point of view, the grappling training I have recieved, and still recieve, fits TOGETHER, with my Uechi like a matching lock and key. A fellow grappler or training partner who is trying to bring me down has to get through my sanchin stance and balance awareness. people would ask, "do you have a wrestling back-ground?" I would reply in the negative...then silently thank my Uechi
for yet another gift.

As I train for my next NHB match, I can take some comfort in knowing that I have recieved training from some of the best "stand-up" fighters (Bob Bethoney), and "ground-fighters" (Don Banville from JBA).
My comfort comes from knowing that if my opponent has a lop-sided strength in either his stand-up or ground skills, I can resort to attacking his weakness.

In street fighting terms; we all want to end a confrontation on our feet, but there is a good chance that you and your opponent will end up horizontal and getting dirty.

Uechi+Grappling= A ready and well rounded martial artist.

Joe P.

[This message has been edited by Joe Sullivan (edited March 16, 2001).]

Rory,

Agreed. The basics of distance are in all combative arts in my opinion. Without it, you lose!

Mal,

Thanks for your input. I hope you become a regular. Uechi curriculum does not include Naihanchi, but I have seen it many times in the Goju system, and I can have seen it bunkai(ed) as well. You are correct about the many shime waza techniques you can get from that kata. Unfortunately, in Uechi we don't (as a practice) bunkai every kata for testing purposes. I think we should, but it's not in the curriculum. How can we say that someone truly knows a kata without a bunkai? I know my Goju friends bunkai their many kata in a non-formated structure. I would like to see Uechi go in that direction.

Do we need any further proof than the testimony from Joe Pomfret regarding his dual training experiences???


mike

Hi mike, Naihanchi may be done by some Goju people but it is really from Shorinryu based systems.

It fills the space sanchin does for Uechi and Goju.

But does so sideways.:-)

How about Uechi plus grappling plus points 'n' joints, plus kicking?

Long a while back a couple other Okinawan masters named Nakamura and Shimabukuro, saw many different styles, and decided they wanted to conine the best aspects into a fighting system containing all aspects, basics, kata, applications, self defense, throws and takedown, groundfighting, kicking, and locking and vital points.Also kobudo weaponry.They made free sparring contact with hard and heavy armor,and emphasized bag and partner training, . lots of baiscs, all basics, and whenever another style showed something good, they swiped I mean 'borrowed' it.

The kata were and are Shorin based with some Naha Ti influence on basics and tomari flavor to the technieues,meaning the applications of the kata moves.

Fighting is hard and self defense is taught as a parallel system of jiujitsu called goshinjutsu , along with the basics. Turns out it derives from kata.

Some specialized in different aspects of the art.

Seems you may be taking Uechi the same way. That is no bad thing.

Some think that no one art can cover it all, but that isn't true. There are a few techniques that are the most impotant from each category.

We had about twenty-seven basic techniques we trained in, then moving versions, combinations, partner work, bag work,kata, self defense, and the rest was worked into the overall framework with no problem.

If someone came up somewhere with something new, we hadn't seen, we learned it and well, then we found a defense for it and mastered that.

How'd we get around people saying, 'that's not Kenpo?'Simple, we called the other techniques 'Borrowed techniques', and used Kenpo principles to make them more effective if we could, and if not,stilll devised defenses against them, whci since we devised them, were kenpo.

No problem.

For instance, many of the kicks we practiced and defended against were called 'Korean borrowed techniques.'Groundfighting takedowns and defenses with legs were called Chinese leg maneuvers.'Also borrowed. Then there were Shotokan techniques, borrowed.and Judo and Aikido stuff.

But none of this distrbed the core training in the twenty seven basics, the thriteen kata and ten weapons kata, the basic self defense series, and all the bag and partner training plus the progressive kumite training drills, we just did the other stuff after we finished our main training.

Why did we do it? Because a technique you don't know can defeat you, so we leqarned all we could about all the techniques could.

We had judo, and Aikido, and other karate style instructors come and do seminars for us, we read books, got films, etc.

This was in the early seventies.Taekwondo held no terror for us, we did more kicks than they did per workout.

The idea we had was style was great, we stuck to our own style religiously in basic trraining, but we learned all the others too, to defend against them.

Some would go take Taekwondo, some Shotokan, or judo, or Kendo, or aikido, to bring it back to others. Some learned Goju ryu and brought back sanchin and tensho, some did Shotokan kata, and shared what they learned.

And did we get whipped first time out on something new? You bet!:-)But not the third or fourth time, also you bet.

So we stayed Kenpo, our style did not change , except it broadened our base of knowledge and skill.

We learned what our weaknesses were and took appropriate measures.

And it was good.

For instance, before the first UFC,we alll knew what was going to happen to al the karate and kickboxing guys that wnet in.Sucker bet, they never did grappling before. They sure did later.:-)

We'd already met Mr. Mat, long before.We had intimate acquaintance with Tatami Sensei.

Regards,
John

Uechi can and should, imo, do the same, and I see it happening.

Kusanku,

You wrote,
"Long a while back a couple other Okinawan masters named Nakamura and Shimabukuro, saw many different styles, and decided they wanted to conine the best aspects into a fighting system containing all aspects, basics, kata, applications, self defense, throws and takedown, groundfighting, kicking, and locking and vital points.Also kobudo weaponry.They made free sparring contact with hard and heavy armor,and emphasized bag and partner training, . lots of baiscs, all basics, and whenever another style showed something good, they swiped I mean 'borrowed' it."

Could you be talking about Tatsuo Shimabukuro Sensei of Isshinryu? He definitely "borrowed" from other Systems to make Isshinryu (Kyan Chotoku and Choki Motobu's Shorin-Ryu, Chojun Myagi's Goju-Ryu, and Taira Shinken's Kobudo). When someone says that a certain technique is not in Isshinryu, we only have to re-interpret the kata, and viola! it appears in the system. However,This is not the opinion shared by many in Isshinryu, who believe the system is "kicking and punching" only.

I do have to admit that Isshinryu, at it's core, is pure basics---9 lower-body basics (kicks) and 16 lower-body basics (punches and blocks). If one masters the basics, he/she should be able to defend himself, even without the kata.

Just for thought, I believe that some styles of Jiu-Jitsu are still complete---that is contain strikes (as refined as any karate style), throws, submissions, controls, kyusho, chin-na, weapons. The early 19th century Japanese masters decided to split up these complete systems into "Do's" to make them safer for Japanese School children to practice. I think the time is right to put these various elements back together. I could use some help;-)

Sincerely,
Mal Wagner

"Just for thought, I believe that some styles of Jiu-Jitsu are still complete---that is contain strikes (as refined as any karate style), throws, submissions, controls, kyusho, chin-na, weapons. The early 19th century Japanese masters decided to split up these complete systems into "Do's" to make them safer for Japanese School children to practice. I think the time is right to put these various elements back together. I could use some help;-)"

<hr>

hear hear!!!!!

And it's not just ju-jitsu. Uechi was/is a complete system it simply has not been taught as a complete system for a long time. It is not Uechi that needs to be changed, but how we frame and teach it.

we've spent a lot of time looking at how Uechi works when someone puts their hands on you from in front. the joy is to discover the prinicipals that apply from the same movements if the attacker's hands or feet or body comes from the side, an angle, from below, or from behind.

dana

i think people should stop, read the history of their art, and realize that most if not all martial arts even in the strtictly traditional sense are a mixture of several other arts, karate, "any style" is a combination of chinese martial arts, with the indigenous arts of okinawa for instance.
i have read that isshinryu (a traditional system?) is a mixture of shorin ryu and goju ryu.....isshinryu isnt a very "old" style but its methods ARE, it is "old fashioned karate", and i think thats whats important. after all dont we all develop our own style within our respective systems anyway?
i used to totally disregard karate because i didnt think it had anything to teach me, i studied a system called gokei-ryu kempo jujutsu, which is kempo striking with jujutsu (japanese) obviously, we strike kick elbow etc as well as lock and twist joints, throw and grapple. then i actually watched someone's bunkai from kata and realized that karate (any style) has allot more grappling than i ever realized and its a very complete artform, including groundfighting....ya never know
i think how the arts are taught is the key, noone will learn karate's grappling techniques if their sensei doesnt teach it to them.....i always thought that goju, isshinryu, uechi and ryukyu kempo are known more for their grappling and in fighting .......thats what makes them unique as compared to some other purely striking arts. a sensei told me once that you shouldnt have to look outside of your art to find the answers, just dig deeper!!! not to say that you shouldnt study other arts as well...and as far as kata, i think you should bunkai each kata as in depth as possible, after all isnt kata the heart of karate? ok i'll shut up now lol
"if tradition was the one true way, there would be but one method"

Isn't stand up grappling part of almost all Okinawan Karate? That has been my understanding.

Hey Everybody,

Awesome post here, no need to repeat all that much.....



So very true



plus weapons training.....uechi is so very lacking in weapons training....not that there is not enough to study already, but along the lines of knowing your enemy, knowing the characterists of the weapons that your enemy may carry can really help. Plus weapons training also increases coordination & strength, interest in MA, and I swear it improves your speed, you learn how to block things flying at yourhead (like nunchaku, 3 sectional staff, bo, jo, cane, you name it....

ATH[/quote]

_________________
Seek knowledge from cradle to grave

How do we know that Uechi is being taught differently or the same, or whatever? Anybody have any hard knowledge on this. I've listened to Tomoyose sensei and find his stories are different than Gordi Breyette's stories Toyoma sensei told him. Which is true? Anybody around back in the 1800's when Kanbun sensei was in China that could shed some light on this subject?

Sorry, just can't buy that quote without proof.

mike