Uechi-Ryu.com

Discussion Area
It is currently Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:27 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Qinna in Uechi
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:02 am 
Qinna in Uechi

Qinna or Chi’na is the area of a Chinese martial art that deals with what the Japanese systems would see in Jujitsu or Aikido. (And perhaps more. 8O )

While similar it has a different flavour to it than the Japanese approach.

“Different” folks just a different flavour. 8)

It has been commented on this forum before that pretty much all Chinese systems have some Qinna in them. Some are heavier with it than others.

The two main forms of Bagua went separate ways when the founder of Bagua taught a person strong in striking bagua and a person strong in Qinna. They each focused Bagua on their strengths.

Where I am going with this is that as a system that came from China Uechi has many Qinna moves. Those who have studied Jujitsu as well as Uechi find them to be a great match.

I read once that when Uechi Kanbun Sensei began teaching in Japan he of course drew martial artists to his school. As many of these where well trained in the grappling arts of Japan his school focused on the striking areas to fill in their gaps or holes.

Interesting that today some cross train in grappling styles to fill that hole in Uechi. What goes around comes around.

Of course there would be some claiming now that is not Uechi when really it is or it should be.

Odd that some cannot see the depth and riches that are in Uechi and choose to turn a blind eye claiming, things that come straight from the Uechi Kata, are not Uechi. Baffles me greatly but that is another thread. :roll:

And my round about point is that Uechi is a very hands on system so once you get a hold of them then you should be able to do things with them. And this is where Qinna comes in.

An aside: Some don’t like Taiji and yet it is rich with Qinna. When my friend Rick Bottomley asked Joseph Chen (Chen Taiji) when they would learn Qinna, Joseph replied you are learning Qinna. Taiji is Qinna.

So along with our striking I see that Uechi should also be rich in Qinna.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:11 am 
From my perspective Rick , Uechi`s more grappling than it is striking .

though it`s definately a mix .

the dynamics though are so grappling orientated though , of course my instructors arent the norm .... :twisted: :lol:

the whole obsession with base , close range etc .

I havent seen anything thing in uechi that didnt resemble grab and then strike . But just my take .


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:18 am 
Marcus, I am shocked that you can see it -- not.


I love Tim Cartmell’s stuff and if you want to see stuff that will blend with your Uechi get his “Effortless Combat Throws” (book and video) or his Qinna video series.

Bagua:

http://www.shenwu.com/bgtchnq.htm

http://www.shenwu.com/b3_techq.htm

http://www.shenwu.com/bg4tchnq.htm


Xing YI:

http://www.shenwu.com/drgntchnq.htm

http://www.shenwu.com/aligator.htm

http://www.shenwu.com/mnkytchnq.htm

Taiji:

http://www.shenwu.com/yangtchnq.htm


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:35 am 
Have the book Rick :) , I love it , some fellow in Banff put me onto it and gave me a copy . 8) :D

great links :) thanks


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 12:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:21 am
Posts: 2407
Location: NYC
When you guys talk about 'grappling' or chin-na are you also including, trapping, seizing, pinning, jamming, etc?

The super styles that I believe gave birth to Okinowan Tote and later styles like Uechi were indeed Chinese but did not emphasize locking and throwing. Surprise neither did Tote.. Not to say these systems had NO locking or throwing, they did and do, but the emphasis was on 'trapping,' seizing, jamming, balance stealing, energy issuing to facilitate instant control that is used in conjunction with striking often vital areas. The reasoning and point of this emphasis was, and is, conservation of motion, time and energy while maintaining maximum destruction. When looking at any movement or concept in these styles I believe this criteria must be used to evaluate and validate, at least for true combat application.

Keep in mind that these areas, even excluding complex locks and throws, is a huge area of study that addresses multiple ranges, contact sensitivity and continuous countering, changing and adapting with the energy and resistance of the partner or opponent. Indeed there is no real art of striking in these systems without taking into consideration, feeling contact and destruction of the opponent's structure and energy from within the clash.

It was once posted that it is nearly impossible to 'control' the limb of a trained fighter. This is true and also false depending on how one defines control. Does the move or technique require control for 1 second? For 10 seconds? Or for a tenth of a second? The point in the focus on 'control with striking,' or trapping, seizing was to minimize time for recovery by the opponent and instead create INSTANT DESTRUCTION with structure elimination and balance removal – done case closed ASAP.

The whole point in training the inside and trapping etc, is to feel that one tiny error and in that same instant unleash utter destruction. Movements that require extra time or extra movement or movements were avoided because it becomes geometrically more difficult and even unrealistic to the point of impossible to maintain control of a skilled fighter for prolonged length of time – read multiple preliminary movements that are absent the utter destruction component. Each tenth of a second and/or each additional movement you add will sharply reduce the percentage of success and again that's why the super styles made their focus efficiency above all else.

Indeed the longer the time needed for completion, which means time to devastation, the greater are the chances that the opponent will convert, change or otherwise escape the 'control stage' and then you may never get to the finish, or final act of devastation. Not to mention multiple attackers, in that case lengthening the time to devastation in the least becomes all the more intolerable. The whole point in not getting involved with complex chin-na, throwing , etc, is to minimize that 'time to devastation,' which in these styles should happen in the blink of an eye.

Just my advice for combat training for what it’s worth. Do use KISS for true combat concept training and be wary of multiple movement BS that is best saved for cousin Vinny when he gets drunk and ornery at the family reunion.. ;)

_________________
Shaolin
M Y V T K F
"Receive what comes, stay with what goes, upon loss of contact attack the line" – The Kuen Kuit


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:00 pm 
“When you guys talk about 'grappling' or chin-na are you also including, trapping, seizing, pinning, jamming, etc?”

Yes.

Which makes your post another excellent one! :D


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 2:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 8:59 pm
Posts: 56
Location: Brandeis University
Over the past few summers I've worked on Goju-ryu with some jujitsu/judo thrown in. That in combination with Rory's seminars at SummerFest have really opened my eyes to controlling and trapping your opponent. I'm starting to see a lot more in my kata beyond simply striking (whether I can pull it off is another matter :!:). It's pretty damn cool.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2005 5:44 am 
Well I've already said that I see a link between Uechi and Tai-Chi, and as Rick says TC is chi-na :D
In TC though you have three areas downing the enemy, i.e. throws, cavity strikes i.e. strikes to vital areas and chi-na i.e. locking.
I can see all of these in Sanchin.although you have to modify bits of it to fit my ideals I have just written an article all about this which will be on line in September.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 3:18 am 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chin_Na


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 3:20 am 
Nice qinna article:

http://www.wle.com/resources/art040.html


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 3:25 am 
Here is another one:

http://www.hunggar.net/chinna.htm

Can you see all the Uechi.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 3:34 am 
Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 3:37 am 
Image

Image


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 7:31 am 
BUMP ***

found it finally Rick :lol: :D 8)

what style is this ? , any more info , very uechi :)

would love to see there take on applications of these postures ....

see lots of karate in general in these chinese moves ... :D


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:02 am 
The style is Hung Gar which I believe is Tiger/Crane.

(Techno geek hint: Right click on image and click properties. Tells you the link to the pic. :D )


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group