^v^ Kitei
Ucha Aratangy
It's the first time I'm posting, so forgive me if my question (and my
english), is not very good.
I would like to know when the kata Kitei was created. As far as I
understood, it is a very recent kata, created to contain stances and
movements from many different styles. How was it created?
There is a movement in the end of this kata that I don't exactly understand.
After the last mae-gueri, you sort of step back with a guiaku-tsuki, with
your left hand on the top of your right elbow. Am I right? What is that for?
Well, thanks for reading and answering my "debut"!
Ucha Aratangy
glaw...@ben2.ucla.edu
Ucha Aratangy wrote:
> I would like to know when the kata Kitei was created. As far as I
> understood, it is a very recent kata, created to contain stances and
> movements from many different styles. How was it created?
Kitei, was developed for an ITKF tournament event called "Fukugo". It is
supposed to be changed every few years. It may change after this years
World Championship in Poland. It is my understanding that Mr. Nishiyama
finalized the current version of Kitei in the late 1980's. (Someone else
know the history in more detail?) Mr. Nishiyama is very firm in stating
that Kitei is not a true kata! He says Kitei means "compulsory" and it
should be used as a training tool as well as for competition. It is
suppose to contain pieces of katas from the major "traditional" styles
of Japanese karate.
> There is a movement in the end of this kata that I don't exactly understand.
> After the last mae-gueri, you sort of step back with a guiaku-tsuki, with
> your left hand on the top of your right elbow. Am I right? What is that for?
The left hand is pulling an attacker toward you as you counter punch
him.
> Ucha Aratangy
George Lawless
Karateka63
George Lawless wrote:
>is my understanding that Mr. Nishiyama
>finalized the current version of Kitei in the late 1980's. (Someone else
>know the history in more detail?) Mr. Nishiyama is very firm in stating
>that Kitei is not a true kata!
I have also heard Mr. Nishiyama say this...at the time he said Kitei was a kata
that was not a kata, just a training exercise...
I'm not sure I understand the difference...I guess that makes me clueless!
Bruce Flanagan
<Sir Clue...@aol.com>
glaw...@ben2.ucla.edu
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Fri, 01 May 1998 13:03:49 -0700, glaw...@ben2.ucla.edu wrote:
>
> :
> :Kitei, was developed for an ITKF tournament event called "Fukugo". It is
> :supposed to be changed every few years. It may change after this years
> :World Championship in Poland.
>
>
> --
>
> Rob Redmond, big...@mindspring.com
> http://bigred.home.mindspring.com/
> Member of the Secret Order of the ^v^
I understand that other kata have been changed over time. Just last
month we discused the changes in Nisieshi that became Nijushiho.
George Lawless
Roberto Alvelais
On Sat, 02 May 1998 14:44:25 -0400,
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>RHIP. "Rank has its privileges." _He_ can change a kata. _He_ can
>make a kata. _You_ cannot.
>
>When you look at it that way, it isn't confusing at all. It's
>sickening, but not confusing.
>
>
>--
>
>Rob Redmond, big...@mindspring.com
>http://bigred.home.mindspring.com/
>Member of the Secret Order of the ^v^
Absolutely!! It would seem that Mr. Nakayama or others in the JKA
changed a lot of the kata. For example, I just learned the Shito Ryu
version of Unsu (we call it Unshu) . It's different from the Shotokan
version. It is said that Unsu was "borrowed" from Shito Ryu so it had
to be changed from that "original" to it's current form. (In shito
ryu the opening spear hand is with the hand on the side of the rear
leg. (gyaku te ippon nukite. neh?) The kicks from the ground are
definitely back kicks. just to point out a couple of differences.)
So why can they create or change kata and not us?
This brings me to possibly another thread, bunkai.
It seems to me that most of the bunkai that has been given for the
shotokan kata are "reverse engineered" . You start with the kata and
you go " what on earth could That be?" and come up with an answer.
(Not a bad thing IMO. )
Obviously the shotokan kata were changed at some point (Nakayama, JKA
committee, Gigo or Gichin Funakoshi). When these changes were made,
they therefore changed the bunkai from what it was in the original
Okinawan or Shito Ryu kata. What then is "THE" bunkai? Is it
what the person who changed the kata said it is?
Well, what if he didn't say? Then is the bunkai up to the performer
to specify for himself? If the bunkai wasn't specified by the person
or committee who changed the kata then is there even such a thing as
"THE" bunkai?
Mr. Keeling, did Mr. Nakayama dictate what the bunkai was for the kata
that changed from their original Okinawan or Shito Ryu forms?
If the bunkai wasn't specified, then it kind of makes one wonder about
those who propose to $how you the $ecret$ contained within your
shotokan kata.
Boy, lots of questions!
Rob
R...@JKO.com
"Karate is a form of martial arts in which people who have had years and =
years of training can, using only their hands and feet, make some of the =
worst movies in the history of the world."
-Dave Barry
Roberto Alvelais
This didn't seem to go through. Sorry if it is a repeat
Mark Goetsch
rob said:
$ Why can Nishiyama haul off and create a kata that is designed to be
$ changed, and then change it regularly, while at the same time teaching
$ that "traditional karate must not be modernized."
Mr. Nishiyama doesn't claim Kitei as a new form of Kata, it will not be
added to the 25 currently in the system. This is just a method where two
people can do Kata on a head to head basis with equal time in practice (or
equal amount of time to practice).
Mark
Roberto Alvelais
On 3 May 1998 05:42:27 GMT, "Mark Goetsch" <no...@cyberconnect.com>
wrote:
Since the ITKF is very slanted toward's shotokan, it seems that
simply doing shotokan kata will allow adequate comparison of kata
performance. If one's looking to compare the same kata, just pick one
of the extant 25 and have the competitors perform that one.. Why make
up another for this purpose?
What it looks like to me is a way to stack the odds that one
particular dojo in the world will be able to claim that they
consistantly produce Local, National & World Champions. Since the
kata changes and the changes eminate from one particular dojo in the
world.
Elmar Schmeisser
[hope this posts - I haven't had replies to my posts for the past week...]
In message <199805021820...@ladder01.news.aol.com> -
karat...@aol.com (Karateka63) writes:
#I have also heard Mr. Nishiyama say this...at the time he said Kitei was a kata
#that was not a kata, just a training exercise...
#
#I'm not sure I understand the difference...I guess that makes me clueless!
Look at the taikyoku "kata" - they're exercises as well, and not really
kata in the old sense (of close combat self defense training routines).
The Heians for that matter are just barely kata - Itosu didn't want them
used for combat related training, just for exercise.
"Kata" has been used to mean everything from a single hand shape up to the
long extended routines we know and love...
-elmar
Elmar Schmeisser
[e-mailed & posted .. I think my isp is flakey again]
In message <354BB4...@ben2.ucla.edu> - glaw...@ben2.ucla.edu writes:
#I understand that other kata have been changed over time. Just last
#month we discused the changes in Nisieshi that became Nijushiho.
#
#George Lawless
#
#glaw...@ucla.edu
we did? I must have missed it.
- elmar
Elmar Schmeisser
[e-mailed & posted..my isp seems flakey again...]
In message <354e7df7...@NNTP1.ba.best.com> - r...@JKO.com (Roberto
Alvelais) writes:
#It seems to me that most of the bunkai that has been given for the
#shotokan kata are "reverse engineered"...
Exactly - but not in isolation. At least as I do the reverse tinkering, I
look at as many variants of the kata as I can find across the stylistic
universe available to me. As a result, my present performance of the kata
differs in some deatils from the modern accepted (and simplified) ??KF
formats.
#Obviously the shotokan kata were changed at some point (Nakayama, JKA
#committee, Gigo or Gichin Funakoshi). When these changes were made,
#they therefore changed the bunkai from what it was in the original
#Okinawan or Shito Ryu kata.
You make an unwarranted assumption here - that they were even concerned
about bunkai at all. I don't think they were, nor have they been since
after Itosu "downleveled" the training for school kids.
#...is there even such a thing as
#"THE" bunkai?...
IMHO, no, not in what's available to us. Without a useful "talk to the
dead" session, there is no way to find out what each kata's originator
intended. We are limited to reverse engineering and then testing, with our
only database an horizontal one (cross styles). And it doesn't really
matter - if it works, it's a "good" bunkai.
#If the bunkai wasn't specified, then it kind of makes one wonder about
#those who propose to $how you the $ecret$ contained within your
#shotokan kata.
I don't charge all that much <g>....
-elmar
George Winter
>Or it could mean that Nishiyama doesn't have a clear explanation for a
>situation that is a paradox in the world that he has created. He says
>"thou shalt not invent thine own kata." But, then he does it.
>
>"It isn't really a kata." He says.
>
>"How so?" We enquire?
>
>"I change it." he says.
>
>"So, we can change kata, as long as we say that they are not *real*
>kata?"
I can see a difference. Kitei is a series of compulsory exercises
designed specifically for a tournament comparison. I guess much like
the dull routines the skaters & gymnasts do for their technical
scores. It's roots are in sport & the design philosophy is an
"obstacle course" of karate motions. Kata has a different evolution.
To me, this would seem a very significant difference.
Why change Kitei? Perhaps so that no one will be able to practice the
kata for more than X years. I would imagine that Kitei 99 would be
completely different & not "improved".
The fact that a copy is not made available tells us that the kitei
concept is probably a flop. After all if it is supposed to be
practiced by multiple styles in competition it should be easily
available, highly specific, hell, available on video for less that 15
dollars. As someone pointed out, there won't be a lot of excitement
about the "kata" if only one dojo gets to create it, practice it,&
judge it - not too tough to guess who would win.
What to call it? Call it a Kata. After all doesn't it just mean
"Form". People have been practicing/demonstrating "Tournament Kata"
(translation: pure gymnastic bullshit), still no one objects to the
word kata in the phrase.
--
George
______________________________________________________________________
George Winter gwi...@q-sys.com
Qsys Ltd. - Information Systems Consulting
Mike Krantz
George Winter wrote:
>
> I can see a difference. Kitei is a series of compulsory exercises
> designed specifically for a tournament comparison. I guess much like
> the dull routines the skaters & gymnasts do for their technical
What he said.
> completely different & not "improved".
Ditto.
> The fact that a copy is not made available tells us that the kitei
No? I have a copy on paper, and it is higly specific.
I think it's available through the ITKF national office.
But that's just a guess. Do any of you compete in ITKF
or under ITKF rules, and not have access to a copy?
> What to call it? Call it a Kata. After all doesn't it just mean
Is that really all it means in practicing karate?
I'll leave that to you guys. Elmar?
> "Form". People have been practicing/demonstrating "Tournament Kata"
> (translation: pure gymnastic bullshit), still no one objects to the
> word kata in the phrase.
Sure, but lots of us object to the gymnastic bullshit.
I think Mr. Nishiyama is trying to keep gymnastic bullshit
out of his tournament kata events.
--
Regards,
Mike Krantz <mi...@ethos.net> 214-588-0379
Mike Krantz
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> I understand that Mark. I think you missed my point entirely. I was
> pointing out how convenient it is for him to claim that Kitei is not a
> kata - that way he is not breaking his own rule about creating kata
> and changing them for personal preference.
Without getting into a discussion of what Mr. Nishiyama
may or may not have said in various contexts, kitei is
a compulsory exercise for the Fuku-Go competition. It
is not a kata for learning karate, and is not generally
taught or practiced in order to develope karate skills.
(That's my understanding of what kata are for. New thread?)
Even among JKA-style Shotokan instructors, there are
usually variations in how katas are taught. My own
instructors does many things differently than his,
even though he (and I) train under his instructor.
If a kata is performed differently by two competitors,
under ITKF rules developed by Mr. Nishiyama judging
should be on the body dynamics and demonstrated skill,
not on which details of movement a judge might have
learned.
In contrast, kitei must be performed in a precise
manner or points are deducted. I don't know if
there are really any bunkai associated with it, or
if it is recommended as a useful training exercise.
(Anyone know?) It may not be performed in kata
competition. It does incorporate some advanced
(I think) stances and movements from various
kata as performed by various styles.
It is not intended to emanate from one dojo.
I think Mr. Nishiyama designed this kitei,
and Mr. Shirai in Italy is supposed to be
completing the next. Or the reverse.
However, kitei mixes and differs fundamentally
from other kata and skills, so that no school or
style can have an advantage with a particular kitei.
I don't think such a kitei would be accepted.
The Fuku-Go event alternates kitei and kumite
in the competition ladder, culminating in a
final kumite match. The purpose of the event
is to weed out specialists and favor generalists.
Enbu also has this characteristic, thought that
event is not specifically designed for this purpose.
A superior fighter with weak kata skills will not
perform a good kitei. A strong kata performer
should be able to learn the kitei and perform it
well. I have heard the kata specialists tend to
do better in fighting than the kumite people in
kata, but still get hammered.
I think the intent of creating a synthetic kitei for
this event, rather than just performing regular kata,
is to level the playing field. Everyone who competes
is learning a new exercise from scratch. Everyone has
done some of the moves and stances and may have never
seen others. You may have spent ten years or so
perfecting Nijushiho, but kitei has only been around
three years, and is about to be replaced by a new one.
It cannot be said that Fuku-Go is an Unsu/Gojushiho
competition, as is sometimes claimed of kata events,
because there is no kata that tends to win the event.
It cannot be said that judges favor a particular
athlete's interpretation, because kitei is not open
to interpretation, and its definition should not be
mostly similar to any particular way of interpreting katas.
And there's no question about one kata being more difficult
or more appealing -- everyone does the same exercise.
Seems like something developed entirely for sport karate,
which kata is not.
Has it worked in practice?
I'd like to hear the good and the bad.
As far as changing katas, they change in little ways
as various instructors find a better (for them) way
to generate power or another application. But it has
to be recognizable as to lineage to be accepted for
kata competition, and has to hang together to be useful
for training. (Another thread for more learned minds.)
But you don't re-invent kanku-dai from scratch into
some totally unrecognizable hodge-podge and say that's
the only thing that can be performed in kata events
for three years.
I suspect the detailed requirements for an acceptable
kitei are a greater thesis than this. Can anyone
present them here?
Can anyone tell me if I am using the word correctly,
or is Kitei actually the name of the current form of
the exercise?
Vassil Peytchev
In article <354d2c47...@NNTP1.ba.best.com>,
Roberto Alvelais <r...@JKO.com> wrote:
[snip]
>Since the ITKF is very slanted toward's shotokan, it seems that
>simply doing shotokan kata will allow adequate comparison of kata
>performance. If one's looking to compare the same kata, just pick one
>of the extant 25 and have the competitors perform that one.. Why make
>up another for this purpose?
Maybe to reduce the slant towards shotokan? The kitei I've seen seems to
have several "non-shotokan" stances and/or moves (e.g. shiko dachi).
These could have been borrowed from Richard Kim's Shorinji Ryu group.
Since I don't know much about the world-wide membership of the ITKF, how
prevalent is shotokan? At the three AAKF nationals I have seen, there
has always been a non-shotokan competitor in the final four in kata.
>What it looks like to me is a way to stack the odds that one
>particular dojo in the world will be able to claim that they
>consistantly produce Local, National & World Champions. Since the
>kata changes and the changes eminate from one particular dojo in the
>world.
AFAIK, the different versions of Kitei are not supposed to come from
Mr. Nishiyama's dojo exclusively. Also AFAIK, the next version is supposed
to be developed by Mr. Shirai.
--Vassil
DevonErik
If it's not "really" a kata, why are we competing with it?
Kata competition is competition in the performance of kata. We don't add in
juggling, because juggling isn't relevent to karate.
If kitei is relevent, it's a kata. If it's not relevent, if do it?
-Devo...@aol.com
Grand Poobah of the Grammor and Syntax Police:
Self-appointed castigator of posters with poor English. (You have been warned!)
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Fri, 01 May 1998 13:03:49 -0700, glaw...@ben2.ucla.edu wrote:
>
> :
> :Kitei, was developed for an ITKF tournament event called "Fukugo". It is
> :supposed to be changed every few years. It may change after this years
> :World Championship in Poland.
>
> Why is it wrong to change other kata, but not this one?
Nishiyama(personaly) doesn't like others changing kata. When
talking to him about people changing kata, he thinks that most
people don't understand enough about the kata, so they change
the performance to equate back to "thier understanding".
Nishiyama's position on the compulsory set of moves currently
called Kitei is that it is exactly that, a compulsory skillset
perfomance like skating and gymnastics have. And the reason
for it to change is to make a level playing field in the
event called Fuku-Go. The idea of the event is to promote
the best overall athlete. Currently the event is slightly
slanted towards fighters although based upon experience if
the fighter(s) doesn't have decent technical kata skills they
won't be able to take advantage of the slant.
(The slant is that the 1st-2nd and 3rd-4th place matches are
Kumite matches.)
Brad.
--
Brad Webb, 972-231-4922 Nortel Info Systems, 972-684-1737
Japan Shotokan Karate Dallas/Richardson TX.
JKA Dallas http://www.dallas.net/jka/
Mike Krantz
DevonErik <devo...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199805041307...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
> If it's not "really" a kata, why are we competing with it?
Because it's a test of skill. In this context, kata
are the ones that are commonly taught in traditional
karate -- some say the ones that define traditional
karate.
I'll admit up front (again) that I'm still learning what kata
is and is not, and why Mr. Nishiyama and others find certain
kata useful to teach. But regardless of what you call "kata"
and how you teach it, kitei has a function in competition which
is distinct from kata in the following respects:
(1) a given kitei exercise is created, used for a few years,
and then thrown away; (2) on the whole it must not be related
to any of the allowed kata or to any particular style of karate;
(3) it must be specifically defined and not open to interpretation,
so that competitors must perform it executing the specified
techniques using the prescribed timing; and (4) it is required
for the Fuku-Go event and not permitted in the kata events.
Also, it is not intended as a general training device, apart
from Fuku-Go competition, AFAIK.
So athletes train identical kitei just for competition
and just for a few years, while they may train some katas
for many years in their own manner, and these kata may show
fundamentally how they do karate. If you like, kitei is
a kata-like exercise, but can be judged more objectively,
and permits fewer initial advantages or disadvantages to
athletes from different backgrounds based on style or
time spent practicing a particular kata. Maybe a better
or different demonstration of general skill, which is the
point of Fuku-Go. Thanks for making me think about it. :)
> Kata competition is competition in the performance of kata. We don't add
in
> juggling, because juggling isn't relevent to karate.
>
> If kitei is relevent, it's a kata. If it's not relevent, if do it?
Look, if we are talking about why certain things are
allowed in tournament competition, it looks to me like
the kata competition allows the major kata which have
been taught in traditional karate for decades or centuries
in various ways (including some which are not taught in
Shotokan). In contrast, the Fuku-Go event requires an
exercise which is not taught in any style and is only
used for competition for a few years, which must be
performed within very narrow parameters. That's how
it's different, and it's called kitei to refer to those
distinct characteristics.
Call it a kata anyway, if that floats your boat, but
the exercise required in the Fuku-Go competition event
is distinct from those permitted in the kata competition
events in the above respects.
> Grand Poobah of the Grammor and Syntax Police:
"Grammor?"
"Diction."
Regards,
Mike Krantz
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
snipola
Traditional karate must maintain it's traditional
roots and mental philosophy. :) That's not a
quote, but he'd probably like it.
>
> I think that's kind of silly, don't you?
Hmm. No. That's just his opinion. And he has
just as much right to be arbitrary as you. His
actions just get examined more and he does answer
to others. <shrug>
Kitei is not really meant to be modified. If some of the
various persons who know it wish to continue to practice
it then they can. HOWEVER for the purposes of competition
it is meant to be scrapped and a different set of moves put
into place and called Kitei. It's just a compulsory skillset
that will change every four years.
Nishiyama did exactly what half of the instructors in the
country had been talking about for years. He put together
an event that includes kata skills AND kumite skills AND
he worked out a way that anyone of any style can compete
and be judged on exactly the same moves.
Bradley Webb
Mark Goetsch wrote:
>
> rob said:
> $ Why can Nishiyama haul off and create a kata that is designed to be
> $ changed, and then change it regularly, while at the same time teaching
> $ that "traditional karate must not be modernized."
>
> Mr. Nishiyama doesn't claim Kitei as a new form of Kata, it will not be
> added to the 25 currently in the system. This is just a method where two
> people can do Kata on a head to head basis with equal time in practice (or
> equal amount of time to practice).
>
> Mark
Well if he ever decides to form his own ryu he could put it in
and he would end up renaming it to something else.
Brad.
***Leom Sill, in Dallas 5/9 & 5/10***
Mark Goetsch
Roberto Alvelais wrote:
> Since the ITKF is very slanted toward's shotokan, it seems that
> simply doing shotokan kata will allow adequate comparison of kata
> performance. If one's looking to compare the same kata, just pick one
> of the extant 25 and have the competitors perform that one.. Why make
> up another for this purpose?
>
> What it looks like to me is a way to stack the odds that one
> particular dojo in the world will be able to claim that they
> consistantly produce Local, National & World Champions. Since the
> kata changes and the changes eminate from one particular dojo in the
> world.
You missed the whole point. The Kata was to level the playing field. The
techniques in thier were a good percentage Shotokan but also had some
newer techniques and som Goju techniques. It by far isn't perfect but it
at least is a first try.
If it was so slanted the kata part of Fuko-go whould be won by that
Dojo, no?? But as it is the spread of winning is quite even and doesn't
seem to show that bias.
Mark
Bradley Webb
Roberto Alvelais wrote:
>
> On 3 May 1998 05:42:27 GMT, "Mark Goetsch" <no...@cyberconnect.com>
> wrote:
> >added to the 25 currently in the system. This is just a method where two
> >people can do Kata on a head to head basis with equal time in practice (or
> >equal amount of time to practice).
> >
> >Mark
>
> simply doing shotokan kata will allow adequate comparison of kata
> performance. If one's looking to compare the same kata, just pick one
> of the extant 25 and have the competitors perform that one.. Why make
> up another for this purpose?
Because not all of those 25 are shotokan :) They include Shito-ryu,
Goju-Ryu, and Wado-Ryu kata. The ITKF whats to keep to the ideal
that each teacher is different and each person is different which
may lead them to slight differences of performance. The ITKF is
also not requiring the kata competitors to learn all these kata.
I believe this may be coming done the pike for the WUKO/WKF, if
it's not already a requirement.
>
> What it looks like to me is a way to stack the odds that one
> particular dojo in the world will be able to claim that they
> consistantly produce Local, National & World Champions. Since the
> kata changes and the changes eminate from one particular dojo in the
> world.
Hmm, Fukugo winners in the US(AAKF) have come from these places
men women
94 CA(1st),TX(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
95 MN(1st),OR(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
96 TX(1st),MN(2nd) MD(1st),IL(2nd)
97 CA(1st),MN(2nd) OR(1st),CA(2nd)
I don't remember the womens as well as the mens, sorry
there may be errors. 97 I'm sure on, and my rotten
memory sticks to Jackie Voight of MD for the prev years.
So does that blow your conspiracy theory out of the water?
I'm sure that paranoids will say NOT!
As for intls, men winners are from Argentina, Brazil, Italy,
Poland. For women, its been Italy, Brazil, Romania.
Brad.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Sun, 03 May 1998 08:40:05 GMT, Roberto Alvelais wrote:
>
> :What it looks like to me is a way to stack the odds that one
> :particular dojo in the world will be able to claim that they
> :consistantly produce Local, National & World Champions. Since the
> :kata changes and the changes eminate from one particular dojo in the
> :world.
>
And very wrong. See other posts.
Please do more research before casting
aspersions, doubts and shadows.
However I imagine that's how alot of people
think <shrug>.
I wish I could get as much of Nishiyama sensei's time
and energy as that statement somehow seems to say.
Then I might actually be able to break the lock that
the Italian team seems to have.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On 02 May 1998 18:20:18 GMT, Karateka63 wrote:
> :I have also heard Mr. Nishiyama say this...at the time he said Kitei was a kata
> :that was not a kata, just a training exercise...
This is how kata start. As training exercises. Whether this
set of moves can stand the test of time... Maybe in
ten years it'll be a kata. Right now it's only a
set of compulsory moves that help me to win a medal.
> Or it could mean that Nishiyama doesn't have a clear explanation for a
> situation that is a paradox in the world that he has created. He says
> "thou shalt not invent thine own kata." But, then he does it.
> "It isn't really a kata." He says.
>
> "How so?" We enquire?
Because a kata is supposed to involve learning one or more
principles of karate that can be applied towards fighting.
(My Definition, not Nishiyama's)
> Is this confusing you as much as me? The problem is that he is
> breaking his own rules, so the rules cannot be applied to determine
> what the thing is. Of course it is a *real* kata. Yes, he changes
> it.
By your definitions, not his.
>
> Thus, shodan, nidan, and sandan will be born. He knows that. He
> wants that, I'm sure.
Rob, you do put a smile on my face and help
me to be just a little more paranoid. :)
>
> RHIP. "Rank has its privileges." _He_ can change a kata. _He_ can
> make a kata. _You_ cannot.
Exactly so. You are being hypcritical here Rob. You say to your
students "I'm the teacher, you'll learn it my way" or some such
similar paraphrase. RHIP.
> When you look at it that way, it isn't confusing at all. It's
> sickening, but not confusing.
Then everybody is sick, You, Me, Rob Alvelais, Elmar, up to
Nishiyama and Hayashi. Deal with it. It's a competition
device.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
> On Sun, 03 May 1998 15:00:24 GMT, Elmar Schmeisser wrote:
> :Look at the taikyoku "kata" - they're exercises as well, and not really
> :kata in the old sense (of close combat self defense training routines).
>
>
> Just because they are bad kata doesn't mean they aren't kata.
> Nishiyama has created a kata, and has mandated it change per his
> wishes regularly - but doesn't want anyone pointing that out.
They have become Kata. The Heians were invented as exercise
and they became kata over the years. The same with the set
known as Taikyoku.
This thing might become a kata, but that remains to be seen.
Roshan Mamarvar
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> : Kata has a different evolution.
>
> No it doesn't. Not really.
> :designed specifically for a tournament comparison.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is the key IMO, and taking this as major term to define the
difference between traditional kata, and modern sports-kata, I'd
say they really have a different evolution.
Roshan
--
______________________________________________________________
.oO° Member of the Secret Order of the ^v^ °Oo.
Homepage: http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Roshan.Mamarvar/index.htm
Karate: http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Roshan.Mamarvar/Karate.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bradley Webb
Ucha Aratangy wrote:
>
> It's the first time I'm posting, so forgive me if my question (and my
> english), is not very good.
>
> I would like to know when the kata Kitei was created. As far as I
> understood, it is a very recent kata, created to contain stances and
> movements from many different styles. How was it created?
Nishiyama Sensei had been thinking about it and working
on it for some time before it's "debut". I remember
watching him during warmups and sometimes he would be
going through the movements. Of course, that's all in
hindsight. At the time I thought he was working on
what we were going to do in that particular class.
Silly me :).
It debuted in the 93/94 time frame. Nishiyama Sensei
travelled his rear off to try and teach to as many of
the students and teachers as possible. He also made
it available to anybody with a SASE (self addressed
and stamped envelope) in a written format. He didn't do
a video tape of it, to my knowledge.
As an aside, the term "Kitei" is used by at least one
Aikido group with a similar meaning... in other words
a set of standardized-compulsory-defined-techniques.
George answered your other question and welcome to the
AMAKS Club. I assume that you have read the FAQ because
you used the filter, but just for you....
Have a FAQ-tastic day.
Tom Mitchell
On Mon, 4 May 1998, Bradley Webb wrote:
> twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
> > Why can Nishiyama haul off and create a kata that is designed to be
> > changed, and then change it regularly, while at the same time teaching
> > that "traditional karate must not be modernized."
>
> Traditional karate must maintain it's traditional
> roots and mental philosophy. :) That's not a
> quote, but he'd probably like it.
>
> >
> > I think that's kind of silly, don't you?
>
> Hmm. No. That's just his opinion. And he has
> just as much right to be arbitrary as you. His
> actions just get examined more and he does answer
> to others. <shrug>
This notion of Kitei makes me wonder about
how we communicate the correct way to do
anything.
It is not uncommon for some to work on an advanced kata for
a year or so to get it ''right''. i.e. know it well enough
to teach.
So I wonder, how is the correct way to execute a set of
compulsory exercises taught. The hand full close to the
inventor take their year. Then they go forth with the
'correct' way and year later another group can go forth,
until the entire organization has the word. This notion of
a changing Kitei/kata sounds as if it would bias winners to
the inner circle.
At first this sounded like a good idea but if I can see both
^v^ and ^V^ in this group in a world where it is so very
easy to copy exactly. Would this work for a large world
wide organization? Does it work?
-.-
Tom Mitchell - mi...@NSsgi.com, mi...@NSrelay.csd.sgi.com,
mi...@NSacm.org NS = No Spam
Jon Keeling
Mark Goetsch wrote:
> rob said:
> $ Why can Nishiyama haul off and create a kata that is designed to be
> $ changed, and then change it regularly, while at the same time teaching
> $ that "traditional karate must not be modernized."
>
> Mr. Nishiyama doesn't claim Kitei as a new form of Kata, it will not be
> added to the 25 currently in the system. This is just a method where two
> people can do Kata on a head to head basis with equal time in practice (or
> equal amount of time to practice).
>
> Mark
Does Nishiyama Sensei not include Jiin in his list of kata?
I'm wondering why you say '25' instead of '26,' which is how
many kata are recognized as official JKA kata.
-Jon
Jon Keeling
Roberto Alvelais wrote:
> This didn't seem to go through. Sorry if it is a repeat
>
> On Sat, 02 May 1998 14:44:25 -0400,
> twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> >RHIP. "Rank has its privileges." _He_ can change a kata. _He_ can
> >make a kata. _You_ cannot.
> >
> >When you look at it that way, it isn't confusing at all. It's
> >sickening, but not confusing.
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> >Rob Redmond, big...@mindspring.com
> >http://bigred.home.mindspring.com/
> >Member of the Secret Order of the ^v^
>
> Absolutely!! It would seem that Mr. Nakayama or others in the JKA
> changed a lot of the kata. For example, I just learned the Shito Ryu
> version of Unsu (we call it Unshu) . It's different from the Shotokan
> version. It is said that Unsu was "borrowed" from Shito Ryu so it had
> to be changed from that "original" to it's current form. (In shito
> ryu the opening spear hand is with the hand on the side of the rear
> leg. (gyaku te ippon nukite. neh?) The kicks from the ground are
> definitely back kicks. just to point out a couple of differences.)
> So why can they create or change kata and not us?
>
I would call it "gyaku ippon nukite," vs. the Shotokan version of"kizami ippon
nukite." Whatever...
More interesting, conserning terminology--
The term "Unsu" as many of the kata names, is composed
of Chinese pronunciations of the characters, or at least pronunciations
closer to the original Chinese.
The "su" of "Unsu" would usually be pronounced "te" in normal
Japanese, like the "te" in "Karate." There are alternate pronunciations
for most Japanese characters, and this is no exception. "shu" is
one of the other choices, but I've never heard of any other reading
in 'Japanese' for this kanji as "su." The Chinese, by the way, is "shou."
Therefore, I believe the Shito-ryu pronunciation is actually more
'correct,' according to Japanese linguistics.
> This brings me to possibly another thread, bunkai.
>
As long as I'm onto Japanese terminology, I think it's worthpointing out that
"bunkai" means "analysis," as an analysis
of a kata's moves.
"Application" is actually "ouyou" (or "ohyou") or tekiyou.
I think "ouyou" is the best word to use if you are talking strictly
about the self-defense applications. If you are including anything
else, like mechanics, then "bunkai" is also fine.
> It seems to me that most of the bunkai that has been given for the
> shotokan kata are "reverse engineered" . You start with the kata and
> you go " what on earth could That be?" and come up with an answer.
> (Not a bad thing IMO. )
>
I also think this is fine. I hope so. That's what I've done withall the kata
myself over the years.
> Obviously the shotokan kata were changed at some point (Nakayama, JKA
> committee, Gigo or Gichin Funakoshi). When these changes were made,
> they therefore changed the bunkai from what it was in the original
> Okinawan or Shito Ryu kata. What then is "THE" bunkai? Is it
> what the person who changed the kata said it is?
> Well, what if he didn't say? Then is the bunkai up to the performer
> to specify for himself? If the bunkai wasn't specified by the person
> or committee who changed the kata then is there even such a thing as
> "THE" bunkai?
>
My opinion has always been that as long as you don't change thekata TOO much
(this is where the conroversy comes in), then I think
you can imagine any application that works. But you should have
AT LEAST one application in mind for every move in every kata.
> Mr. Keeling, did Mr. Nakayama dictate what the bunkai was for the kata
> that changed from their original Okinawan or Shito Ryu forms?
>
Nakayama Sensei rarely discussed self-defense applications in any ofthe
classes I had with him. But my classes with him were day-to-day
at his private dojo, not at camps. He may have gone into application
at camps/clinics, I don't know. He did discuss application at times though,
particularly how some instructors under him seemed to be changing
them to make their kata flashier at tournaments (like Yahara Sensei's
jumping in Unsu). But he didn't really discuss the deviations from
other styles when I was there.
> If the bunkai wasn't specified, then it kind of makes one wonder about
> those who propose to $how you the $ecret$ contained within your
> shotokan kata.
>
There are no 'secrets' in karate. All the answers are there.People looking
for '$ecrets' are mostly those too lazy to figure
things out for themselves. And those people, I believe, deserve
to pay for their laziness.
> Boy, lots of questions!
>
> Rob
>
Keep those questions coming!-Jon
George Winter
On Mon, 04 May 1998 15:13:43 -0400,
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>However, the results you show above pretty much show that CA, MN, TX,
>and MD control all competitions. Which dojo are these? Nishiyama's,
>Fusaro's, Brad's, and who else?
>
I asked Brad the same question :-) Jackie Voight of Mamood (sp)
Tabassi's Dojo
I think the winners are the same *people*, so the dojo list doesen't
change much.
I think there is a mild-prejudice in favor of previous champions.
Their quality is assumed, their "mistakes" are innovations, etc. This
may well contribute. You don't look for a fantastic performance from
Joe Schmoe, so you don't give him full marks. Next year, you know you
are in for a good performance, so you are prepared to award higher
marks.
--
George <gwi...@q-sys.com>
AMAKS On-line archive http://shell7.ba.best.com/~qsys/amaks/
Mark Goetsch
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 10:08:22 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
> :Hmm, Fukugo winners in the US(AAKF) have come from these places
> : men women
> :94 CA(1st),TX(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
> :95 MN(1st),OR(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
> :96 TX(1st),MN(2nd) MD(1st),IL(2nd)
> :97 CA(1st),MN(2nd) OR(1st),CA(2nd)
The ole' memory goes every once in a while but '95 in the men's division
looks suspicious. Oregon fouled out on Minnesota( (the cheek crack heard
across the world), Minnesota lost to Chicago in the Kata portion and
then Chicao narrowly lost to someone from the South?? (who was also the
Kumite champion for that year). I'll look at the tape again tonight just
to make sure.
Mark
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 10:08:22 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
> :Hmm, Fukugo winners in the US(AAKF) have come from these places
> : men women
> :94 CA(1st),TX(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
> :95 MN(1st),OR(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
> :96 TX(1st),MN(2nd) MD(1st),IL(2nd)
> :97 CA(1st),MN(2nd) OR(1st),CA(2nd)
> :So does that blow your conspiracy theory out of the water?
> :I'm sure that paranoids will say NOT!
>
> and that it was a conspiracy.
>
> However, the results you show above pretty much show that CA, MN, TX,
> and MD control all competitions. Which dojo are these? Nishiyama's,
> Fusaro's, Brad's, and who else?
Well the CA's train out of Nishiyama's NKI and
Penny Ringwood's Marina Del Ray Dojo.
TX is me. I'm the maniac. There are other people
around here, they just won't go <shrug>.
The Oregon people are ex-Robert Graves students
who now have their own schools up there.
Maryland was Mamood Tabassi's school.
The Illinois girl was from Joe Gonzalez' school.
(And I got eliminated by an Ill independant in 95 ;p).
The Minnesotan is out of Joel Ertl's dojo, not Fusaro's.
Fusaro's student took third in 97.
Even so you're only going to have a certain number of athletes,
show up because you only have a certain number of medals.
Unlike other associations there is no wieght class.
One event, one gold, period. That's the way the events are.
The most # of athletes from any given region is 3 per
individual event. And that's if there are three willing to
travel. That's my biggest beef. I hardly ever see new people.
It's almost as if instructors are squelching the competitive
attitude of the students. Either that or nobody is willing
to spend the money to get hit :).
> Seems pretty cliqued up to me - but then it has to be considering the
> subjective nature of karate competition. There is no way to have a
> "fair" karate competition unless you put two naked people in a cage
> and only let the last one alive out.
Yep, sortof. I mean, really, given the attitude:
"If I can't get my way I'll take my ball and go play elsewhere."
that most associations seemed to have been born out of.
Even Nishiyama and JKA Japan(in 1989).
Or him and the ISKF.
Bradley Webb
Tom Mitchell wrote:
snip stuff...
> This notion of Kitei makes me wonder about
> how we communicate the correct way to do
> anything.
>
> It is not uncommon for some to work on an advanced kata for
> a year or so to get it ''right''. i.e. know it well enough
> to teach.
>
> So I wonder, how is the correct way to execute a set of
> compulsory exercises taught. The hand full close to the
> inventor take their year. Then they go forth with the
> 'correct' way and year later another group can go forth,
> until the entire organization has the word. This notion of
> a changing Kitei/kata sounds as if it would bias winners to
> the inner circle.
It works for the Gymnastics and Skating world.
The routines are spread through the network and
at the major meets the year before it goes live.
I.e. at the 96 Olympics the Belarussians presented the
compulsory exercises for the next four years.
What'll happen is the developers will have some
early rampup time, but this is minor IMHO.
Then at the major national and continental camps
the new compulsory will be taught. And all of
us little maniacs will be dutifully videotaping
and taking notes like machines. Because if you want
to win at competition you'd better be working smarter
and harder than the other guys.
What inner circle? The countries with the best coaching
and training programs are the ones who win.
The Italians have locked the most wins in the last two
world championships. Easily. I watched. The only
countries that can compete with them are all funded:
Poland, Romania, Argentina, Brazil, and sometimes Canada.
The US has won 6 golds in internationals since 1991.
4 women’s medals, 2 men’s. It's the coaching and training
systems, not some inner sanctum sanctorum.
Sorry, I'm just jealous because our coaching and national
training program is left up to what the athletes can do
on their own. Soapbox mode off :(.
Brad<sulking>
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 09:16:51 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
>
> <snip good stuff>
>
> I appreciated your :) - it made me feel like the entire world is not
> upside down.
>
> :AND
> :he worked out a way that anyone of any style can compete
> :and be judged on exactly the same moves.
>
And shorin-ryu judges.
Richard Kim's group have quite a few senior
people who are judges and they are usually
willing to travel to help Kim sensei.
Most nationals they will have at least two judges,
sometimes 4 or 6 who are around the rings judging.
My personal favorite is Leon Sensei, as polite and
as humble as can be. While his karate probably just
isn't there any more (at 70 +), I would not want to
be in front of him if he had even a broomstick in
his hands. His eyes are still pretty good too.
As far as local US shito/wado/goju ryu...
It's not because Nishiyama won't teach them. It's
just that all their sensei's went WUKO. Argentina
is bringing out more shito-ryu stylists who will
hopefully go into judging.
Given that, who's he gonna call? The ghostbusters?
Brad, I liked that one:).
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 10:34:09 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
>
> :Deal with it. It's a competition
> :device.
>
> Haha. Joke's on you. Guess what I don't have to deal with?
Agreed.
I choose to.
You are welcome to choose not to.
That's ok.
Brad.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 11:11:52 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
>
> :As an aside, the term "Kitei" is used by at least one
> :Aikido group with a similar meaning... in other words
> :a set of standardized-compulsory-defined-techniques.
>
I believe it's a basic philosophy thing with
Nishiyama which may spring out his Japanese origins.
The difference between "Kata" and competition stuff.
He just refuses to try to standardize the JKA kata like
the ISKF. If you specificly "want to study under him"
he'll alter it to all get out, because he has his POV
of how kata are/should done. Yet he hasn't changed his
tune towards taking wayward shotokan JKA people and
making them do katas his way.
For instance, Bassai-dai. I do some of it different
from him. He corrected/corrects me, and I ask for
an application demo... at which point he responds
asking for my application. After I perform on one of
the other students in class, he then shows me his
application and states that this is his preference.
He's never bothered to correct it since ^-^.
It's like if you can show understanding he's not that
concerned or anal-retentive.
Ucha Aratangy
Bradley Webb wrote in message <354DE8...@nortel.com>...
>George answered your other question and welcome to the
>AMAKS Club. I assume that you have read the FAQ because
>you used the filter, but just for you....
>Have a FAQ-tastic day.
>
>Brad.
Well, thanks for a complete answer, and for the welcome. Actually, the
question that was really going thru my mind, when I started the whole thing
about kitei, and it was "developed", is being answered and requestioned all
over tihs thread...It is "How can someone create a kata and say it is a
instituition from "now on"? What is the real meaning, and history, of
"kata-making"? Do we practice them so our kumite, our karate, gets better or
in order to be better judged in contests? Is there a line border between the
two things or one thing takes to the other?
Well, again please forgive me if my english is bad, and my question not
suitable...but I'm new to the group, and reading all this is bringing a
whole lot of new questions to my mind...
Ucha
Mike Krantz
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On 4 May 1998 14:30:21 GMT, Mike Krantz wrote:
>
> :> If it's not "really" a kata, why are we competing with it?
> :
> :Because it's a test of skill.
>
> provide so therefore a cheesy sort-of-kata needs to be invented?
You are right. Kitei doesn't test different skills than kata.
But it tests them more "evenly" in the context of tournament
competition. See previous post.
> Why are we making something like Kitei when karate has so many other
> kata that are outside the shotokan curriculum that could be imported.
> Seiunchin, Sanchin, etc. etc etc.
Because they are in someone's curriculum, and performed differently
by different people with different ideas and different opportunities
to practice. But you saw the previous post, yah?
> Just more JKA, non-creative, "what the heck should we do next?" stuff
> - that's what it seems like.
Maybe even less creative, "what are the other sports doing
for competition that we're not." I think it has value,
but not necessarily originality. Except for looking at
what works in other fields outside of one's own familiar --
see what the rest of the world is doing, today -- rather than
more JKA, head-in-the-sand, "this is what we've always done."
> : these kata may show
> :fundamentally how they do karate.
>
> I thought that was the point.
A point, perhaps. They may not show how well they
can perform something new that they haven't been
doing for years. Is that not also an important part
of karate?
More important, kata may show your karate, but it
can't be judged very objectively. So it's good for
competition, and so's the other thing (kitei).
BTW, I back off on the whole semantic thing about
whether a kitei is also a kata. It's even called
kata on the front page of the specification.
But it's obviously not the same as the traditional kata.
It's not the same in competition, because the rules and
purpose are different. It's not the same in karate,
because it doesn't have the history. No traditional
kata was created from scratch and practiced specifically
for tournaments for three years. Maybe some were created
from scratch and evolved (or stagnated) for many decades.
FWIW, this kitei hasn't had time to do either.
Someone who doesn't think those differences are interesting or
significant probably has no reason to give it any attention.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 09:30:10 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
>
> :***Leon Sill, in Dallas 5/9 & 5/10***
>
> Has he been booted from ISKF? Or did he leave on his own?
When you come right down to it,
whether deserved or not...
They booted him, recinded rank, and revoked his
certifications. Granted I haven't seen the letter,
yet there was one sent to all All-South members and
I heard all of ISKF.
Bradley Webb
Actually in this case, I'm looking at the ITKF Comp Rules
and there are 26 different katas + variations that apply.
While counting the shotokan vs non-shotokan specific kata
there were 13 that are not in the shotokan lexicon.
BTW, Kanku(sho/dai) and all it's variations were counted
as 1 of the 26.
Bradley Webb
George Winter wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 15:13:43 -0400,
> twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> >
> >and MD control all competitions. Which dojo are these? Nishiyama's,
> >Fusaro's, Brad's, and who else?
> >
>
> Tabassi's Dojo
>
> I think the winners are the same *people*, so the dojo list doesen't
> change much.
>
> I think there is a mild-prejudice in favor of previous champions.
> Their quality is assumed, their "mistakes" are innovations, etc. This
> may well contribute. You don't look for a fantastic performance from
> Joe Schmoe, so you don't give him full marks. Next year, you know you
> are in for a good performance, so you are prepared to award higher
> marks.
That's the same as in any competition through,
you have to earn respect one way or another.
Either you have to able to stomp the other guy
so blatantly there's no doubt or when it's a
judgement call you are depending on the judges
interpretation. Now if the judge has watched
you stomp others in years past... it's just the
way things are.
You need to realize it when you go into a contest.
Even though I go to ISKF and WUKO style comps I
fully understand what I type of rep that I need to
build before I'll get on an even keel.
George Winter
On Mon, 04 May 1998 16:32:24 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
wrote:
>
>It's like if you can show understanding he's not that
>concerned or anal-retentive.
Someone mentioned that he failed a student for changing a move & not
being able to explain the bunkai justification.
--
George
_____________________________________________________________________
George Winter gwi...@q-sys.com
Qsys Ltd.
Information Systems Consulting
Elmar Schmeisser
[e-mailed & posted -- my isp seems to be missing sending things]
In message <355497a2...@news.mindspring.com> -
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com writes:
#Just because they are bad kata doesn't mean they aren't kata.
#Nishiyama has created a kata, and has mandated it change per his
#wishes regularly - but doesn't want anyone pointing that out.
OK - as Mike Krantz also pointed out, we need some definition of "kata". I
see a set of hierarchial possibilities:
1) the raw translation of the word - "shape/form". In this case it can be
used to mean the formal structural position/movement of anything - a hand
technique, a stance, something performed as a "basic" kihon-waza (the way
G. Funakoshi is reputed to have used it in his "autobiography" referring to
boasting about nukite).
2) A sequence of a set of the above - a kata of "kata". In this case, any
formalized combination (including kitei, taikyoku or one of Lester's
training combo's) is kata.
3) As in #2 above, but that is historical [through more than one teacher,
and the originator is dead] - in this case kitei and Lester's combo's fall
out, but the Taikyoku and the Heian stay in.
4) as in #3, but it must be structured around a coherent, non-tournament
self-defense theme or themes (i.e. have functional close combat bunkai) -
this kills the heian, the taikyoku (and the gekisai for our nahate
friends).
At the oment, I'm a kata purist - I draw the line between #3 and #4. I
think Rob is drawing the line between #1 and #2. I think Brad is drawing
the line between #2 and #3. Am I right?
- elmar.
Roshan Mamarvar
Jon Keeling wrote:
> Does Nishiyama Sensei not include Jiin in his list of kata?
> I'm wondering why you say '25' instead of '26,' which is how
> many kata are recognized as official JKA kata.
> -Jon
This is something I wonder often about. Some lists contain Jiin and
leave Wankan out, others vice versa. Has anyone the "official" list
of JKA-Kata, and do they contain Wankan or Jiin or even both?
Roshan Mamarvar
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Sun, 03 May 1998 23:46:59 -0500, Mike Krantz wrote:
>
> :But you don't re-invent kanku-dai from scratch into
> :some totally unrecognizable hodge-podge and say that's
> :the only thing that can be performed in kata events
> :for three years.
>
> Why not?
I think he meant: At least we wouldn't like that ! ;-)
DevonErik
Mike Krantz wrote:
>DevonErik <devo...@aol.com> wrote in article
>> If it's not "really" a kata, why are we competing with it?
>Because it's a test of skill.
Skill at what? Doing Kitei? An activity we have stated is "NOT" a kata? We
could as easily have a test of skill at juggling eggplants.
>I'll admit up front (again) that I'm still learning what kata
>is and is not
Not learning. Deciding. "Kata" is a word somebody made up. It means whatever we
want it to mean.
>Also, it is not intended as a general training device, apart
>from Fuku-Go competition, AFAIK.
So why do it?
>> Grand Poobah of the Grammor and Syntax Police:
>
>"Grammor?"
Scrambled ASCII. Don't know how that happened. Been fixed now.
-Devo...@aol.com
Grand Poobah of the Grammar and Syntax Police:
Self-appointed castigator of posters with poor English. (You have been warned!)
Richard Frazier
On Mon, 04 May 1998 20:38:36 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
wrote:
>They booted him, recinded rank, and revoked his
>certifications. Granted I haven't seen the letter,
>yet there was one sent to all All-South members and
>I heard all of ISKF.
Wow! If you get the opportunity, and Leon Sill is willing, you should
conduct an interview.
Mike Krantz
Roshan Mamarvar wrote:
>
> twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 03 May 1998 23:46:59 -0500, Mike Krantz wrote:
> >
> > :But you don't re-invent kanku-dai from scratch into
> > :some totally unrecognizable hodge-podge and say that's
> > :the only thing that can be performed in kata events
> > :for three years.
> >
> > Why not?
>
> I think he meant: At least we wouldn't like that ! ;-)
Actually, I was trying to place what "changing kata"
meant in the context of this thread. We all know that
instructors adjust how they teach any given kata to
what works best for them -- change a move slightly
to generate more power or fit a new application.
I don't see any objection there.
There's probably some disagreement about who (what
level) should do this, or institute more major changes
in a traditional kata all at once. I'm not going to
go there, and that's not what kitei is.
Perhaps the issue is that Mr. Nishiyama says that
most people, lower ranks, whatever should play with
the traditional kata and not just create their own
on the fly, and then creates kitei "on the fly" for
competition. That you beef, Rob?
OK. I think we've answered that. He and his colleagues
around the country and the world now create a new "kata"
every few years to be performed in the kitei segment of the
Fuku-Go event. The reason for this, the purpose it serves
which is distinct from the traditional kata, was enumerated
by myself and others several times in this thread.
He/they continues to recommend the traditional kata for
training and for kata competition. AFAIK, they do not
recommend (nor discourage) kitei exercises for that purpose.
I see no hypocrisy. They probably see the various traditional
kata as best and adequate tools for the purpose of learning
and practicing karate, but see a need to have an event with
a competition exercise that is uniformly defined and judged,
and is cleared and re-set periodically -- separate and in
addition to traditional kata competition.
I'm sure they think that anyone who sees a need for a new
kata just doesn't understand the traditional ones well
enough, and doesn't know enough to create a superior kata
to meet their own need. I'm sure I think that anyone who
sees no need for kitei or Fuku-Go in competition is surely
not interested in this. Whatever floats your boat. ;)
--
Regards,
Mike Krantz <mi...@ethos.net> 214-588-0379
Mike Krantz
Roshan Mamarvar wrote:
>
> Jon Keeling wrote:
>
> > Does Nishiyama Sensei not include Jiin in his list of kata?
> > I'm wondering why you say '25' instead of '26,' which is how
> > many kata are recognized as official JKA kata.
> > -Jon
>
> This is something I wonder often about. Some lists contain Jiin and
> leave Wankan out, others vice versa. Has anyone the "official" list
> of JKA-Kata, and do they contain Wankan or Jiin or even both?
Wankan is on the list. (#26)
Ji'in is also on the list.
I don't know what official JKA list means.
That sounds like a list of Shotokan kata.
What I saw was the ITKF competition list,
and roughly half are not taught in Shotokan
that I've ever heard.
Mike Krantz
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 21:16:45 -0500, Mike Krantz wrote:
>
> Yes, but I think that importing interesting kata is more productive
> than making a bad kata just for sports purposes.
Is kitei bad? How do you determine that.
Other kata are in the competition list.
I've never heard of them, which makes them interesting
and exotic. You want to teach them? Great!
> : Maybe some were created
> :from scratch and evolved (or stagnated) for many decades.
> :FWIW, this kitei hasn't had time to do either.
>
> Everything was created from scratch, Mike.
Yeah, but my point is that kitei doesn't have
the evolution and divergence associated with them.
(Also, the test that instructors kept teaching them.)
> :You are right. Kitei doesn't test different skills than kata.
> :But it tests them more "evenly" in the context of tournament
> :competition. See previous post.
>
> Forget about competition. I'm not competing in any ITKF tournies.
> It's really the same old thing.
> Again, forget about sports for a second and stand over here.
So you think karate competition in general is bad?
That's a new thread, right? Great. This one was
getting rilly old.
How about, "Sports gets more students interested."
vs. "Sports causes teaching of non-sport aspects
to lose ground."
How about, "Mr. Nishiyama is trying to define the
sport so as to incorporate rather than loose the art,
as much as possible."
> :Someone who doesn't think those differences are interesting or
> :significant probably has no reason to give it any attention.
>
> In other words, you have little respect for my position, therefore I
> should not speak about it?
No, you seem to be saying it's bad because you aren't interested.
If you aren't interested in competition and formal exercises,
do what floats your boat. As for respecting your position,
I think I do, but I can't have an opinion unless I understand
it better.
Mike Krantz
Sorry I answered you post badly.
I got confused on semantics.
DevonErik wrote:
>
> Mike Krantz wrote:
>
> >DevonErik <devo...@aol.com> wrote in article
>
> >> If it's not "really" a kata, why are we competing with it?
>
> >Because it's a test of skill.
>
> Skill at what? Doing Kitei? An activity we have stated is "NOT" a kata? We
> could as easily have a test of skill at juggling eggplants.
I backed off on "kata." I was wrong.
Yet it's still different in usage and
recent origin from traditional kata.
See elsewhere in thread.
> >Also, it is not intended as a general training device, apart
> >from Fuku-Go competition, AFAIK.
>
> So why do it?
Fuku-Go explained elsewhere in thread,
if you're interested in competition aspects of karate.
> Scrambled ASCII. Don't know how that happened. Been fixed now.
Thanks.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Tue, 05 May 1998 04:54:47 GMT, Shawn Jefferson wrote:
> :At the club, I've almost given up on everything I've been working on the
> :past couple of years and tend to just work on my reverse punch and hip
> :motion.
> :
> :I've really got to get it all straight in my head...
>
> Please let me know when you figure out how to beat it. I've been like
> this since 1993. I think I'm broken.
Why? There's nothing wrong with you. We've a number of nidans(15+ yr)
local who have reached a point in their lives where testing and tournies
just aren't where it's at for them. They are willing to help out,
judge,
whatever... but they just want to practice their particular kata and
a reverse punch, front kick combo. I used to bitch more about it
until I gave up. I can't change them (and I like them anyway) so
why waste my energy fretting. Or yours. Enjoy your differences from
me, I know that I intend to enjoy mine from you.
I don't think that Nishiyama thinks he is fixing tournament karate.
During tournies he sits there like a rock absorbing things,
trying not to interfere in the judging of the event.
Just as Shawn stated... he is adding another event. I don't think
that any ONE person whether from Nishiyama's position down to the
lowest white belt can FIX tournament karate. Everybody has to be
willing to give up the ego, the favoritism, their pre-concieved
notions about winning, losing, and not competing. It's just a
little set of contests about punching and kicking.
Of course if you waive all that experience, you'll be very malleable
in other peoples hands :).
Bradley Webb
Elmar Schmeisser wrote:
>
> [e-mailed & posted -- my isp seems to be missing sending things]
This seems to happening regular, for several weeks I would only recieve
half the posts here... And Rob A is consistently doubling his posts
for some reason ^-^.
>
> OK - as Mike Krantz also pointed out, we need some definition of "kata". I
> see a set of hierarchial possibilities:
snip elmar's definitions
> At the oment, I'm a kata purist - I draw the line between #3 and #4. I
> think Rob is drawing the line between #1 and #2. I think Brad is drawing
> the line between #2 and #3. Am I right?
Actually Elmar, I'm in agreement with you, it's just that I bow to
the majority. I realize that currently everyone and his brother
calls the heian and taikyoku kata, instead of what they started
out as - kihon. Somewhere between 1900 and 1950 they crossed a
barrier and became known as kata. Probably when they (the heian/
taikyoku/gekisai) got published in wide distribution.
In talking to some jujitsu folks, they call every formal demo of
a throw/whatever a "Kata" ie we have up to 3000 kata in our system.
When I heard that I howled with laughter, until I understood what
she meant :). Then I just snickered and remembered Lester's thing
about how many combos there can be based upon 7 stances, 5 basic blocks,
5 basic punches, 6 basic kicks, 6 basic directions of movement,
and 3 basic targets(face/stomach/groin).
P. Bromaghin
George Winter wrote
> Their quality is assumed, their "mistakes" are innovations, etc.
But in Fukogo, no innovations are allowed. You have to do the "not-kata"
exactly as it is designed.
I'm not sure everybody understands the format: They have elimination
brackets just like a regular competition, but alternate rounds of kumite
and one-on-one "not-kata" competition. In the "not-kata", both competitors
perform simultaneously and the winner is decided by the judges (there is no
score, only red or white flag).
As an aside, I have been shown the current kitei and done it a few times.
I don't like it. It feels like just a bunch of unrelated kihon strung
together with no theme. I don't get that satisfying feel that there is
something hiding from me that I will learn from time and repetition.
Bradley Webb
George Winter wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 16:32:24 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >It's like if you can show understanding he's not that
> >concerned or anal-retentive.
>
> Someone mentioned that he failed a student for changing a move & not
> being able to explain the bunkai justification.
It was in Minnesota.
Peter Bromaghin reported the incident.
As I remember the person performed the
kata a certain way, then when trying to
make application could not make that particular
motion work. Then the student changed how they
performed the movement to make it work in
application. Then went back to performing it
the former way. Nishiyama's question was why
are you doing it different then you just performed
it in the kata ( I think?).
Peter, your take? I'm citing from memory.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 16:34:39 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
>
> :That's ok.
>
> I'm ok...you're ok. Heck, I luv ya, man.
Ahem, not in front of the children.
Mark Goetsch
Bradley Webb wrote:
> In talking to some jujitsu folks, they call every formal demo of
> a throw/whatever a "Kata" ie we have up to 3000 kata in our system.
> When I heard that I howled with laughter, until I understood what
> she meant :). Then I just snickered and remembered Lester's thing
> about how many combos there can be based upon 7 stances, 5 basic blocks,
> 5 basic punches, 6 basic kicks, 6 basic directions of movement,
> and 3 basic targets(face/stomach/groin).
When I practiced any of the older Martial Arts (Kenjutsu, Jujitsu) the
terms for these sequences was Waza.
Mark
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Tue, 05 May 1998 08:04:57 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
>
> :>
> :> Please let me know when you figure out how to beat it. I've been like
> :> this since 1993. I think I'm broken.
> :
> :Why? There's nothing wrong with you. We've a number of nidans(15+ yr)
> :local who have reached a point in their lives where testing and tournies
> :just aren't where it's at for them.
>
> for an extended period and "feel my pain."
>
> George Weller did. I think he knows what I am talking about.
Now I feel like the Titanic.
Going to Japan. Me, probably never.
If I had figured out that I could have gone
when I was younger, yah. But given my current place
in life it would be only as a visitor or as a
short-termer(unless work footed the bill).
Maybe in 5 years.
And to give you this, since talking to you
folk I think I'm a lot more real about Japan
and what it may or may not mean.
Brad.
P. Bromaghin
GMT, George Winter wrote:
>
> :Someone mentioned that he failed a student for changing a move & not
> :being able to explain the bunkai justification.
>
The guy was testing for sandan. What happened was that his movements in
doing the bunkai were slightly different from his movements in the kata. I
can't remember the kata or the particular moves. It had to do with
delivering a finishing blow to an attacker who, based on the guy's
explanation of the prior move, would not be where the blow was directed.
After about 3 or 4 questions he was so completely tied up in knots he
wished he'd never got out of bed that morning. Unfortunately, he was
taught that bunkai by the guy sitting next to Nishiyama. Several people
inferred from the comments that the guy would have been okay if he HAD
changed the movement in the kata to match the bunkai.
P. Bromaghin
Bradley Webb wrote
>
> I don't think that Nishiyama thinks he is fixing tournament karate.
> During tournies he sits there like a rock absorbing things,
> trying not to interfere in the judging of the event.
>
Brad,
Were you here for the last Nationals? He interfered big time in the kumite
final against a guy, Pat Richoux, from your region (your club?). The
judges were standing in a circle trying to figure out how to avoid the
embarrassment of giving the national championship to a guy who got fouled
in 3 matches on his way to it. Nishiyama walked up, said about 2 words,
and the match continued, eventually to be won by Ron Vance from California.
BTW, I didn't attend the preliminaries, but was told that he also won one
round be default when both potential competitors were disqualified for
excesssive contact.
Bradley Webb
P. Bromaghin wrote:
>
> Bradley Webb wrote
> >
> > I don't think that Nishiyama thinks he is fixing tournament karate.
> > During tournies he sits there like a rock absorbing things,
> > trying not to interfere in the judging of the event.
> >
> Brad,
> Were you here for the last Nationals? He interfered big time in the kumite
> final against a guy, Pat Richoux, from your region (your club?). The
> judges were standing in a circle trying to figure out how to avoid the
> embarrassment of giving the national championship to a guy who got fouled
> in 3 matches on his way to it. Nishiyama walked up, said about 2 words,
> and the match continued, eventually to be won by Ron Vance from California.
That was when Ron hit him in the throat/chin and
Pat didn't try to block, eh? Pat's from Houston, BTW.
Nishiyams does try to not do anything, but doesn't
always succeed. :) :( I don't remember what
his words were but given the situation it was almost
certainly: "Make your decision and get on with the match"
in a mixture of japlish.
I was there, Judging :(. Due to illness I wasn't allowed to
compete. Poison Ivy's a bitch. Thankfully I was probably
to the side (or a sidejudge) of that match. The mens kumite
was poor this year. Almost everybody seemed to forget about
technique and became all shoulders and head-hunters. Two
of the people I brought from Texas couldn't block face for
their life, and I'm sitting there watching the show.
Very Frustrating.
Conversly the womens kumite was better than it'd been in 4yrs.
Go figure.
In Hindsight we should have dq'ed people
(including Pat) for taking face hits or you
DQ the other guy, for hitting the face.
> BTW, I didn't attend the preliminaries, but was told that he also won one
> round be default when both potential competitors were disqualified for
> excesssive contact.
That match both guys went semi-nuts, Doroff and another
guy, they just kept getting wilder until they got DQ'd.
Wouldn't stop trying for each others heads even after
the warnings. And Alex(the center judge) doesn't take
kindly to people who don't listen.
Roberto Alvelais
On Mon, 04 May 1998 21:13:35 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
wrote:
>Actually in this case, I'm looking at the ITKF Comp Rules
>and there are 26 different katas + variations that apply.
>While counting the shotokan vs non-shotokan specific kata
>there were 13 that are not in the shotokan lexicon.
Since you're looking in the rules, does the ITKF take off points if
you don't end within about a foot or so from your starting point?
If so, is it just for Shotokan Kata or any styles kata?
R...@JKO.com
"Karate is a form of martial arts in which people who have had years and =
years of training can, using only their hands and feet, make some of the =
worst movies in the history of the world."
-Dave Barry
Roberto Alvelais
On Mon, 04 May 1998 10:08:22 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
wrote:
>Hmm, Fukugo winners in the US(AAKF) have come from these places
> men women
>94 CA(1st),TX(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
>95 MN(1st),OR(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
>96 TX(1st),MN(2nd) MD(1st),IL(2nd)
>97 CA(1st),MN(2nd) OR(1st),CA(2nd)
>I don't remember the womens as well as the mens, sorry
>there may be errors. 97 I'm sure on, and my rotten
>memory sticks to Jackie Voight of MD for the prev years.
>So does that blow your conspiracy theory out of the water?
>I'm sure that paranoids will say NOT!
These all shotokan stylists?
Re conspiracies:
Fiddle away Nero! There are conspiracies all around us. So why is it
that we lose socks in the laundry but mysteriously acquire wire
hangers???
(do I really *need* a smiley with that?)
Rob
Roberto Alvelais
On Mon, 04 May 1998 16:19:24 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
wrote:
>twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 04 May 1998 09:16:51 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
>>
>> <snip good stuff>
>>
>> I appreciated your :) - it made me feel like the entire world is not
>> upside down.
>>
>> :AND
>> :he worked out a way that anyone of any style can compete
>> :and be judged on exactly the same moves.
>>
>> By shotokan judges?
>
>And shorin-ryu judges.
>Richard Kim's group have quite a few senior
>people who are judges and they are usually
>willing to travel to help Kim sensei.
You know, despite what Mr. Kim may assert, his karate is not Shorin
Ryu. His kata and his kihon seem nearly identical to shotokan. I'm
not saying that his karate is bad or anything but, it's not indicative
of a Shorin style nor does it resemble the Shorinji ryu that you'd
find on Okinawa. Having him or his students judging is much like
having another shotokan exponent judging.
Roberto Alvelais
There's a lot of talk about the desire to create a "level playing
field" to compare peoples kata across various styles. Hence the
creation of Kitei. But what about the body dynamics? For example,
JKF Goju Kai has a slight forward lean of their torso when in front
stance. If they were to perform Kitei with that lean would the judges
consider it to be an error? If so, then it would seem to favor styles
other than JKF Goju. So how is it then achieving the stated goal?
The body dynamics are different with the different styles. Even
"same" stances are different. Shorin Ryu's Shiko Dachi is not as wide
as Shito Ryu's. Shito ryu's Cat stance is longer than Shotokan's.
So which shiko dachi is going to be used? If you use the other, is it
an error?
Bradley Webb
Roberto Alvelais wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 10:08:22 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Hmm, Fukugo winners in the US(AAKF) have come from these places
> > men women
> >94 CA(1st),TX(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
> >95 MN(1st),OR(2nd) MD(1st),CA(2nd)
> >96 TX(1st),MN(2nd) MD(1st),IL(2nd)
> >97 CA(1st),MN(2nd) OR(1st),CA(2nd)
> >I don't remember the womens as well as the mens, sorry
> >there may be errors. 97 I'm sure on, and my rotten
> >memory sticks to Jackie Voight of MD for the prev years.
> >So does that blow your conspiracy theory out of the water?
> >I'm sure that paranoids will say NOT!
>
> These all shotokan stylists?
>
Ah, Rob. You and I both know they are.
Almost all the non-shotokan in the US are
in the USANKF. Those that aren't are in the
AAU or in none of the above...
All of their sensei are in those orgs.
and thats where they stay...
Bradley Webb
Roberto Alvelais wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 21:13:35 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Actually in this case, I'm looking at the ITKF Comp Rules
> >and there are 26 different katas + variations that apply.
> >While counting the shotokan vs non-shotokan specific kata
> >there were 13 that are not in the shotokan lexicon.
>
> Since you're looking in the rules, does the ITKF take off points if
> you don't end within about a foot or so from your starting point?
>
> If so, is it just for Shotokan Kata or any styles kata?
Yes.
No. It's for all styles. This is one of the
ITKF items that other styles have an issue with.
Yes it came from shotokan, as far as we are all concerned.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Thu, 07 May 1998 06:20:19 GMT, Roberto Alvelais wrote:
>
> :So why is it
> :that we lose socks in the laundry but mysteriously acquire wire
> :hangers???
>
> my new neo-fascist suit.
I have got to get one of those suits. I need more socks.
Bradley Webb
Roberto Alvelais wrote:
>
> There's a lot of talk about the desire to create a "level playing
> field" to compare peoples kata across various styles. Hence the
> creation of Kitei. But what about the body dynamics? For example,
> JKF Goju Kai has a slight forward lean of their torso when in front
> stance. If they were to perform Kitei with that lean would the judges
> consider it to be an error? If so, then it would seem to favor styles
> other than JKF Goju. So how is it then achieving the stated goal?
> The body dynamics are different with the different styles. Even
Is your body constructed differently? Leaning is not viewed as
good in medical and physiological journals... Sorry I can't help that.
Bad on the spine, so my doctor tells me. Also, remember not to overdo
the tuck that many other styles try for in the hips :).
Does the JKF shito-ryu also lean? How about the JKF shotokan?
Now that might actually be a part of the application of the movement,
Hmmm.
> "same" stances are different. Shorin Ryu's Shiko Dachi is not as wide
> as Shito Ryu's. Shito ryu's Cat stance is longer than Shotokan's.
> So which shiko dachi is going to be used? If you use the other, is it
> an error?
Why, of coourse not, so long as you do it well. Perhaps you like to
categorize folks. I'm interested in what they can do.
Dynamics are dynamics. If you, personally, have different
strengths, you might be able to change things... but that's
an individual thing, not a Body Dymanics issue. Besides,
just as the JKF/USANKF judge things differently than the
ITKF... I expect ITKF to judge things differently than the
USANKF organization. Mr Alveris, you have to understand that
we practice somewhat different arts.
Somewhat like specifying kata that can be chosen for Shitei kata
as part of the beginning portions of kata competitions? The ITKF
doesn't do that. Aren't you baising things in favor of persons
whose bodu types equate to those kata???
If you wish to change these things, then you should and can
join up and equal out the balance of the judges out there.
Either way, depending upon the way that the goju-folks work
with the movements they should be able to show more skill in the
skills that are more practiced in goju and shito-ryu than in
shotokan, neh?
Pretty simple, eh.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On 5 May 1998 14:28:40 GMT, P. Bromaghin wrote:
>
> :But in Fukogo, no innovations are allowed. You have to do the "not-kata"
> :exactly as it is designed.
>
Of course we see the irony.
It's the same thing that comes out of every
damn test of skill that was ever designed.
Unless of course the student killed the teacher. :)
The leader makes the rules. If we don't like them,
we quit, leave, shutup, or play behind the leader's
back or just maybe we become the leader...(so, so rare).
Nothing has changed, just the names.
Brad.
Leon Sill, in Dallas May 9-10.
Will he do an interview, I don't know.
What are your Questions?
Bradley Webb
Richard Frazier wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 May 1998 20:38:36 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
> wrote:
>
> >They booted him, recinded rank, and revoked his
> >certifications. Granted I haven't seen the letter,
> >yet there was one sent to all All-South members and
> >I heard all of ISKF.
>
> Wow! If you get the opportunity, and Leon Sill is willing, you should
> conduct an interview.
Will he do an interview, I don't know.
What are your Questions?
Brad.
Bradley Webb
Roberto Alvelais wrote:
> You know, despite what Mr. Kim may assert, his karate is not Shorin
> Ryu. His kata and his kihon seem nearly identical to shotokan. I'm
> not saying that his karate is bad or anything but, it's not indicative
> of a Shorin style nor does it resemble the Shorinji ryu that you'd
> find on Okinawa. Having him or his students judging is much like
> having another shotokan exponent judging.
I'm sorry, but have you ever watched his students?
I have watched them in tournament and training since
before 1985. They are not JKA Shotokan. Since I am
not an expert in shorin ryu I will bow to your opinion
that they are not shorin ryu... Yet THEY ARE NOT SHOTOKAN.
However, I certainly appreciate them and the karate that
they do. They have better applications knowledge yet
worse body dynamics.
Richard Frazier
On Thu, 07 May 1998 23:35:52 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
wrote:
>Richard Frazier wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 04 May 1998 20:38:36 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >They booted him, recinded rank, and revoked his
>> >certifications. Granted I haven't seen the letter,
>> >yet there was one sent to all All-South members and
>> >I heard all of ISKF.
>>
>> Wow! If you get the opportunity, and Leon Sill is willing, you should
>> conduct an interview.
>
>Will he do an interview, I don't know.
>What are your Questions?
For starters, I'd find out if the above statement was true, and his
personal slant on it.
Time is limiting me from spitting out a laundry list. Just free flow
associate!
Rick
GrandMaster of The Secret Order of the ^v^
Keeper of the Official AMAKS Homepage
http://home.att.net/~Geodome/amaks/
DevonErik
Roberto wrote:
>There are conspiracies all around us. So why is it
>that we lose socks in the laundry but mysteriously acquire wire
>hangers???
Each pair of socks consists of an alpha sock and a beta sock. The alpha sock is
a regular sock. The beta sock is the larval form of a wire coat hanger.
-Devo...@aol.com
Grand Poobah of the Grammar and Syntax Police:
Self-appointed castigator of posters with poor English. (You have been warned!)
Member of the Secret Order of the ^v^
Roberto Alvelais
On Thu, 07 May 1998 23:26:03 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
wrote:
>Roberto Alvelais wrote:
>>
>> There's a lot of talk about the desire to create a "level playing
>> field" to compare peoples kata across various styles. Hence the
>> creation of Kitei. But what about the body dynamics? For example,
>> JKF Goju Kai has a slight forward lean of their torso when in front
>> stance. If they were to perform Kitei with that lean would the judges
>> consider it to be an error? If so, then it would seem to favor styles
>> other than JKF Goju. So how is it then achieving the stated goal?
>> The body dynamics are different with the different styles. Even
>
>Is your body constructed differently? Leaning is not viewed as
>good in medical and physiological journals... Sorry I can't help that.
>Bad on the spine, so my doctor tells me. Also, remember not to overdo
>the tuck that many other styles try for in the hips :).
>Does the JKF shito-ryu also lean? How about the JKF shotokan?
>Now that might actually be a part of the application of the movement,
>Hmmm.
Non sequitor.
What medical journals and your physician say have no bearing on the
question posed.
I'll repeat the question. If a competitor in the Kitei aspect of
competition competes displaying the correct body dynamics of his style
will he be penalized if those body dynamics are different from
Shotokan? In the example I gave, (I thought for simplicity and
clarity, oops!) I used Zenkutsu dachi. I presume that Kitei has
zenkutsu dachi in it. (maybe that was my mistake) Let's say that it
does. The JKF Goju person does his zenkutsu with a slight lean. This
is not considered "correct" in Shotokan. Will a goju competitor be
penalized (graded lower, whatever) for performing his zenkutsu dachi
in accordance with his kihon (lean) in this aspect of competition?
>
>> "same" stances are different. Shorin Ryu's Shiko Dachi is not as wide
>> as Shito Ryu's. Shito ryu's Cat stance is longer than Shotokan's.
>> So which shiko dachi is going to be used? If you use the other, is it
>> an error?
>
>Why, of coourse not, so long as you do it well. Perhaps you like to
>categorize folks. I'm interested in what they can do.
If you don't know what is correct, then how can you compare? How do
you know if someone is doing his stance well if you don't know what is
correct? Do the rules of competition specify Shotokan body dynamics?
>
>Dynamics are dynamics.
So why all of the different styles then?
Granted, certain aspects of body dynamics are shared across many, many
styles. That wouldn't be a problem. It's where a style has a
different notion of what to do while executing a common technique
where confusion arises. For example, the forward lean in Wado's
junzuki dachi or in the JKF Goju's zenkutsu dachi.
>If you, personally, have different
>strengths, you might be able to change things... but that's
>an individual thing, not a Body Dymanics issue. Besides,
>just as the JKF/USANKF judge things differently than the
>ITKF... I expect ITKF to judge things differently than the
>USANKF organization. Mr Alveris, you have to understand that
>we practice somewhat different arts.
Please spell the name correctly .
My changing things is not the question.
Is this competiton, kitei, truly inclusive of other arts (styles of
karate) or do the competitors have to change the way they do such
basics as Zenkutsu dachi to conform and sucessfully compete? That is
the question.
I am aware that we practice different arts. I am also aware of some
of those things that make these arts different.
>
>Somewhat like specifying kata that can be chosen for Shitei kata
>as part of the beginning portions of kata competitions? The ITKF
>doesn't do that. Aren't you baising things in favor of persons
>whose bodu types equate to those kata???
>
No. You're referring to the WKF's shitei kata list? It is 22 kata
long. There is sufficient variety on the list to accomodate largely
any body type. The only stipulation is that the kata be performed in
accordance to the four major Japanese styles of karate, Goju, Shito
Ryu, Wado ryu and Shotokan. In other words Isshin Ryu's Seyunchin is
not acceptible in this competition.
>If you wish to change these things, then you should and can
>join up and equal out the balance of the judges out there.
No,
In order to change things, I need to work into the seat of power of
the organization to institute changes. As an official, I can execute
and implement the rules, not make them up.
>Either way, depending upon the way that the goju-folks work
>with the movements they should be able to show more skill in the
>skills that are more practiced in goju and shito-ryu than in
>shotokan, neh?
>
That is if they aren't penalized for doing those goju or shito skills
correctly
>Pretty simple, eh.
>
>Brad.
I thought it was. (the question, that is) I was mistaken
Tom Mitchell
On Fri, 8 May 1998, Richard Frazier wrote:
> On Thu, 07 May 1998 23:35:52 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Richard Frazier wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 04 May 1998 20:38:36 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >They booted him, recinded rank, and revoked his
> >> >certifications. Granted I haven't seen the letter,
> >> >yet there was one sent to all All-South members and
> >> >I heard all of ISKF.
> >>
> >> Wow! If you get the opportunity, and Leon Sill is willing, you should
> >> conduct an interview.
> >
> >Will he do an interview, I don't know.
> >What are your Questions?
>
> For starters, I'd find out if the above statement was true, and his
> personal slant on it.
>
> Time is limiting me from spitting out a laundry list. Just free flow
> associate!
Do the obvious.
When and why did you first begin to study Karate.
How has it changed over time.
What three changes do you believe are the most valuable to
the art.
What three changes do you believe are the worst for the art.
If you could ask Master Funakoshi a question today what
would it be.
If you were 20 years old again who would you want to train
with today.
Oh and btw about the political stuff. What is going on....?
> Rick
>
> GrandMaster of The Secret Order of the ^v^
> Keeper of the Official AMAKS Homepage
> http://home.att.net/~Geodome/amaks/
>
>
-.-
Tom Mitchell - mi...@NSsgi.com, mi...@NSrelay.csd.sgi.com,
mi...@NSacm.org NS = No Spam
RToyboy
>Ah, Rob. You and I both know they are.
>Almost all the non-shotokan in the US are
>in the USANKF. Those that aren't are in the
>AAU or in none of the above...
>
>All of their sensei are in those orgs.
>and thats where they stay...
>
>
Brad,
Just to make sure everything is clear, your statement could be interpreted
to mean that there are no Shotokan folks in the USA-NKF or AAU (or USAKF, for
that matter), but there is indeed a very significant Shotokan presence in these
organizations.
Just clearing things up,
Ray
DevonErik
Rob wrote:
> he's one of the most soft-touch human beings I've
>ever known. I've never seen him say anything negative about anyone at
>all. He is, for all practical purposes, my exact opposite in the
>Universe. He probably hates green. :-)
Green?
>However, the JKA is totally convinced that everything different is
>therefore bad - and the membership will come up with anything to
>defend that perception.
>Many times they are right - but still
>intolerance is ugly.
>Yeah. I said that. That was me.
>
>Uh oh.
Do I need to say it?
I don't think I need to say it.
-Devo...@aol.com
Grand Poobah of the Grammar and Syntax Police:
Self-appointed castigator of posters with poor English. (You have been warned!)
Member of the Secret Order of the ^v^
RToyboy
>Will he do an interview, I don't know.
>What are your Questions?
>
>
For starters, how about, "what happened?"
Ray
Bradley Webb
Sorry for the delay, it's been a nasty 5 days.
Roberto Alvelais wrote:
>
> On Thu, 07 May 1998 23:26:03 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Roberto Alvelais wrote:
> >>
> >> JKF Goju Kai has a slight forward lean of their torso when in front
> >> stance. If they were to perform Kitei with that lean would the judges
> >> consider it to be an error? If so, then it would seem to favor styles
Depends on how much they lean I suppose. Given current judging
standards a minor lean would not have a formal penalty. A major
lean would probably be considered doing Kitei too far different from
the demonstrated performance.
>
> I'll repeat the question. If a competitor in the Kitei aspect of
> competition competes displaying the correct body dynamics of his style
> will he be penalized if those body dynamics are different from
> Shotokan? In the example I gave, (I thought for simplicity and
No, they won't be penalized unless they stray too far from the
defined movement.
How far is too far? That's a case by case analysis.
An example. Let's say I refuse to open my hips on the first
uchi-ude-uke, Gyaku-zuki chudan movement. I will not get a
penalty for using this different body dymanic rather than the norm.
Ie muscle contraction/expansion vs counter rotation/rotation actions.
If I angle my body at more than 15 degrees I'd expect one, If I
chose to make my front stance a very high zenkutsu, then I'd expect
one. Because I am not following the scripted movements well enough.
I may have gotten baised a the Goju-Ryu judge, and
lost the bais from the shotokan. But this is what
judging training is for to try to get all the judges
on the same train of thought and standard(s).
Probably impossible but you can try it.
> clarity, oops!) I used Zenkutsu dachi. I presume that Kitei has
> zenkutsu dachi in it. (maybe that was my mistake) Let's say that it
No, you guessed right :).
> does. The JKF Goju person does his zenkutsu with a slight lean. This
> is not considered "correct" in Shotokan. Will a goju competitor be
> penalized (graded lower, whatever) for performing his zenkutsu dachi
> in accordance with his kihon (lean) in this aspect of competition?
In general the Shotokan judges would have a bais to grade lower based
upon a person leaning. This is not a penalty, this is a judging
problem and a training issue for the Shotokan judges. OTOH if a
Shotokan person is generating a greater amount of power than another
person should that Shotokan person have their kata rated higher because
of the power generation?
> >> "same" stances are different. Shorin Ryu's Shiko Dachi is not as wide
> >> as Shito Ryu's. Shito ryu's Cat stance is longer than Shotokan's.
Rob, you go from the general definition of the stance and then
you differeniate based upon the quality of the technique. Say if
somebody does Shiko-dachi with their damn thighs parallel to the
floor while maintaining good movement, balance, and power. Damn hard.
That help will differentiate them from the rest without getting them
penalized. Cat Stance. How is it that you know it's a
Neko-Ashi-dachi?
Experience and judgement. This should be applied to the motions. If
somebody wants to do a Shito-ryu version that's ok so long as it is
not to far from the standardized demonstration.
Another example, I used to have my front toes quite inside on front
stance. After I got penalized for doing a sochin stance during a
Kitei judging seminar by one of the judges, I became much more careful
about foot position. The same would happen to the competitors you
are talking about. If you say that's wrong, Ohwell. That's your
opinion. You're welcome to it.
If I decide to play in the contest, then I do my best to abide by
rules of the contest. That's my job as a competitor. It's the
judges job to give as fair judging as possible.
> >> So which shiko dachi is going to be used? If you use the other, is it
> >> an error?
see above.
> >
> >Why, of coourse not, so long as you do it well. Perhaps you like to
> >categorize folks. I'm interested in what they can do.
>
> If you don't know what is correct, then how can you compare? How do
> you know if someone is doing his stance well if you don't know what is
> correct? Do the rules of competition specify Shotokan body dynamics?
You are trying to define it down to the micron, maybe? The variations
of the different stances are ok. No, I don't believe it specifies the
body dynamics (it's been years since I looked at the definitions).
> >
> >Dynamics are dynamics.
> So why all of the different styles then?
> Granted, certain aspects of body dynamics are shared across many, many
> styles. That wouldn't be a problem. It's where a style has a
> different notion of what to do while executing a common technique
> where confusion arises. For example, the forward lean in Wado's
> junzuki dachi or in the JKF Goju's zenkutsu dachi.
>
> >If you, personally, have different
> >strengths, you might be able to change things... but that's
> >an individual thing, not a Body Dymanics issue. Besides,
> >just as the JKF/USANKF judge things differently than the
> >ITKF... I expect ITKF to judge things differently than the
> >USANKF organization. Mr Alveris, you have to understand that
> >we practice somewhat different arts.
>
> Please spell the name correctly .
No problem, my typing is not my best skill.
> My changing things is not the question.
> Is this competiton, kitei, truly inclusive of other arts (styles of
> karate) or do the competitors have to change the way they do such
> basics as Zenkutsu dachi to conform and sucessfully compete? That is
> the question.
They have to change to the way the movements are demonstrated.
This includes the shotokan folks. This includes me. You will also
find many of the students under Nishiyama don't even know the
sequence. They aren't interested. That's ok.
> I am aware that we practice different arts. I am also aware of some
> of those things that make these arts different.
I was cognizant of that too.
> >If you wish to change these things, then you should and can
> >join up and equal out the balance of the judges out there.
>
> No,
> In order to change things, I need to work into the seat of power of
> the organization to institute changes. As an official, I can execute
> and implement the rules, not make them up.
Rob, actual interpretation at the time of the event
is a powerful tool. This is also why differing judges
have different opinions. If I touch skin and don't
hurt the other person, it can be a point or a penalty,
depending upon the interpretation of the rules.
> >Either way, depending upon the way that the goju-folks work
> >with the movements they should be able to show more skill in the
> >skills that are more practiced in goju and shito-ryu than in
> >shotokan, neh?
> >
> That is if they aren't penalized for doing those goju or shito skills
> correctly
The general form of the performance is a dictated
thing. Shotokan people don't do Shiko-dachi either,
yet it's part of the requirements.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Thu, 07 May 1998 23:26:03 -0500, Bradley Webb wrote:
>
> :Dynamics are dynamics.
>
> No, they aren't. Many Goju stylists have *different* body dynamics
> that they aspire to, and different ideas about what powers a punch.
>
Rob,
I know that they tend to work different types of
dynamics than Shotokan. There are still only a
number of ways that the body can work to generate
power.
Even if they want to work/try differnet ones than
I prefer, with training and demonstration you or
I should be able to understand the process.
Performing it may be a different story, but
understanding or appreciating is a much easier thing.
This is why I don't know how to make dynamite, yet
I still appreciate what it can do with a match and
a primer/fuse.
Brad
DevonErik
Brad wrote:
>Rob,
>I know that they tend to work different types of
>dynamics than Shotokan. There are still only a
>number of ways that the body can work to generate
>power.
And shotokan doesn't use *nearly* all of them.
>Even if they want to work/try differnet ones than
>I prefer, with training and demonstration you or
>I should be able to understand the process.
>Performing it may be a different story, but
>understanding or appreciating is a much easier thing.
Do we always get a chance to train with someone before having to judge his
kata? Not in this lifetime, my friend.
Bradley Webb
twenty-four.fi...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> On Fri, 08 May 1998 22:16:27 GMT, Roberto Alvelais wrote:
>
> :
> :What medical journals and your physician say have no bearing on the
> :question posed.
>
> Irrelevant. What you are encountering is the typical JKA response to
> anything that is not JKA shotokan: WRONG! WRONG! DANGER WILL
> ROBINSON! DANGER! CRITICAL ERROR!
Actually I was playing into the common sense theme rather
than resorting to the rules theme. I didn't think that
Mr. Alvelais would have appreciated me saying ... "that's
the rules, deal with it". There are all kinds of shades
of gray in every rule, otherwise why would there be judging
seminars & training. If the rules were crystal clear, why
would the judges need them?
And that's what Rob was asking, what are the shades?
Which would take me hours to write up, considering
my typing speed.
> Brad doesn't mean anything by it - from what I've seen of him for oh,
> three years now, he's one of the most soft-touch human beings I've
> ever known. I've never seen him say anything negative about anyone at
It's trying at times, but I really don't like negative shit.
JIMHO. If I don't have constructive stuff to say or aren't
trying to learn, I try to keep my mouth shut. It's already
gotten me into enough trouble over my life. And besides, if
I'm talking then it's really hard for me to listen.
> all. He is, for all practical purposes, my exact opposite in the
> Universe. He probably hates green. :-)
Actually I like green, most of the polo shirts I own are green.
My eyes are sometimes green(they change). I still hate brussel
sprouts and nothing you say can make me eat them. Not even if
Nishiyama endorses them, uugh. ;)
> However, the JKA is totally convinced that everything different is
> therefore bad - and the membership will come up with anything to
> defend that perception. Many times they are right - but still
> intolerance is ugly.
Well, If I can't defeat it... either I shut up or I shut up.
I won't deny that I'm wrong, I'll just say that I have a
different opinion.
> Yeah. I said that. That was me.
>
> Uh oh.
Right o' intolerant one.
Almost hoist on your own Picard
(hmm, Damn this isn't StarTrek ...)
poniard, eh. :)
Brad.
George Winter
On Wed, 13 May 1998 14:39:37 -0500, Bradley Webb <we...@nortel.com>
wrote:
>
>Right o' intolerant one.
>Almost hoist on your own Picard
>(hmm, Damn this isn't StarTrek ...)
>poniard, eh. :)
>
"petard" actually, think its a small cannon.
--
George
_____________________________________________________________________
George Winter gwi...@q-sys.com
Qsys Ltd.
Information Systems Consulting