6 posts / 0 new
Last post
Wastelander
Wastelander's picture
Chinto Repeated Supported Low "Blocks"

Hello, everyone,

A few weeks ago, we received a request to look at the repeated supported low "blocks" found in Chinto--admittedly, this isn't necessarily present in all versions of Chinto/Gankaku, but since I does show up in the version we practice, and is present in other kata, we figured it could still be helpful. In this example, I use the sinking juji-uke as a choke to provide a simple starting point, since that is a fairly common application for that movement, although there are many others (I actually personally prefer using it as a figure-4 arm lock, which changes the application of the low "blocks" for me). From the choke, I show how the low "blocks" can be used to throw the opponent to the ground, and how it being repeated can simply be showing you to step in front of the opponent and try again, should they step around your initial throw.

 

What I don't mention in the video is that the kata also gives you another option, should the opponent step around the throw--either the first time, or the second time you try it. This sequence is followed by a hammerfist, then a stepping punch, then a visually-unusual movement that I can best describe by calling it a low supported inverted ridgehand. Since you already have a hold of your opponent, the hammerfist is a simple follow-up to them avoiding the throw. Should they block the hammerfist, it can then be used to pull their block out of the way to clear the path for the punch. The last motion in that sequence can also be used as a "wedge" throw, which enables you to grab the opponent's legs and dump them over yours.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Thanks for posting! The version of the kata I do has two gedan juji-uke (arms crossed at low level) which I see as strangles. The video below will start playing at that point.

 

I find it interesting that you also have a strangle in there (using the pull down I use as a grip-strip / lock). I like the throw and the reference to Itoman’s book. I again find it interesting that you also see the repeated movement as trying to catch them again with the same technique.

Wastelander wrote:
Since you already have a hold of your opponent, the hammerfist is a simple follow-up to them avoiding the throw.

Yep! That’s what I do if they avoid the second strangle.

I like what you show and feel it fits your version of the kata very well. While the version I do is a little different, and hence the bunkai is also a little different, it seems the underlying concepts are common.

I enjoyed that Noah! Thanks for sharing!

All the best,

Iain

Marc
Marc's picture

Very interesting to see the same concept expressed in the two kata variations and therefore in different applications: When the opponent resists our attempt to manipulate (throw/choke/lock) them we can flow with the direction of their resistance and by moving faster we can unbalance them and re-apply our technique. If it fails again the kata offers an alternative follow-up.

We can move faster than the opponent because we rotate through our center while the opponent has to travel a longer path at a larger radius in the same amount of time.

The version I practice (Shotokan) also has the two gedan-juji-uke like Iain's. My application also starts with a wrist lock from a high wrist grab and the kicks against the legs. The first low cross-"block" brings the lock further down and forward which either sends the opponent down or at least unbalances them. The turn into the next low cross-"block" then takes them down. During the turn the Shotokan version pulls the crossed hands back to the right hip which allows for additional pressure on the opponent's elbow which requires them to move even faster.

The wrist grab attack is a possible response if we try to grab their face or poke their eyes with our thumbs. The application works on both right and left side wrist grabs.

Here's the video (starting at that sequence).

Take care,

Marc

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Hi Marc,

Thanks for the addition! Lovely stuff! Lots of inform for folks in this thread!

All the best,

Iain

Marc
Marc's picture

Marc wrote:

We can move faster than the opponent because we rotate through our center while the opponent has to travel a longer path at a larger radius in the same amount of time.

Sorry, I just realised that this statement is of course the opposite of what actually happens, physics-wise:

When the opponent travels around us while we turn on the spot, they actually have to move much faster than us because they have to cover a larger distance in the same amount of time.

And that is exactly why it works. They have to move fast on an arc. Too fast to regain their balance. At the same time we merely need to turn around.

So it might seem that we are moving faster because the opponent cannot catch up, when in fact we are simply taking a shortcut through the center of the arc while the opponent has to take the long route.

And there we have another principle: We don't necessarily need to be stronger or faster if we can have physics work for us.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Marc wrote:
We can move faster than the opponent because we rotate through our center while the opponent has to travel a longer path at a larger radius in the same amount of time.

Marc wrote:
Sorry, I just realised that this statement is of course the opposite of what actually happens, physics-wise:

When the opponent travels around us while we turn on the spot, they actually have to move much faster than us because they have to cover a larger distance in the same amount of time.

I got what you meant :-) Essentially, the enemy can’t keep up with the rate of rotation because we have to move a relatively small amount per each degree rotated; whereas they have to move much further because they are further from the centre of rotation.

The tip on the second hand of a clock is going faster than a point half way down the second hand because it travels a greater distance with each “tick” i.e. travels a greater distance per second. While the rate of the second hand is constant, the speed varies along its length.

You could argue that you are moving “faster” (in an everyday sense of the word) because you are leading that rotation (i.e. causing it) and you are still going as the enemy fails to keep up and falls. I think most people would understand what is meant by “faster” in that context. However, I think the additional breakdown you provided is really useful because it does pinpoint the physics being employed.  As you say, we are not really moving faster than the enemy. Instead, we are causing them to move faster that they can.

Marc wrote:
And there we have another principle: We don't necessarily need to be stronger or faster if we can have physics work for us.

Indeed! I think your follow up post helped highlight that element. And it’s important too because all the applications shown in this thread make use of it.

I really like this thread :-)

All the best,

Iain