Judo Striking and Self-Defence

Amazing !  Always interests me how common techniques pervade all martial arts.  We have a 76 Year old 6th Dan that trains at my shotokan club, he's also got dan level grades in Tai Chi, Aikido, Aiki and Iaido and Jodo and he's always on about the amount of duplication across the martial arts (in terms of non competitive techniques)

We recorded his 6th Dan karate grading where he demonstrated karate as well as Aikido, Iaido, Tai Chi, Jodo and how they all relate.  The introduction can be found here.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBOnZ9EbnI4  There's another 6-7 videos with the different arts he does starting with 'Alex Cousland - 6th Dan grading/demo' on the same channel.

In regard to your video I just thought of the oppostie and googled 'Karate throws' and a short video of you came up !  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MicMq0OgP4

Anyone point me in the direction of any other decent 1-2  minute videos on Karate throwing and grappling (other than Iain's videos of course) that I can pass onto club members?!

Iain Abernethy wrote:

While I remain unconvinced about the practically of some elements of the kata (i.e. unnecessarily complex in parts) there is nevertheless some very interesting aspects

True on both counts, Iain

Iain Abernethy wrote:

It’s interesting how many systems have narrowed their field of study as they become more and more specialised in a given area. Karate, judo, boxing, aikido, etc have all been prone to this.

Yes, very much.

Funny, Kano's book indicates that striking is a full one-third of judo, and he has illustrations of  body weapons for striking that are virtually identical to Funakoshi's.   I wonder sometimes how much of the loss of striking and subsequent sportification of judo was due to the banning / reintroudtcion of judo as a support as a result of WWII.  It is undeniable however, that Kano himself emphasized that students should start with throws first, before moving to ne-waza, and then finally, striking.  When I read Kano, I almost sense a 'pejorative disdain' for striking (kind of an "oh sure, you could always do that"), but maybe that is my imagination.

I have found that many "traditional" judoka are just as attached to their forms as some of their karate counter parts.  Where I find the judo kata approach to be 'superior' in approach to karate (method wise) is in the fact that at least the motions they are training-- while still very much idealized-- are "WYSIWYG"-- i.e. they are the 'ACTUAL motions' you would use in combat, not 'abstracted' motions that need to be 'interpreted' for combative relevancy.   (This, depsite the noted formality of organization and approach).

Having practiced many of these katas, personally, I find all the aligning, pacing and precision to be almost unbearably tedious.  However, that is a function of the 'art' side of judo and there are legitimate cultural and attribute development reasons for it (for instance, cultivating self discipline and patience.  )  .  Also, such training is a direct function of  both individual practitioners and schools, i.e.:  I have seen many judoka run through the series of throws reperesented by a kata with 'fast motion' and without all of the preliminary pacing and formality.  This latter approach, (to me, anyway) is decidedly much more 'interesting', at least to watch.   I also think that the art/sport of judo would have more interest among their own practitioners in the kata exercise if they made it more of a a fast paced and 'reality based', but I am told then that that would "not be judo", the same way I am told that karate without its inherited forms is "not karate".  I am also told that that would somewhat  'miss the point', and that judo kata practice are meant to SHOWCASE the studen'ts understanding ***NOT*** of the application, but instead of the IDEALS and principles underlying the application (although I'm also told that many students miss that point all together).

This last point was explained to me when I attempted to take what I deemed was a 'less-effective' single hand 'high block' entry to a judo throw (the kind that someone really trying to hit you could blow a punch right through), and substitute what I felt was a more effective two handed variety that not only deflected the strike, but which also set my hands in a better position to enter the throw... "bad dog, no biscuit."     I was told, politely but gently, that "that's not judo"...  Judo was the way they showed me, with a wooden high block.  This left me with the impression that, in many cases, judoka (like almost any style) are just as blinkered by their own methods as other styles.  However, I also did recieve the additive point of explanation above:  that the form wasn't really about the 'block' as it was about harnessing the momentum of ANY punch and executing a successful throw.  The explanation left all kinds of questions in my mind from a 'reality based' training perespective, and was suspiciously close to that which I have heard from karate sensei defending the inherited approaches of their art, but I attend this program as a student to learn judo, not as an instructor to improve judo.  So my point is only that the human desire to 'justify' some aspects of any art that maybe 'don't make sense' upon examination is not unique to karate, but in fact is quite common and pervades many styles.

ON a related but unrelated note, this was why I found the 'martial map' podcast you did to be so brilliant-- it accommodates all of these perspectvies and allows the student to better understand and choose the personal pursuit of a greater or lesser degree of art, pragmatism, or some personal blend of both.

Kodokan Goshin Jitsu is a relatively modern Kata, it was compiled in the 1950s by a commitee headed up by Tomiki Sensei - who then went on to found Tomiki Aikido. The Kodokan Goshin-Jitsu is an "updating" of a much older Judo kata, and one directly compiled by Kano: Kime-no-kata. Many youtube videos of this kata exist and are worth checking out to see the evolution of judo based self defence.

As for the subject of striking in judo, there has been much written on the relative importance Kano placed upon striking techniques, but most is speculation rather than hard fact. What is for certain is that Kano's own ideas on what Judo actually was in the widest sense of its curriculum changed over time. Kano wrote many things about how various different arts, such as Funakoshi's karate or even weapons based arts such as kendo or jo-jitsu might some day be incorporated into judo, but these proved not to occur. Kano "mused" on many subjects, and was also a political animal, he was often very complimentary in the first instance to incorporating different disciplines, or praising others such as Funakoshi or Ueschiba, saying in effect that "this is what we should be doing" only to go back to the Kodokan and do nothing of the sort.

In the end though, I find it best to view Kano's vision for judo through its basic principles and training methods, as these never wavered. Judo for him was a method of education, a pedagogy, not a martial art. Definately Do rather than Jitsu. Combat effectiveness was secondary: even though the useful by-product of self defence training via judo was never ignored. That is why Tachi-waza was of primary importance to Kano, it best transmitted judo's core principles of maximum efficiency and mutual welfare and benefit. Ne-waza training was always secondary to Kano, not grudingly so, because he saw its value in the contests vs. the Tenshin-Shinyo ju-jutsu Ryu in judo's formative years. Striking never really got "off the ground" in judo - it got incorporated only in kata form as it was deemed too dangerous for randori - and randori was always the litmus test for Kano, if something could not be done in Randori (or shiai) it could never truly be Judo (which is not to say Kano eschewed Kata - kata, randori, shiai and mondo (lecture) have always been equal at the judo table-but one has to engage in all, at least in Kano's vision).

Striking was put to one side, almost if it was something that Kano would get around to later. I have never heard any accounts or seen any films of striking being seriously drilled outside of kata in Kodokan, DNB or other big judo institutions pre WWII. And by serious I mean bag work, pad work, all the building blocks of proper striking training. The immergence of karate in Japan probably had something to do with this, Funakoshi established Shotokan and any judoka interested in striking probably went "down the road" to see him instead, and many did.

So judoka are left today a few kata which teach atemi based striking in kata form. These atemi are mostly of the "distract before throwing" ethos, in effect a form of kuzushi in line with core judo principles of "ju" and maxmimum efficiency - so they conform to judo but remain somewhat abstract, rarely broken down via "bunkai" exploration of the type promoted here, so one has to ask how seriously judoka on the whole take them, I'm afraid the answer would appear to be, never that seriously. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, Judo has always been primarily grappling, there is little evidence to say that striking was really ever seriously incorporated, there may have been plans, but they never materialised before Kano died in the late 1930s. 

Good post, Jon.

Here is a good kime no kata.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl4SfhZwwUY

Note the seiza/suwari/idori waza techniques at the begining, a legacy of koryu ju-jutsu in this much older kata.

I recall there are similar kneeling position techniques described in Funakoshi's Karate Do Kyohan, at least in my copy (Kodansha copy with the Okinwan Statue on the front, the one with this plus throws demonstrated by Funakoshi and Ohtsuka), but I've never heard any serious discussion as to their history in karate circles. Are they practiced by anyone? Do they have their origins in Okinawan karate or are they also ju-jutsu derived. Any karate experts have any idea?

p.s I've heard that the English language section of Kodansha Publishers in Tokyo is being closed - that is a real shame. Half my Judo and Karate books are from Kodansha.

Jon Lean wrote:

Here is a good kime no kata.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl4SfhZwwUY

Note the seiza/suwari/idori waza techniques at the begining, a legacy of koryu ju-jutsu in this much older kata.

I recall there are similar kneeling position techniques described in Funakoshi's Karate Do Kyohan, at least in my copy (Kodansha copy with the Okinwan Statue on the front, the one with this plus throws demonstrated by Funakoshi and Ohtsuka), but I've never heard any serious discussion as to their history in karate circles. Are they practiced by anyone? Do they have their origins in Okinawan karate or are they also ju-jutsu derived. Any karate experts have any idea?

Jon,

Great posts and good question.

In my very humble opinion as to what Funakoshi borrowed from existing Japanese systems, to make his karate "more Japanese" I don' think we'll ever know the truth, or full extent. (Sorry Iain, but I'm more of a Motobu fan. ) Since Tegumi, aka Okinawan wrestling/sumo, was widely practiced by the early karate pioneers it shouldn't come as a surprise to see similar grappling techniques within karate as what's found in Judo. However, to me at least, Funakoshi's karate always seemed a bit more formal and structured than Motobu's, Miyagi's or some of the others who travelled to Japan.  Funakoshi and his son both borrowed philosophies like the "One Punch, one kill," motto from Kendo because they were to a degree in competition with the exitisting budo systems of the day. Face it having karate be as popular as kendo and Judo would have been a major accomplisment, so it wouldn't suprise me in the least if he took something from Judo, or the classical jujitsu styles to make his karate appear more traditional to the Japanese. That and the fact that it's common place for fighters to borrow from each other.

Mike

I subscribe to Iain´s idea that originally strikes, throws, locks... belonged to one system. We know this for judo since it comes from jiu jitsu. Mabuni (2010, Empty Hand) claimes that Okinawa traditional (budo) karate had all of this. As Iain said, it is due to a specialization for sports competition that one got rid of the "extra stuff".

It seems for me that it deserves only the status of a footnote that one is aware of striking in judo (how often do they practice goshin kata?) and the examples of throwing in karate are also marginal. Since Othsuka comes from shindo yoshin ryu ju jitsu they practice forms of throwing and locking.  In shotokan there are only a few exceptional people (e.g. Asai, Kanazawa, Nishiyama,...) who demonstrated an ability to throw.

Harold

It has been a quest of mine for many years to learn this kata, I have put many posts on various forums including this one looking at a way to find someone!
I believe this kata is only taught to 4th Dan Judoka and above, and no school "seems" to teach this in the UK!?!
I found a senior graded Judoka who is willing to teach me the kata, via the notes ans videos from the internet! What Karate kata are the closest to it

Good thread

Thanks

Been away all weekend so a little late with this. However, I just wanted to thank Jon for the superb post on the 17th. Great background information and I've embedded the video in his following post.

Jon Lean wrote:

I recall there are similar kneeling position techniques described in Funakoshi's Karate Do Kyohan, at least in my copy (Kodansha copy with the Okinwan Statue on the front, the one with this plus throws demonstrated by Funakoshi and Ohtsuka), but I've never heard any serious discussion as to their history in karate circles. Are they practiced by anyone? Do they have their origins in Okinawan karate or are they also ju-jutsu derived?

The origins and nature of the kneeling techniques in karate is not something I’ve personally looked into in any great depth. Because they have no direct practical relevance to the culture in which I live, I prefer to spend training time on other things and hence I’ve never paid the kneeling stuff much attention. You’ve sparked my interest historically though! Aside from the ones in Kyohan and the Wado-Ryu Idori, I’m not aware of any other karate styles that do them? I’m sure there are people here that will know more about this so I’ll start off another thread to that effect.

All the best,

Iain

I'm guessing, and I stress that word, that the kneeling element is simply a legacy of a much older era and not widely practised anymore in karate circles.

At the risk of teaching you to suck eggs..... (given the accepted high knowledge levels of the posters here)

If you think of it in HAPV terms, it's simply practising to defend against a common form of assault for that time. Remembering that, when indoors it was customary for a samurai to relinquish their primary weapon, the katana, though they often retained the wakizashi. So, if you wished a samurai harm, a good place to attack them would be when they had no sword and were in a vulnerable kneeling position with limited mobility. Hence the need to practice unarmed defences from this situation.

Hi Jon,

A dedicated thread on the kneeling drills / techniques of karate has now been started here: http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/karate-kneeling-defences-wado-shotokan-and-others

All the best,

Iain

Finding Kodokan Goshin Jitsu in the UK is difficult but not impossible. The problem is that kata has been so effectively removed from the "sports-centric" BJA syllabus. Kata requirements for BJA are still fairly non-existant under the "Contest" grading system, all the way to 5th Dan. One can nowadays go the "Technical" route for which kata is an obvious choice, but then you have to get someone to teach you the kata -and that is not always easy. There are kata seminars now and then run by the BJA, often at the High Wycombe dojo - look on the BJA website for more details 

Things are better in other organisations, or at least they were. I remember having Nage-no-Kata (standing techniques) and Katame-no-Kata as BJC grading requirements above blue belt or so, don't know if that is still the case. This may be complicated by the fact that Kodokan 8th Dan and BJC Chief Technical person Akinori Hosaka Sensei died recently, and I can only hope he passed his knowledge onto enough others to keep Judo kata alive in the BJC. Blacktiger - your info puts you in Manchester - so first place I would look is Hosaka Sensei's dojo in Sale, close to you.

http://www.salejudo.com/

Kodokan Goshin Jitsu is one of the more popular kata and I can think of individuals who know it-but you have to know where to look.  I'm in the US at the moment and kata knowledge is pretty good here, I've attended a number of Goshin Jitsu seminars. I hear it is good in Italy and also Spain, and probably France too.