27 posts / 0 new
Last post
Graziano
Graziano's picture
Karate's Blocks

Hi  to everyone this is my first post here, I read the Ian's article about the applications of blocks, he say who there are not block on okinawa karate, and they are annaquate tecniche for learning karate to japanese scholar.   Now  my question is if there are not block in karate

1- How defended themselves by the punch and the kick the ancient karateka without use blocks?

2- Why okinawa style like Matsumura Shorin ryu , and Matsubayashi Shōrin-ryū use the same blocks of shotokan, like you can see from this video?

MATSUMURA SHORIN RYU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KNsgXKTGxY

MATSUBAYASHI SHORIN RYU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KNsgXKTGxY

is like shotokan they are okinawa karate style, not japanese.

                                                                   Greetings

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

Graziano,

It isn't that karate doesn't block things--although "block" isn't the most accurate word, all the time--but when looking at the kata, the vast majority of techniques that we call "blocks" in English aren't used to block in the scenario of the kata. Instead, they are used to control limbs, attack joints, strike, throw, etc. Even when they are being used to block attacks, they should also be incorporating some form of counter attack. Honestly, they are very versatile techniques! It's important to remember that, in Japanese, the techniques are called "uke-waza," which means "receiving techniques." They do not call them "blocks" because that is more limiting in regards to what the technique can do.

I realize that I'm not Iain, but I have written about the versatility of "blocks" on several occasions:

http://www.karateobsession.com/2016/02/motobu-choki-and-stopping-attacks...

http://www.karateobsession.com/2015/05/compound-movements-cutting-lines....

http://www.karateobsession.com/2014/08/chudan-uke-as-a-strike.html

http://www.karateobsession.com/2015/05/practicing-basic-uke-waza.html

http://www.karateobsession.com/2015/06/the-limb-strikes-of-karate.html

With regards to your other questions, the simple answer is that uke-waza have been taught as hard-style, basic blocking techniques for a long time, and while that has been more prevalent in Japanese karate than in Okinawan karate, it exists in both. I don't like the way it is done, and would like to see it changed, but it's been that way for a long time and people are hesitant to change things that have been done for a long time.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Noah’s post is a really good. Not much I can really add to that. So I’m going to repeat what has been said here.

For me, the key issue is that blocking does not work well in a self-protection context; and that’s what kata are designed for.

Blocking and countering can work really well when you have distance and recognisable technique. This is what we see when martial artists fight each other in a consensual duel. However, in a self-protection context it is way closer (in terms of rate of fire), way faster, and way more chaotic. In that context blocking does not work well. Instead we need to fight pro-actively and not reactively.

Graziano wrote:
1- How defended themselves by the punch and the kick the ancient karateka without use blocks?

We knock them out before they get a good punch off. We dominate so the enemy has to worry so much about our strikes that they can’t get the opportunity to throw their own. We crash in or cover. We control the limbs so the enemy can’t strike. We position ourselves to make it difficult for the enemy to hit us. And so on. We see all these in kata, and they work.

What we don’t see is plain old blocks. We do see parries and jams is all else fails, but they are very much techniques of last resort. Additionally, the “blocks” of modern karate don’t work as blocks … we don’t even see them in karate vs karate sparring. Those motions have been misunderstood and are wrongly considered as “blocks”. They work great, but not as blocks.

Graziano wrote:
2- Why okinawa style like Matsumura Shorin ryu , and Matsubayashi Shōrin-ryū use the same blocks of shotokan, like you can see from this video?

Many modern styles see those motions as blocks. It’s a common misunderstanding that “Okinawan = Original Karate” and “Japanese Karate = Modern Karate”. But the fact is that modern takes on karate from all over the globe labour under that misunderstanding. We have modern groups and styles based on the older way of viewing kata (close-range practical self-protection); and we have modern groups and styles based on the post 1930’s way of viewing kata (long distance contrived karate vs karate). Both approaches are not limited to any geographical location.

I hope that helps?

All the best,

Iain

JWT
JWT's picture

I think Noah and Iain have answered this very comprehensively. For what it's worth I tried to sum up my thoughs on receiver (uke) techniques two years ago after a very long winded (and misquoted) discussion on another forum. Here it is:

https://johntitchen.wordpress.com/2014/08/25/karate-uke-blocks-and-other...

All the best

John Titchen  

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

I think this must be one of the most thorough and quick answers ever given!

Thanks Noah. Thanks John.

Does that answer your questions Graziano?

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

I think this must be one of the most thorough and quick answers ever given!

Thanks Noah. Thanks John.

Does that answer your questions Graziano?

Happy to help! I have actually been working on yet ANOTHER article on uke-waza, that should be ready in a couple weeks, so if Graziano had asked this a month from now, I would have had even more stuff to share :P

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Wastelander wrote:
Happy to help! I have actually been working on yet ANOTHER article on uke-waza, that should be ready in a couple weeks, so if Graziano had asked this a month from now, I would have had even more stuff to share :P

Awesome! I look forward to reading that :-)

JWT
JWT's picture

Wastelander wrote:

Happy to help! I have actually been working on yet ANOTHER article on uke-waza, that should be ready in a couple weeks, so if Graziano had asked this a month from now, I would have had even more stuff to share :P

Once you start you can't ever stop! smiley The first book I wrote (which I've still never published) was a catalogue of applications for Uke waza.

Graziano
Graziano's picture

Wastelander wrote:

Graziano,

It isn't that karate doesn't block things--although "block" isn't the most accurate word, all the time--but when looking at the kata, the vast majority of techniques that we call "blocks" in English aren't used to block in the scenario of the kata. Instead, they are used to control limbs, attack joints, strike, throw, etc. Even when they are being used to block attacks, they should also be incorporating some form of counter attack. Honestly, they are very versatile techniques! It's important to remember that, in Japanese, the techniques are called "uke-waza," which means "receiving techniques." They do not call them "blocks" because that is more limiting in regards to what the technique can do.

I realize that I'm not Iain, but I have written about the versatility of "blocks" on several occasions:

http://www.karateobsession.com/2016/02/motobu-choki-and-stopping-attacks...

http://www.karateobsession.com/2015/05/compound-movements-cutting-lines....

http://www.karateobsession.com/2014/08/chudan-uke-as-a-strike.html

http://www.karateobsession.com/2015/05/practicing-basic-uke-waza.html

http://www.karateobsession.com/2015/06/the-limb-strikes-of-karate.html

With regards to your other questions, the simple answer is that uke-waza have been taught as hard-style, basic blocking techniques for a long time, and while that has been more prevalent in Japanese karate than in Okinawan karate, it exists in both. I don't like the way it is done, and would like to see it changed, but it's been that way for a long time and people are hesitant to change things that have been done for a long time.

THANK YOU! THANK YOU! AND THANK YOU AGAIN!!! There is  a video that I cannot see here 

http://www.karateobsession.com/2016/02/motobu-choki-and-stopping-attacks...

you know I am italian I cannot understand all that you say but it seems to me who in this video http://www.karateobsession.com/2014/08/chudan-uke-as-a-strike.html  you say that is possible using UCHI UKE LIKE STRIKE is it correct? 

Graziano
Graziano's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

Noah’s post is a really good. Not much I can really add to that. So I’m going to repeat what has been said here.

For me, the key issue is that blocking does not work well in a self-protection context; and that’s what kata are designed for.

Blocking and countering can work really well when you have distance and recognisable technique. This is what we see when martial artists fight each other in a consensual duel. However, in a self-protection context it is way closer (in terms of rate of fire), way faster, and way more chaotic. In that context blocking does not work well. Instead we need to fight pro-actively and not reactively.

Graziano wrote:
1- How defended themselves by the punch and the kick the ancient karateka without use blocks?

We knock them out before they get a good punch off. We dominate so the enemy has to worry so much about our strikes that they can’t get the opportunity to throw their own. We crash in or cover. We control the limbs so the enemy can’t strike. We position ourselves to make it difficult for the enemy to hit us. And so on. We see all these in kata, and they work.

What we don’t see is plain old blocks. We do see parries and jams is all else fails, but they are very much techniques of last resort. Additionally, the “blocks” of modern karate don’t work as blocks … we don’t even see them in karate vs karate sparring. Those motions have been misunderstood and are wrongly considered as “blocks”. They work great, but not as blocks.

Graziano wrote:
2- Why okinawa style like Matsumura Shorin ryu , and Matsubayashi Shōrin-ryū use the same blocks of shotokan, like you can see from this video?

Many modern styles see those motions as blocks. It’s a common misunderstanding that “Okinawan = Original Karate” and “Japanese Karate = Modern Karate”. But the fact is that modern takes on karate from all over the globe labour under that misunderstanding. We have modern groups and styles based on the older way of viewing kata (close-range practical self-protection); and we have modern groups and styles based on the post 1930’s way of viewing kata (long distance contrived karate vs karate). Both approaches are not limited to any geographical location.

I hope that helps?

All the best,

Iain

THANK YOU FOR THE ANSWER!!! 

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

Graziano wrote:

THANK YOU! THANK YOU! AND THANK YOU AGAIN!!! There is  a video that I cannot see here 

http://www.karateobsession.com/2016/02/motobu-choki-and-stopping-attacks...

you know I am italian I cannot understand all that you say but it seems to me who in this video http://www.karateobsession.com/2014/08/chudan-uke-as-a-strike.html  you say that is possible using UCHI UKE LIKE STRIKE is it correct? 

My apologies for the video--I don't own it, so I didn't get a choice in it being taken down. That said, it was simply an example of a fight between two untrained men, where they kept pushing forward into each other with flailing punches.

And yes, in that video, I am saying that it can be used to strike

Graziano
Graziano's picture

JWT wrote:

I think Noah and Iain have answered this very comprehensively. For what it's worth I tried to sum up my thoughs on receiver (uke) techniques two years ago after a very long winded (and misquoted) discussion on another forum. Here it is:

https://johntitchen.wordpress.com/2014/08/25/karate-uke-blocks-and-other...

All the best

John Titchen  

Thank you for the article I Saw this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6hLJcJNmbo&feature=youtu.be&list=PLhcLR...

, but I Cannot see none karate's techinique!  

JWT
JWT's picture

Graziano wrote:

Thank you for the article I Saw this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6hLJcJNmbo&feature=youtu.be&list=PLhcLR...

, but I Cannot see none karate's techinique!  

Hi

Well bear in mind that the aggressors are predominantly attacking with HAOV (pushes, wild haymaker punches, grabs, tackles, a knife) in this footage. The non role players are a mixture of different styles and some of them naturally respond in kind if they are unfamiliar with the environment, range and adrenaline.

It takes quite a bit of experience in close quarter defences against HAOV to be able to effectively use Uke (and other martial arts) techniques. I’ve seen martial artists with decades of experience in training behind them and very senior grades resort to brawling and barging under pressure because they are not used to having to access their martial art’s skill set under such conditions (there are 7th, 6th and 5th Dans defending themselves in this footage). Because of the dynamic ‘messiness’ of such events (compared for example against clean cut choreographed movie footage) it can also take a lot of experience in what techniques look like under such conditions and the applications to see what’s going on. 

The ‘taster’ video your looking at has Ju Jitsu, K1, BJJ, MMA, Wado, Shotokan, CLF, DART and TKD practitioners in it (off the top of my head). So there will be a mix of tactics on offer… but here are some moments where people (usually my students or people who have done lots of this type of training) are demonstrating specific ‘karate' applications.

0.15 left hand side. Wado ryu 5th Dan utilising a head grab illustrated in Heian Yondan. Dynamism (and lack of experience in dealing with close quarter resistance) means he’s not able to get the knee in.

0.57 Karate students utilises open handed kakewake uke followed by kick (Heian Yondan / Jion).

2.12 One of my students uses extended open handed cover (used in most Shotokan Uke techniques) and hiza geri.

2.16 Same extended arm cover and mae geri keage, a string of wild chasing strikes finishing with fumikomi.

2.26 An extended arm uke prep, 2.27 pressing receiver (Heian Nidan, Heian Sandan, Kanku Dai), open handed strikes /counter punch Heian Yondan swimming , mae geri, hiza geri.

2.58 In the foreground a TKD 3rd Dan utilising the Heian Yondan head pull and knee.

3.25 One of my students using the elbow and knee combination from Heian Yondan against the black clad attacker.

4.01 one of my students using Heian Yondan again against a simulated attack from a role playing Shotokan Nidan.

What you are seeing here is snippets of multiple events so it’s not so easy to follow as looking at all the footage from a single day’s training.

Hope that helps

John Titchen

Graziano
Graziano's picture

JWT wrote:
Hope that helps

John Titchen

THANK YOU!!!

dhogsette
dhogsette's picture

I'm getting in here a bit late, and my thoughts don't differ from what has been generally said, but mainly comments on the yakusoku kumite drills illustrated by the Matsubayashi video. I decided to comment since Matsubayashi is my main tribe. Matsubayashi, like Shotokan and many other styles, are "modern" in the sense that they were formalized in the 20th century (Matsubyashi in the 1947). And, like Shotokan, Matsubayashi is rooted in Okinwan Shorin ryu (though, I would say that Matsubayashi is more similar to its Okinwan origins than is Shotokan, which has been influenced and changed by mainland Japanese martial culture. This is not a value judgment, but merely an historical reality). The drills illustrated in the video are indeed the yakusoku kumite drills from Nagamine, the founder of Matsubayashi, but they do not illustrate the full spirit of his drills, as revealed in his book The Essence of Okinawan Karate-Do. 

Indeed, "blocks" are used as blocks in these drills (for better or for worse), but what we see today are not, in my humble opinion, fully what Nagamine intended when he created these drills. Choki Motobu was one of Nagamine's instructors, and Nagamine developed these drills based upon Motobu's teachings. Nagamine notes that Motobu "preached" against "dead kumite" in which the drills are so pre-arranged as to be impractical and ineffective for real civil combat. Nagamine states that he developed the yakusoku kumite drills to avoid "dead kumite," yet, in my view, many folks practicing these drills today are indeed engaging in dead kumite. If you would indulge a quote from Nagamine describing some principles behind his yakusoku kumite drills:

The fact is that we should not assume any discontinuation of the opponent's movement since he would, in an actual situation, likely continue his movements, and perhaps even emerge as the victor. Our attitude in practicing prearranged kumite should, therefore, be based strongly on the premise that our opponent is likely to try to block our counterattack and continue to fight. We should also, as part of our mental attitude in practicing kumite, bear strongly in mind that our opponent may vary his attack, and endeavor to be always prepared to defend against such variations. (The Essence of Okinwawn Karate-Do, pp. 251-52)

When I read this, I think that the drills are intended merely to teach combative principles (and in his book, Nagamine lists seven such principles), and we are not to be locked within those drills, but, rather, consider how to apply the principles in real combative situations. However, too many Matsubayashi practitioners practice the drills in themselves and don't move beyond them, beyond what Motobu called "dead kumite." Iain sensei has a GREAT podcast discussing such drills, and I agree with his views. I don't practice these drills too much, as I see them as "dead kumite," but I teach them as a way to preserve the core elements of Matsubayashi. However, I DO teach the combative principles of these drills, and I strive to work more realistic variations of these drills, applying them to real-life self-defense. (I find kata-based sparring a far more practical and instructive exercise to train self-defense combative responses.) Moreover, I gain guidance and inspiration from my Matsubayashi sensei, Jerry Figgiani, who teaches variations on these drills, in the spirit, I believe, of Nagamine, who talks about training to deal with variations in attacks. (Here is an example of Sensei Figgiani teaching self-defense variations of yakusoku kumite #4 that moves beyond "dead kumite": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12y8LAZvFDU

So, all that to say, yes, many “traditional karateka” today in Matsubayashi (and other "modern" systems based upon traditional Okinawan karate) misunderstand blocks as blocks, and we even see it manifest in what Motobu called "dead kumite." But, if we strive to glean the combative principles found within the drills, we can train beyond the drills and move from "dead kumite" to practical karate, which is what true traditional karate is all about to begin with. 

Best,

David 

Graziano
Graziano's picture

I read again this article  http://iainabernethy.co.uk/articles/The%20Basics%20of%20Bunkai%20%28Kata...

and I am studing with attention, but I was wondering if is there evidence on some old Karate book of this way of using the  Blocks, and which Ian karate style, maybe shorin ryu? Which his lineage, where his knowledge come from?

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Books are only written when there is a market from them. So most of the books we have come from the period when karate had shifted away from combative function. However, there are some references to "blocks" originally having alternative functions. For example, in "Rentan Goshin Karate Jutsu" Gichin Funakoshi tells us that the "lower block" from Tekki / Naihanchi is to be used as an armlock in application. 

Mabuni, in his book "Seipai no Kenkyu Goshin Jutsu Hiden Karate Kenpo" also tells us that the motions had no names in Okinanwa: "From long ago, all karateka had names for their kata, however the tecniques in the kata had no names, and this is quite foolish." So the labels for the uke-waza we have today are recent and come entirely from the "revised karate". 

The bottom line though is that motions are demonstrable ineffective when considered as "blocks", and demonstrably effective when applied as strikes, locks, throws, etc.

I hope that's of some help.

All the best,

Iain

Graziano
Graziano's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:
Mabuni, in his book "Seipai no Kenkyu Goshin Jutsu Hiden Karate Kenpo" also tells us that the motions had no names in Okinanwa: "From long ago, all karateka had names for their kata, however the tecniques in the kata had no names, and this is quite foolish." So the labels for the uke-waza we have today are recent and come entirely from the "revised karate" ....

Ok , but where your knowledge come from? Have you made some research? Have you studied some particular kung fu or karate style?

Wastelander
Wastelander's picture

Iain's karate background is in Wado-Ryu, if I remember correctly. I think his answers to your questions make it fairly evident that he has done plenty of research, as well.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Graziano wrote:
Ok , but where your knowledge come from? Have you made some research? Have you studied some particular kung fu or karate style?

No one, single source. It’s a mix of studying old texts, instruction received, personal analysis, group analysis, personal experience, etc. There is no bunkai “Rosetta stone” that reveals all. That’s why we have differing views on bunkai. So long as any given bunkai is true to the kata, does not contradict historical precedent, and (most importantly of all) it works, then it is right. There’s a lot of information we do have, and from there we can make robust interpretations. However, like so much of history generally, there is nothing unequivocal that rules out all but one option. Much is ruled out, but there’s still room for equality valid alternative conclusions.

At the seminars, I make a point of explaining what specific pieces of information have led to me making my own personal conclusions for any given bit of bunkai, but those sources are many and varied. I know that’s probably not what you were after, but the only way to discuss this is on a move by move basis. Those who’ve been to the seminars know what I mean.

As some examples, I will show the “lower block” in Naihanchi / Tekki Shodan as an arm-bar because that is what Funakoshi says it is in Rentan Goshin Karate Jutsu. I teach the opening movement of Kushanku / Kanku-Dai as a “diving wedge” because the same technique is shown in the Bubishi as “two dragons play in the water”. I teach the movement before the jump in Wanshu (Enpi) kata as a shoulder wheel throw because that’s exactly what the movement looks like and there is a story of Wanshu throwing an opponent in to a trough of water with the method (so it makes sense it would be in the kata). I teach the motion before the jump in Pinan / Heian Godan as a one-arm-shoulder-throw because that’s what it looks like, and because Funakoshi shows the same throwin Karate-Do Kyohan (although he makes no reference to the kata specifically). I do however teach the double-head-block sequence of Passai / Bassai-Dai as a double-leg-tackle because Funakoshi describes it as such in Karate Do Kyohan. And so on.

Not possible to list my reasoning behind every single move in a forum post of course. However, at seminars I will go into the background for each move, as well as describing the generic points the past masters made about the nature of kata, the angles, the stances, the role of various hand positions etc. in order to explain my thinking and conclusions reached.

I hope that’s of some help. If you can get to a seminar you’d be able to better understand my process.

All the best,

Iain

Graziano
Graziano's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

Graziano wrote:
Ok , but where your knowledge come from? Have you made some research? Have you studied some particular kung fu or karate style?

No one, single source. It’s a mix of studying old texts, instruction received, personal analysis, group analysis, personal experience, etc. There is no bunkai “Rosetta stone” that reveals all. That’s why we have differing views on bunkai.

This reguards also other aspect of karate like the  use of stances? You wrote a  nice article about the stance!

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Graziano wrote:
This reguards also other aspect of karate like the  use of stances? You wrote a  nice article about the stance!

Thanks. In that article I make references to the texts where I draw my understanding from (Funakoshi, Nakasone, etc). I also put forth my own take on stances based on how I’ve been taught to move by my teachers and my own experiences. So once again no single source, but a mix of complementary sources.

I’m sorry to say I had to delete your other post. I’m not sure what went wrong but it was unreadable and seemed to contain a lot of non-functioning code relating to images. You can use the “image” button to display linked images, but the code you used does not work on this forum. I tried to neaten it up but it would have taken too long. I did not want it messing up the thread, so I had to delete. Sorry.

The general point of the deleted message was around the commonality of given methods within differing martial arts. The most logical explanation is that these related methods arose independently and looking for common origins is probably going to lead to confusion and false assumptions. The example I always give is that every single culture independently came up with the bow and arrow. It was not invented by one group of people and then spread around the globe (and throughout time). It’s the same with unarmed systems. The common problem necessitates the creation of independent common solutions. So lots of arts have common methods, but it does not follow they therefore have a common origin.

All the best,

Iain

Graziano
Graziano's picture

What I told you is, you can find all karate blocks  and to be honest  all karate's techniques also on kung fu muai thai, bare knucle boxe e.ccc, I Think who okinawa master don't create anything, he studied kung fu, karate is a reinterpretation of kung fu and patrik mac charty say also of thay boxe. It's important understand like other martial arts  interpret the movements I will try to send again the pictures and videos

 

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Graziano wrote:
What I told you is, you can find all karate blocks and to be honest  all karate's techniques also on kung fu muai thai, bare knucle boxe e.ccc,

You’ll find common methods in all martial arts. My local “martial art” of Cumberland and Westmoreland Wrestling has throws in it that are also found in Judo … but that does not mean that the Vikings who are said to have brought that form of wrestling to these shores also travelled to Japan to wait around for a few centuries before sharing their throws with Kano. What happened is that two groups of people, when faced with similar problems, independently came up with common solutions.

Commonality in method does not automatically infer a common origin.

Romans had shields, and Zulus had shields. It does not mean that the Zulus learnt to make shields from the Romans. It’s the same with unarmed methods. All cultures learned to punch, kick, lock, throw, strangle, etc so there is obviously some commonality. It does not follow there is a common origin. We need specific evidence for that.

Graziano wrote:
okinawa master don't create anything, he studied kung fu, karate is a reinterpretation of kung fu

Your argument is in danger of infinite regress. “Karate came from Kung Fu, and Kung Fu came from Art X, and Art X came from Art Y, and Art Y came from Art Z … and so on”. That way we reach one man who is responsible for all combat arts throughout all cultures and all points in history. That’s not tenable and we know it’s not true. The karate masters learnt somethings and created other things.

Where did the western boxers in your pictures learn the things shown from? It certainly wasn’t Kung Fu because boxing had been around in the west for a very long time before Kung Fu was ever known about. We have to accept that western boxers developed similar methods to karate, not because of common origin, but because of common solutions arising from common problems.  

Graziano wrote:
I will try to send again the pictures and videos

Thanks for doing that. As mentioned in the last post, the code you are using for images does not work on this forum. You need to use the image icon (the picture of the landscape) in the space where you enter posts. There was only two pictures this time so I was able to do that for you.

They are good pictures and videos! I liked the bareknuckle boxing one and that certainly applies to bare-knuckle boxing, bare-knuckle karate, and bare-knuckle kung fu. The main reason being they are all bare knuckle systems so what works, works.

In summary, all arts are a mixture of prior-learning, experimentation, and innovation. I’d also caution against assuming common origin because of common method. James Figg (British Bareknuckle Boxer) and Soken Masumura were doing similar things at around the same point in history. However, this is not because of common origin because those two people were totally unaware of each other’s arts and cultures.

All the best,

Iain

Graziano
Graziano's picture

Hi Ian, above all thank you, for have correct my post,  and thank you for all patience to answer the questions . I do not want to continue the discussion about the history of karate here, because I think it is better to do a post for this, I want says that the human body, is the same for all, you can be italian, japanese  and also body mechanics is the same for all and maybe fot this there are similarities between different martial arts. The fact is who I am italian,  I want to be sure to understand. Reading your article my impression is, WHO there wasn't  on traditional karate a name for the blocks, and  they wasn't born for to be blocks, but the  answer of other members of forum sayS who they can be also blocks. On the video who I send(with wrong code) about kung fu there were many example how kung fu use the same karate blocks ecc, times have changed your opponent can be a expert for  example  a boxer and he can giving to you a punch without  grabbing to you. How defend yourself  if your opponent is a expert?Greetings !!!

 

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

You’re’ welcome!

Learning to stop punches through crashing, covering, smothering, parrying, blocking, etc are all important. I’m not saying people should not practise those things. They definitely should. However, the motions in kata often labelled as “blocks” don’t work well as blocks. They are too big and slow. They do, however, work well as other things … and, as we’ve discussed, there is evidence they were intended to be used in other ways.

We should learn to stop punches effectively, and learn to apply the kata effectively. And neither one of those things will have us using the “blocks” of the kata as blocks.

If you tried to stop a boxer’s punches (or any other competent punch) with karate “blocks” you’d get hit a lot. Action is faster than reaction and most of the motions labelled as “blocks” require two large motions (i.e. hand to hip or shoulder and then back out again). So we have the puncher rapidly attacking with simple and direct motions, and the defender trying to stop them with large motions that require two actions in response to one. The only place those motions work as “blocks” is in formal one-steps where the “attacker” is forced to attack in a way where the “blocks” can work as blocks.

Add in some realism and the limitations of the motions as “blocks” become inescapable; but, conversely, their combative efficiently is revealed when we see beyond the labelling of the Japanese university days.

I hope that helps clarify my position?

All the best,

Iain

Graziano
Graziano's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:
Learning to stop punches through crashing, covering, smothering, parrying, blocking, etc are all important. I’m not saying people should not practise those things. They definitely should. However, the motions in kata often labelled as “blocks” don’t work well as blocks. They are too big and slow ... SNIP

Thank you so much and Merry christmas!!!