Making Bunkai competitive?

I think an event based on effective responce to a small set of random attacks (grab, punch - double grab headbutt, knockdown and pin etc etc) could be good for sure - there would need to be a careful set of rules and the attackers would need to be able to deliver 'street' attacks and accept that they will get hit - maybee decent armour is the way.

I recon your on to something myself.

shoshinkanuk wrote:

I think an event based on effective responce to a small set of random attacks (grab, punch - double grab headbutt, knockdown and pin etc etc) could be good for sure - there would need to be a careful set of rules and the attackers would need to be able to deliver 'street' attacks and accept that they will get hit - maybee decent armour is the way.

I recon your on to something myself.

Maybe take Pat McCarthy's list of HAPV, have an impartial judge (which would have to be thought through) and have that person apply randomly (again some kind of system to fairly apply these across everyone) one of these to those competing, 1 person at a time and somehow measure the results.

But this would remove the confrontation aspect, as you wouldnt be 'fighting' directly with someone else.  I think the only way to create something to compete against other would be to create some kind of 100% stand up grappling event with no striking allowed with the aim of gaining a dominant position (not including submissions) where you would be able to strike well

Not a great fan of armour as wearing it personally just changed the way I did things so it wasn't relevent to working without armour anymore !

Paul Anderson wrote:

But this would remove the confrontation aspect, as you wouldnt be 'fighting' directly with someone else.  I think the only way to create something to compete against other would be to create some kind of 100% stand up grappling event with no striking allowed with the aim of gaining a dominant position (not including submissions) where you would be able to strike well

But a stand up grappling match with no striking would not really be either Karate or bunkai would it?  In addition - since bunkai is the application of Kata, it would be difficult to do bunkai against other Karateka doing Karate techniques, since that is not really what the fighting movements of Kata were predominantly designed for.  I would have said a better form of competition would be based on how quickly the attacker was disabled from the moment their attack began, or in how few moves, or even with how little 'injury'.

Paul Anderson wrote:

Not a great fan of armour as wearing it personally just changed the way I did things so it wasn't relevent to working without armour anymore ! 

What armour did you wear, and how did you use it?  Bad armour drastically changes the way the body can move and feels - good armour doesn't.  Bad armour use teaches you to rely on it for protection - good armour use highlights your weaknesses and gives you the opportunity to change your approach in order to negate them.

JWT wrote:

But a stand up grappling match with no striking would not really be either Karate or bunkai would it?  In addition - since bunkai is the application of Kata, it would be difficult to do bunkai against other Karateka doing Karate techniques, since that is not really what the fighting movements of Kata were predominantly designed for.  I would have said a better form of competition would be based on how quickly the attacker was disabled from the moment their attack began, or in how few moves, or even with how little 'injury'.

You're right it would be fighting and not self defence I guess ... hmmm so maybe it's not possible to have 'competitive' Bunkai, only semi live with a bunkai defending against simulated attacks.

JWT wrote:

What armour did you wear, and how did you use it?  Bad armour drastically changes the way the body can move and feels - good armour doesn't.  Bad armour use teaches you to rely on it for protection - good armour use highlights your weaknesses and gives you the opportunity to change your approach in order to negate them.

Can't recal but it was bulky.  What armour have you used?

Paul Anderson wrote:

Can't recal but it was bulky.  What armour have you used?

Hi Paul

I've used the FIST suit in the past, but didn't like it as I found it too much like a sumo suit, and rejected using Redman for similar reasons, and Bulletman because of the cumbersome unrealistic head.

I switched to using High Gear about 6 years ago, as I found it gave the protection needed to go for realistic contact levels without much compromised mobility.  I recently started using Spartan Training Gear which is similar to High Gear but with a number of important modifications that make it a superior more versatile product.  At present I use 4 High Gear Suits and 4 Spartan Training Gear suits along with two of my own brand suits that I have put together myself (not for sale but can be worn beneath a Gi if required) - you'll spot those because it looks as if only a helmet is being worn.  

I've posted the video below before here.  It shows all 3 types of armour being worn under t shirts (and in some cases under tracksuit bottoms), and you can see how mobile people are:

The second video is a mobility demonstration by Scott Sonnon of one of his tacfit routines performed in Spartan Trianing Gear:

Not to appear too cynical, but this conversation, which is essentially about creating a set of tournament rules that will best reflect the realities of a street situation, closely resembles the conversation that has probably prefaced the creation of most every set of rules for every combat sport on the planet.  I realize this thread is nuanced because of a desire to emphasize self-defense over fighting, but, as I see it, implicit in the genesis of every combat sport is the acknowledgement that self-defense can't be effectively simulated.  Most people want fair competition, and nice clean fights are the best way to encourage that.  Save for some sort of rules in which competitors are all put into the exact same scenario (without knowing it before hand) and are judged on how effectively they wiggle out of it, a tournament that tries to represent self-defense must include some measure of unfairness for the sake of accuracy.  

While some combat sports have existed for hundreds or thousands of years (or are being recreated from cultural memory and archaeological record), most are relatively new.  These sports developed from actual martial arts that were designed for the difficulties of a more violent world.  The martial artists of old were in constant competition with all manner of ruffian...only the prize happened to be survival.  In our more civilized world, without that pressure to avoid actual harm, martial artists decided they needed a way to best simulate combat with people who they could not ethically or legally maim or kill.  I believe this is the cicumstance that birthed competitive karate.  More importantly, the dilemma that those martial artists from not too long ago faced, appears yet again in this thread. There would definitely be a benefit to having the experience of pitting my skills gleaned from bunkai against a live foe.  If I were attacked on the street, assuming I successfully defended myself to some degree, I think I'd learn a lot from the experience.  That's certainly not cause for me to go picking fights.  Nor do I hope to ever have such a life threatening experience.  I also don't think desgining a system for competitive bunkai could ever hit the mark.  Competition feels good.  Its validating.  That's one reason why so many people do it.  But its not self-defense, and I'm not convinced that it could ever effectively simulate it.  

Drew Loto wrote:

but, as I see it, implicit in the genesis of every combat sport is the acknowledgement that self-defense can't be effectively simulated.  

I really don't believe this.

I think the majority of combat sports owe their genesis in a desire to compete in learned skills to find out who is best and that self defence has very little to do with the creation of any new set of rulesets.

I also believe that self defense can be effectively simulated, just the same way that police and military situations can be effectively simulated (and are).  To do so however is not competitive except against oneself.

There is a competative form of bunkai happening this year in Belgium, The European Ramdom Attacks Championships 2012. Its set up by Van Hoef Bart, who himself is a 6th dan Ju jitsu and saw a gap in the competative side of reality based practice.

Our Federation , The UKMAGB is the sole UK representative and will be sending a UK squad to the competion. The UKMAGB does not represent just Ju Jitsu, our club is a Wado based ryu but is a member of the Federation and has the option to attend squad training.

Check out the Jikishin ju jitsu association web page or the European Random Attacks Championships Page. Looks like a good opportunity if thats what you are looking for.

Wayne

years ago when i was practicing jujitsu with a BJJA GB affiliated club they held national and international level competitions which consisted of the following elements;
Kumite - similar to karate style ippon kumite but with the added element of being able to incorporate jujitsu / judo type throws also
Grappling / Ground Fighting - starting from a one knee on the ground kneeling position and holding onto ones opponent.
Randori - a jujitsuka would take the centre of the mat and be faced by three attackers to their front number 1-3. and attack type would be openly given to each attacker (1 punch to head, 2 grab and headbutt, 3 overhead knife attack etc). The jujitsuka defending would be judged on the proficiency and effectiveness of the techniques utilised against the attacks. However even this format I feel was false and limited when looked at from a realistic and effective self defence viewpoint.
Later I had cause to change to another club with entirely diferent emphasis on practical effectiveness and affiliations. With this club every grade had to undertake a Randori phase as part of the grading test. The Randori phase would be limted by time dependant upon grade and the attacks deployed against the defender would be consistant with the techniques that the defender had learned up to their current grade.
This Randori phase to the grading took the following shape;
The defender would take the centre of the mat and be faced by three attackers initially sited to their front approx 2 mtres away. Upon the command from the examiner to begin the centre attacker would attack first with any attack of their choice dependant upon the grade of the defender. The defender would utilise any of the appropriate defence techniques learned to date. No sooner than they had dealt with the first attack either one of the other attackers would attack straight away with any attack including blades, bottles, sticks and firearm threats. The attackers would attack from any direction without any warning and in any sequence.
The level of contact for all strikes used thoughout this was expected to be no less than full contact with careful control of force only exercised when attacking joints. If the defender was ever taken to the ground or went to the ground as a result of losing their balance etc the attackers were expected to swarm the defender who would be expected to deal with the matter and regain their feet as soon as possible.
As this was a grading the defender was continually being assessed for their proficiency and the effectiveness of the techniques that they utilised. This is the only way I can see of an effective Bunkai Competition format. Also from a Self Defence view of judging such a competition i think that the judgeing should be based not solely upon technical proficiency but also compliance with the law.

Looks like this subject has been done, and well for a tournament - im not much of a JuJutsu fan and to be honest alot of the defences were 'flash' insead of functional first but a pretty good job being done here in random attacks tournament based on the video and documentation presented etc etc.

Hmm..good subject to think about.

Something this makes me think of, Rory Miller and others have written extensively about the difference between  social and asocial violence. Generally competitive forms will fall under the social violence category, whereas 'bunkai' if being applied for self defense comes at things from the angle of survival, not competition.

Naturally there is some crossover there, seems the problem is that perhaps to create a competitive format you would need to create a 'win' based on something other than survival.

I know some will claim there is no difference, but I have come to believe that fundamentally that there are some differences between how people operate when they are really going at someone, and when they are trying to 'win' something in a competitive format.

Hi Zach, thats why I suggest armour - despite its draw backs it allows full contact with relative safety for this kind of testing.

Something like this will only go so far of course, but I think that the variable nature of attack combined with heavy contact is a great start to get somewhere near 'realism' for your average Joe.

I agree Jim you can do that with the armor, it's just that when 'bunkai' actually works, it ceases to be a competition, if you put two people together and say "ok whoever does X wins", it becomes a different game. That's why personally i'd opt for scenario-based RBSD styles setups with the armor above any kind of competitive bunkai format where you are defining a 'win' as something other than survival, albiet simulated survival.