22 posts / 0 new
Last post
Chris R
Chris R's picture
Rising Block in Karate-Do Kyohan

Hi,

In the text "Karate-Do Kyohan: The Master Text" there is a description of how the rising block should be performed in a basic partner drill format. I think it is on page 225 if anyone has access to a copy.

Here is what a part of the description says, with the main part of interest in bold:

"Defender: Lowering the hips and stepping back with the right foot, execute an upper level rising block with the left arm. The intention here is to hit the opponent's chin or armpit."

Does anyone practice it like this? Personally I have never been taught to do it as the text describes. The version in the text looks like a very effective way to perform the block, and I was thinking that perhaps it was changed in more modern times to make training less dangerous? I'm not too sure, maybe someone more knowledgeable knows about the history?

I would be interested to hear anyone's thoughts on this version of the technique.

Anf
Anf's picture

In our club, we are taught things like this, but only as you get to the higher grades. Lower grades still see it as an almost useless block. Despite its apparent uselessness, it is drilled religiously even from white belt, and at higher grades it starts to become apparent why that is, as we start to use it more as a strike, as setups for joint locks, etc. But in our club, at white belt, we start off practicing staying out of range, getting in and out quickly, and as we move up, we practice more and more closer range, so I think in our case, there's a clue. Play it safe at white belt, get more real as you move up.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Chris R wrote:
In the text "Karate-Do Kyohan: The Master Text" there is a description of how the rising block should be performed in a basic partner drill format. I think it is on page 225 if anyone has access to a copy.

Interesting! Could you let me know what translation that is? And what section it is found in?

I have the Neptune and Kyodansha versions to hand, but I can’t find what you are referring to on page 225 of either version.

Page 225 of the Kyodansha version is show the 3rd and 4th kneeling techniques of the Iai section. I can’t see the text you are referring to.

Page 225 of the Naptune version is the “side capture” part of the Women’s self-defence chapter. Again, I can’t see the text so I think we must be looking at different translations?

Could you let us know which technique / section you are looking at too, so I can find it in the other translations.

All the best,

Iain

Chris R
Chris R's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:
Interesting! Could you let me know what translation that is? And what section it is found in?

It was translated by Tsutomu Ohshima. The technique is found under: "Chapter 5: Engagement Matches," more specifically "Basic Sparring: Ten No Kata Ura." It is the fourth technique shown, after demonstrations of using a downward block aganist a punch, a "middle level inside forearm block", and  a "middle level sword hand block." I was looking at a digital copy of the book, and I just realized that I was looking at 225 as the digital page number, so that would be including some of the pages at the beginning. Going back to around 215 should be more accurate I think, I'm sorry for the error.

Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture

Chris R wrote:

 The intention here is to hit the opponent's chin or armpit."

Hi Chris

I do use both of them, entry under the armpit is more as a off balanc. It works great, as you lift your oponent. Often age uke under armpit we use as a limb control and pass to get behind the oponent.

Some examples on my clips below.

Kind regards

Les

See 3 mins 18 seconds

 

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Chris R wrote:
It was translated by Tsutomu Ohshima. The technique is found under: "Chapter 5: Engagement Matches," more specifically "Basic Sparring: Ten No Kata Ura” …

Great! Thank you.

That would be page 215 for those with the print version of that translation. Important to note that the Ten No Kata was not in the original edition of Karate-Do Kyohan; so those with the Neptune version won’t find it in there. However, Ten no Kata was in Funakoshi’s Karate-Do Nyumon, and a quick look at the Kyodansha translation of that one (page 95) shows that it does not give the same instructions:

Revised Kyohan

Defender: Lowering the hips and stepping back with the right foot, execute an upper level rising block with the left arm. The intention here is to hit the opponent's chin or armpit.

Same part of Ten No Kata Ura in Karate-Do Nyumon

Defender: Step back with the right leg into the immovable stance. Pull the right fist to the right side while using the left wrist to snap the opponent’s attacking hand upward.

So there’s a difference there. No mention of a strike.

Ten No Kata is not a traditional kata, but reflects the 3K karate of the 1940s onward; its creation being largely credited to Gigo Funakoshi. It consists of two parts; the “Omote” part which is performed as a solo kata (Karate-Do Nyumon pages 62 to 83) and a “Ura” part when it is performed with a partner (Karate-Do Nyumon pages 84 to 98 / Revised Karate-Do Kyohan pages 212 to 216).

All very much of its time and a good case can be made to say it is the “kata of 3K ippon-kumite karate” i.e. it’s all formal blocks and counters from a big distance, hands on hips for no reason, “enemies” who stand there and do nothing, stepping in to gedan-barai before punching, super low stances, etc.

So not in Kyohan originally, but added later to reflect the karate of the 1950s when the revised version was issued. Gichin Funakoshi’s introduction to the revised edition, written when he was in his late 80s, shows he is not entirely happy with the karate of that time:

“As a result of the social disorder that followed the end of World War Two, the karate world was dispersed, as were many other things. Quite apart from the decline in the level of technique during these times …”

He then continues to also critique the spiritual state of karate believing it to be in a worse state than when he first introduced karate to Japan. He continues:

… Although one might claim such changes are only the natural result of the expansion of karate-do, it is not evident that one should view such a result with rejoicing rather than with some misgiving.”

Anyhow, back on point …

The Ten No kata reflects the degenerated karate of 1940s. And I think that is clear when you see the accompanying pictures of the movement in question. On the photographs in both versions (Nyumon and revised Kyohan) it just looks like a standard 3K “age-uke”, which is to be expected really.

Both look like standard 1940s 3K karate, and neither shows the arm being anywhere near the chin or armpit.

Chris R wrote:
I was thinking that perhaps it was changed in more modern times to make training less dangerous?

There has defiantly been a number of factors that has seen karate be “declawed”, but the Ten No Kata reflects the declawed karate of the time of its creation. We need to look beyond that for the more pragmatic "old school karate".

I think it is pretty clear from the photos, the history of the kata, and the alternate descriptions, that the movement was intended to be used as unworkable block in a 3K manner. No sign of a strike there.

The fact the fact that the Kyodansha version of the revised Kyohan states, “The intention here is to hit the opponent's chin or armpit" is very interesting – and maybe an echo of true traditional karate? – but it seems clear from the photos that was not how they were using it in practise at that time.

All the best,

Iain

Paul_L
Paul_L's picture

In the version I have there is a sequence showing the defender stepping back and performing Jodan Uke to drive the attackers arm up and then moving forward to drive the “blocking” arm into the attackers armpit in preparation for a throw.

I’ve always thought that the rising block was a strike to the throat and it is the Hitake hand that is actually the defending hand, although we have never drilled it tha way in training. 

Paul_L
Paul_L's picture

Chris R wrote:
"Defender: Lowering the hips and stepping back with the right foot, execute an upper level rising block with the left arm. The intention here is to hit the opponent's chin or armpit."

I found it on page 215. Its not clear to me if it is saying that the block should hit the armpit or chin, or if the block is performed with the intention of the following counter being a strike to the armpit or chin. The photos don’t seem to confirm or deny either.

AllyWhytock
AllyWhytock's picture

Hello,

We practice Age Uke under the chin, under the side of the jaw (lower mandible), across the chest and the armpit. We don't practice a defense against a straight punch. Combined with Hikite it is a great way to impact the side of the neck. Using "kime" to drive in and twist then the neck internals are stretched adding some deeper pain to the inititial "parallel" ulna & radius strike.

Century BOB is a good training tool, as are L-Shaped upper cut pads.

We also practice a melee with three pad holders with said L-Shaped pads and Age-Uke is a common method folks employ to push back.

As a reference you can see in this confrontation the natural use of an age-uke. See 00:20.

Kindest Regards,

Ally

Chris R
Chris R's picture

Thank you to everyone who replied and gave examples of their training.

Iain Abernethy wrote:

The fact the fact that the Kyodansha version of the revised Kyohan states, “The intention here is to hit the opponent's chin or armpit" is very interesting – and maybe an echo of true traditional karate? – but it seems clear from the photos that was not how they were using it in practise at that time.

Thank you for the details about the history, I learned some new information. I also think it could be an "echo of true traditional karate" as you mentioned. Regardless, it seems to be a good version of the rising block with a variety of applications, as the other replies on the thread have shown. 

Paul_L wrote:

I found it on page 215. Its not clear to me if it is saying that the block should hit the armpit or chin, or if the block is performed with the intention of the following counter being a strike to the armpit or chin. The photos don’t seem to confirm or deny either.

It is definitely the block that is supposed to hit the armpit or chin, as the block and counter are described seperately. Figure 12 is the blocking technique, and then figure 13 shows the counter after that block. The figure 13 description reads: "2. Defender: Execute a middle level reverse punch with the right fist. Refer to figure 13." So my understanding is that you are supposed to block the punch with the intention of hitting the armpit or chin, and then punch towards the solar plexus/torso as a counter strike.

Bob Davis
Bob Davis's picture

What I find most interesting about Age-Uke/Rising block is the detail in which I was originally taught it.

My old association were real sticklers for getting the body mechanics just so and for correcting any bad habbits that might creep in BUT still only ever taught it as a rising block for a straight long distance punch at all levels (or at least up to 4th Dan), however, since moving on I have found that the mechanics as I was taught them so rigorously are exactly correct for the proper function of the technique as a versatile and useful tool in applied karate and all the "bad habits" that they worked against are the same ones I work against as they cause the technique to fail. I never cease to be amazed how you can be so right and yet so wrong at the same time.

Of course, I have to allow for the fact that my uses and understanding of the technique may be heavily influenced by the way I was taught the body mechanics in the first place ;-)

Marc
Marc's picture

Bob Davis wrote:

I have found that the mechanics as I was taught them so rigorously are exactly correct for the proper function of the technique as a versatile and useful tool in applied karate and all the "bad habits" that they worked against are the same ones I work against as they cause the technique to fail. I never cease to be amazed how you can be so right and yet so wrong at the same time.

I have a similar experience. My teachers have always been keen on minute details of motion, positioning, weight shifting, be it in kihon or kata. But applicationwise it had been more ore less 2-meter karate with block/counter combinations.

It was only around my 1st kyu exam (almost a decade ago now) that I started to come across more practical applications, and I realised how the techniques from the katas made so much more sense when applied at close distance.

The details my teachers taught me, however, proved to be exactly what was needed to make the practical applications effective. Fortunately, around the same time, they also started to incorporate more practical stuff into our training. So I'm still a very happy student with them.

And today, being an instructor myself, I also like to point out such details. Because they are important for power generation, targeting, decoding kata, and last but not least anatomically healthy movement.

Paul_L
Paul_L's picture

In Karate Do Kyohan it says earlier in the the Introduction section that block attack combinatons are performed simultaneously. Later on in the book it shows  applications for blocks and counters against attacks but these are not shown as simultaneous blocks and attack moves instead they are shown as discrete techniques, as seen with the description of age uke.

In light of this, what Iain posted earlier and the hint about age uke striking the chin and or armpit would I be correct in guessing that maybe the book deviates from what Funakoshi actually wrote?

Chris R
Chris R's picture

Paul_L wrote:

In Karate Do Kyohan it says earlier in the the Introduction section that block attack combinatons are performed simultaneously. Later on in the book it shows  applications for blocks and counters against attacks but these are not shown as simultaneous blocks and attack moves instead they are shown as discrete techniques, as seen with the description of age uke.

In light of this, what Iain posted earlier and the hint about age uke striking the chin and or armpit would I be correct in guessing that maybe the book deviates from what Funakoshi actually wrote?

I think it must have deviated. Iain said in his post above: "Gichin Funakoshi’s introduction to the revised edition, written when he was in his late 80s, shows he is not entirely happy with the karate of that time." The text is also hypocritical in the sense that the theory and practical parts don't match. Not only do they not do the rising block as described, but the same trend follows with some of the other techniques, where the description and the pictures don't match. Perhaps the descriptions contain some of the original instructions, while the pictures show the modern 3K version? Also, if we assume that the original Karate was effective, then by looking at the ineffective techniques shown in the pictures, we can tell that there was a deviation somwhere.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Bob Davis wrote:
since moving on I have found that the mechanics as I was taught them so rigorously are exactly correct for the proper function of the technique as a versatile and useful tool in applied karate and all the "bad habits" that they worked against are the same ones I work against as they cause the technique to fail. I never cease to be amazed how you can be so right and yet so wrong at the same time.

Good observation and an experience I think many will recognise. I think this may arise from the following stages in karate’s development:

Combative Karate:

“You have to get this detail right in application and the supporting kata in order to achieve maximum effect.”

Transition Phase:

“This is the right way to do the movement. I understand why combatively, but I’m not going to teach that to you. I just need you to get it right for the muscle control, discipline and the art.”

3K Karate:

“Sensei said it was very important to do the motion like this. He never said why, but I want you to do it as I was taught.”

Because of this, I feel the kata have been passed on relatively unscathed in terms of recording combative function. It does seem that the important parts of the motion were emphasised, even when the reasoning as to why it was important was not emphasised.

This also no doubt why the combative commonality of the kata between styles is so strong i.e. you could vary the unimportant things (what essentially demarcates the styles), but important things were non-negotiable (the combative core of all karate).

All the best,

Iain

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Chris R wrote:
Perhaps the descriptions contain some of the original instructions, while the pictures show the modern 3K version?

There’s definitely an element of that what you look at the throws. Funakoshi’s throws look correctly positioned; especially when you consider he was having to hold a pose because cameras could not capture a moving image at that time (i.e. they had to stay still to avoid blurring). However, if you look at the positions in the photos in the revised version, the alignments are frequently off. A non-thrower may not see it … and my strong suspicion is the photos were posed by non-throwers as they tied to mimic that part of what had gone before.

All the best,

Iain

Paul_L
Paul_L's picture

I saw this the other day:

To me it looks like it is not the block per se, but what would be done afterwards to try to sieze the initiative by clearing and jamming the opponents arm?

Chris R
Chris R's picture

In that picture it is still one movement. He is facing an overhead attack, and blocks targetting the chin/armpit like the karate-do kyohan described. I don't see how there could be a second movement. The above version of the picture makes this clearer to see due to the knife in the attacker's hand.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Chris R wrote:
The above version of the picture makes this clearer to see due to the knife in the attacker's hand.

That was one of the first karate books I owned (published in 1967 and I have a 1985 reprint). I think my folks bought it for me for Christmas when I was 14. Still have it :-)

The cover photo would seem to be from the knife defence section (picture 313b on page 122). The description states:

“ … when the attacker raises his arm to strike, the defender steps forward and blocks with his left forearm in a head block. If the defender’s timing is good, the attacker’s arm will be broken. Note, the defender must step forward to the left, so that even if the block is unsuccessful the defender will not be hurt. See figs 313a and b.”

The technique then continues with a punch to the armpit with a middle knuckle fist, before a bent arm-lock is applied.

Figure 313a is the same position photographed from ninety degrees. You can see the step off line clearly i.e. the defender is out from under the line of the knife irrespective of the block.

While this moving off line is not immediately apparent when viewed from the angle shown in the cover picture, taken as a whole, such a knife defence is obviously very questionable (the defender moving in, hand on hip for no reason, no attempt at a follow up from the attacker, the needless lock instead of escape, etc). What is also highly questionable is the idea that the block could break the attacker’s arm!

One thing that all of the 3k examples we have looked at so far have in common is the idea that the block should be done forcefully. The revised Kyohan states to the idea is to hit the enemy’s armpit. Nyumon’s explanation of Ten No Kata states we should “snap the opponent’s attacking hand upward” and Suzuki states that the motion could be forceful enough to “break” the attacker’s arm. While I see none of these methods as being effective, it is possible that the forceful rise – which is not needed, or even desirable, for blocking – is a faint echo of the use of the forearm as a strike?

All the best,

Iain

Paul_L
Paul_L's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

...While I see none of these methods as being effective, it is possible that the forceful rise – which is not needed, or even desirable, for blocking – is a faint echo of the use of the forearm as a strike?

This is what I was trying to get at. As a strike or a jam it seems like it could be feasible. As a block while stepping backwards it seems unworkable to me. Surely the technique must of had a practical and useful application originally, but that application got lost along the way and something fantastical replaced it.

Chris R
Chris R's picture

I understand what you mean now. I agree that it probably was originally used for striking/jamming/a similar purpose, my point was just that the text did not describe that. Something else to think about might be the transition between the hands when doing rising blocks in kihon and kata. I guess that some styles do this differently, but I have wondered whether this is just a transition or a part of the technique intended for use. For example, the non-"blocking" hand could interact with the opponent's arm, and the "blocking" hand could deliver the strike with the forearm. Just a thought anyway.

I came across a video where someone uses the block against a punch, as it is described in the text. I am not yet convinced about the effectiveness of this block against someone who knows how to punch, but it is relevant to the topic so I thought I might share it:

Paul_L
Paul_L's picture

I think that a lot of what is written in amny of the books out there has to be taken with a pinch of salt and that you have to try to read between the lines, even if it appears as being Funakoshi’s teachings.

Personally I dont believe that there are effective “blocks” from a self defence standpoint where by block I mean a descrete parry. There are effective blocks in the sense that there are checking or jamming techniques that should be executed at the same time as (or immediately followed by) an offensive technique. I see a lot of the moves labelled as blocks (XXX uke) being techniques to enter the opponents space and control them so that you have the dominant position.

I found these posts on this forum really helpful.

https://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/content/defence-agaist-strikes-traditional-karate

https://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/content/karates-blocks

https://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/content/basic-drill-application-blocks-video