Tkd Throws

Discussion in 'Taekwondo Patterns' started by John McNally, Mar 12, 2013.

  1. John McNally

    John McNally Active Member

    I think the point may be missed, okay practice punching, so a beginner puches with an unclenched fist to you teach them to make a good fist, okay now you teach them how to kick so they do this with thier toes, so now you show them how to kick without breaking thier toes, now you ask them to block to the rear and them low block because they did not see you were showing defence of a high section punch, so now you show them to look as they turn.
    The tuls are a basic learning curve that advance as they go.
    If you show the purposes that each move can be used for then where is the confusion.

    Of course in the street many aspects are not used in formal stance but it is natural once taught and have thourough understanding of to use the techniques.

    If you only see a Tul as prety moves then thats all they will be to any student, but if they practise dilligently and also practice them as in attacked situation then this is the practicle aspect.

    May be many are making the same point in different eyes.
     
  2. John McNally

    John McNally Active Member

    WIKI
    Bunkai (分解?), literally meaning "analysis"[1] or "disassembly",[2] is a term used in Japanese martial arts referring to the application of fighting techniques extracted from the moves of a "form" (kata).
    Bunkai is usually performed with a partner or a group of partners which execute predefined attacks, and the student performing the kata responds with defenses, counterattacks, or other actions, based on a part of the kata. This allows the student in the middle to understand what the movements in kata are meant to accomplish. It may also illustrate how to improve technique by adjusting distances, time moves properly, and adapt a technique depending on the size of an opponent.
    Some kata have another layer of application that is taught using an Oyo Bunkai, an "application of the kata in ways other than the standard bunkai."[3] Different practitioners will learn or discover alternative applications, but the bunkai, like the kata, varies based on the style and the teacher.
    A single kata posture or movement may be broken into anywhere from a few to a few dozen applications, and the same sequence of kata moves may sometimes be interpreted in different ways resulting in several bunkai. Students are encouraged to consider each movement and technique in a kata in response to multiple possible attacks, for example: use of a particular movement against a kick, against a punch, against various forms of grappling. Through analysis of the move and practice in variant scenarios, the student will unlock new techniques and expand their understanding of known ones. Some martial arts require students to perform bunkai for promotion.
    Bunkai can be obvious or elusive depending on the technique in question, the moves preceding and following it, and the individual practitioner. There are usually many stages of depth of comprehension of bunkai only reached through the passage of time. The terms toridai and himitsu are used to refer to techniques not readily seen to the casual observer and hidden techniques within kata.[citation needed] For example, in Gōjū-ryū karate, two-man kata training is used to reinforce bunkai and correct technique.[4] If techniques in the kata are not performed correctly they will not be effective in two man training.
     
  3. bowlie

    bowlie Well-Known Member

    Skip to 32:22

     
  4. bowlie

    bowlie Well-Known Member

    Repost, sorry
     
  5. UK-Student

    UK-Student Active Member

    I can't say you are wrong or right but what happens behind closed doors, stays behind closed doors so I can't prove or disprove it.

    Iain publishes his books and DVDs in the open and is constantly doing seminars, free videos and free podcasts. Other people are doing exactly the same thing. I have never seen someone from a "direct" lineage with the same level of skill demonstrate in public. Sure, it makes sense I guess "to keep their secrets in house" but frankly in an age when I have access to every component art in MMA at my fingertips, "in house" techniques are irrelevant because I'm never going to gain access to them.

    Another thing is that BJJ got really dramatically improved once it became widespread because the competitors innovated and developed techniques. You would also wonder about an in-house style which is kept almost as a secret (at least so much as the majority of Karate instructors are completely interested in it and completely unaware of it) that limited to only a small group of people, the style may degrade and may not have been preserved at the same level. That does not mean that it cannot be useful and insightful but even if something of a tradition remains, I would be totally interested in it but it might not necessarily be the 100% total package.

    Every time a Japanese instructor publishes a good book on Bunkai which is translated, Iain will link to it.

    When someone from a "direct" lineage who actually can prove they have the "original" bunkai by showing me completely real techniques, I'll totally start following them and implementing their teachings. Until they do that, they may or may not exist but it's kind of irrelevant to me and they might as well not exist.

    Another thing is like I said before, it's way to easy for people to claim to be Bunkai masters when they are not. My rule would be to disbelieve until I see something that substantiates the claim. On the British TV Show "Mind, Body...etc" they built up a guy as "Okinawan Karate - the original Karate" and all he demonstrated were one-step sparring, punches and back kicks. It was totally modern and sport-based and just shows that you can take a Karate guy from Okinawa and say "original karate" but that may or may not be the case and they may or may not have access to knowledge on Bunkai beyond what the rest of us have.
     
  6. UK-Student

    UK-Student Active Member

    I don't think this is true because we have evidence from Funikoshi's early dojos such as the picture below which show that clinching, grappling and throws were trained there:

    http://www.kowakan.com/archives/3627/funakoshi-nage-waza

    It's speculative to say that Funikoshi never learnt Bunkai because there is so much evidence in body his autobiography and in his early books that suggest he did know Bunkai. His earliest book (which I own in the UK but do not have here and cannot remember the title) shows a neck ring throw and links it to a movement in the Kata. Iain as a result teaches this throw.

    Iain also teaches a similar throw as seen on the right of the picture but there is lots more evidence for the existence of that throw in Kata besides this.

    I too used to believe that Funikoshi and maybe even Itosu received incomplete teaching but there is a grand weight of evidence counter to that view and I had to concede that I was incorrect (for one, Funikoshi trained with and met a number of teachers whilst he was with Itosu and it does not make sense to imply they were all so misinformed). We also have to remember that Shotokan was not the only art that was taught "without Bunkai" to school children as I believe Goju was taught to children in Naha without applications for physical training and philosophy. We often say that Itosu was responsible for creating the style of Karate without Bunkai and teaching it to children but others were doing it too and I believe to some extent, the original form which was "kept back" to personal students simply died out in the Karate explosion. I see now how some of the original TKD pioneers have almost no students at all whilst much more recently trained instructors have hundreds of students. I believe the "Bunkai" version may have been swamped in this way and it may have been that only a fragmented part of it was handed down if there were not many high level practitioners and they were always being told that they were wrong about Karate or could not compete with the sport practitioners.
     
    John McNally likes this.
  7. michael mckenna

    michael mckenna Active Member


    what do you mean about them not knowing what the kata is for ?
     
  8. Gnarlie

    Gnarlie Well-Known Member

    One kata contains several sequences to be used against single opponents. That's multiple opponents said in a different way, and when we are dealing with translations I wouldn't put too much stock in either idea being correct.
     
    Oerjan likes this.
  9. Oerjan

    Oerjan Active Member

    That is exactly what I was going to Write and is my own take on the "multiple" vs "single" opponent view.
     
  10. Blue_Knight

    Blue_Knight Active Member

    The following is a bit off topic, but considering what all has been posted here - I feel it needs to be said.

    The repeated notion by some that Taekwondo founders did not “understand” Karate or Kata is absolute nonsense uttered from the mouths of woefully undereducated beginners. Won Kuk Lee, founder of Chung Do Kwan, was THE highest ranked student at 3rd Dan in Shotokan other than Funakoshi. Everyone wants to put down the “other guy” and the “other art.” They say Funakoshi didn’t know what he was doing, yet he was considered one of the foremost Karate experts in his time.

    One thing I find so absolutely astounding is that bowlie will suck up everything this Iain Abernethy says, quoting him and posting links to his videos - yet argues with me even though I have said much of the same thing about forms that bowlie quote Iain saying.

    Bowlie quotes Iain as saying, “I therefore underwent a process of “reverse engineering” the applications drawing on what I know about civilian violence, the nature of the kata itself, and what the information the past masters left us.”

    This is the exact same thing that far more experienced Masters who developed the art of Taekwondo and the forms they wanted for practice of the Korean Martial Art did. They had knowledge of real world fighting (cleaning up the streets of Seoul from gangsters after WWII), in war time combat (Korea and Vietnam), and working at the Blue House protecting Korea’s President. They “reverse engineered” the Kata, and did not feel it was necessary to ‘duplicate’ everything Karate Kata bunkai taught, but create forms and teaching application for techniques that ACTUALLY WORKED according to their expertise in unarmed combat. Why you have your head so far up Abernethy’s butt that you can’t hear anyone else say the same thing is beyond me!

    Abernethy says, “I can’t know for certain if what I have came up with was the original intent, but I can say it works, is consistent with the kata, and is consistent with the firm information we do have.”

    NOTHING NEW! Taekwondo Masters did that decades ago and we still know more than these young, novice internet gurus who keep challenging us saying we don’t “understand” kata bunkai!

    Abernethy explains, “Having undergone that process, I have found the end result to be very useful. I therefore teach that to my students. They know EXACTLY what the kata motion represents because I tell them exactly what it represents. They do not need to undergo the “reverse engineering” process that I undertook.”

    Bow down to Iain Abernethy because he’s cool like you, but ignore the Taekwondo Masters who did the exact same thing long before Abernethy was born. We know what we are doing, and our students don’t have to “reverse engineer” our forms because we teach them what works - - just like good ole Iain.

    Brilliant insight from Iain…. do you listen to him? “They are modern day practitioners who want to practise something that works in the here and now. We KNOW with 100% certainty what the application is for every kata we practise. We know it with full certainty, because it is what we say it is. We therefore end up using the kata in exactly the same way as the masters of the past.”

    Exactly what I have been telling you, bowlie, about the philosophy of Taekwondo Poomsae. It serves our purpose, and we teach it with 100% certainty because WE are the experts of today, and WE know what works in modern street combat. We don’t NEED a history lesson on what Karate Masters of the past did and why they did it - AND it is not because the TKD founders were ignorant of the subject. We are actually much more educated and experienced today then they were back then, and have good scientific knowledge and practical real-world experience to validate why we teach the way we do.

    Abernethy says to you “The process of kata and bunkai that we utilise works for us. And because it works we teach it as concrete fact i.e. “this motion means this, and here is the drill”. It’s not a case of open ended interpretation in my dojo. I did the interpreting, I reached what I feel is a sound conclusion, and my students are told exactly what the kata motion records.”

    NOW - - HERE is the most important part you quoted. Read it carefully

    “When they are higher grades they may decide to reinterpret things (which is as it should be) but when gaining the experience that would allow them to do that effectively there is no “it could be this?”; it is a categoric, “this motions is this”.”

    Did you catch that, bowlie? “When they are higher grades…” This should be understood as when you are higher degree than your instructor was when he did his research and taught it to you - - NOT as a beginner to say the Masters of Taekwondo don’t know what they are doing so I am going to study the bunkai of Karate Kata, reverse engineer the Taekwondo Poomsae, and tell all of the Taekwondo world what they are doing wrong because they are so ignorant and I know so much in a couple of years training.

    Yes, I am being harsh because you don’t seem to get it - and you post insults and corrections to people far more knowledgeable than you, and bash an art that you have barely studied.

    Abernethy said in his reply to you, “In my view instructors should not be telling students to “work it out for yourself”. You go to an instructor to be instructed! The instructor should be telling the student what the kata records.”

    So… you tell me, bowlie - - which one are you…. the student or the teacher? The beginner or the Master?

    Are you 'working it out for yourself' or are you in the mode of learning what those more knowledgeable have to teach FIRST? I think you need to shift gears and get back into the mode of being a 'student' and learning before you start reworking what YOU don't understand!

    See if you can wrap your head around this. In Taekwondo… we are NOT teaching Karate, and we are not teaching Karate Kata. The founders of Taekwondo understood it quite well (probably more than you will in the next 20 years of your training), yet with full purpose and educated intent, they designed an art based on kicking as a primary weapon and redesigned the training tools (such as forms based on the ‘concept’ of kata) to be useful for OUR art.

    Our forms are practice sessions of an imaginary street fight scenario involving multiple attackers from multiple directions - although each section can be used against a single opponent, and the whole form should not be interpreted as exactly what is done when faced with a group attack. It is a training tool - period.

    These kinds of repetitive statements by you are so unbelievably misinformed and overwhelmingly exude the characteristic of a Star Wars fan with toy light saber telling a fencing master that he doesn’t hold his foil right and doesn’t know how to fight. I would love for you, bowlie, to stand face-to-face with any of the Taekwondo founders and tell them they are wrong about their art, and that they didn’t understand what they were “copying.”

    I agree with Iain on this point. Students should respectfully be quiet and learn what their expert instructors are teaching them until the point that the student has mastered the art. Then if you still think you know more - speak up and criticize - - or better yet, create your own system so you can do it YOUR way, and the next generation of internet experts can tell you how much more they know after a couple of years of training than you do.

    Blue Knight
     
    RTKDCMB and Gnarlie like this.
  11. GreywulfTKD

    GreywulfTKD Member


    After reading many Karate history books, I think you are absolutely correct about Karate bunkai being lost or atrophied based on the stripped-down, standardized, school-boy karate becoming more popular in Okinawa and Japan post-war. Itosu introduced a system to the public school -- excellent for kids, but not for adults serious about combat. Unfortunately that sort of curriculum seems to have become popular. I don't know what the mainstream is in dojo in Okinawa, but here in the US a lot of Karate schools I see seem to be focused on learning the curriculum and much less on understanding it. The massive sportification of Karate has also served to water down its self defense capability.
     
  12. John McNally

    John McNally Active Member

    In the Tuls the actual first throw of a physical throw is in Do San after the thrust. the first throw for attacker body throw off target thus leaving an opening is in Chon Ji.​
    You are right. I said Won Hyo but I was thinking Do San. I swear....:)

    Hechyio Makgi to Annero sang Sonkal Taerigi or so on​
    Wedging block to inward twin knife hand strike? I don't understand. Please explain.




    Lol i hear you and i know you meant Do San

    the second was meant as a combination of movement so one set can be used from another set move in conjunction as in the flow of conversation (not as a throw).

    Nightwing in regards ambiguous, i wouldn't take that route as all i am trying to discuss and point out in my own opinion is that every one learns fundamentally the martial art technicalities and then applies them to use in life, if required.

    The Tuls in my opinion are there as is learning to write, write the letter and make a word, make a move and make it as good as possible, only by repetition do we, i believe, become good at what one does.

    the tuls are not meant to be used as a complete attack and self defense but teach us many uses and techniques to amalgamate in real situation of life use.

    If one concentrates on the application for one practicality then one loses sight of learning an art.

    Again only my opinion, one does not start to master the movements until BB and then only under good guidance.
     
  13. Finlay

    Finlay Active Member

    I use movement from dan gun and chonji to throw people.

    who is to say where the first 'throw' appears if it works for you then go with it
     

Share This Page