The Way of Least Resistance

Over the last 2 decades I've noticed an explosion of interest in karate in "bunkai" - applications of karate's kata (forms).  There was a time (in the not too distant past) where karate had stagnated badly.  Kata were practised almost in a vacuum: forms as a series of movements and no analysis on one hand - sparring or two person drills with no nexus to the kata on the other.  This seemed to be the case since karate became popularised in Japan in the 1930s and was diluted for teaching to school kids.  It only got worse in the 1950s and 60s when it spread to the West. By the 1980s I noticed a few teachers trying to claw the way back to bunkai as the primary source of karate knowledge.  As just one example, Higaonna Morio sensei of goju ryu released his 8mm and later video tapes of kata and applications.  Meanwhile, other teachers, like Hirokazu Kanazawa sensei of SKI shotokan, handled the dilemma in a totally different way, cataloging hundreds of two ...

I saw this video the other day: The defender is attacked by a fellow who runs at him from a distance with bat or pole. The defender responds by stepping off line inside the circle and moving his hand upward to deflect. In doing so he contacts the shoulder first, jamming the attack at its source. This is known as " cutting the supply lines ". This instantly takes the bulk of the force out of the attack.  This is the favoured tactic of arts like arnis/escrima/kali when defending against weapons: jam the slow moving parts of the body. In aikido terms the approach would be an " irimi " - ie. "entering" - however there is no "turning" ("tenkan") or other "blending" as is typically seen in aikido. The defender also manages to deflect the attack by sliding up the attacker's arm, " slicing " aside the remaining downward action  (probably a high hiki/kake uke or a kind of " steeple block ") (note -...

[This article is split from my earlier one " There are no blocks ".]  The knockout punch "I don't care about your stupid articles.  You don't see blocks in MMA, so that proves they don't work.  Checkmate!" If I only had a dollar for every time I heard that statement... For many, this is the "knockout punch" in the "blocks don't work" argument. But there are many false assumptions inherent in this statement, which I will now proceed to analyse: No blocks in MMA?  So what? Okay, let's assume there are no "blocks" in MMA.  Why would this be conclusive evidence that they "don't work" in civilian defence? I'll take it point by point: Fighters in MMA have a very different goal to civilians who are being attacked. Fighters in an MMA cage are in there with the express aim of beating an opponent.  It is their only goal to land blows or submit - ie. to "hurt".  They don't ge...

I'm going to start a series of short pieces dealing with what I consider to be "persistent myths" in the martial arts: myths that won't go away despite contrary logic and a plethora of available information. Since I've been talking about blocks a lot lately, I'm going to start with this one: Traditional blocks are designed to be executed in isolation. Erm... No, they're not.  Why would anyone think so? People might not say this so clearly, but it is often necessarily implicit in their argument.  As Rashaud noted in the comments to my last article: "What's interesting, I think, is that most people look at "blocking" as a static thing.  That all of you've done is "parry" or "deflect" an incoming strike. From that line of thinking, most would therefore consider the formal block overkill, or unworkable." Presumably the impression among these people is that all you do is "block" (ie. stop or re...

Back on my "blocks" soapbox Okay, so this common, indeed popular , view is one of my biggest "soapbox items": " Traditional blocks comprise two movements. " Of course, I'm referring to two separate movements off the same arm (eg. to one side, then back to the other; or up to the ear, then down low). Obviously I don't subscribe to this view.  In fact, I think it is a misconception.  And, as far as martial arts misconceptions go, I think it is one of the worst. In fact, I see it as blatant nonsense . Doesn't everyone has a valid viewpoint? Now I can see why some people might be scratching their heads here: why can't we just "agree to disagree" - everyone has a perspective and why should one person's be more "valid" than another? Well my feelings are strong on this issue precisley because the "blocks comprise two movements" misconception is profoundly wrong : in physics,...