Kodokan Goshinjutsu

I didn't read Hanon's rant until after (he?) locked it.

He starts by questioning the very first move - ryote dori. I would ask if he's mastered the five distinct technical moves and the kuzushi principle integral to its proper execution.  Is there nothing to learn in that?

Also, he mentions Tomiki sensei as an aikido 8dan 'for 40 years' IIRC.

Tomiki was promoted directly to aikido's highest rank 8dan, its first 8dan, by Ueshiba Morihei sensei during the latter's trip to Manchuria in 1942 - only after aikibujutsu joined the new Butokukai and became aikido, thus adopting the dan  / i rank system for the first time.  

Tomiki sensei died in 1979 so he held only one aikido rank - 8dan, its highest - for 37 years.

NBK wrote:He starts by questioning the very first move - ryote dori. I would ask if he's mastered the four distinct technical moves and the kuzushi principle integral to its proper execution.  Is there nothing to learn in that?
 

Mr. Natural,

Pray tell us, what are the four distinct technical moves and the kuzushi principle integral to its proper execution that we should endeavor to master?

Also, how does one distinguish a Japanese turkey from the fowl that foul fair Asakusa?

Happy holiday, see you Sunday I hope.

BillC wrote:

NBK wrote:He starts by questioning the very first move - ryote dori. I would ask if he's mastered the four distinct technical moves and the kuzushi principle integral to its proper execution.  Is there nothing to learn in that?
 

Mr. Natural,

Pray tell us, what are the four distinct technical moves and the kuzushi principle integral to its proper execution that we should endeavor to master?

Also, how does one distinguish a Japanese turkey from the fowl that foul fair Asakusa?

Happy holiday, see you Sunday I hope.

I modified that to 'five' distinct technical moves upon reflection.

Why, didn't you take notes?

1. After being grasped, tori steps back a half step timed so that uke is unable to execute the knee kick to which he committed, and is jammed, made unable to move easily, the preliminary forward kuzushi.
- Tori releases uke's grip by:
2. Left hand moves upward into a V-notch shape - yahazu - breaking uke's grip to grasp uke's right wrist just above the hand from below, and pulling uke further offbalance forward while....
3. Turning his right hand palm down while pulling it through an arc from the opening of the fingers of uke's left hand, tori breaks uke's right hand grip, finishing with his palm roughly facing towards the left side of his own face, then,
4. Strikes deeply into uke's eyesockets with the tips of his right hand fingers in a backhand, whipping action - metsubushi - then, on the recoil,
5. While rotating uke's entire extended arm in a clockwise fashion (as seen from tori's standpoint), grasps the back of uke's hand from above (in opposition to his own left hand) with tori's right hand, and ending with the back of uke's right hand, thumb down / little finger up / palm facing out (left as seen by tori), pressed against tori's own upper left breast, steps back with his right foot / partially turning his body clockwise (someone asked about hiraki ashi' - I reckon this is an example), pulling uke further off balance forward (the final kuzushi), and applies 'kote hineri' (wrist twist) to seal the deal.

Or something like that, I don't have time for the details. I think this all tracks consistently.

NBK

NBK wrote:
Why, didn't you take notes?  

Confucius say, most unwise ask question, not already know answer.

BillC wrote:

NBK wrote:
Why, didn't you take notes?  

Confucius say, most unwise ask question, not already know answer.

so, what makes you think I do not already know the answer?

Please give me a call or an SMS when you get in, let's talk about Sunday!

NBK wrote:

BillC wrote:

NBK wrote:He starts by questioning the very first move - ryote dori. I would ask if he's mastered the four distinct technical moves and the kuzushi principle integral to its proper execution.  Is there nothing to learn in that?
 

Mr. Natural,

Pray tell us, what are the four distinct technical moves and the kuzushi principle integral to its proper execution that we should endeavor to master?

Also, how does one distinguish a Japanese turkey from the fowl that foul fair Asakusa?

Happy holiday, see you Sunday I hope.

I modified that to 'five' distinct technical moves upon reflection.

Why, didn't you take notes?  

1.  After being grasped, tori steps back a half step timed so that uke is unable to execute the knee kick to which he committed, and is jammed, made unable to move easily,  the preliminary forward kuzushi.
- Tori releases uke's grip by:
2. Left hand moves upward into a V-notch shape - yahazu - breaking uke's grip to grasp uke's right wrist just above the hand from below, and pulling uke further offbalance forward while....
3. Turning his right hand palm down while pulling it through an arc from the opening of the fingers of uke's left hand, tori breaks uke's right hand grip, finishing with his palm roughly facing towards the left side of his own face, then,
4. Strikes deeply into uke's eyesockets with the tips of his right hand fingers in a backhand, whipping action - metsubushi - then, on the recoil,
5. While rotating uke's entire extended arm in a clockwise fashion (as seen from tori's standpoint), grasps the back of uke's hand from above (in opposition to his own left hand) with tori's right hand, and ending with the back of uke's right hand, thumb down / little finger up /  palm facing out (left as seen by tori), pressed against tori's own upper left breast, steps back with his right foot / partially turning his body clockwise (someone asked about hiraki ashi' - I reckon this is an example), pulling uke further off balance forward (the final kuzushi), and applies 'kote hineri' (wrist twist) to seal the deal.

Or something like that, I don't have time for the details.  I think this all tracks consistently.  

NBK

NBK

Have you notes like this for the whole of Goshin jitsu? If so can you post them here?

samsmith2424 wrote:

NBK wrote:

BillC wrote:

NBK wrote:He starts by questioning the very first move - ryote dori. I would ask if he's mastered the four distinct technical moves and the kuzushi principle integral to its proper execution.  Is there nothing to learn in that?
 

Mr. Natural,

Pray tell us, what are the four distinct technical moves and the kuzushi principle integral to its proper execution that we should endeavor to master?

Also, how does one distinguish a Japanese turkey from the fowl that foul fair Asakusa?

Happy holiday, see you Sunday I hope.

I modified that to 'five' distinct technical moves upon reflection.

Why, didn't you take notes?  

1.  After being grasped, tori steps back a half step timed so that uke is unable to execute the knee kick to which he committed, and is jammed, made unable to move easily,  the preliminary forward kuzushi.
- Tori releases uke's grip by:
2. Left hand moves upward into a V-notch shape - yahazu - breaking uke's grip to grasp uke's right wrist just above the hand from below, and pulling uke further offbalance forward while....
3. Turning his right hand palm down while pulling it through an arc from the opening of the fingers of uke's left hand, tori breaks uke's right hand grip, finishing with his palm roughly facing towards the left side of his own face, then,
4. Strikes deeply into uke's eyesockets with the tips of his right hand fingers in a backhand, whipping action - metsubushi - then, on the recoil,
5. While rotating uke's entire extended arm in a clockwise fashion (as seen from tori's standpoint), grasps the back of uke's hand from above (in opposition to his own left hand) with tori's right hand, and ending with the back of uke's right hand, thumb down / little finger up /  palm facing out (left as seen by tori), pressed against tori's own upper left breast, steps back with his right foot / partially turning his body clockwise (someone asked about hiraki ashi' - I reckon this is an example), pulling uke further off balance forward (the final kuzushi), and applies 'kote hineri' (wrist twist) to seal the deal.

Or something like that, I don't have time for the details.  I think this all tracks consistently.  

NBK

NBK

Have you notes like this for the whole of Goshin jitsu? If so can you post them here?

Yes
Yes
... But not likely to do so

Maybe someplace else

PS - I did this off the top of my head. My notes on several kata are more detailed.

My interest in how the kata are meant to instruct may not endear you with your judo org's kata folks.

Some interesting thoughts here – thank you. Two things strike me (no pun intended) about your description:

1. You have tori using yahuza before? At the same time? as freeing his right hand to perform the metsubushi. One of the views I’ve taken is that as tori’s kuzushi causes uke to increase his forward motion, the strike can be more effective if done earlier (as then uke is still moving forward, or at least hasn’t had the opportunity to re-set his balance, and so tori’s striking hand meets uke while uke is still in the latter stages of his motion forward). As a result, I usually do the yahuza after the strike. Wouldn’t doing it before take a bit longer, and so miss this opportunity?

2. Using the recoil from the metsubushi to go back to the kote hineri. I’d never thought of that before, and it was right there before me. Nice one!

regards,

Lurker wrote:1. You have tori using yahuza before? At the same time? as freeing his right hand (....)

Yes, as soon as possible! While pulling back both hands for kuzushi, Tori has no grip on Uke. Uke´s normal reaction at the moment he is about to loose is balance is opening his hands and releasing his grip. So Tori must grip Uke´s wrist as early as possible - and BTW make use of the weaker grip to free his hands.

Good point Wdax - thank you. I think I had viewed this like an aikido attack, where uke grabs and then just doesn't let go (which I sometimes had trouble with understanding). I'll work this.

Thank you for your judging posts.

Kelly

NBK wrote:
My interest in how the kata are meant to instruct may not endear you with your judo org's kata folks.

Heresy !! Burn him, burn him !!  

Bring in the kindling and lumber now......Its going to be a great bonfire...

Someone asked about ryote dori in Kime no Kata. It is coompletely different trchnique.

In idori (seated position) if tori!s hands are properly placed (Ie hands closed, fingers together, on top of thighs, and thumbs against base of thigh / lower abdomen intersection ) and the ma'ai (spacing, interval) is correct then uke must and will be offbalance to reach tori's hands. Tori increases the natural kuzushi by opening his hands to his sides, thus lengthening the distance that now more offbalance uke must reach / pulling uke fwd. tori cannot give ground / move back / ie use taisabaki to his rear (effectively) from seiza (formal seated position). Same if you're pinned against a wall.

You _can_ turn (and do so later to apply wakigatame) but the riai of the initial kuzushi is to offbalance uke _forward_ first. Then very easy and safe to turn (hiraki ashi again?).

Very different techniques to deal with very different fundamental positions. Different finishes, too.
GSJ - grasp hand apply kote hineri (wrist twist) against chest
KNK - grasp wrist apply wakigatame (elbow lock) under armpit

Why ryote dori? Who attacks with both hands? Contrived? most certainly.

I believe that this is a 'worst case' scenario, but the same counter techniques to respond to an attack can be used and should be practiced against a single grip or a double hand grasp of one of Tori's wrists. Multiple options from a single stance.

If you can perform the kuzushi, ridatsu and taisabaki correctly then you have set up so you have many options, more than an aikidoka - they don't kick, punch, or throw.

iPhone will edit later.

Lurker wrote:Some interesting thoughts here – thank you. Two things strike me (no pun intended) about your description:

1. You have tori using yahuza before? At the same time? as freeing his right hand to perform the metsubushi. One of the views I’ve taken is that as tori’s kuzushi causes uke to increase his forward motion, the strike can be more effective if done earlier (as then uke is still moving forward, or at least hasn’t had the opportunity to re-set his balance, and so tori’s striking hand meets uke while uke is still in the latter stages of his motion forward). As a result, I usually do the yahuza after the strike. Wouldn’t doing it before take a bit longer, and so miss this opportunity?

2. Using the recoil from the metsubushi to go back to the kote hineri. I’d never thought of that before, and it was right there before me. Nice one!

regards,

1.  Same time. Movement / taisabaki / timing more subtle than many think, only a half step. Objective is to offbalance uke so he cannot kick / set him up for kote hineri.
2.  Very strong distraction - fingers whipping eyes - and very fast back to grasp uke righ hand. Uke wears glasses?  Back fist whipping to bridge of nose. Both fingers in eyes and broken nose have same results - watering eyes, momentary loss of vision, and great distraction from next unpleasantries. And prep position is strong blocking position if uke attempts left hand strike.

I practice by actually striking uke's upper chest near collarbone with whipping fingers. Have been told it is not pleasant. If uke complains use punching bag to get the feel and reach. 2-3 inches longer reach than standing or back fist.

I have practiced goshin jutsu a lot, I was amazed at just how automated my responses became to a lot of situations - mostly when playing around at judo training (once in response to a blow from a shinai!). My point being...I now have somewhere to start from when defending myself from attacks that may be 'outside the box' of my previous Judo experience - I've learned a lot from KDK Goshin Jitsu and really enjoy it - maybe it means more or less to different people?

NBK wrote:

Lurker wrote:Some interesting thoughts here – thank you. Two things strike me (no pun intended) about your description:

1. You have tori using yahuza before? At the same time? as freeing his right hand to perform the metsubushi. One of the views I’ve taken is that as tori’s kuzushi causes uke to increase his forward motion, the strike can be more effective if done earlier (as then uke is still moving forward, or at least hasn’t had the opportunity to re-set his balance, and so tori’s striking hand meets uke while uke is still in the latter stages of his motion forward). As a result, I usually do the yahuza after the strike. Wouldn’t doing it before take a bit longer, and so miss this opportunity?

2. Using the recoil from the metsubushi to go back to the kote hineri. I’d never thought of that before, and it was right there before me. Nice one!

regards,

1.  Same time. Movement / taisabaki / timing more subtle than many think, only a half step. Objective is to offbalance uke so he cannot kick / set him up for kote hineri.
2.  Very strong distraction - fingers whipping eyes - and very fast back to grasp uke righ hand. Uke wears glasses?  Back fist whipping to bridge of nose. Both fingers in eyes and broken nose have same results - watering eyes, momentary loss of vision, and great distraction from next unpleasantries. And prep position is strong blocking position if uke attempts left hand strike.

I practice by actually striking uke's upper chest near collarbone with whipping fingers. Have been told it is not pleasant.  If uke complains use punching bag to get the feel and reach. 2-3 inches longer reach than standing or back fist.

Small comment. I opine that ryôte-dori isn't really ryôte-dori. Let me clarify. It is not reasonable to assume that in an art such as jûdô that is all about jû, that one would hit the other one in the face just because he grabs your hands. Doing so would be disproportional. If you would ever do that in the street, hit someone in the face just because he grabs your wrist, you might get arrested and find yourself in court and lose. It isn't, however, disproportional if ryôte-dori isn't ryôte-dori, i.e., the grabbing of the hands is not the attack, in essence, and only a means. It achieves establishing and ensuring ma-ai, so that the person can effectively kick you in the groin. So, really the attack is a groin kick, not a grabbing of both hands. Unfortunately in many performances there barely is a kicking to the groin and uke just lifts his knee a bit as an ... "aesthetic complement" perhaps ...

Cichorei Kano wrote:

NBK wrote:

Lurker wrote:Some interesting thoughts here – thank you. Two things strike me (no pun intended) about your description:

1. You have tori using yahuza before? At the same time? as freeing his right hand to perform the metsubushi. One of the views I’ve taken is that as tori’s kuzushi causes uke to increase his forward motion, the strike can be more effective if done earlier (as then uke is still moving forward, or at least hasn’t had the opportunity to re-set his balance, and so tori’s striking hand meets uke while uke is still in the latter stages of his motion forward). As a result, I usually do the yahuza after the strike. Wouldn’t doing it before take a bit longer, and so miss this opportunity?

2. Using the recoil from the metsubushi to go back to the kote hineri. I’d never thought of that before, and it was right there before me. Nice one!

regards,

1.  Same time. Movement / taisabaki / timing more subtle than many think, only a half step. Objective is to offbalance uke so he cannot kick / set him up for kote hineri.
2.  Very strong distraction - fingers whipping eyes - and very fast back to grasp uke righ hand. Uke wears glasses?  Back fist whipping to bridge of nose. Both fingers in eyes and broken nose have same results - watering eyes, momentary loss of vision, and great distraction from next unpleasantries. And prep position is strong blocking position if uke attempts left hand strike.

I practice by actually striking uke's upper chest near collarbone with whipping fingers. Have been told it is not pleasant.  If uke complains use punching bag to get the feel and reach. 2-3 inches longer reach than standing or back fist.

Small comment. I opine that ryôte-dori isn't really ryôte-dori. Let me clarify. It is not reasonable to assume that in an art such as jûdô that is all about jû, that one would hit the other one in the face just because he grabs your hands. Doing so would be disproportional. If you would ever do that in the street, hit someone in the face just because he grabs your wrist, you might get arrested and find yourself in court and lose. It isn't, however, disproportional if ryôte-dori isn't ryôte-dori, i.e., the grabbing of the hands is not the attack, in essence, and only a means. It achieves establishing and ensuring ma-ai, so that the person can effectively kick you in the groin. So, really the attack is a groin kick, not a grabbing of both hands. Unfortunately in many performances there barely is a kicking to the groin and uke just lifts his knee a bit as an ... "aesthetic complement" perhaps ...

You and I have spent some hours on this subject and I sincerely don't desire to test your kindness nor patience. Be assured of that.

The question for me is truly simple. Why does a kata developed in 1952-1956 begin with ryote dori? I accept that IN THE KATA, Uke's aim is to control tori at the same time uke makes a kick to the groin (that in itself is technically flawed). I accept totally that your description is correct. This, non the less, still begs the question that, in the history of any self defence WHAT attacker is going to walk up to a would be victim, hold his wrists and kick said victim in the groin?

I am going to try and redeem myself from being emotive and ranting. Cold hard questions. Logic.

May I?

1) 1952-1956
2) The kodokan decide to formulate a new kata of SD
3) A commission is established to devise said exercise (kata)
4) Needs to be new and show the that kodokan techniques can be utilised in this new era of attacks with guns and sticks rather than swords and daggers?
5) The commission is composed of from 18 to 20 top kodokan sensei.
6) After some three years and two months? They have formulated the KGJ.
7) New kata begins with ryote dori?

Mike

Hanon sensei,

I spent too much time today looking for Tomiki Kenji sensei's book on KGJ; I have two, can't find either one. Maybe early next yr, I'm traveling the rest of the month.

Anyhow, I can't figure out why this bothers anyone.

To me, it's kind of a worst case training scenario.
- Uke moves in and controls both of your hands,...
- while cocking his leg back to drive his knee through your scrotum into your brain stem (see CK comment above)

So, if you were to commit a similar but different attack, let's look at some possibilities:
- uke grasps your shoulder with both hands while preparing to knee you in the crotch
- " " your lapels with both hands " "
- " " one lapel with one hand, while preparing to strike you in the face with his free hand
- "" " one lapel with the other hand " "
etc

So, if I can find Tomiki's point on this, I'll post, but meanwhile, does the above look like a plan?

Also, you could train:
- escape / counter after grasped
- escape / counter when grasped
- escape / counter before grasped

Are these more realistic and more to your liking?

this sort of exploration was originally the point of the kata. In particular, KGJ was meant to be a point of departure for exploration of techniques.

NBK

Hanon wrote:(...) Cold hard questions. (...)

With regards to Kime-no-Kata:
What´s the logic in Kime-no-Kata to grip both hands and why should it not make sense 40-50 years later?

But the most interesting questions IMHO are:

• Why 1952? What was the historical context of the years 1951-1953 for Japan, Judo and japanese Judo?
  
• Why did they want an alternative to the use of katana after WWII? What was the educational context of the usage of Katana until 1945 after carrying of Katana was forbidden in 1877? Why did schoolboys learn to defend against katana during wartime (official judo-curriculum for schools)? What was the educational purpose of this?

Yep, indeed. Criticisms to Kôdôkan goshinjutsu are not unprecedented, and it is opportune that wdax mentions kime-no-kata here. The acceptance of kime-no-kata was particularly troubled, and the committee that debated this kata could not agree during the 1906 Butokukai meeting. There were very serious issues and infighting regards this. This is no surprise given that the kata was to serve not just as an exercise within Kôdôkan but as a kind of national, and generally accepted self-defense kata, thus outside of Kôdôkan jûdô. Naturally many jûjutsu masters had strong feelings about this. The legend says that in fact one of the sensei died apparently as a consequence of endless demonstrations and arguing. Whlist the Kôdôkan claims that there was this friendly 1906 meeting presided by Kanô and all shook hands, hugged and went home satisfied, the reality seems to have been quite differently. There is basically no trace of kime-no-kata (not talking about the old preceding Shôbu-no-kata) until approx. 1917. This is very strange. If it was all finished and approved in 1906 then why an 11-year blank ?  So, many questions can be asked, and as a scholar these are of interest to me. However, it is easier to ask them than to answer them, at least in many cases.

I only wanted to illustrate that questions about the effectiveness are not new. They probably are also justified, but they are a different discussion really than simply discussing teaching and correct performance. One of the problems that Westerners have failed to see, partly because the component is very poorly developed in Kôdôkan writings, is that jûdô has a purely aesthetic component. This is not unique, and this problem has affected even koryû. The late Donn F. Draeger addressed this problem already back in 1973. As much as you all may dislike this, jûdô and even some koryû to some extent belong in the series of performance arts, together with puppetry, music, things that "look nice" and that people come to watch. In that context, it is somewhat ironic to criticize just Kôdôkan goshinjutsu, since ... can you ... can anyone at all seriously consider a traditonial martial arts school like Kitô-ryû, and all you find in there over the last century is nothing but Koshiki-no-kata, a single exercise of 21 mostly artistic and spiritual exercises. Of course, traditionally it wasn't like that, but as far as my research findings show, Kanô Jigorô, the great martial artist who was this "master of Kitô-ryû" never learnt anything else in that school than these 21 techniques of what essentially is an aesthetic performance. Sure there is a lot behind that too, and yes Kanô was introduced to that too, but that is very advanced, and something I am skipping here just to make a point. It is important though that people are starting to realize. You can't approach this with the idea of approach of a military elite-minded person or a SWAT-Team member approach. If you realize that, is it really that far-fetched that there are things in these disciplines and kata that in real life make one frown ?  Take aikidô, in most cases the sensei sticks out his hands and his uke in the most docile way grasps his hand or wrist. Why ?  If I were uke I would simply kick him in the balls or headbutt him, but somehow this never crosses the mind of any uke in aikidô. They also never really attack, never try to throw the sensei, just grasp a wrist or move their hand in shômen, very strange, very unrealistic. It is in fact so far that some experienced aikidô researchers have questioned whether the discipline even can be effectively used to respond to serious uncooperative attacker, and while no one questions Ueshiba's skills, certainly not in comparison to Kanô, some have suggested that what Ueshiba was able to do had nothing to do with aikidô but was due to his skills and experience in Daitô-ryû. Much of what we see and have in jûdô was meant to be used on a totally untrained and unskilled attacker who attacked you. After all, just watch any judo shiai, how much jû do you see applied ?  Very little. In most cases the opponent wins due to his superior strength, endurance, power, strategy and luck. Even if they succeed in making ippon, in many cases that ippon is rather the result of supreme athletism than that it is of some idealistic application of sei-ryoku zen'yô. So, the problems highlighted about Goshinjutsu aren't at all as unique as we may think. There are many and tremendous problems in judo, but obviously there is also a certain taboo as critiques is often perceived by individuals as their competency being questioned, even though that is an entirely different issue.

However, to get back on track, some of the more detailed information on these issues  does exist but not in so many places. NBK makes a reference to Tomiki's book, but as far as I recall the answers Hanon is seeking aren't really in there. I think that Mifune addresses some of it in his 5-volume Jûdô Kôza, and the other references are Daigo in Jûdô in Part5 of a series of articles, that appeared in volume 80, issue 2, pages 43-50 of 2009 and in Part 6 in the next issue, so number 2, pages 12-16, all in Japanese only, evidently ...

wdax wrote:

Hanon wrote:(...) Cold hard questions. (...)

With regards to Kime-no-Kata:
What´s the logic in Kime-no-Kata to grip both hands and why should it not make sense 40-50 years later?

But the most interesting questions IMHO are:

• Why 1952? What was the historical context of the years 1951-1953 for Japan, Judo and japanese Judo?
  
• Why did they want an alternative to the use of katana after WWII? What was the educational context of the usage of Katana until 1945 after carrying of Katana was forbidden in 1877? Why did schoolboys learn to defend against katana during wartime (official judo-curriculum for schools)? What was the educational purpose of this?
  

In the koryu jujutsu I study the two hand control is done usually with the objectives of controlling Tori's access to a weapon in preparation for binding or assassination by a third party. Some of the scenarios include two or more attackers. I just assume this a truncated vestige of a more elaborate scenario.

I'd like to hear the thoughts on the latter questions.

NBK

wdax wrote:

Hanon wrote:(...) Cold hard questions. (...)

With regards to Kime-no-Kata:
What´s the logic in Kime-no-Kata to grip both hands and why should it not make sense 40-50 years later?

But the most interesting questions IMHO are:

• Why 1952? What was the historical context of the years 1951-1953 for Japan, Judo and japanese Judo?
  
  
  
• Why did they want an alternative to the use of katana after WWII? What was the educational context of the usage of Katana until 1945 after carrying of Katana was forbidden in 1877? Why did schoolboys learn to defend against katana during wartime (official judo-curriculum for schools)? What was the educational purpose of this?
  
  

IF ryote dori made sense 50 years before WHY repeat the action in a NEW kata?
IF ryote dori didn't make sense WHY make the same mistake twice?

This is an invaluable question for the kime no kata thread. I am not debating that here. Any chance of a straight answer to my most simple of questions regarding the inclusion of ryote doti in the KGJ?
Regards,

Mike

Hanon wrote:

wdax wrote:

Hanon wrote:(...) Cold hard questions. (...)

With regards to Kime-no-Kata:
What´s the logic in Kime-no-Kata to grip both hands and why should it not make sense 40-50 years later?
......

IF ryote dori made sense 50 years before WHY repeat the action in a NEW kata?
IF ryote dori didn't make sense WHY make the same mistake twice?

This is an invaluable question for the kime no kata thread. I am not debating that here. Any chance of a straight answer to my most simple of questions regarding the inclusion of ryote doti in the KGJ?
Regards,

Mike

Do you have a response to my earlier post?  or you discount this entirely?

NBK wrote:Someone asked about ryote dori in Kime no Kata. It is coompletely different trchnique.

In idori (seated position) if tori!s hands are properly placed (Ie hands closed, fingers together, on top of thighs, and thumbs against base of thigh / lower abdomen intersection ) and the ma'ai (spacing, interval) is correct then uke must and will be offbalance to reach tori's hands. Tori increases the natural kuzushi by opening his hands to his sides, thus lengthening the distance that now more offbalance uke must reach / pulling uke fwd. tori cannot give ground / move back / ie use taisabaki to his rear (effectively) from seiza (formal seated position). Same if you're pinned against a wall.

You _can_ turn (and do so later to apply wakigatame) but the riai of the initial kuzushi is to offbalance uke _forward_ first. Then very easy and safe to turn (hiraki ashi again?).

Very different techniques to deal with very different fundamental positions.  Different finishes, too.
GSJ - grasp hand apply kote hineri (wrist twist) against chest
KNK - grasp wrist apply wakigatame (elbow lock) under armpit

Why ryote dori?  Who attacks with both hands?  Contrived? most certainly.

I believe that this is a 'worst case' scenario, but the same counter techniques to respond to an attack can be used and should be practiced against a single grip or a double hand grasp of one of Tori's wrists. Multiple options from a single stance.

If you can perform the kuzushi, ridatsu and taisabaki correctly then you have set up so you have many options, more than an aikidoka - they don't kick, punch, or throw.  

iPhone will edit later.

NBK wrote:

wdax wrote:(...) But the most interesting questions IMHO are:

• Why 1952? What was the historical context of the years 1951-1953 for Japan, Judo and japanese Judo?
  
• Why did they want an alternative to the use of katana after WWII? What was the educational context of the usage of Katana until 1945 after carrying of Katana was forbidden in 1877? Why did schoolboys learn to defend against katana during wartime (official judo-curriculum for schools)? What was the educational purpose of this?
  

I'd like to hear the thoughts on the latter questions.

NBK

My thoughts - it would be interesting, if they can proofed by original sources. But if someone can check it, then it´s you.

One of the reasons, why the decision was made to creat a "modern" kata of SD in 1952 was west-integration of Japan and the role of judo. Let me elaborate.

Reality of judo in the japanese education before and during WWII

In the 1930s - 1945 education in Japan was under complete control of the right-wings. Martial arts played a major role in ideologic indroctination. The "samurai-spirit" had to be implemented into the brains of the japanese youth. Katana - the traditional waepon of the samurai - was used as a symbol for the samurai-spirit and without of being of any military worth, every kid had to learn to use it and how to defend against attacks with katana. Kiri-oroshi is clearly described in the manual for judo-instructions in schools of 1942/43.

I think, that it´s not really necessary to explain, that his kind of decation was completely against the ideas of Kano´s ideals of seiryoku-zenyo-jita-kyo´ei....

West-integration of Japan after WWII

After WWII the geo-strategic situation changed. United States needed a strategic base for their east-asian "activities" and Japan wanted to get back it´s national souvereignty. So the treaty of peace was signed in 1951 and the US supported Japan on the way to west-integration. But of course everything associated with nationalistic and militaristic ideas had to be removed from japanese education. This also effected the martial arts.

Japan and the olympic games

Japan (and BTW Germany and Italy) were excluded from the olympic games 1948. West-integration of all three countrys made it possible to participate in the games of 1952. Japans participation was supported by McArthur as a part of above mentioned cooperation. It´s very interesting to research the function of olympic games for the international recognition of Japan/Germany and Italy - who hosted the Games in 1960 (Rome), 1964 (Tokyo) and 1972 (Munich/Sapporo). But this would run completely off-topic.

The first bid for hosting olympic games in Tokyo after WWII was BTW already in 1952 for 1960 but Rome was selected.

Judo and west-integration

After WWII Japan was seeking for fields, which helped to establish international contacts and recognition - primarily in the west. J. Kano undertook a lot of activities to export judo as an educational system to the west. He gave lectures, sent instructors etc. Kano´s message was peace, not war. Jita-kyo´ei - not (Showa-)Bushido.

1951 IJF was founded and in 1952 Risei Kano was elected as IJF-president. This was very important for Japan and to the best of my knowledge the first international sports-federation with a japanese president. There was a huge promotion-tour for that election, what underpins the political importance of this. In later years, the japanese governement paid a lot of money to send judo-instructures to many countrys in the world. Judo became a japanese gift to the world.

Judo and olympics

Now it becomes very interesting. When Risei Kano became president of the IJF in 1952, the IJF was already recoginzed by the IOC as the legitimate organization to represent judo. One of the first things he did, was to ask the IOC to include judo into the olympic games, what was a "long desire" of his father J. Kano. This was on the agenda of the IOC for the first time in 1953.

Almost unkown is, that there was another judo-organization - run by south-african Jack Robinson - who seeked for recognition as international body of judo in replacement of IJF. He accused the Kodokan (and the IJF via Kodokan), that they did not have primarily sportive goals, but instead wanted to spread a "cocktail" of Zen and Bushido and therefore is a threat for the christian world.

Conculsion

My personal conclusion is, that Japan, japanese judo and the Kodokan - beside other practical ideas - felt the need to another a system of self-defence, which had no direct relation to militarisic and ideologic wartime education. Kodokan Goshijutsu is perfect for this purpose as it is clearly not militaristic, but a completely civilian form of self-defence, while Kime-no-Kata was "outdated". In this regard Kodokan Goshinjutsu represents a shift in Judo to a more peacefull art of self-defence, rather then a military art. This is perfectly in line with the general political change in Japan after WWII.

(no time to remove the typos - sorry)

Warning; this post presents no concrete evidence but only speculation

Second world war and its aftermath saw lots of books (=interest) about self defence;
The japanese art of wrestling and self-defense : Jiu jitsu : A superior leverage force : Muscle science tricks of Jiu-jitsu, Stein, 1940
Umíte se bránit? : Zápas Jiu-Jitsu, Slípka, 1940
Unarmed combat : The Art of Physical Defence and Attack Practically Explained and Illustrated, Hipkiss, 1941
Edward L. Allen’s system of American jiu-jitsu : a Quick Way to Self Defense in All Emergencies as Taught to Civilians and Armed Forces Throughout the Country, Allen , 942
Get tough! How to win in hand-to-hand fighting, Fairbairn, 1942
Hadaka-Jime: The Core Technique for Practical Unarmed Combat, Feldenkrais, 1942
Self Defense or Jiu Jitsu, Mitchell, 1942
A defense manual of commando Jiu jitsu, Cahn, 1943
American Judo Illustrated : Improved, Modern, Scientific Jiu-Jitsu the Art of Hand-Tohand Combat, Farrar, 1943
Combat conditioning manual : Jiu jitsu Defense, Bayonet Defense, Club Defense, Hanley, 1943
Combat Jiu jitsu for offence and defense Linck 1943
Everybody's self defence, Sagittarus, 1943
Get tough! How to win in hand-to-hand fighting, Fairbairn, 1943
Itsepuolustus : Jiu-jitsu ja poliisiotteet, Schønning (Schönning), 1943
Judo and Its Use in Hand-to-Hand Fighting, Caldwell, 1943
Judo jiu-jitsu and hand-to-hand fighting a list of references, Jones, 1943
Simplified self defense : thru an improved system of Americanized jiu-jitsu and judo, Galen, 1943
Weerbaar zonder wapen : (Jiu Jitsu), Tops, 1943
How to use Jiu Jitsu : Army-tested methods of self-defense for men and women, King, 1944
Judo en la Defensa Personal aplicada al combate Cuerpo a Cuerpo, Garcia Arzua, 1944
Manuel pratique de jiu-jitsu : la défense du faible contre l'agresseur, Feldenkrais, 1944
Selvforsvar, Jiu jitsu og politigrep, Schønning, 1944
Combat Judo, Carlin, 1945
El arte de la defensa propria, Garcia Arzua, 1945
Konsten att försvara sig : Jiu-jitsu japansk försvarsmetod, Ricthoff, 1945
Dokonalá sebeobrana : Džiu-džitsu, Zrůbek, 1946
Jiu-Jitsu, umění sebeobrany, Drobeček, 1946
Sports de combat : judo boxes anglaise et francaise et méthode de défense contre un agresseur, Poulain, 1946
El Arte del la Defensa Personal, Cascante, 1947
Judo mastery in self-defense, Smith, 1947
O fraco vence o forte, golpes de Jiu-jitsu, ou Judo, sistema nipónico de educacáo física e de defesa individual, Goncalves, 1947
Umite se branit : Zapeo Jiu Jitsu, Slípka, 1947
Yui-Yitsu : praktishe zelfverdediging, Rooker, 1947
Zelfverdediging Door Middel van Jiu Jitsu, Nieuwenhuizen, 1947
Manuel de Jiu-jitsu et Judo a l'usage del la formation premilitaire, Herdt, 1948
20 leçons de jiu-jitsu judo : Défense personnelle, Nieuwenhuizen, 1949
New improved Americanized judo, Sharp, 1949
50 Jahre Jiu-jitsu und Judo mit Erich Rahn : Die unsichtbare Waffe, Rahn, 1950
Defensa Personal (Judo, Jiu-jitsu, Lucha, Boxeo), Valle, 1950
der Selbstverteidigung, Mägerlein, 1950
Jiu-Jitsu : Die kunst der selbstverteidigung : Ein volksbuch zum selbstunterricht, Scholz, 1950
Jiu-Jitsu im Selbstunterricht, Klinger-Klingerstorff, 1950
Ju-do and ju-jitsu : 40 lessons, latest holds, defend yourself against any man, Weider, 1950
Judo And Self-Defense, Shaffer, 1950
Manuel complet de judo et jiu-jitsu, tome 3 : Self-défense, attaques, atémis, boxe, boxe francaise, combat de rue, utilisation des armes, Lamotte, 1950
Defesa pessoal : método eclético - Box - Jiu-jitsu - Capoeiragem - Luta livre, de Lima e Silva, 1951
Jiu Jitsu : Een handleiding in zelfverdediging, Koning, 1951
Jiu-jitsu : Judo : Die Kunst der waffenlosen Selbstverteidigung und Körperstählung, Vary, 1951
Jiu-jitsu und Judo : Selbstverteidigung ohne Waffen und sportlicher Zweikampf, Glucker, 1951

It almost seemed that if you wrote a book you put there self-defence and yes how to disarm persons with guns and knives. yes, almost every book has a scenario against attacker that holds your hands  

Also there was lot of interest in Judo from military circles e.g. American air force. Therefore adding 'harder' techniques could have appealed then to persons in charge.

I'm not saying that this is what drove the creation of goshinjutsu but at least it gave some commercial thrust to be able to offer also that kind of services under Judo.  

I wonder why people discuss the utility of practicing defences against gun or knife. We all know that if the wielder is somewhat proficient we don't stand a chance. Similarly it can be asked why practice against a sword? We all know that if the wielder is somewhat proficient we don't stand a chance. Similarly we should not practice self defence against people younger than us, heavier than us or stronger than us. In a real contest we are statistically sure to loose. Why is there no delf defence courses against kids and grandpas? Rationally those are the only ones we are sure to beat? or?