Kodokan Goshinjutsu

NBK 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?

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

HI,

I agree with "In the koryu jujutsu I study the two hand control is done usually with the objectives of controlling Tori's access to a weapon"

This is how I understand the use of ryote dori in certain circumstances. There are other reasons also. It does not conform to the principle of maximum efficiency with minimum effort though in the physical nor mental sense.

"In preparation for binding or assassination by a third party. Some of the scenarios include two or more attackers." I don't understand what you write? If you can extrapolate I may better offer some sort of opinion.


In general and not in response to NBK.

I have read and re read several times this and the original thread. I have made several early, I hope, temporary conclusions. One that springs to mind is there are an awful lot more questions to the practice of KGJ than answers and it 'appears' the answering of a question is responded to by a further question?

Mike

wdax wrote:

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)

I neither agree nor disagree with what you wrote. What I cannot yet grasp is what your reply has to do with the ryote dori in terms of its use and effectiveness in a 1956 kata.
I think we can surmise many things, What this postulation will achieve I have no idea, it will be interesting to see how this develops. Non the less it appears that answers are thin on the ground? I am still at a total loss as to why the kata consists of the techniques it contains. After all it was you that said that this kata was developed by a commission of the most able sensei of the day. Does this, to you, mean we should accept the KGJ as it is and not ask questions? I have never learned nor taught judo myself that way. Its a dangerous philosophy.

My quest is to ascertain what it is about this kata that I am missing.

Mike

Another topic that I know to be dear to NBK and that may not be totally irrelevant here is the position and interest of Japanese police and the whole taihô-jutsu movement. I believe this was created around 1947, so very close to 1952 when the work on goshinjutsu started. Some of the people who were very involved in Taihô-jutsu and who had Kôdôkan links (Kikuchi, Nagaoka, even though the latter died just 2.5 months after the work on goshinjutsu started) were also part of the goshinjutsu committee that established this kata.

Taihô-jutsu differs in its goals from traditional jûjutsu in that it's objective was to arrest people without causing major injury since it was the prosecution and court that needed to decide on a person't fate, and not the arresting officer. For that reason, defenses needed to be characterized by proportionality to the attack. Who are these attackers ?  Japan is not the US. You do not attack police, so oftentimes these were just drunks rather than trained killing machines.

Kôdôkan goshinjutsu resembles taihô-jutsu a lot. I could well have been called "Taihô-jutsu-no-kata". I think that some of the principles are identical. But maybe NBK has a different viewpoint.

If one scrutinizes self-defense-like movements in jûdô (and other arts) there are many that in 2013 or even before lack realism. For example, consider obi-tori in jû-no-kata or koshiki-no-kata. So, you are really going to grab both of a samurai's swords with your arms crossed to disarm him ?  Really ?  You got to be kidding !!  Or, kime-no-kata ... only someone on coke would seriously conisider simply jumping to the side in response to a downward cut with a sword. Dunno how many of you have ever faced a trained kenjutsu or iaijutsu master, I assure you that there would be two mirror images of you before you can even blink. Only a drunk who does not know how to handle a sword would be a realistic challenge to perform this on But it looks nice, spectacular even, certainly for an audience 100 years ago that had never seen anything like that in movies or on TV, except for in kabuki theater. Judo is riddled with these things. Sleeve grabbing. A man comes next to you and grabs your sleeve and forces you to walk with him ?  Um, really ?  How many attacks today involve someone "who grabs you by the arm and forces you to walk with him ?"  Maybe if you are a young attractive girl, yes ...

Kime-no-kata ... someone comes sit next to you to attack you from your side with a knife ??  Really ??  

Koshiki-no-kata ... someone wants to grab you or push your shoulder so you grab his hand with your other hand underneath his elbow lift him, and you then go sit down and he falls ?  Um ... really ??

Someone attacks you and you go sit on all fours because if you don't see him the attacker will just stop attacking you, get bored, or walk away ?  Um really ??

Etc, etc, etc .

It's physical education, with SOME gentle and moderate application to offer you a way to deal with what essentially are nuissances. It was never meant to create a fighting machine, a one-man army able to dodge bullets, fold steel plates, and crush someone else's skull.  Moreover, these defense-like skills were applied in a "game atmosphere" like a play, and with an artistic component.

But, when judo was introduced to the West, well ... the whole framework was skipped and the Westener who didn't understand a word of Japanese only saw tricks, some good enough to surprise a wrestler with during one of the numerous exhibitions and other early 20th century entertainment.

Therefore, the problems quoted here, are only natural. Besides, as I have said many times, the martial art does not really exist independent of the fighter. All martial arts have flaws, but extraordinary skilled martial artists have the ability to use even the most flawed art with a high level of effectiveness. Didn't someone like Randy Couture pretty effectively use judo against all-round martial artists who kick and hit, during cage fighting contests. So why can he do that ?  The judo techniques he learnt are not more or less effective than the ones you and I learn ?  He can do that because he understand their strengths and flaws and knows control and when and hop to apply them at the right moment.

Hanon wrote:What I cannot yet grasp is what your reply has to do with the ryote dori in terms of its use and effectiveness in a 1956 kata.

Nothing - because this was/is already answered by NBK and C.K.

I responded to NBK, who asked about my thoughts, why the creation of Kodokan-Goshinjutsu started in 1952 - not a decade earlier or later. So many things happened 1952 plus/minus one year. Finarashi´s thoughts are also interesting.

finarashi wrote:Warning; this post presents no concrete evidence but only speculation

 

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. ?

Hi, Wow that list must have taken you an awful lot of time to research and compile. Many thanks for doing so.

I had to laugh when I read you comment about the knife and sword attacks. I totally understand your point BUT.....

The first time my sensei told my uke to use live blades came to me as an awful shock. Both my uke and I where very nervous in fact scared to death.

In my mind I questioned the logic and safety of doing such a thing. I recall my thoughts from those days with great interest. Like you I questioned the logic of even trying to defend oneself against a person who has a live blade katana or tanto. It was at that time an absurd thing to do. Why on earth would my sensei place his pupils in such a dangerous position. for what reason? No one was going to attack us with a katana in the street?
It is odd to note that I had never thought this way when we played with bokken!

I learned over that week and following weeks that the lessons behind using live blades with an uke who is going to make a full unreserved attack, even though a pre determined attack, that the point of using live blades is little to do with the reality of being attacked by a katana!

Concentration, focus, 'bottle', trust, speed, technique, timing, tai sabaki, shisei, control over ones emotions, control over ones body, self confidence, self respect, respect for others, did I write CONSENTRATION AND FOCUS? The list can go on. THESE are the PRINCIPLES I learned those few weeks way back in the mid 70's. I also learned to trust my sensei and respect his judgement. Believe me at the time in my mind I questioned the sanity of my sensei, not to mention my own.

No one is going to attack you with a katana today, well not unless you are most unfortunate. The philosophy of practising such an action is more than the sum of its action. One of the things I have always enjoyed regarding the practice of judo is the reality of it. Full contact. The satisfaction in producing that ippon in shiai. It is also of vital importance to understand that the ippon we aim for is the ippon in our character and how we live our daily lives. (chocking on my hypocrisy again)
Judo has never been about beating some one else its all about how we develop ourselves and to that end the kata of kodokan judo all have a purpose and use.

My quest here is to establish the place Kodokan goshinjutsu has in the kodokan syllabus.

This is not my first nor hundredth crisis of faith in relation to kodokan judo and all it entails. Over the years I have learned that my list of questions has grown much larger than my list of answers

I had to know WHY we practiced ukemi, taiso, uchikomi, nage komi, the gokyo, reigi etc. You would be amazed to learn that in the 70's, when air fare cost a months salary, I have travelled 3.500ks just for an hours instruction by a sensei who could answer a question I had!

Kind regards,

Mike

Cichorei Kano wrote:Another topic that I know to be dear to NBK and that may not be totally irrelevant here is the position and interest of Japanese police and the whole taihô-jutsu movement. I believe this was created around 1947, so very close to 1952 when the work on goshinjutsu started. Some of the people who were very involved in Taihô-jutsu and who had Kôdôkan links (Kikuchi, Nagaoka, even though the latter died just 2.5 months after the work on goshinjutsu started) were also part of the goshinjutsu committee that established this kata.

Taihô-jutsu differs in its goals from traditional jûjutsu in that it's objective was to arrest people without causing major injury since it was the prosecution and court that needed to decide on a person't fate, and not the arresting officer. For that reason, defenses needed to be characterized by proportionality to the attack. Who are these attackers ?  Japan is not the US. You do not attack police, so oftentimes these were just drunks rather than trained killing machines.

Kôdôkan goshinjutsu resembles taihô-jutsu a lot. I could well have been called "Taihô-jutsu-no-kata". I think that some of the principles are identical. But maybe NBK has a different viewpoint.

If one scrutinizes self-defense-like movements in jûdô (and other arts) there are many that in 2013 or even before lack realism. For example, consider obi-tori in jû-no-kata or koshiki-no-kata. So, you are really going to grab both of a samurai's swords with your arms crossed to disarm him ?  Really ?  You got to be kidding !!  Or, kime-no-kata ... only someone on coke would seriously conisider simply jumping to the side in response to a downward cut with a sword. Dunno how many of you have ever faced a trained kenjutsu or iaijutsu master, I assure you that there would be two mirror images of you before you can even blink. Only a drunk who does not know how to handle a sword would be a realistic challenge to perform this on But it looks nice, spectacular even, certainly for an audience 100 years ago that had never seen anything like that in movies or on TV, except for in kabuki theater. Judo is riddled with these things. Sleeve grabbing. A man comes next to you and grabs your sleeve and forces you to walk with him ?  Um, really ?  How many attacks today involve someone "who grabs you by the arm and forces you to walk with him ?"  Maybe if you are a young attractive girl, yes ...

Kime-no-kata ... someone comes sit next to you to attack you from your side with a knife ??  Really ??  

Koshiki-no-kata ... someone wants to grab you or push your shoulder so you grab his hand with your other hand underneath his elbow lift him, and you then go sit down and he falls ?  Um ... really ??

Someone attacks you and you go sit on all fours because if you don't see him the attacker will just stop attacking you, get bored, or walk away ?  Um really ??

Etc, etc, etc .

It's physical education, with SOME gentle and moderate application to offer you a way to deal with what essentially are nuissances. It was never meant to create a fighting machine, a one-man army able to dodge bullets, fold steel plates, and crush someone else's skull.  Moreover, these defense-like skills were applied in a "game atmosphere" like a play, and with an artistic component.

But, when judo was introduced to the West, well ... the whole framework was skipped and the Westener who didn't understand a word of Japanese only saw tricks, some good enough to surprise a wrestler with during one of the numerous exhibitions and other early 20th century entertainment.

Therefore, the problems quoted here, are only natural. Besides, as I have said many times, the martial art does not really exist independent of the fighter. All martial arts have flaws, but extraordinary skilled martial artists have the ability to use even the most flawed art with a high level of effectiveness. Didn't someone like Randy Couture pretty effectively use judo against all-round martial artists who kick and hit, during cage fighting contests. So why can he do that ?  The judo techniques he learnt are not more or less effective than the ones you and I learn ?  He can do that because he understand their strengths and flaws and knows control and when and hop to apply them at the right moment.

Spot on CK sensei (even though we both know you are playing devils advocate and you CAN answer your own questions). SO why repeat the same actions in a new kata?

Mike

wdax wrote:

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.

....
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)

Wdax, I thank you for the vote of confidence and the thesis. Unfortunately, while I do have a good number of materials from that era, other research has priority. For what it is worth, I think you are on the right track but I could not confirm. I would differ on some minor points.

finarashi wrote:Warning; this post presents no concrete evidence but only speculation

Second world war and its aftermath saw lots of books (=interest) about self defence;
.....
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?

Finarashi, thanks for the extensive list.

You're right, there is a self defense portion in most every postwar judo book. But, I'd point out that there are many such in prewar books, too.

In fact, I was just looking at a 1938 judo instruction book. It has a women's self defense section - which starts with a double hand grasp! It also has a head butt (by a woman, no less!), the earliest I can recall seeing.

Hanon wrote:

NBK 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?

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

HI,

I agree with "In the koryu jujutsu I study the two hand control is done usually with the objectives of controlling Tori's access to a weapon"

This is how I understand the use of ryote dori in certain circumstances. There are other reasons also. It does not conform to the principle of maximum efficiency with minimum effort though in the physical nor mental sense.  

"In preparation for binding or assassination by a third party. Some of the scenarios include two or more attackers." I don't understand what you write? If you can extrapolate I may better offer some sort of opinion.


In general and not in response to NBK.

I have read and re read several times this and the original thread. I have made several early, I hope, temporary conclusions. One that springs to mind is there are an awful lot more questions to the practice of KGJ than answers and it 'appears' the answering of a question is responded to by a further question?

Mike

Spotting that women's self defense section in the 1938 judo book that starts with the double hand grasp attack / defense got me to thinking - is the attack of a double hand grasp a cultural meme of some sort? I.e., is that a traditional actual or commonly feared attack in Japan?

Before the great cultural whore and global cultural leveler that is Hollyweird (punch 'em in the face! a stupid attack if ever there was one) there were such culturally specific attacks - witness French Apaches with stilettos, 1950's US motorcycle gangs with chains, Filipinos with balisong / butterfly knives, Thuggee with cord and scarves, probably dozens more. Some more iconic than real, some deadly and very real. I don't know about Japan, might be worth checking out somehow.

Cichorei Kano wrote:Another topic that I know to be dear to NBK and that may not be totally irrelevant here is the position and interest of Japanese police and the whole taihô-jutsu movement. I believe this was created around 1947, so very close to 1952 when the work on goshinjutsu started. Some of the people who were very involved in Taihô-jutsu and who had Kôdôkan links (Kikuchi, Nagaoka, even though the latter died just 2.5 months after the work on goshinjutsu started) were also part of the goshinjutsu committee that established this kata.

Taihô-jutsu differs in its goals from traditional jûjutsu in that it's objective was to arrest people without causing major injury since it was the prosecution and court that needed to decide on a person't fate, and not the arresting officer. For that reason, defenses needed to be characterized by proportionality to the attack. Who are these attackers ?  Japan is not the US. You do not attack police, so oftentimes these were just drunks rather than trained killing machines.

Kôdôkan goshinjutsu resembles taihô-jutsu a lot. I could well have been called "Taihô-jutsu-no-kata". I think that some of the principles are identical. But maybe NBK has a different viewpoint.

If one scrutinizes self-defense-like movements in jûdô (and other arts) there are many that in 2013 or even before lack realism. For example, consider obi-tori in jû-no-kata or koshiki-no-kata. So, you are really going to grab both of a samurai's swords with your arms crossed to disarm him ?  Really ?  You got to be kidding !!  Or, kime-no-kata ... only someone on coke would seriously conisider simply jumping to the side in response to a downward cut with a sword. Dunno how many of you have ever faced a trained kenjutsu or iaijutsu master, I assure you that there would be two mirror images of you before you can even blink. Only a drunk who does not know how to handle a sword would be a realistic challenge to perform this on But it looks nice, spectacular even, certainly for an audience 100 years ago that had never seen anything like that in movies or on TV, except for in kabuki theater. Judo is riddled with these things. Sleeve grabbing. A man comes next to you and grabs your sleeve and forces you to walk with him ?  Um, really ?  How many attacks today involve someone "who grabs you by the arm and forces you to walk with him ?"  Maybe if you are a young attractive girl, yes ...

Kime-no-kata ... someone comes sit next to you to attack you from your side with a knife ??  Really ??  

Koshiki-no-kata ... someone wants to grab you or push your shoulder so you grab his hand with your other hand underneath his elbow lift him, and you then go sit down and he falls ?  Um ... really ??

Someone attacks you and you go sit on all fours because if you don't see him the attacker will just stop attacking you, get bored, or walk away ?  Um really ??

Etc, etc, etc .

It's physical education, with SOME gentle and moderate application to offer you a way to deal with what essentially are nuissances. It was never meant to create a fighting machine, a one-man army able to dodge bullets, fold steel plates, and crush someone else's skull.  Moreover, these defense-like skills were applied in a "game atmosphere" like a play, and with an artistic component.

But, when judo was introduced to the West, well ... the whole framework was skipped and the Westener who didn't understand a word of Japanese only saw tricks, some good enough to surprise a wrestler with during one of the numerous exhibitions and other early 20th century entertainment.

Therefore, the problems quoted here, are only natural. Besides, as I have said many times, the martial art does not really exist independent of the fighter. All martial arts have flaws, but extraordinary skilled martial artists have the ability to use even the most flawed art with a high level of effectiveness. Didn't someone like Randy Couture pretty effectively use judo against all-round martial artists who kick and hit, during cage fighting contests. So why can he do that ?  The judo techniques he learnt are not more or less effective than the ones you and I learn ?  He can do that because he understand their strengths and flaws and knows control and when and hop to apply them at the right moment.

There was certainly police taihojutsu technique influence on KGJ, but I don't see it as a taihojutsu kata. Too many throws.

As far as the renko-ho (come-along) most are very poorly performed. Done correctly, you can control folks, but it is very unpleasant for uke.

Battery dying, gotta send this now.

Hanon wrote:
Spot on CK sensei (even though we both know you are playing devils advocate and you CAN answer your own questions). SO why repeat the same actions in a new kata?

Mike

Ryôte-dori is not a unique case of repetion in Kôdôkan goshinjutsu. Take the knife attack choku-tsuki, which is more or less the same as tsukkomi in kime-no-kata. In fact, not only is the attack nearly the same, so is the defense, with the only major difference being tori taking uke's wrist from the bottom instead of from above. Why this repetition and why the small difference ?

Many questions can be asked: why 21 techniques and not 20 such as in kime-no-kata. Why the switches in position of tori compared to kime-no-kata. Why the constant switching of positions, etc.

Some issues or fact can be documented, and I will do so in my book. Others can't. To that extent, Heikojr's answer is not just a joke. We can't speak for dead people. Your last chance to maybe get a response to this was 1991, which is the year Kotani died.

That being said, I am not sure that there is a conscientious rationale behind some of these things. I doubt that there was a decision were someone said: "Uh huh, if we are going to mae a new kata, we must put in two techniques directly taken from kime-no-kata, lets now take a vote which techniques".

Anyhow, Hanon-sensei, you do realize that what you have done now is make a case for ... the Judo Show, since this provides you with an option to integrate whatever you like totally according to your own choice !!

Hanon wrote:
Spot on CK sensei (even though we both know you are playing devils advocate and you CAN answer your own questions). SO why repeat the same actions in a new kata?

Mike

They Are Not The Same.
They Are Not The Same.
They Are Not The Same.

KNK's ryotedori response is very different from KGJ.

IMHO if you do them the same one is wrong.

And that is why it the attack occurs in both kata - to highlight the different responses.

NBK wrote:

Hanon wrote:
Spot on CK sensei (even though we both know you are playing devils advocate and you CAN answer your own questions). SO why repeat the same actions in a new kata?

Mike

They      Are      Not     The       Same.
They      Are      Not     The       Same.
They      Are      Not     The       Same.

KNK's ryotedori response is very different from KGJ.

IMHO if you do them the same one is wrong.

And that is why it the attack occurs in both kata - to highlight the different responses.

Not the response the attack. Ryote dori-both hand seizure. I am aware the response from tori differ and in the case of KGJ the ryote dori is accompanied by an attack to tori's groin.

You guys do realise this is just the first technique we are debating, wait for the questions I have on the second, third...... Don't panic, that wont happen.

Ryote dori appears in two kodokan kata years before the establishment of the KGJ. I cant imagine a less likely scenario for a self defence kata.
As Heikojr mentioned I can see this being of value if judoka make the KGJ there only kata and avoid the Kime no kata and the ju no kata.

ON a BTW sort of this we could establish a kata with 15 attacks using ryote dori with 15 different escapes and counters etc. I am NOT being flippant either when I write that yamamoto sensei used to spend an entire week end teaching one technique that being sankaku jime. Yamamoto could sankaku a toilet seat. Constant attacks from the same attack with different responses is a must in goshinjutsu. I agree with this. However we only have a set limited amount of attacks and here I go again I just cannot see the reason why ryote dori opens a new kata. Maybe I am not men to understand it?
maybe I am going to have to accept it is what it is? That's a shame. 

Perhaps I am just not making any sense with my questions. My fault not the readers.

Mike

To create some more ripples in the pond, there are actually three kata preceding Goshinjutsu. Ryôte-dori is also included as the second technique of the second series in Joshi jûdô goshinhô, but it is again somewhat different and indicates a grip with both hands of one wrist, this just to underpin that I don't think that the Japanese view these things as the same. The names of techniques have been always much more of a fuss in the West. Oftentimes, a Japanese sensei would "describe" technique in a couple of words, but for Westerners this has always been interpreted as a "name of a technique". If you mention a certain choke one time ryôte-jime and the other time morote-jime then Westerners will be confused wanting to know "which name is right and which one wrong" not understanding that they really are identical descriptions

I am developing my own goshinjutsu which only uses the most realistic and efficient techniques one can come up with. It starts off with the following two techniqus:

Cichorei Kano wrote:
Another topic that I know to be dear to NBK and that may not be totally irrelevant here is the position and interest of Japanese police and the whole taihô-jutsu movement. I believe this was created around 1947, so very close to 1952 when the work on goshinjutsu started. Some of the people who were very involved in Taihô-jutsu and who had Kôdôkan links (Kikuchi, Nagaoka, even though the latter died just 2.5 months after the work on goshinjutsu started)。。。。。

The first specifically named taihojutsu kata dates back to around 1937. Prior to that police training for such was under judo instructors but a kendo instructor developed a series of defenses against and disarms of traditional weapons based on koryu techniques and began the lead taihojutsu instructor of the Tokyo Metropolitan Police. I wrote a detailed history of it in the old forum.

Today it is taught by the lead Jodo instructor, my old sensei.

NBK wrote:

The first specifically named taihojutsu kata dates back to around 1937. Prior to that police training for such was under judo instructors but a kendo instructor developed a series of defenses against and disarms of traditional weapons based on koryu techniques and began the lead taihojutsu instructor of the Tokyo Metropolitan Police. I wrote a detailed history of it in the old forum.

Today it is taught by the lead Jodo instructor, my old sensei.

But did the taihô-jutsu itself as a discipline exist that early ?

This is a Kodokan goshinjutsu by Gary Goltz, 7th dan of the USJA.



No comment other than where do the additional grab and knife attack from behind come from?

Jonesy wrote:This is a Kodokan goshinjutsu by Gary Goltz, 7th dan of the USJA.
No comment other than where do the additional grab and knife attack from behind come from?

He's a candy belt and a great awarder of candy belts and the president of a national judo association and he wanted to do it. The Kodokan goshinjutsu is a springboard for further study and so if he wants to claim the privilege who's to comment?

At least he's one candy belt that is doing something. Please anyone feel free to criticize by posting their performance.

Jonesy wrote:This is a Kodokan goshinjutsu by Gary Goltz, 7th dan of the USJA.



No comment other than where do the additional grab and knife attack from behind come from?

'a Kodokan goshinjutsu'.... note 'the' Kodokan Goshinjutsu. OK....

The extra rear grab could be seen as from Kime no Kata. I've never seen the rear knife defense in judo. There are some vague similarities to some koryu kata, but not directly.

Perhaps uke was free-lancing and Mr. Goltz was simply responding?

BillC wrote:

Jonesy wrote:This is a Kodokan goshinjutsu by Gary Goltz, 7th dan of the USJA.
No comment other than where do the additional grab and knife attack from behind come from?

He's a candy belt and a great awarder of candy belts and the president of a national judo association and he wanted to do it.  The Kodokan goshinjutsu is a springboard for further study and so if he wants to claim the privilege who's to comment?

At least he's one candy belt that is doing something.  Please anyone feel free to criticize by posting their performance.

Fair play. I think we have to go back as far as George Kerr to find a BJA Chairman who has heard of, and can possibly spell, Kodokan goshinjutsu, let alone ever attempted it.

Ck wrote

"Sleeve grabbing. A man comes next to you and grabs your sleeve and forces you to walk with him ?  Um, really ?  How many attacks today involve someone "who grabs you by the arm and forces you to walk with him ?"  Maybe if you are a young attractive girl, yes ..."


Actually I was attacked like this....

I was in Pakistan, a car drove near me three men jumped out two grabbed my arms (one either side) to take me to a car. I did do a kick to the knee (but crossing one leg over the other to get some space and power to kick) to get one to let go of me. I then punched the other in the face to let go of the arm he was holding. I then escaped.

samsmith2424 wrote:Ck wrote

"Sleeve grabbing. A man comes next to you and grabs your sleeve and forces you to walk with him ?  Um, really ?  How many attacks today involve someone "who grabs you by the arm and forces you to walk with him ?"  Maybe if you are a young attractive girl, yes ..."


Actually I was attacked like this....

I was in Pakistan, a car drove near me three men jumped out two grabbed my arms (one either side) to take me to a car. I did do a kick to the knee (but crossing one leg over the other  to get some space and power to kick) to get one to let go of me. I then punched the other in the face to let go of the arm he was holding. I then escaped.

It's called "rhetoric question".

Many, many years ago I was once "attacked" in broad daylight in one of the country's main stations by someone with a table knife who had just been released from prison. I said: "You're going to attack me with that ?" and started laughing very hard. He left. Now, if anyone would have included "laughing" as a defense in Kôdôkan goshinjutsu, I also would have written "I anyone really going to defend himself to a knife attack by laughing ?"

With regard to extra or 'new' defenses, I have already pointed out that Kôdôkan goshinjutsu is not a kata in the real sense of the word. It is not even meant to be done one technique after the other. The idea is that you during jûdô class after you perhaps do warm-up, yaku-soku-geiko, uchi-komi, you do perhaps two defenses against a stick, then continue with newaza or whatever. In Itô Kazuo's "This is judo: for women" he includes an alternative knife defense technique in Joshi goshinhô. Such alternatives are interesting for many reasons, but one of them also is that while many people criticize Kôdôkan goshinjutsu when additional or alternative techniques are created are they then more realistic or better ? The origin of Itô-sensei's alternative technique has not been determined. Did it originally exist but was it rejected ? Did he come up with it himself ? Did he see it or learn it from someone else ? In any case, when one evaluates Itô-sensei's additional knife defense, I would not exactly call it a better alternative. In that sense, I think like with anything in jûdô practice is important, and when proficient one no longer is limited by the form, but the basis of many techniques and options will allow a situational response that is improvisatory, just like the techniques we apply in jûdô shiai.

Sorry but I thought you meant that such an attack is not likely and doesn't happen unless you are an attractive girl.

samsmith2424 wrote:Sorry but I thought you meant that such an attack is not likely and doesn't happen unless you are an attractive girl.

I did, and I still do, even if 5 more ugly males here report that they once were attacked like that. "People" also have been killed falling out of planes, or have their house or head destroyed by ice falling of an aircraft. But is it likely to happen to you ? No.

Just happened to see this video provided By Baritsu society

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAVyBQxo4yk

Note grabbing of both arms

NBK wrote: 
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 ....

...etc.

My guess might be that some on this forum have not done shiai or even randori for some time ... at least not with challenging partners.  Because being grasped by both sleeves happens ... all ... the ... time.  For example when I have a hold of one sleeve on the usual hikite side and my grasp on the usual tsurite side is lost my opponent may in turn grasp both my sleeves near the end in order to frustrate my attacks, open me for ko-waza, or just to be a muscle-bound young asshole.

The response NBK describes is one possible response ... totally applicable to judo competition.  That is except for #4 which seems to be the weapon of choice for certain "elite" judoka lately ... hard not to mention the Germans there ... but hey when tensions run high and your job is on the line why not take a swipe at your opponent's head?

Anyway, my sensei used to point out that the goshinjutsu was among other things a good sampling of certain kumikata drills ... and his phrase "train is coming, get off the track" will forever be etched inside my skull.

Getting back to the double sleeve grip specifically, what does one learn from the defense to ryotedori?  On that list I'd start with ...

-  A grip by either me or my opponent is a connection to which tension or compression can be applied ... in short if someone has a hold of me I can push or pull just as well as they can as long as they maintain their hold ... and thereby affect their balance;

-  Further, I can make sure they stay connected by improving the grip and neutralizing their ability to let go;

-  Just because someone has a hold of me at one point does not mean that my whole body is locked ... barring any other problem I can pivot around that connection point and affect their balance and control ... the direction of their intended force.

NBK when his jet lag wears off may add that ryote dori is a more difficult grip anatomically and that grips with one hand, or double grips to the torso are somehow less difficult to manage ... I'll let him make his case because I don't quite concur ... but that this defense belongs in judo is something on which we agree.

My guess might be that some on this forum have not taught self defence to active service personnel?

Ryote dori has value in its correct context such as the kime and ju no kata. I can write a booklet just on how valuable such a technique can be under specific situations in demonstrating a physical aspect  of a core principle.  

For the sake of sounding like a parrot this is a modern day rendition on the theme of self defence.

Its such a simple concept that some of you fail to see it. WHO in modern day society, yes 1956, is going to walk up to a person, grab both his wrists and try to kick him in the groin. Have any of you actually been attacked this way, seen it on the movies, heard of such an attack, read of such an action? Well, have you?

lets move onto the second technique I think this has been done to death.

Hidari eri dori. Much more plausible attack no doubt about that. Attack not in question.

End result...again WHY does tori go to the floor to apply a lock that can and should be completed standing up.
In SD it is very wise to avoid the floor unless there is absolutely no option. Reason being in multiple attacks tori is at a grave disadvantage. Ne waza can, under the correct circumstances be invaluable. It is never an area to deliberately take an attacker unless there is zero other option available. If tori desires the final action, the foot of tori could and should be utilised not the knee.

BTW I did NOT formulate the self defence techniques taught to the armed forces. They are not from my pen nor individual study. Very little is new in the world of SD. Man has always had two arms and two legs and been attacked with various weapons. The amount of counters, though immense, are to a given degree, inevitable taking the natural weapons our human body allows us. No one attacks with three arms and three legs at the same time? We all only, at best, have two of each.

Question what we do and why we do it or we will lose it. The reason so many do not enjoy kata or ukemi, happo no kuzushi, shisei, uchikomi etc today is that they simply do not understand what they are doing or have not been taught the value of such actions-concepts-principles and how they play a vital role in ones general judo and mind set.

Perhaps its a debate like this one that can help us all find some answers. They are certainly thin on the ground.

Mike