looking for info on French Judo system of using numbers instead of technique name

The Kawaishi système was very effective. One has to look at all the champions produced And their followers. Éven today, most teachers overcom 50 .years of age Have a reasonable

forgeron judo wrote:Of course, you will find several techniques outside the thinking of the Kodokan and that was ok at the time since Kawaishi mixed his jujitsu background to complete his teaching. As canadian students, we the students had Sensei Kawaishi as technical director and  we had to perform both ju jitsu and judo during the exam periods.

Bonjour, forgeron.

Which ”jujitsu background“ are you talking about ??
Over the years, we had many online debates about Kawaishi sensei, but I do not remember any mention of a jujitsu school, other than Kodokan Judo, that Kawaishi would have studied.

Unless, of course, that ”jujitsu” is only an european-friendly term, meaning self-defense applications of judo training.

Cheers,
J-F.

There were no definite system identified in my early days, as you may know the early french references were loinked to the Jujitsu school or system of Kano and published in early 1900's. We in Canada (eastern provinces) made maximum use of the DEFENDO method by Mr Underwould of the british special forces and the unarmed combat techniques found in the military police training manuals in early 1900's. When Kawaishi system of self defence was introduced in the the late 30-40, we were insructed in thoses methods. There was no references to any koryu then.
The french federation conserved the Kawaishi techniques and programs for a long time and still do to some degree as it has developped its own methodology and incorporated the programs with the streams for qualifications and licensing of black beltsé.

Hope it make some senses.

Since Kawaishi came from the Budokan in Kyoto it would be very well possible he practiced one of the older jujutsu styles besides Kodokan judo.
There are several techniques in his self defense repertoire which are not Kodokan techniques, a lot of them is plain judo. I do believe Kawaishi made a difference in his texts between judo and jiujitsu (the latter meant self defense, based on judo).
Maybe Kawaishi's interpetation of judo was more broad than the Kodokan's . Long after neck- and leglocks were banned from Kodokan judo they remained in the curriculum of Kawaishi's judo. Standing armlocks also.

For Jacob, I learned the osaekomi sequence of your video from my first judoteacher who was very fond of and followed the Kawaishi system. Althoug I do not know if it was a formal sequence (I doubt it) it came from Kawaishi.

One little question you mention flaws in technqiues, what techniques are flawed in your opinion?

Happy landings.

johan smits wrote:Since Kawaishi came from the Budokan in Kyoto it would be very well possible he practiced one of the older jujutsu styles besides Kodokan judo.
There are several techniques in his self defense repertoire which are not Kodokan techniques, a lot of them is plain judo. I do believe Kawaishi made a difference in his texts between judo and jiujitsu (the latter meant self defense, based on judo).
Maybe Kawaishi's interpetation of judo was more broad than the Kodokan's . Long after neck- and leglocks were banned from Kodokan judo they remained in the curriculum of Kawaishi's judo. Standing armlocks also.

For Jacob, I learned the osaekomi sequence of your video from my first judoteacher who was very fond of and followed the Kawaishi system. Althoug I do not know if it was a formal sequence (I doubt it) it came from Kawaishi.

One little question you mention flaws in technqiues, what techniques are flawed in your opinion?

Happy landings.

I had to check the video again to see what sequence I used
All the show osaekomi waza are in the kawaishi system ( that is... if the lists above, and the secondary books I have which describe them, are correct ). But I did not show them in the 'correct' order here. That was not the goal of this film and I personally hardly ever use the kawaishi system in newaza anymore.

There are several techniques in Kawaishi's system that are not accurate. Thinking about it, I should probably not have used the word 'flawed' because that might be interpreted like them being wrong. That was not what I was trying to say though.
More things like Kubi nage, being the second hip throw in Kawaishi's system. This throw comes from jujutsu and has never been accepted in judo, since it can be a dangerous throw.
Or uchi mata, which is regarded 10th hipthrow in Kawaishi's system, whilst it is actually a legtrow. So we learn it with making use of the hip and secondarly the leg when we are starters, but when we start learning nage no kata, someone is telling us that it is all wrong and we need to relearn it as a legtrow, which is significantly different.
Or the introduction of 'shoulderthrows' as being different from arm(hand)throws, which in fact are the same category. At itself it is not very interesting to what group a throw belongs, but kids tend to take this quite literally and fe at ippon seoi nage, drag ukes arm directly on their shoulder, with the risk of breaking it. Then when you try to explain them that it is incorrect and dangerous to pull him over the shoulder, the first question you get is why it is called a shoulderthrow then. And then try to explain a 7 year old that it has nothing to do with the shoulder, but with the arms and back....
Just a few examples.

So his system is not perfect, but I do agree that he has at least paved the way in Europe for the sensei that came here after him. If he had not been here before many others, I wonder if Judo would be where it is today, over here.

Hi Jacob,
I see what you mean. Some of your comments are valid enough. About the uchi mata for instance. Got no idea why that turned into a hipthrow. Maybe it had something to do with the ' not so limber' European build, just guessing.
My first judo teacher taught judo well before the war and made uchi mata very low on the shin. He named it the shin throw.

I really feel there are many plusses in the Kawaishi system of teaching. One of the things I really like is that judo is less narrowed down to a sport.
In my point of view it remains more a martial system with elements of sport and self defense. This is a very classical approach to judo I feel.

Happy landings.

johan smits wrote:Hi Jacob,
I see  what you mean. Some of your comments are valid enough. About the uchi mata for instance. Got no idea why that turned into a hipthrow. Maybe it had something to do with the ' not so limber' European build, just guessing.
My first judo teacher taught judo well before the war and made uchi mata very low on the shin. He named it the shin throw.

I really feel there are many plusses in the Kawaishi system of teaching. One of the things I really like is that judo is less narrowed down to a sport.
In my point of view it remains more a martial system with elements of sport and self defense. This is a very classical approach to judo I feel.

Happy landings.

But what is the "Kawaishi System" ? A bunch of techniques, taught by name or number, plus or minus some more "dangerous" techniques, does not a "system" make.

My exposure was that the standing portion was not as organized as the katame waza/ne waza. There were definite sequences of techniques that were learned in what I would call "informal kata" fashion. There were action-reaction sequences in ne waza as well, based on position and how uke reacted to a given "attack".

The most organized training I got for nage waza was in regards to ashi barai. Realize, I was already yudansha at that point, had been in Judo around 7-10 years. The sequence of ashi barai drills and progression were excellent, and after spending several weeks on it, I got MUCH better at ashi barai techniques.

I don't remember any such...detail regarding other nage waza. That doesn't mean they dont' exist, though.

BTW, the instructor I learned from was Jacque Legrand (RIP).

johan smits wrote:
I really feel there are many plusses in the Kawaishi system of teaching. One of the things I really like is that judo is less narrowed down to a sport.
In my point of view it remains more a martial system with elements of sport and self defense. This is a very classical approach to judo I feel.

Well, to be honest, I am not aware that there is anything more to the Kawaishi system then the numbers/sequence of the techniques. I cannot even find anything regarding the series Ben is referrering to. So is it really a system of teaching what Kawaishi did? Or is it just the fact that at that time there were just many more techniques 'allowed' and therefore taught than nowadays?
I also believe that the sportification does not really need to have anything to do with a perticular system, but is more based on specific teachers / schools. At my club there are several teachers. Some of them mainly focus on techniques that are usefull in competition. But I for one, don't care much about that and do not even hesitate to throw in some leg- and/or wristlocks ( to people of whom I am sure they can handle it btw ). And we ( my partner and me ) are even teaching a group of youngsters ( 10+ ) techniques from f.e. kime-, goshin- and ju no kata ( besides nage- and katame no kata ). Not for competition purposes, but purely for their benefits. So even within a middle-large club, with only 4 locations, there are serious differences in teachings. Not in a technical sense, but more in approach. There is no official 'system' behind this, but purely based on our experiences and the interests of our students.

Ben Reinhardt wrote:
BTW, the instructor I learned from was Jacque Legrand (RIP).

Since so far no one seems to be able to reproduce those series, are you sure that it was an 'official' part of Kawaishi's system? Can it be that it was created by Legrand himself?

Until not too long ago, we were required to show a 'personal program' ( eigen programma, as Johan will know aswell ) in dan gradings. There was a list of techniques you needed to show, and you had to show these in a logical sequence, based on action/reaction. Besides those, you were allowed to throw in any other techique you wanted to show. As long as the total performance would not exceed 10 minutes.

I have made several of these series for myself and helped many people with making theirs. Most of these series were therefore personalised, but at some point many people for shodan, started to use the same serie as some people before them. Thereby a sort of unofficial 'standard' arose ( at our club that is ). I can imagine that if any outsider would have seen us practicing those, knowing or hearing who our teacher was, they might consider it a part of his 'system', which in fact would not be true.

Perhaps in those days, this requirement was also used in our surrounding countries. Just guessing, but if it was, or if it was just a common way of practice back then, that might be the origin of the series you are speaking about.
Just guessing ofcourse.

Hey Jacob,

I am not in any way trying to convince you about the worth of the Kawaishi system. But I think that when you look close enough there is a lot.

The numbering is one difference. The positioning of the arm-locks another thing. Kawaishi system teaches techniques from stand still that is very good for learning basic principles as disturbing of balance etc.
The entries into throwing techniques are better geared towards self defense. Falling is only allowed for sutemi-waza, standing techniques have tori standing after the execution of a throw.
Kawaishi favored an intuitive approach to learning, not everything was explained.
In the higher echelons kuatsu (seifuku) and kiai were part of the curriculum.

The dangerous techniques were taught (should be in a system which teaches self defense).

I wish you happy landings.

johan smits wrote:Hey Jacob,

I am not in any way trying to convince you about the worth of the Kawaishi system. But I think that when you look close enough there is a lot.

The numbering is one difference. The positioning of the arm-locks another thing. Kawaishi system teaches techniques from stand still that is very good for learning basic principles as disturbing of balance etc.
The entries into throwing techniques are better geared towards self defense. Falling is only allowed for sutemi-waza, standing techniques have tori standing after the execution of a throw.
Kawaishi favored an intuitive approach to learning, not everything was explained.
In the higher echelons kuatsu (seifuku) and kiai were part of the curriculum.

The dangerous techniques were taught (should be in a system which teaches self defense).

I wish you happy landings.

I guess I did not make myself clear enough. You do not need to convince me, nor do I feel like you are trying to

I sincerely am not aware of his system going any further then the numbering, as being a system. It seems to me that you know more about this then I do. So therefore my question wether it is really a system you describe.
Let me clarify:
I do know the numbering. I do know about his way of entering/positioning for the tachi waza. But I do not know the exact positioning in ne waza. Nor any descriptions about any techniques besides his numbering system.
I cannot find anything serious about that on the internet. Nor in my books regarding Kawaishi ( those are all Dutch books btw. I only own 'the complete 7 kata's of Judo' of Kawaishi himself ( translated that is )). So since you seem to know more about him/his system, is there more to it then what I am aware of? Are there any books or sites that you might recommend on that?
I would find that interesting, since it might shed some light on our own development over here.

Thanks!

Jacob3 wrote:

Ben Reinhardt wrote:
BTW, the instructor I learned from was Jacque Legrand (RIP).

Since so far no one seems to be able to reproduce those series, are you sure that it was an 'official' part of Kawaishi's system? Can it be that it was created by Legrand himself?

No, I don't think that Jacque came up with it himself. This was not just a couple of sequences. Jacque was French, originally from Corsica, but trained I think in Paris. He was in the Army, and started off as an elite level swimmer, then went to Judo. Fantastic athlete he was. He trained with Pariset, and many other famous French judoka of the time. He moved to the USA eventually.

Jacob,

The books by Kawaishi himself are interesting. Some are translated in English others are not.
Ma methode de judo
My method of self defence
Ma methode secrete de judo

Feldenkrais higher judo (Feldenkrais was a student of Kawaishi)
Entretiens avec les pionniers du judo Francais door Claude Thibault.
Claude Thibault also wrote a book comparing the Kawaishi method and the Kodokan method ( I do not have the title here). I think Wim Luiten wrote a similar book in Dutch long ago.

An helpfull little book in Dutch is by Elseviers judo boek by Hein Essink. The older editions have got the leglocks and necklocks in them.

Of any help to you?

Happy landings.

Hi,

https://www.canal-sport.fr/fr_FR/stage-haut-grades-2013/llm-title03-avi

Jeanjean,

Many thanks,
What a wonderful link.
I have some troubles with my pc at home so I could not get the beginning.
The teacher who explains and shows the techniques, do you know his name?

Happy landings.

johan smits wrote:The teacher who explains and shows the techniques, do you know his name?

That is Kawaishi's son. Norikazu Kawaishi, 7th dan.

Thank you Jihef.
A very impressive man.
Just watching his explanation and the few techniques he showed was wonderful.
Do you know if he has made any dvd's on the Kawaishi system?
I did a search but could not come up with anything.

Happy landings.

jeanjean wrote:Hi,

https://www.canal-sport.fr/fr_FR/stage-haut-grades-2013/llm-title03-avi

Thanks for posting the video.

The first pin sequence was familiar, but not what Jacque taught. I didn't see any of the other sequences. He did teach some of the other locks not for use in shai/randori (by Kodokan standards).

Just to be picky; and apologies to members who may not have English as their first language...

I think there is a subtle difference between 'system' and 'method'.  A system implies a holistic approach to something.  In a ju-jitsu context, it could be the way that techniques are introduced within a syllabus, specific combinations of techniques and pedagogical approaches.  A method implies mostly a pedagogical approach.  Whilst a system may have a very specific outcome that is different to other systems, a method is a different teaching approach to achieve the same outcome as others.

I am not sure that Kawaishi ever referred to his judo and jiu jitsu as a system; he always used the term 'method' in his publications.  As such, 'method' fairly describes the numerical ordering, sequences and combinations unique to his teaching.

johan smits wrote:Jacob,

The books by Kawaishi himself are interesting. Some are translated in English others are not.
Ma methode de judo
My method of self defence
Ma methode secrete de judo

Feldenkrais higher judo (Feldenkrais was a student of Kawaishi)
Entretiens avec les pionniers du judo Francais door Claude Thibault.
Claude Thibault also wrote a book comparing the Kawaishi method and the Kodokan method ( I do not have the title here). I think Wim Luiten wrote a similar book in Dutch long ago.

An helpfull little book in Dutch is by Elseviers judo boek by Hein Essink. The older editions have got the leglocks and necklocks in them.

Of any help to you?

Happy landings.

My French is not good enough to really read descriptions of techniques, so I will have to go by English or Dutch ( or German ) books.
I have the books of Wim Luiten and Hein Essink. And indeed there are leglocks and necklocks in them, but those are already familiar. I am now more interested in his METHOD . So I will search around for some translated versions.

Thank you

DougNZ wrote:Just to be picky; and apologies to members who may not have English as their first language...

I think there is a subtle difference between 'system' and 'method'.  A system implies a holistic approach to something.  In a ju-jitsu context, it could be the way that techniques are introduced within a syllabus, specific combinations of techniques and pedagogical approaches.  A method implies mostly a pedagogical approach.  Whilst a system may have a very specific outcome that is different to other systems, a method is a different teaching approach to achieve the same outcome as others.

I am not sure that Kawaishi ever referred to his judo and jiu jitsu as a system; he always used the term 'method' in his publications.  As such, 'method' fairly describes the numerical ordering, sequences and combinations unique to his teaching.

Thank you for clarifying that

Doug,

You are not being picky. You are absolutely right. Kawaishi mentiones a method (of teaching) which is not anoter system (as in Kodokan judo).
What makes it a little dilluted is I think that what he taught was not exactly one hundred percent Kodokan judo.

Mind you we Dutch are a funny lot. Know ten words of another language and we will take over the world.

Happy landings