My last post on Scoring Kata has brought several other topics to mind.
I was competing in my first tournament as a brown belt, in Wilkes Barre, Pa. As luck had it in Kobudo competition the Brown and Black belts were competing together. I did get through my form Chantan Yara No Sai, but in the division I was also competing against Cynthia Rothrock.
It takes no stretch of the imagination that my form was no threat to the Black Belt competitors. But I survived my kata, and as the Brown Belts went first, I then settled down to watch the pro’s. Cynthia received a 10 from one of the judges (who as fate had it was her then husband and instructor, Ernest Rothrock). I recall that clearly as a friend who was a Sho Dan in Kyokushinkai later discussed with me he felt it was impossible to receive a perfect score, and obviously this was just her husband’s choice.
Perfection can exist, however, in a time and place, for an instant, for a judge or judges. You’ve seen it on occasion in Olympic diving and gymnastics competition. Or watched a Billy Banks float over the air through opponent after opponent in a different dimension of time and space. In many places in many different ways. It just requires an open mind to clearly look at that time and place and find no openings, no imbalances, nothing to detract from the instant of incredible human perfection.
The first instance I recalled reading of the Perfect 10 in Karate involved the Okinawan Isshinryu instructor Angi Uzeu, being asked to enter a karate tournament in Pennsylvania long ago. He had never entered one before, as they didn’t have them in Okinawa at that time. The report was after he did his kata, all of the judges awarded him a perfect 10. Another well know and respected competitor of those days Hidy Ochai was due to compete next, and as the story had it, simply turned around and left the floor after seeing the judges scores. [Now don’t turn this into Angi was obviously better than Hidy. I am quite sure that is not the case in either direction. I’m sure there were many complex reasons behind this, and I also expect most or all of the judges were Isshinryu, perhaps creating a stacked house in Hidy’s mind.]
On other occasion I’ve seen 10’s, too.
In the late 70’s through mid 80’s Pennsylvania had a host of incredible kata and kobudo competitors, all of whom were, are and always will be champions. In no particular order, the students of Vince Ward and John Hamilton in Shorin No Tora, Gary and George Michak from Goshin Jutsu, the Shotokan of Tristan Sutrisno, the Goju Students of Ron Martin, John Chung from Jhoon Rhee, Cindy Rothrock, John Snyder with Bruce Heilman, and many others who were just as incredible, alas the years make the names fade for the moment. While I’ve separated from the tournament scene over the years, when I attend on occasion those of today, I have not seen a group of so talented individuals as in those days. [That is perhaps a moment of introspection for another day.]
On occasion they would draw other National level competitors into the region to test their mettle, too. Several of them entered the national level competition. Gary Michak received to 20 recognition in forms, weapons and kumite. Cynthia Rothrock in forms and weapons rose to stellar height in anybodies book. Yet almost any of them had that potential to excel, chance, cash and serendipity were as much the driver of the larger recognition.
On any given day they could exceed. And they had to be prepared for incredible levels of mental preparation. They could not excel at one form or two forms. On occasion I’ve seen them have to do three or four different forms to break ties. Likewise in weapons, I remember when Cynthia Rothrock and a member of Manny Augreila’s Green Dragons,had to do four different weapons to break a tie. The judges having decided, doing the same weapon twice, would give the individual doing a different weapon the win, assuming they did a great job, which they did.
That was competition. And they weren’t competing for, training for or being satisfied with second place.
Who really was better? The answer was obvious, they all were. The created a forge of excellence to drive them and those of us who dared to step up and try, to excel and find a way to exceed.
I cannot go back into that past to review those days. Perhaps with older eyes I would see some of it differently. Consider Gary Michak with his incredible choreographed kata “Superman” done to the theme music of Superman.
After all who was I to call Superman less than a perfect '10'.
I just got a letter from an old friend (non-Isshinryu) who just shut down his school in a different part of the country. Interesting timing as this somewhat parallels a different conversation I just had several days ago.
As things have it he’s shut down a modestly successful dojo of many years and leaving the arts. When he came up he was only interested in hard-ass karate, and ran a tough ship. He was one of many who thought I was crazy for teaching kids, regardless of my urging him that youth instruction for the commercial school was the growth potential of the future. Yes as iconoclastic as I am, teaching for free, I’ve always supported my friends in their Commercial systems, too.
Well as times changed, he went to business seminars and eventually went into the youth programs, including the ‘kinder kid karate’ (a practice I don’t participate in myself). His dojo grew and his income. But what he observed, in his community was as more youth trained, it was harder and harder to find adults to join the program. In part his town is a bedroom community and people commuting to work were less interested in spending free time training, but in part, as he became a successful youth instructor adults weren’t interested in training some place kids were either.
This didn’t just happen, but slowly over quite a few years, he ended up with fewer and fewer adults who wanted to train hard. As the adults dropped off, he also found his interest waning, and eventually realized that spending years in the dojo left many other things undone which he never had time to do.
On the other end, my friend Ernest Rothrock, with his in my opinion very successful Kung Fu programs teaches almost exclusively to adults (yes he does have some youth programs but they are not his primary goal), and after decades of work, has a real word of mouth in the adult communities where he and his instructors have schools. Now there is considerable difference between the mindsets of Kung Fu students and Karate students (btw, the Tai Chi student mindset is very different too). The people who train with him aren’t interested in Karate training, and on the whole most karate students I’ve know really aren’t interested in studying kung fu either.
In a different example, a local combination Goju/Shorin instructor has over 1,000 students in his and his students schools and manage to successfully balance youth and adult classes. But in his case, his students do most of the teaching (and 100% of the youth programs). So variety is possible.
So my friend folded his program and has retired from the arts, to pursue other interests.
My own instructors have retired from Isshinryu. Mr. Lewis in part because he wanted to live out west, hunt, fish, hike et.al, and in part because he accomplished everything in Isshinryu that he ever wanted to do. Likewise Charlie Murray retired from Isshinryu last year, his USAF duties so encompassing and little time to train on a regular basis, he’s choosing to concentrate on his Air Force and Church responsibilities.
The fact that some stay and some leave, and fold it up, is very rarely discussed, but is there. Most never make it to Black Belt. Many more leave within 5 years of attaining their ShoDan. And as time passes, real people choose different responses to life situations.
Running a very small adult program these past 25 years (now 40 years) has helped me understand one of my personal goals, to try and understand karate instruction prior to 1900, a time when everything was small and personal.
When we were driven in our training to prepare for our sho-dan, that pace was fun, always pushing yourself as hard and as far as you could go. I'm sure at that time that was what I thought the goal of an instructor was, to have a group that could move at that pace forever.
Reality however becomes very different.
Of course we don't live on a small island and all our students are not in walking distance from our program.Today even for a small program students may have to fly home from working in another state, deal with late work hours, or frequent times when they're not available for training from work.
What I've found in the last quarter century, except for a year when there were just two of us training regularly, the rest of my classes have never had the same members there two classes in a row. That doesn't mean the group has quit, but that they're adults who have to balance many issues to maintain their training.
As an instructor you prepare for a class with a specific lesson plan in mind, and then often depending on which students are present, may or may not be able to use it and have to flow to plan 'b'. I find in time my lesson plan isn't for a class but what I focus on for a quarter of the year at a time, and find a way to touch that training over that period again andagain.
I've experienced the death of a very good student and then over the next year the departure of most of the older group members, perhaps taking the experience to adjust their personal goals, each of which training over 15 years.
Then the program slows, the most seniors training at a more and more advanced level till slowly new members ferret out the existence of the dojo, and suddenly you're in a beginning adult program.
Students really are the ones who control what you can do in a program.As an instructor you can only teach those who are willing to train. You have no control over how they deal with life's ever present reality, the fact that everything else in life is conspiring to stop your training, you can only always be there and teach.
Then slowly over 5 years, as you and your senior students focus on the group, you shift from a white belt program to build towards shodan instruction.
Which is where most of my program is right now.
Begin the shift to dan drilling studies, working on principles behind technique application, working on a very different range of drills for new movement flow, laying the ground work for dan training, and you're still moving at slow speed.
Balancing the groups needs, you most senior students needs and your own desires.
And knowing under the best of circumstances, if no corners are cut, it will be another 5 years before the program fully engages the training you enjoy most.
The program is small and personal, the instructor must go slow meeting the students needs foremost.
Helps one gets older and slower I guess, but for the upcoming joy when fists will collide and the arts potential can be realized.
The smaller the program in fact means the slower the instructors wishes are realized.
If long ago you were an instructor and have one student, if their time passes for any reason and you have to begin again, consider the slow of that instructors flow.
Bill Glasheen offered these comments on the Uechi Ryu World Cup 2005. of course this is not Isshinryu but I always found lessons to be learned and I believe they are worth reading.
I have never seen similar comments from a senior instructor from any system. I believe it shows commitment to one's art and system is worth consideration.
Uechi Ryu World Cup 2005 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBffOSipm6A
posted May 18, 2002 07:35 PM
It's the Saturday evening after the Uechi Ryu Karate Championships. I'm now over at George Mattson's place relaxing, slumming with Tia, and winding down.
To start with, I had a rare view of many of the more interesting events. Because I ACTUALLY READ THE RULES (five times, to be exact), I ended up (along with Al Wharton and Mike Murphy) judging the black belt kata and sparring for both sexes. Again, having done my homework meant I was asked - for better or for worse - to be head judge and center referee. I can tell you that my extra effort saved my butt several times.
George asked me to spend some time relating a few incidents at the tournament on the forum. While this might be more appropriately put on the sparring forum, I have quite a bit to post about (some about tournaments, and some about general things), and this forum is about any topic anyhow.
So given a podium, I am usually up to the task of using it. I will try to help communicate many of the important things I experienced, but I will try to do so without either touting any individual's achievements or potentially embarrassing others that don't care to be the topics of public discourse. Thus in the spirit of the forum, this thread will remain about issues and not about personalities.
There are many issues, so I will post them as they come to me. Feel free to chime in if you were there, or if you have comments/questions.
- Bill
The best of style, the worst of style
Judging kata and prearranged kumite (yes, I even did some of that), can be a tricky business.
Before I go any further, I'd like to remind the audience that I'm my own worst critic. So when I make comments about imperfections, please understand they come from a perfectionist that NEVER will be happy with his own effort. Such is the nature of the beast. Truthfully, I am honored and awed at the prospect of being a member of a team that stands in judgement of others. Trust me when I say that I take the task at hand and the efforts put forth quite seriously. And please understand how wonderful it was seeing all these fantastic efforts. THAT BEING SAID...allow me the opportunity to get out my metaphoric red pen and offer a little bit of critique. And if you think I am pointing it in your direction, understand I am a master of the red pen because it gets ten times the use on myself in my own dojo.
You would think that the best of the best of a generation would have nothing to work on, and no flaws to spot. The truth is that each individual walks in doing SOMETHING really well. And the fact they do those ONE or TWO things really well makes their weaknesses all the more obvious. Ahhh, but wouldn't it be nice if we could all be perfect at everything. don't think those animals exist.
Sooo...it was actually easy to find little pieces here and there to make mental black marks on in the scoring. Trust me when I say that I was not alone. In whole sections on the scoring, Al, Mike and I saw eye to eye in our "relative" impressions. While Mike's scores were often higher than mine and Al's were occasionally lower, I noted a remarkable tendency for the three of us to fluctuate in unison from candidate to candidate. So...it's obvious we often were seeing the very same things.
So...what kinds of things did I notice in the kata? Here's a short list:
* The circle movements in seiryu, kanchin, and sanseiryu truly separated the men from the boys and the women from the girls. The mechanics of these movements require the most precise of technique. You can blast your way through a seisan jump, but the shoken sukui age uke requires BOTH precision and power. Nobody did these complex movements perfectly, but...some did them better than others.
In any case, understand that we judges appreciate that these kata are forms of higher difficulty. This became readily apparent in the several cases were there were ties and kata runoffs. What a difference a different kata makes.
* THE PERFECT KATA has many elements. There's power, speed, fluidity, timing, precision, mindset, balance, etc., etc. We judges were looking for the whole package. Some would spend lots of effort on precision at the expense of power and spirit, while others were explosive but oddly lacking in balance and control. Twice in the day there were significant runoffs, and we settled the score by having the three of us point to one or the other individual after the performance of a second kata. Both times, it was two for one individual, and one for the next. WHY??? Good question. The truth is that Mike, Al and I discussed the issues later. WE ALL SAW THE EXACT SAME FLAWS! But their relative importance vairied from individual to individual when the two candidates were close in performance. What did it mean for me to be in the majority vote in both cases? I have absolutely no idea!!!
* One case in partucular is striking. One individual performed an EXTREMELY powerful form, but the balance was very shaky. Another individual performed an EXTREMELY precise form, but with suspect power and spirit. Van and I later were talking about the individual doing the powerful form, especially since he was so upset with himself and the result. After talking about it for a bit, we realized that we both saw "flaws" in the power, but identified it in different elements. I saw it as a lack of coordination of lower with upper body. Van saw it as being too hard in the upper body too quickly in the generation of the power. Within a minute, we realized we both identified the exact same phenomenon, but with different language and paradigms. Great minds think alike, even when they think differently.
More later
- Bill
Ryuji Isobe2005 world weight tournament IKO1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyGPKFohTms
Thank god for rules
One incident in particular prompted George to request a "writeup" by me. I will relate it the best I can.
This was not one of the more tidy matches. From the get-go, both candidates were a bit...frisky. On more than a few matches, I handled this by breaking the two individuals up, and giving them BOTH warnings. The next warning is a point for the other, and the fourth is automatic disqualification.
THERE WERE NO DISQUALIFICATIONS IN ANY OF MY MATCHES, NOR WERE THERE ANY INJURIES WORTH WRITING HOME ABOUT. (One case of a few drops of blood from the nose, and another brief case of the male ouchies. This is remarkable, and speaks volumes of the organization involved By Richie Bap, George, and Jay.
That being said...
This match started out a bit wild. I did my best to control it as best I could. One candidate in particular though was flailing. Yes, flailing. I can't think of a better word for it. The resulting chaos even prompted Jay Salhanick to ask me to stop the match, and give him an opportunity to offer the two of them a free ticket home. You go Jay!!
So in any case, the "flailer" came charging at his opponent. This opponent faded back, but managed to get a quick side kick in before stepping out of the ring. I stopped the match. After they returned to their positions, I yelled "JUDGES CALL!!" I pointed to the gentleman that threw the quick kick. The judge behind me signaled no call. And Al...did nothing. I was about to signal "No call" to the scorekeeper when Al suddenly threw his hand towards the same side-kicker. I quickly gave the individual the point and moved on.
More chaos, Jay's speech, a little more chaos, and match ended. Nobody got hurt, so good. But more than once during the rest of the match, I heard these angry protests from the back. I had a feeling I knew what his beef was. Afterwards, he made his displeasure quite clear. He was unhappy about the "weak side kick," and Al's late call. That point was the difference in the match.
WHAT WOULD YOU DO? How to solve the dilemma? Did I do the right thing?
Here's the deal. This individual complained to me, and I first started by reminding the individual (according to the rules) that he needed to register his protest in a sportsmanlike manner. Fine...he calmed down. Then he talked about the delayed call. I explained my logic to him, and I will put it here - for the record and for anyone else interested in such classic protest situations.
First, I paraphrased the rule (on this webpage for anyone to see) that I applied.
quote:
LATE CALLS: All officials should make their calls at the sane time. If, in the opinion of the referee, the corner judges are making a late call intentionally, the referee can disqualify the call (noise not allowing the judges to hear the referee and the honest mistake of raising the wrong color or pointing at the wrong competitor should be taken into consideration not to disqualify the call).
I explained to this individual - and I am now explaining "for the record" - that I did not view Al's act as an "intentional late call." Al was distracted (it was VERY noisy) and it just took a second for him to snap to attention. I trust Al. Al was winning tournaments when the competitors (and coach) were pooping their diapers. Al has no agenda. Al told me later he was distracted. Yes...these things happen.
Note: At one point in the tournament I actually pointed to the wrong competitor when I yelled "JUDGES CALL." Humans goof. But when I saw the other two judges pointed to the person I MEANT to point to, I didn't advertise my brain fart. Point for Andrew Moore. Sorry Andrew, but no harm in the end.
That's what we were talking about - a human goof. But the intentions were honest, and the initial intentions were correctly recorded. I would also like to add the following points....
The rules state
quote:
1. Never, at any time, can a coach enter the ring without the referee's permission
Sorry, fellow, but you lost brownie points in my head when you entered the ring and started complaining (over my left shoulder) during Sal's speech to the contestants. I DID NOT GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO ENTER THE RING. I let it slide.
MORAL OF THE STORY:
1) I appreciate the emotions involved. I told the protesting coach that I fully understood how bad things looked. IT'S IMPORTANT FIRST TO UNDERSTAND, AND THEN TO BE UNDERSTOOD.
2) I read the rules. I read them five times. I discussed aspects of them on several forums (CHECK IT OUT!!!) weeks ago. This saved my butt, folks. If you aren't with the rules, then an unruly protestor will eat you alive.
3) Any good competitor doesn't get themselves in a situation where a single "event" causes them to lose a match. Be above it all by being good - period. Win convincingly. This is how the champions make it to the end.
4) Learn some defense so you don't get nailed running into a weak-assed kick.
5) Competitors need to understand that the referee reads and abides by the rules. Parents need to understand that the referee reads and abides by the rules. When this happens, everyone appreciates that things are "fair", even when things don't go their way. It also implies that the event is likely to be a safe and rewarding one. And on that note, the proof was in the outcome.
6) And finally, the poor losing competitor here is a fine martial artist. He did a most amazing form in the men's black belt. I told him how impressed I was with him when I shook his hand later. I expect to see him next year, and he better walk home with a sparring trophy at the end of the day to match the kata award!
- Bill
David
You and Mike sure saved me some posts! Thanks for chiming in. One in particular was about the whole "hearing" thing. Yes, there were problems.
LET US REMEMBER THE EFFECTS OF EXTREME STRESS, AND THE CHAOS OF BATTLE.
An experienced law enforcement officer and firearms expert, Tom Crawford, once told me of an interesting situation. It seems that a number of police officers were in an intense gun battle. One officer was taking time to reload. A second officer, who was also reloading, noticed a bad guy walking up to the first policeman with gun pointed at his head. The officer yelled at the top of his lungs. No response. The officer yelled again, and again, and again. Totally oblivious to it all, the first officer continued to reload. The bad guy slowly aimed the gun within feet of the officer, and blew his brains out.
What's going on?? Tunnel vision, in both the literal and figurative sense. This is what happens when the autonomic nervous system kicks into overdrive.
I know most of the competitors I judged. I trust them. I care deeply about them. I want the experience to be a safe but extremely competitive one. With that in mind, I have a few tactics I use both inside my dojo and in the ring.
First,I establish myself as an authority figure from the get-go. In order for me to do my best in the weight room, I put my complete trust in the person spotting me. In order for the competitors to go at it full bore, they need to trust me. I do that by giving them confidence in my control over the both of them. Just as a mom can make her fully-grown son snap to attention, I will command the meanest, nastiest of them like they are my kids.
Second, it's important to recognize HOW to communicate with people under stress. I do not take their shortcomings personally. If they have tunnel vision and they need to stop, I step in between them and trust my ability to protect myself. If their vision AND their hearing fail them, I use the sense of touch. That works GREAT with kids, by the way. I have learned all kinds of fun tricks in that venue. And when that fails, I literally collar them.
IT ISN'T PERSONAL, and I tell them that right off the bat. I often tell a "collared" competitor that I am protecting them, and not to worry. I've never had a problem with this either in the dojo or in the ring. Just like fast drivers on the Autobann, it's all about communication. There are many ways to signal your intent. Sometimes you just need to do what you gotta do.
Food for thought, though, for when the "real thing" comes down.
- Bill
On a final note...
Referees and judges aren't perfect. And sometimes they even do things contrary to the intentions of the rules arbitrator (Sal) and tournament promoter (George).
The lightweight sparring A division ended in "sudden victory." (Apparently folks aren't real wild about the use of the term "sudden death" in a karate tournament. It all ended with Fidele Cacia throwing a beautiful reverse punch to the head of a retreating opponent. All three judges agreed, and the match ended. The division ended.
But later George had a word with me, and expressed his concern about the potential momentum. Was George right? The rules are pretty clear about the amount of contact (light touch) allowed to the head (if any). Light touch contact does not allow for quote:
visible movement of the competitor
. The big boys and girls can do this to each others' bodies, but not to the heads.
Were we wrong? One could argue that Fidele's opponent was running away, and his head went back because he was off balance and avoiding being scored on. But...it still looked bad, and George is da boss.
Solution....
1) Tell all judges what the expectation is from that point on. Clearly define what light touch contact means.
2) Remind the next set of competitors - and Fidele - what George was unhappy about.
3) Remind everyone before the matches what you expect of them, even though they SHOULD have read the rules.
Humans are humans. We sometimes all need a little help to get the best outcome.
Things ultimately worked out well. Again, nobody was disqualified (in all these matches), and nobody walked home hurt. Everyone deserves the chance to have fun, do their best, and not be cheated in any way.
This is what rules and judging and preparation and organization are all about.
Good thing we had plenty of strong shoulders to stand on. to all for making this a great event.
And thanks to...whomever...for giving me the best seat in the house.
From: "Tom Saunders" Date: Tue Nov 12, 2002 12:51 pm
My good friend Marilyn Fierro talked about Sherman Harrill and I asked her if she knew about his 'balance point' theory. She asked, "What is a balance point?" The following is the explanation I have so far. I learned it at the Oceanside Enbukai.......
John Peterson and John Kerker demonstrated the application of "balance points" as developed as a throwing technique by Master Sherman Harrill. I was amazed at the proficiency which throws could be administered by the applied theory. Second, the theory can be applied to others which are relevant to throwing and takedowns, and most important understanding the strengths and weaknesses of your opponent's balance.
As I studied the moves Kerker and Peterson demonstrated I marked the "balance points" on a human caricature composed of squares. A square for the head, on top of a square torso, etc. Even as I drew the figure, I realized a relationship between the balance points on the body, and to the "Square of Opposition" used in logic by philosophers like Plato, Socrates, Philo, and Aristotle. Although the similarity of the mechanics can be seen, it may be a very complex similarity. It may also explain why certain mental characteristics appear and develop in Karate-ka.
As a tool of logic the Square of Opposition was believed to have been used and developed by Aristotle, and certainly applied in the development of Plato's theory of forms. There are variations in the use of the square. As a tool of logic one example gives the relevant points of the square as primary and predicate themes. As a measurement device the square can be used where the points of the square might indicate something like Republican, Democrat, conservative, liberal.
The basic tool is a square, with an 'x' or a '+' drawn in it. On a human the points of the square indicate the 'balance points' located around hinged joints. In the application of the theory, balance points are effected by the direction, usually push-pull, against the juxtaposition ,opposites, of balance points. One example is to throw a person by grasping at the balance points, points of the square on the body, the shoulder, and hip. You push the shoulder back and down, and you pull in the hip, at the opposite point of the square. The result can be a very powerful throw.
The use of the square of opposition for application in analyzing martial technique, propaganda and logic should not be confined to one type of application, tied to one model. There may be variations of the application no one person has yet thought of. The uses, models, and tools that can be applied here are probably only limited by human imagination. For instance the square itself can be two or three dimensional.
There are questions of how the square of opposition theory might be applied to the current judo theories of kazushi (balance). There are considerations for how this theory might be used to explain karate techniques, especially those that are meant to effect an opponent's balance. Probably every concept applied to karate can be tied to the square of opposition theory, including atifa, and fesa, even the Karate Code.
Intrinsic to the theory of the square, is the 'point of centering.' There is a point in the middle of the square which indicates dead center. It is logical that this center would indicate the most effective point of ultimate balance. For the human it is easy to imagine the entire body in the square, the tanden is indeed the center. Putting this point outside this center area would create an imbalance. Perhaps pushing the center point outside the square means, you just got dumped.
In the torso, the center point would be that point in the middle of the points of the square, the 'balance points' are located at the opposite ends. Balance points include the top of the head, the shoulders, the hips, both just above and below the knees, and the ankles. Throws, blocks, punches, and kicks have been employed in the applications of the balance point theory.
The square works in body mechanics in a similar fashion seen in the square's use in thought. The stress points are very similar as to how the square itself is seen to work when applied, whether it is body mechanics or thought. As the square of opposition may increase the mental capacity of a person in the philosophical form, it probably works to help one grow when applied in the structure of karate practice. The body and mind truly work as one in this model.
It is my hope that the 'square of opposition theories' and Sherman Harrill's "Balance Point" theory can be taken to a knew level of understanding. We could all benefit from the understanding these applications have to both martial practice and everyday life. Below is an explanation of the square's use in logic......
John Kerker's Examples of striking the off balanced opponent https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hWXfhZ8gok
The Square of Opposition
When two categorical propositions are of different forms but share exactly the same subject and predicate terms, their truth is logically interdependent in a variety of interesting ways, all of which are conveniently represented in the traditional "square of opposition."
"All S are P." (A)- - - - - - -(E) "No S are P." | * * | * * | * * | * | * * | * * | * * | "Some S are P." (I)--- --- ---(O) "Some S are not P."
Propositions that appear diagonally across from each other in this diagram (A and O on the one hand and E and I on the other) are contradictories. No matter what their subject and predicate terms happen to be (so long as they are the same in both) and no matter how the classes they designate happen to be related to each other in fact, one of the propositions in each contradictory pair must be true and the other false. Thus, for example, "No squirrels are predators" and "Some squirrels are predators" are contradictories because either the classes designated by the terms "squirrel" and "predator" have at least one common member (in which case the I proposition is true and the E proposition is false) or they do not (in which case the E is true and the I is false). In exactly the same sense, the A and O propositions, "All senators are politicians" and "Some senators are not politicians" are also contradictories.
The universal propositions that appear across from each other at the top of the square (A and E) are contraries. Assuming that there is at least one member of the class designated by their shared subject term, it is impossible for both of these propositions to be true, although both could be false. Thus, for example, "All flowers are colorful objects" and "No flowers are colorful objects" are contraries: if there are any flowers, then either all of them are colorful (making the A true and the E false) or none of them are (making the E true and the A false) or some of them are colorful and some are not (making both the A and the E false).
Particular propositions across from each other at the bottom of the square (I and O), on the other hand, are the subcontraries. Again assuming that the class designated by their subject term has at least one member, it is impossible for both of these propositions to be false, but possible for both to be true. "Some logicians are professors" and "Some logicians are not professors" are subcontraries, for example, since if there any logicians, then either at least one of them is a professor (making the I proposition true) or at least one is not a professor (making the O true) or some are and some are not professors (making both the I and the O true).
Finally, the universal and particular propositions on either side of the square of opposition (A and I on the one left and E and O on the right) exhibit a relationship known as subalternation. Provided that there is at least one member of the class designated by the subject term they have in common, it is impossible for the universal proposition of either quality to be true while the particular proposition of the same quality is false. Thus, for example, if it is universally true that "All sheep are ruminants", then it must also hold for each particular case, so that "Some sheep are ruminants" is true, and if "Some sheep are ruminants" is false, then "All sheep are ruminants" must also be false, always on the assumption that there is at least one sheep. The same relationships hold for corresponding E and O propositions.
John Kerker on Balance Points https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3t7RnVjS_M
Personally while I understand what Sherman and John are explaining
