Anyone ever check (count) to see whether gyaku-zuki or
oi-zuki/jun-zuki show up more in old (pre-1900) Suidi kata? Same question about
old (again pre-1900) Nafadi kata? I have been thinking about gyaku-zuki a lot
lately and how to best train for it. I was just struck by the thought that
maybe this emphasis is misplaced... So anyone know off hand which is more
common?
I
am talking about oi-zuki/jun-zuki and gyaku-zuki...
Let's not make this more complicated than it needs to be... Lead hand straight punch vs rear hand straight punch.
Would you please help me out Samir Berardo, and name an old kata with kizami-zuki in it (and where it is found in the
kata).
Bruno
Ballardini In case here it speaks of having replaced if not removed the most
dangerous techniques by kata. It is likely that it was Itosu. But at the time
of Itosu all still had memories of what these techniques. The problem is that
the "mass" versions created by Itosu took over and have spread only
those and gradually was lost memory of kata. Itosu is guilty then indirectly.
But in modern times is repeating the same thing between sports and modern
karate and karate of Okinawa: vince what spreads more and you lose that memory.
A
serious question by Ryan Parker, the
researcher who all know and elsewhere with a similar question posed by Angel Lemus. In particular, Angel claims a
hypothesis whereby the punches in Okinawan kata pulled invariably chudan level
would be a twentieth century invention that coincides with an attempt to accustom
youngsters to pull just a little dangerous targets as the trunk in a couple
exercises and applications. This would coincide with the progressive
introduction of karate in schools after Itosu. These
two observations are very interesting and qualify research that I, Robert
Gonella, Giuseppe Meloni and a handful of Italian pioneers are doing on the old
creating a karate School that studies
Bruno Ballardini is no longer enough "just stumble along" as their
cocks like most Okinawan schools present in the territory. Now it's out in the
open, otherwise the last word will always and only those of Japanese karate I
shudder to mingling. Yes I'm racist: that's not KARATE and I rode her ass to be
mixed with people which so besmirches the name of karate which are full the
message boards Facebook. I have nothing to do with them and don't want to be
together for a sleeve of ignorant not only karate but ignorant in a broad
sense, of the scoundrels who are photographed in the karategi Facebook profile
as if their lives were in karategi. People talking instead of practicing
karate. I do not speak of karate but work to make known the real karate and
stem this ignorance. Karate was not Japanese. POINT.
Peter Fabbroni seems like an interesting theory but a little forced. I
don't think removing the punches Jordan from kata will generate a habit to aim
at targets less dangerous. The first zuffa, and
then surely there was exceedingly great, and at the first punch in the face,
the karateka would undoubtedly done soon to change habits. In my opinion
the tsuki chudan represent the archetype of fist, one that allows you to
understand the principles of chinkuchi, gamaku ... Where is Jordan wants to
suggest a different ingredient. Simplification of the kata was definitely there
but in terms. Rather by bunkai is easier to learn a habit to counter-attack
chudan (but after years of practice and not a. Bettencourt makiwara an attack).
No comments:
Post a Comment