16 posts / 0 new
Last post
Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture
Pinan Sono Ichi/Pinan Nidan / Heian Shodan

Hi all, 

In our karate we start learning forms from Pinan Sono Ichi, I teach starting from application, then going through the motions of the kata. In this way the student knows what and why he or she is doing. Below you can see one of the many bunkai for this kata.

Kind Regards 

Les

Mark B
Mark B's picture

Hi Les. Nice work. I don't practice the Pinan katas but I can appreciate good close quarter application. I particularly enjoyed the"scruffy" energy. One of my pet peeves are applications which are neat and tidy, even for demonstration. To demonstrate actual application there has to be an element of chaos, even if it is controlled.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Thanks for sharing Les! As good as always :-)

Mark B wrote:
To demonstrate actual application there has to be an element of chaos, even if it is controlled.

Totally agree with that sentiment. Bunkai without chaos isn’t really bunkai. However, I would say it depends what you are demonstrating and what stage of the learning curve the student is at. There’s nothing wrong with isolating a given method so the student can get to grips with it in the early stages. Once they have an idea of the technique, then the chaos needs added back in otherwise the motion is always out of context.

There is a place for clear demonstrations and non-resisted, clean practise in the early stages so that the student clearly gets the idea. When they have the idea, then we need to put it into the chaos (“add in the dirt” is the phrase I use) and then build up and up to where things are live and free flowing.

Being neat and tidy in bunkai practise is frequently down to a lack of realism, but there needs to be order within the chaos. I find it’s most effective to get the student to learn the rudiments of the motion first and then introduce the chaos. Trying to learn the rudiments of a motion within the chaos is often inefficient (leads to the “bad kind of ugly” i.e. the technique remains poor). Once the student has the basic idea, then the chaos definably needs introduced though because there are aspects of technique that can only be learnt within the chaos itself.

When practising realistically, we need to demarcate between the kinds of chaos we want. Not all chaos is equal. As just alluded to, I split this down into the two kinds of ugly: “bad ugly” and “the right kind of ugly”.

Bad ugly is when the technique and tactics are poor and the resultant drills are hard on the eye; primarily because there is nothing of any merit or quality within them. In short, everything in chaotic.

The right kind of ugly is when the drill looks chaotic, but you can see good tactics and technique within that chaos. It’s a long way from “neat”, but the methods are carving out an effective and efficient path through the chaos. In short, the context is chaotic, but the methods employed are not.

Sadly, I have seen some martial artists point to their “bad ugly” and mistake it for them being very “realistic”; whereas the truth is that they are just very bad martial artists applying bad martial arts in a chaotic and unstructured way.

This would be an example of “bad ugly”:

It’s certainly chaotic, but there’s nothing good about it (aside from the lucky overhand right at 2:02). So we don’t want “bad ugly”.

The other extreme would the kind of bunkai we see in team kata tournaments where it is all very carefully choregraphed and very neat.

To me, we start by isolating the methods. Once the student has the basics of it (by which I mean they understand the idea; so in most casers we are talking less than 1 hour’s practise), then we add in the chaos. First in a way that is relatively controlled (so that the quality of the technique is maintained and does not fall apart), and then we systematically progress so that the student is ultimately able to apply the method in full chaos (i.e. in various types of unscripted kata based sparring) and that will give us “the right kind of ugly”.

Coincidentally, I added a video to YouTube yesterday where I show some methods from Naihanchi Nidan before quickly moving on to “add in the dirt”. I talk about what I feel the chaos is important in the clip (the “dirt” begins at the 3:00 mark)

Might be a useful video to show how the dirt should be quickly added in, and how we form the foundation to build upon by making it more and more alive as we go.

Les and yourself have the right kind of ugly (that’s a compliment! ;-)), but hopefully the above will be of some use to those finding their way with more realistic practise. The key thing is to progress systematically so we achieve good technique and habitual tactics in a progressively more chaotic context.

All the best,

Iain

Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture

Thank you Mark and Iain,

Iain Abernethy wrote:

There is a place for clear demonstrations and non-resisted, clean practise in the early stages so that the student clearly gets the idea. When they have the idea, then we need to put it into the chaos (“add in the dirt” is the phrase I use) and then build up and up to where things are live and free flowing.

Defenietly, right structure of teaching is essential, we have five steps of developing the technique. I think I did post this clip before but I show it again, this is the way we build up from kata to fighting.  Mark you are 100% right when its done properly its usually not pretty :)

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Les Bubka wrote:
Defenietly, right structure of teaching is essential, we have five steps of developing the technique. I think I did post this clip before but I show it again, this is the way we build up from kata to fighting.

It’s a great clip the Les and that’s the process I’m describing above. Brilliant illustration of the process.

It’s that “the map is not the territory” thing:

Owning a map of the mountain does not make you a mountaineer. Knowing the solo-kata does not make you an effective marital artist.

Walking out on to the mountain without a map is very dangerous. Entering the chaos of conflict without understanding your route though it is similarly dangerous (“the wrong kind of ugly”).

Being on the mountain and following the map is what gets you to the top safely and makes you a mountaineer. Taking the information in kata into the free-flowing world of conflict is what kata, bunkai and karate are really all about (“the right kind of ugly”).

All the best,

Iain

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture

Very adequate quote Iain :)

Marc
Marc's picture

Excellent video, Les!

Thanks for sharing your ideas.

Marc  

Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture

Thanks Marc,

Kind regards 

Les

Mark B
Mark B's picture

I certainly agree that sterile practice is required in the very early stage of someones learning experience, however, I attempt to feed in the actuality of why we practice the applications very quickly.

Getting good at the sterile application is great, but I  prefer to get students at correct range, with a little bit of scruffiness very quickly. 

Resistance/energy/aggression/attitude are also dependent on the students current capabilities. If the student is able to apply nicely in a sterile fashion, yet struggles in a less accomdating exercise I rewind and discuss why that may be. This may because of incorrect technique,  but often when applied with a very small amount of resistance and movement it is because other combative principles need to be applied eg distraction,  maybe a kick or a push into the face. This is a valuable lesson which, in my approach is much easier to understand when it actually becomes necessary to apply.

I don't really do "stages". My approach is to get students to think on the fly asap.

An example I will share is from a recent session.

I regularly have karateka from around the North of England asking to come train with me at my dojo (they're always welcome). Recently one guy from Sheffield took part in a session structured around Naihanchi. 

By teaching  attacks to vulnerable targets as labelled in the TCM charts (which he had never considered), plus the core principles I teach for dealing with grabs to clothes and limbs (which he had never practiced the way I do)he was, by the end of the session able to deal with random attacks of HAOPV and non compliant grappling therein,  something he was unable to do at the start of the session. 

This was achieved by looking at sterile drills to start, but very quickly roughing the edges with ever increasing resistance until by the end of the session he was almost working without thought, on instinct and feel.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Mark B wrote:
I certainly agree that sterile practice is required in the very early stage of someones learning experience, however, I attempt to feed in the actuality of why we practice the applications very quickly.

Yeah, me too. Definitely the way to do things:

Iain Abernethy wrote:
Once the student has the basics of it (by which I mean they understand the idea; so in most cases we are talking less than 1 hour’s practise), then we add in the chaos.

Mark B wrote:
Getting good at the sterile application is great, but I  prefer to get students at correct range, with a little bit of scruffiness very quickly.

I’d not say it was “great”; it’s just a step along the way. I also think that even the initial learning stage needs to be at the right distance (the chaos is not needed to make sure people are not too far apart).

Mark B wrote:
If the student is able to apply nicely in a sterile fashion, yet struggles in a less accomdating exercise I rewind and discuss why that may be. This may because of incorrect technique,  but often when applied with a very small amount of resistance and movement it is because other combative principles need to be applied eg distraction,  maybe a kick or a push into the face. This is a valuable lesson which, in my approach is much easier to understand when it actually becomes necessary to apply.

Definitively. Progressive live practise is a must as many things can only be learnt “in the territory”.

Iain Abernethy wrote:
Once the student has the basic idea, then the chaos definably needs introduced though because there are aspects of technique that can only be learnt within the chaos itself.

Could you expand on the statement below for clarity?

Mark B wrote:
I don't really do "stages". My approach is to get students to think on the fly asap.

It seems to be contradictory to your opening line (my highlight):

Mark B wrote:
I certainly agree that sterile practice is required in the very early STAGE of someone’s learning experience …

Thinking on the fly ASAP is definitely important (practise need to be alive), but the use of the term “ASAP” makes clear you don’t have them “thinking on the fly” immediately but “as soon as possible”, and you say that sterile practise is required in the early “stage”, but then go on to say you don’t “do stages”.

It sounds like there is a structure and progression to what you do (what most would calls stages; as indeed you do yourself in the opening line), but then you seem to contradict that later. For the clarity of the post it may help if you define what you mean?

All the best,

Iain

Mark B
Mark B's picture

I think getting the sterile drill is "great". If a new person steps into the room and we're  working on limb releasing and by the end of the session they understand the "how & why" within the sterile exercise I think that's great. It's not enough in the long term but in relation to where they were a couple of hours earlier it's significant progress. During that session they will have an introduction to a more likely scenario for the given application, and they may struggle at that, but progress is progress.

The word stage is just a word. If we're talking "stages" then I consider that as clearly defined and regulated processes, underlined to seperate one "stage" from another, all very rigid and set requirements.  I don't work or teach that way, I always emphasise improvisation, the edges of my "stages" are blurred.

It's difficult to put into words exactly, but I know from experience that you cannot "fight by numbers". To this end I like to see free thinking. Of course there is structure, but the learning process is circular and organic, not rigid. Ironically that mirrors a physical confrontation.

Cheers

Mark

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Mark B wrote:
The word stage is just a word. If we're talking "stages" then I consider that as clearly defined and regulated processes, underlined to seperate one "stage" from another, all very rigid and set requirements.  I don't work or teach that way, I always emphasise improvisation, the edges of my "stages" are blurred.

I’m with you. It sounded like you had no progression (which you obviously do) but the clarification makes sense.

I think any good approach will include a steady progression with no “jumps” or undefined, assumed links from one aspect to the next. Such an approach will inevitably see the stages bleeding into one another. Anything that does not do that would be ill-thought through and difficult to deliver.  

There are also stages we can identify on the macro level, that are made up of many “sub-stages”, such that there is ultimately a steady seamless progression.

Mark B wrote:
It's difficult to put into words exactly, but I know from experience that you cannot "fight by numbers". To this end I like to see free thinking. Of course there is structure, but the learning process is circular and organic, not rigid. Ironically that mirrors a physical confrontation.

I’m with you. We want structured learning – that includes progressive aliveness, chaos and free-flowing live drills –  so we can work in effectively in the entirely unstructured environment of combat.

I think that’s in line with both traditional writings and the pragmatic thinking of modern bunkai-based karateka too.

Hironori Otsuka: "It is obvious that these kata must be trained and practised sufficiently, but one must not be 'stuck' in them. One must withdraw from the kata to produce forms with no limits or else it becomes useless. It is important to alter the form of the trained kata without hesitation to produce countless other forms of training. Essentially, it is a habit - created over long periods of training. Because it is a habit, it comes to life with no hesitation - by the subconscious mind. "

Choki Motobu: “We must learn to apply the principles of kata; such that we can bend with the winds of adversity.”

Genwa Nakasone: “Never be shackled by the rituals of kata but instead move freely according to the opponent’s strengths and weaknesses”.

A couple of years ago I wrote an article around Funakoshi’s quote:

“Like textbooks to a student or tactical exercises to a solider, kata are the most important element of karate” - Gichin Funakoshi (The Essence of Karate).

The full thing is here: https://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/article/understanding-kata-textbooks-and-tactics

Funakoshi’s analogy of “tactical exercises” is a good one for expressing this concept I think. Such exercises are live drills where the soldiers have to adapt as they go … while still sticking to good tactics. That’s what all good bunkai drills will do.

Some plucked paragraphs from the article:

When soldiers do [tactical] exercises, they are not looking to learn the detailed and exact specifics of a future conflict, but instead they are learning to act in accordance with good tactics and procedures that are most likely to lead to the right result in an ever-changing environment. They acknowledge that it is impossible to know the exact detail of any given conflict ahead of time. The specifics of conflict will never be exactly the same as the exercise, but by engaging in exercises which encourage action in accordance with good tactics the solider will develop what amount to “combative habits” which are most likely to lead to favourable action. This is exactly what kata should do.

The solider does not expect the exercise to perfectly match future conflicts, but they understand that through the exercises they will develop an understanding – hopeful an intuitive and habitual understanding, as opposed to a solely intellectual one – that will enable them to best navigate those future conflicts. Kata is exactly the same when correctly understood and practised.

[Kata]is not a “pretend fight” but instead it is a repository of the knowledge of the experts that came before (like a text book) which provides examples of the combative principles and tactics which underpin karate. As part of our kata practise, we should seek to understand those combative principals and tactics such that they can be freely applied in a habitual manner in the ever-changing, unpredictable world of live conflict (like solders’ tactical exercises). When understood in this way, kata are without a doubt, as Funakoshi said, “the most important element of karate.”

It's clear there was never intended to be any “fight by the numbers” (good turn of phrase by the way) when it comes to karate, kata or the associated drills. It’s supposed to be fluid, alive and ever-changing … just like soldiers’ tactical exercises.

All the best,

Iain

Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture

It become very interesting conversation, thanks Iain and Mark for your posts.

Mark B wrote:
I think getting the sterile drill is "great". If a new person steps into the room and we’re working on limb releasing and by the end of the session they understand the "how & why" within the sterile exercise I think that's great. It's not enough in the long term but in relation to where they were a couple of hours earlier it's significant progress. During that session they will have an introduction to a more likely scenario for the given application, and they may struggle at that, but progress is progress.

I agree with you Mark about progression, but personally I think one session is too quick, to start adding the dirt. As the students brain (if we talking about beginner) is overloaded with info. It takes time to process the info and then modify.

Mark B wrote:
The word stage is just a word. If we're talking "stages" then I consider that as clearly defined and regulated processes, underlined to separate one "stage" from another, all very rigid and set requirements.  I don't work or teach that way, I always emphasise improvisation, the edges of my "stages" are blurred.

I like stages as I have a group of students who started together without any martial arts background, so with use of the clear stages we can build logical progression.

Mark B wrote:
It's difficult to put into words exactly, but I know from experience that you cannot "fight by numbers". To this end I like to see free thinking. Of course there is structure, but the learning process is circular and organic, not rigid. Ironically that mirrors a physical confrontation.

Very true, but using stages it’s like with sports sparring. First you introduce pads and combinations, then partner work with rigid combinations, after that light sparring following with the full on fighting. This way you make sure that the student mastered previous stage and he/she is not crating unwanted chaos.

As instructors we all have our own ways of passing the knowledge, that’s why it is so interesting to compare and learn from others. Also because of that differences students can find the most suited for them way of learning :)

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Les Bubka wrote:
personally I think one session is too quick, to start adding the dirt. As the students brain (if we talking about beginner) is overloaded with info. It takes time to process the info and then modify.

I think that’s a fair point and I need to clarify my position a little as I too stated it was most often within the hour … which it generally would be for my regular students, but certainly not always and for all people.

How quickly you progress will depend upon who you are teaching AND what you are teaching. When I teach basic grips to beginners, we add in a degree of dirt almost immediately because otherwise they are just standing there with their hands on one another. We also do that because most beginners are capable of doing that providing the dirt is relatively gentle. However, if I was teaching something more technically advanced – such as a throw – then we would have the advanced people work the actual method cleanly for much longer before adding in more variables and aliveness.

The technique needs to be at a level that will withstand the pressures put upon it; and benefit from those same pressures. There are degrees of dirt too of course (as demonstrated in your video) so we can add dirt without adding all of it all at once. It’s no good if it instantly collapses because the “quality of technique” vs. “levels of pressure” ratios are out.

So, it’s the balance of who and what that will determine the rate of progression. In many cases you can do it quickly, but if the individual and the methods need longer, then they obviously are afforded that.

I think these circles around to the “bad ugly” thing. As I said in the above post:

Iain Abernethy wrote:
Sadly, I have seen some martial artists point to their “bad ugly” and mistake it for them being very “realistic”; whereas the truth is that they are just very bad martial artists applying bad martial arts in a chaotic and unstructured way.

If the technique is not developed enough, and then people are thrown in at the deep end (i.e. no progression) we are sure to see “bad ugly”.

Again, I think your video nicely shows the progression we want for the “right kind of ugly”.

All the best,

Iain

Les Bubka
Les Bubka's picture

That's what I thought, thanks for clarification Iain, regular students adjust quickly. Kind regards Les