|
|
Post by Derzis on Jan 26, 2017 1:19:04 GMT
Edited. I will try to read Meyer's interpretation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Jan 26, 2017 1:49:47 GMT
Most commonly, A cuts to B, B blocks without moving back (or even moves in).
Sometimes A just wants to get into that position, engages swords near the tip, and steps in. If B cooperates, all is well. If A tries this, just assuming that B will cooperate, it's very dangerous. Shouldn't be done like that IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derzis on Jan 26, 2017 2:08:57 GMT
Interesting. I was reading some Meyer's interpretation and some other topics regarding "the bind" and my understanding resumes to: "Never stay there, do something."
You got yourself in that situation because you wanted to get something from it - a next trust, cut, push etc. No matter if you are A or B. I will read more about it. Looks like a lot of strategy is involved there, not just techniques. My feeling is that above strategy is about mindset, but is something to discover. Thank you
|
|
|
|
Post by howler on Jan 26, 2017 2:44:30 GMT
Yeah, with regards to the grabbing of blades, while doing such with the longsword would be bad enough (while being close and in the bind), since the katana was traditionally fought without blade on blade contact (which movies like Highlander foolishly illustrated) it would seem like an even worse idea. Sorry, this is urban legend. Katana is fought with blade on blade contact too, but the contact per se is most of the time a parry followed by a counter. A parry = a deflection of the blade and there is no stop. There are blocks too, but they don't apply to the described scenario because most of the time these blocks are done when inside of the killing zone. Sure, I can certainly see some contact, particularly touching, measuring, jostling, but in a different way and to a lesser extent than longsword. My main point is that with both Longsword and Katana, the movie fighting styles are clank clank, blade on blade whacking, almost like they are chopping down trees or something. I suppose the movies did that with other swords as well, like swinging a 3lb rapier like it was a sport epee...probably because it was a sport epee with a rapier handle attached  . |
|
|
|
Post by howler on Jan 26, 2017 2:54:44 GMT
Interesting. I was reading some Meyer's interpretation and some other topics regarding "the bind" and my understanding resumes to: "Never stay there, do something." You got yourself in that situation because you wanted to get something from it - a next trust, cut, push etc. No matter if you are A or B. I will read more about it. Looks like a lot of strategy is involved there, not just techniques. My feeling is that above strategy is about mindset, but is something to discover. Thank you Yes, I just read Timo interpretation of the bind "strong vs strong", and this is what I was imagining more common with Longsword. Don't know if tip on tip (weak vs weak) is another term or what...maybe feeling out, measuring, jostling, etc... You guys know much more than me but I learn a lot reading your discussions. |
|
|
|
Post by Derzis on Jan 26, 2017 4:47:06 GMT
The bind explained as stickiness exists but is done with an intent, not a simple result of sword blocking sword and now the guys are testing for the next move. In fact, reading about "weak bind", "strong bind", "neutral bind", the intent might be there too in WSA.
|
|
|
|
Post by howler on Jan 26, 2017 5:46:31 GMT
The bind explained as stickiness exists but is done with an intent, not a simple result of sword blocking sword and now the guys are testing for the next move. In fact, reading about "weak bind", "strong bind", "neutral bind", the intent might be there too in WSA. Yeah, there's a great longsword dueling video on YouTube where the guys (with weird period costumes) move quite fluidly (I should try to catch the name. |
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Jan 26, 2017 12:04:11 GMT
Interesting. I was reading some Meyer's interpretation and some other topics regarding "the bind" and my understanding resumes to: "Never stay there, do something." You got yourself in that situation because you wanted to get something from it - a next trust, cut, push etc. No matter if you are A or B. Of course. The goal is to win (if a real fight; if sparring, the goal is to learn (learn to win, or some other more specific goal)), and to win you need to hit the opponent without getting hit back. The bind is only relevant insofar as it serves that goal. The bind, in itself, is harmless. It's what you do from there that matters. Sometimes, one will wait there in the bind (Meyer's "remaining"), to wait for the opponent to commit to doing something so that you can take advantage of that commit (by reacting or pre-empting). If both decide to wait for the other to commit, then it can look like they're doing nothing. I'd call remaining doing something. It takes focus and effort; if you actually just do nothing, you'll be hit very soon. Fighting in the bind isn't foreign to Japanese MA - it's very important in sojutsu (when fighting against another spear). The details of technique are different, but the basics of timing, initiative, feeling, are the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Dalaran1991 on Jun 23, 2017 16:23:37 GMT
A bit of update from me. I have since joined a good shinkendo dojo, learned a ton.
However, my Sensei forbid me to use whatever techniques I learned against the longsword sparring, under pain of eviction from the dojo. His reasoning was that, "the japanese sword (tachi / katana) was never meant to be used against medievel swords" It's true, but I read that as: you will get murdered against a longsword, and it would make the JSA people look bad. Cant have that.
I couldnt care less anyway and proceeded to use what I learned against my sparring partner. The thing is he has also been learning a lot and his footwork gets more aggressive (I wouldnt say better)
I find that the biggest problem is that, due to the length of the longsword, he doesnt need to raise his sword a lot to deliver a snap cut, thus he limit his opening. A lot of kenjutsu techniques aim at striking during an opponent's opening, but it's meant for katana vs katana.
This problem could be easily negated by taking the initiative, engage his sword and get it to move where I want. Then comes the second problem: I would get close enough for a counter attack, then he blocks. Or he drawbacks and attacks and I have to block with a kasumi (a high block diagonally, allowing you to counter attack) With sword against sword the extra leverage of the longsword is just way better. And I still havent got the reflex to grab his cross guard yet.
The advantages of kenjutsu of using lightning fast counter-strike is rendered much more difficult against a longsword. Take the standard high block (kasumi), after blocking you swing around on your lead foot and cut his head / neck. Problem: against a longsword you are rarely in range to cut the head/neck. So I ended up cutting his arm while he thrust to my neck. Bad exchange.
I learn a lot doing this though, so I'll keep at it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Jun 23, 2017 17:50:02 GMT
Try focusing on his hands while staying at long measure. The longsword has more reach, but there's less emphasis on explosive cuts so you may find his reaction time is too slow. I've seen this first hand a few times (ha ha). When you actually engage the LS you're playing on his field, since so much of the study is in winding and krieg work. But if you refuse the bind things may improve.
That seems to happen a lot in JSA. I remember another thread here where a fellow was actually kicked out for going to an SCA meeting! There's a kind of xenophobia to those arts that does them no credit. But it seems to be slowly improving.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2017 11:57:16 GMT
A bit of update from me. I have since joined a good shinkendo dojo, learned a ton. However, my Sensei forbid me to use whatever techniques I learned against the longsword sparring, under pain of eviction from the dojo. His reasoning was that, "the japanese sword (tachi / katana) was never meant to be used against medievel swords" It's true, but I read that as: you will get murdered against a longsword, and it would make the JSA people look bad. Cant have that. I couldnt care less anyway and proceeded to use what I learned against my sparring partner. The thing is he has also been learning a lot and his footwork gets more aggressive (I wouldnt say better) I find that the biggest problem is that, due to the length of the longsword, he doesnt need to raise his sword a lot to deliver a snap cut, thus he limit his opening. A lot of kenjutsu techniques aim at striking during an opponent's opening, but it's meant for katana vs katana. This problem could be easily negated by taking the initiative, engage his sword and get it to move where I want. Then comes the second problem: I would get close enough for a counter attack, then he blocks. Or he drawbacks and attacks and I have to block with a kasumi (a high block diagonally, allowing you to counter attack) With sword against sword the extra leverage of the longsword is just way better. And I still havent got the reflex to grab his cross guard yet. The advantages of kenjutsu of using lightning fast counter-strike is rendered much more difficult against a longsword. Take the standard high block (kasumi), after blocking you swing around on your lead foot and cut his head / neck. Problem: against a longsword you are rarely in range to cut the head/neck. So I ended up cutting his arm while he thrust to my neck. Bad exchange. I learn a lot doing this though, so I'll keep at it. If it's a comprehensive system it will include mismatched weaponry, and you'll learn how to deal with various measures and circumstances as part of the course of training. You can use anything against anything else, but you need to learn how. If it is focused on like weapon dueling you're not as likely to get the experience to draw on and extrapolate. I'm sure you can get there eventually. One problem with mixing things up, especially at an early stage, is an almost dead certainty that you won't even be doing your own thing correctly yet. Then you end up with guys that are trying to explain how to do a thing they don't even understand themselves, trying to force a square peg into a round hole when they'd be better served figuring out what round and square even are. Maybe you would get murdered against a longsword. Looking bad, or presenting your art poorly isn't really a good thing. A worse thing is severely injuring somebody for no real reason. It's hard enough to just train many techniques with people that haven't developed sufficient ukemi - it takes work to get someone to where they can even start receiving techniques without breaking themselves so the idea of just dropping a lot of this on someone who is not prepared for it is frankly kind of scary. |
|
|
|
Post by Kiyoshi on Jun 24, 2017 18:07:04 GMT
That's... Good? I mean, it's good you're learning, that should help you improve. I found the more I learned about using my weapon, the less it mattered what my opponent was using and it mattered more how skilled my opponent was. A lot of kenjutsu is preformed with a willing partner, especially when you start. It is less that it is for katana vs katana and more that you are not practicing against someone who is going to counter your counter. When you know what is coming and have a set counter already there, it is easy, but pulling a lot of that out mid fight isn't going to work as well as you'd like. Often times it is the opportunistic openings you either find or create in an opponent that you will land a hit on. Those very rarely work how they do in kata. Kata are there to give you a manual of what you can and can not do, theoretically. It is your job to learn to apply those mechanics. I think of them like math problems in a book. Those problems teach me the principles of this mathematical concept but I still have to either adjust a problem I find in the real world to find a situation where I can use that concept or realize that it doesn't work in that situation. It is very unlikely I'll ever run into a math problem exactly like the examples in the textbook, but those problems that work out beautifully and give you a nice easy number (most of the time) help you figure out what to do when it doesn't. That seems to happen a lot in JSA. I remember another thread here where a fellow was actually kicked out for going to an SCA meeting! There's a kind of xenophobia to those arts that does them no credit. But it seems to be slowly improving. True. My teacher never had an issue. He would welcome students to practice with other schools. If we got beat, bring it to class, let's discuss why and what we can do to not get beat next time. He wasn't so insecure in our martial arts, which was really refreshing. If it's a comprehensive system it will include mismatched weaponry, and you'll learn how to deal with various measures and circumstances as part of the course of training. You can use anything against anything else, but you need to learn how. If it is focused on like weapon dueling you're not as likely to get the experience to draw on and extrapolate. I'm sure you can get there eventually. One problem with mixing things up, especially at an early stage, is an almost dead certainty that you won't even be doing your own thing correctly yet. Then you end up with guys that are trying to explain how to do a thing they don't even understand themselves, trying to force a square peg into a round hole when they'd be better served figuring out what round and square even are. Maybe you would get murdered against a longsword. Looking bad, or presenting your art poorly isn't really a good thing. A worse thing is severely injuring somebody for no real reason. It's hard enough to just train many techniques with people that haven't developed sufficient ukemi - it takes work to get someone to where they can even start receiving techniques without breaking themselves so the idea of just dropping a lot of this on someone who is not prepared for it is frankly kind of scary. This first section is similar to what I mean when I reference math problems in a textbook. The second is what I meant by a concept not fitting. Perhaps this is a better way to explain it? The third is a very good point. A teacher may be afraid of you not practicing the style correctly and claiming theirs, making them look bad when you aren't representing the style accurately. Think of all the x style vs y style videos on youtube where neither are actually long time practitioners of either style that get thrown around claiming x or y style is inferior. +1 to learning ukemi. It is often understated as a skill and gets put into the back of my mind at times because I tend to take it as a given after so many years. |
|
|
|
Post by Lukas MG (chenessfan) on Jun 24, 2017 18:24:23 GMT
However, my Sensei forbid me to use whatever techniques I learned against the longsword sparring, under pain of eviction from the dojo. His reasoning was that, "the japanese sword (tachi / katana) was never meant to be used against medievel swords" It's true, but I read that as: you will get murdered against a longsword, and it would make the JSA people look bad. Cant have that. Frankly, a trainer that forbids his students from cross-training for me is a major sign of "run the hell away". It just screams insecurity in the own martial art. Any decent martial artists knows that in a match-up of different styles it mostly comes down to individual skill and very rarely truly represents a direct comparison between styles. It doesn't speak for your trainer that he doesn't see that and childishly says "no, I don't allow it". If you're starting out it might indeed not be the smartest thing to do several things (like JSA and katana vs longsword) at once and I can understand a teacher preaching caution and suggesting to focus on one thing for the time being but it should never go as far as threatening to throw you out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2017 18:54:42 GMT
I guess I just don't see it as insecurity so much as being focused on doing their own thing. What some other group does is their problem, if thats more interesting then maybe those are the mats you should be standing on.
Its like a relationship, if polyamory is your thing and your partner expects exclusivity, then it isn't going to work. He can't stop you from seeing other people, but if that's what you want then he doesn't have to tolerate it.
|
|
|
|
Post by vermithrax on Jun 25, 2017 2:06:52 GMT
Fascinating!!! Love this thread!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kiyoshi on Jun 25, 2017 3:41:42 GMT
I guess I just don't see it as insecurity so much as being focused on doing their own thing. What some other group does is their problem, if thats more interesting then maybe those are the mats you should be standing on. Its like a relationship, if polyamory is your thing and your partner expects exclusivity, then it isn't going to work. He can't stop you from seeing other people, but if that's what you want then he doesn't have to tolerate it. I can see it from that perspective but I don't think I would compare it to polyamory. I see it more of a different kind of relationship all together. It comes off to me as more like that friend who doesn't want you hanging out with other friends because they get jealous you'll start liking other things with other people more. My teachers have never had a problem with me participating in other schools/activities as long as I keep them separate in the class. They were okay with reviewing matches where I used that style against another to see how I could have done better, but they didn't say, let me practice shaolin instead of kenpo during class time and bringing the other students over and talking with them about shaolin. Basically, as long as I respected the style and other members, they were okay with it. If I were to do something reckless like starting a real fist fight to use their martial arts, I would be booted instantly as my teachers always stressed responsibility for my actions, but training matches were fine. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2017 4:09:08 GMT
It seemed like a pretty simple analogy - that teacher wants exclusivity, that student was thinking about pursuing other simultaneous angles. Some people are cool with that, some are not and it's not really fair to call that teacher immature on that basis.
I mean, it's really as simple as "Hey if you want to train here, I don't want you doing X". The mature thing is to either submit to the requirements or acknowledge that it isn't going to work and move on with your life. I guess you could sneak around and hope he doesn't find out but that seems very wrong to me.
That Sports chanbara thing does sparring, that's probably a better fit if it's that important. There's probably other things that do it too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kiyoshi on Jun 25, 2017 5:25:46 GMT
My MJER did sparring as well though, and it felt much better than the foam weapons sports chanbara did. The techniques felt more realistic.
I was mainly trying to say that, unlike a romantic relationship in your analogy, I don't think teacher/student relationships are as generally expected to be very exclusive. One would expect most "normal" romantic relationships to be a one and one relationship but friends to have many. It would be quite oddly viewed if one friend demanded no other friends or they'd stop talking to you. The same cannot be said about romantic ones. If it were truly monogamous, the teacher would also only be allowed one student.
Overall, though, aside from possible safety concerns and concerns about the student bringing the wrong image to the school's name if they don't preform the martial arts well, what reason aside from "because I said so" does a teacher have to forbid a student from training however they want outside of school? If the student keeps school only in school, it isn't disruptive, if the student doesn't use the school's name, it isn't tarnishing the school's name, if the student isn't trying to say the teacher is wrong because such and such didn't work in sparring, they aren't disrespecting, where is the problem? From the perspective of the teacher, is there a difference in functionality of the student if their behavior in the school does not change? There is no societal expectation of exclusivity that one would be betraying, there is one on person preventing another from doing something they enjoy that brings no determent to the school because... reasons.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2017 14:34:26 GMT
You'd have to ask the teacher for his reasons, but one I can guess at is maybe he really wants to make sure his students are taking the art he's sharing with them seriously - that it isn't for playing around with and he doesn't want that mentality seeking in. We don't know what his history is, maybe he's just fed up with dilettantes and wants students that will focus. If anything, it raises my initial estimation of the teacher - we know already at least he's not just in it for tuition or he wouldn't care what they do as long as the checks clear.
As a student in a previous group, it annoyed the living crap out of me when one particular other student would interrupt with irrelevant questions and comments related to arts that weren't the one we were there for, if she either kept it to herself or brought it up afterwards I wouldn't have cared but no amount of hinting or even outright "leave it out of class time so we can get something done please" on my part ever sunk in. I personally don't care if someone wants to focus exclusively or do nothing but train everywhere that will have them every hour of the day.
If I were teaching and a new guy immediately starts asking about training in other things too, it would be a major red flag about their commitment. I'd question how much of my time and energy it would really be worth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kiyoshi on Jun 25, 2017 17:12:56 GMT
Yes, that disruptive behavior is not good and would not have been stood for by my teachers either. The key, to me, in being able to train in multiple things is to compartmentalize and ask about non class things outside of class, as they should be. If you are in shinkendo class, you are to focus on shinkendo. It would drive me up a wall if one couldn't understand at least that much.
I suppose one could see it that way, and I understand that view. I suppose I had more or less assumed that if one was paying for a class, they would be taking it seriously but not all have the same view of money and time that I do, so I will concede that point. Then I would have to say, that if the student were to show they would take the art seriously and practice just that art in class time, give the art the dedication it deserves, would you think less of a teacher who still wouldn't let a student train in other things?
|
|
.
Nov 1, 2024 0:13:58 GMT
Nov 1, 2024 0:13:58 GMT
