What’s the difference? – Ashiwaza

**Res Judicata** · Posted On: 3/03/2011 8:58am

I'm actually not trying to be a jerk. Fundamentals are fundamentals; do the fundamentals well and most other things follow. It's true for Judo and it's true for most other things in life. Those ko uchi gari videos truly are wonderful.

I'm only pointing out that in some areas Judo's classification systems are constraining -- they're a good organizational structure for some things but they can be limiting too if you're too anal about them. You put boxes around things and then see them only in terms of the boxes. There are, it seems to me, multiple subtypes of ko/o uchi gari and they operate on slightly different principles. For example, an Olympic gold medalist taught at a seminar that there are two basic kinds of o uchi gari -- one where you sweep the foot out and one where you reap the leg after it's planted (and, no, not a gake). The first you typically catch on the move with timing. The second is more mechanical.

It is confusing if students are taught that they operate on the same principles, because they don't really. Tori's body mechanics are similar, however.

The principle of the o uchi gari I posted is driving uke along the outside of the non-reaped foot. It's not "wrong" even though it applies a principle that's different from a standard o uchi gari. We understand it as o uchi gari because the entry is o uchi gari.

Ben has a better, more practical, definition of the gari type throws.

**BKR** · Posted On: 3/04/2011 11:14pm

Originally Posted by Res Judicata

I'm actually not trying to be a jerk. Fundamentals are fundamentals; do the fundamentals well and most other things follow. It's true for Judo and it's true for most other things in life. Those ko uchi gari videos truly are wonderful.

LOL, I do not think anyone is worried about you being a jerk. I'm not one of those people who thinks anyone who does not think exactly like me is a jerk.

I'm only pointing out that in some areas Judo's classification systems are constraining -- they're a good organizational structure for some things but they can be limiting too if you're too anal about them. You put boxes around things and then see them only in terms of the boxes. There are, it seems to me, multiple subtypes of ko/o uchi gari and they operate on slightly different principles. For example, an Olympic gold medalist taught at a seminar that there are two basic kinds of o uchi gari -- one where you sweep the foot out and one where you reap the leg after it's planted (and, no, not a gake). The first you typically catch on the move with timing. The second is more mechanical.

Well, the action of reaping (kari) is different than the action of sweeping (harai). By that, as I stated in my earlier post, the body position and overall body action are different. So the kari waza are still kari waza even if the weight is not fully transferred onto the limb that is being reaped. The most basic principle of kari waza are as Judoka_UK has stated and I think we all agree to that point, weight on foot/heel of leg attacked (weight meaning more weight on than off, I suppose). So I do not view the principle as different between the two Ouchi Gari you described. Not that it really matters!

It is confusing if students are taught that they operate on the same principles, because they don't really. Tori's body mechanics are similar, however.

The principle of the o uchi gari I posted is driving uke along the outside of the non-reaped foot. It's not "wrong" even though it applies a principle that's different from a standard o uchi gari. We understand it as o uchi gari because the entry is o uchi gari.

Ben has a better, more practical, definition of the gari type throws.

Anyway, on the version you show that Josh is doing, I do not consider that to be Ouchi Gari. Reason being, neither the basic principle of kari waza is observed in the finish of the throw nor the extension of the principle. At first, tori may well enter for Ouchi Gari with weight on or going onto the leg attacked. But throw is not finished in the manner of an Ouchi Gari. It is more of an Uchi Mata. As you know, there was a big discussion of this over on JF, with the more "experienced" judoka calling the throw as done by Josh a form of Uchi Mata. I think it was in a thread about ken ken techniques? Anyway, If you have Daigo's book, look under Uchi Mata. I think they call this form of Uchi Mata "kake Uchi Mata". I'm not sure if this is the exact form they are describing, I'll have to check when I get home and re-read the description.

My "definition" is just an extension of the main principle of kari waza as I understand them. I think that there are grey areas for sure, and I do not want to get hung up on them. In the end, ippon is ippon. For teaching purposes, it IS very important to emphasize the basic principle of kari waza, and to have them do the throw in a way that clearly lets students feel and see the principle in action.

Something I have been thinking of lately is that each "principle" of throwing, kari, harai, seoi, gake, kuruma, otoshi, etc. have a definite particular body shape and feel and action to them. Sometimes that shape and feel are more of an indicator of the principle in action than the specifics of the throw itself, as in our Kouchi Gari/Ouchi Gari discussion.

Ben

**judoka_uk** · Posted On: 3/05/2011 5:59am

I would add on to what Ben has said that in Kari and Harai the application of the principle of weighting and unweighting is not solely applied to the lower body, but also to the upper body. So that in a sideways skipping O uchi gari or Ko uchi gari though the foot may not actually make contact with the mat tori controls uke's upper body in a way that would see the placement of weight for a Kari waza if the foot were to touch the mat.