Sensei Kochergin, a crazy russian karate coach

[Vieux Normand]

We regard them as conformist and they regard us as individualistic. Another way of saying that is we think of our rights, and they think of their obligations to others. But there society is still a far cry from ours. There is not a fourth amendment. The conviction rate in Japan for crimes is about 99.8%. They do not allow plea bargains, they have no juries. Of course, that may be because they only bring cases they are certain to win.

You observe that America was at one time a nation where people did not sue for hangnails, but the US at one time also had very few attorneys and most people could not afford them. My point here is that the recourse to legal channels becomes more viable for any culture once the option is presented. Without that option, one can ascribe it to an innate sense of self-reliance, but I'm not sure that is the case.

Not being american--nor having ever resided in the u.s.--I made no statements of comparison between Japan and the u.s. (I'd imagine I'm more familiar with Japan, where I have lived, than with the u.s., where I haven't). This "their country is a far cry from ours" and "fourth amendment" business is best addressed to your fellow americans (I will add my hope that the former citation describes a situation which--for the sake of the Japanese--always remains the case).

If you want to play comparative legalisms, look at the respective per-capita incarceration and execution rates between your country and Japan. Meanwhile, the jury system is being considered for use in Japanese jurisprudence, but juries are by no means universal in the West, being a historical byproduct of English Common Law--only one historical source of jurisprudence among several in the many Western countries. I hope they reject it: in terms of obtaining justice, jury trials are as much a travesty as gitmo-tribunals...except that the former are far more effective as money-mills for the legions of lawyers that some seem to adulate.

Why, in any case, would "rights" and "obligations to others" be mutually-exclusive values? The Japanese teach both, as do you americans. They may find a different point of balance between right and obligations, but so what?

[crappler]

No value judgment here, although I strongly suspect the influence of the dreaded Canadians upon reading your post, which, unless I am mistaken, expresses thinly veiled contempt for Americans. I'm just observing the typical "all lawyerz are bad and Americuns are litigus scum" nonsense which came from another poster and not yourself, and felt the need to point out that as much as people dislike the American court system, and express their disdain for it, they might find themselves looking at it a little differently if, for example, they had some legal trouble in a place like Japan or Russia.

I really don't want to be argumentative, but it sounds a lot like you are putting Japan on some kind of pedestal when you comment "for the sake of the Japanese--always remains the case)." and I don't know if I would do that. I'm no flag-waiving Bushie by any means, but Japan hasn't exactly been a beacon for freedom in the last century, if you know what I mean, at least until the Canadians...er..uh... Americans invaded.

You have an interesting take on the Jury system and I can only say that bench trials come with their own unique set of problems that I would hardly regard as a better option.

We should get back to a fruitful discussion on the merits of pounding the shit out of people's faces. Apologies to all. Osu.

[Vieux Normand]

No value judgment here, although I strongly suspect the influence of the dreaded Canadians upon reading your post, which, unless I am mistaken, expresses thinly veiled contempt for Americans. I'm just observing the typical "all lawyerz are bad and Americuns are litigus scum" nonsense which came from another poster and not yourself, and felt the need to point out that as much as people dislike the American court system, and express their disdain for it, they might find themselves looking at it a little differently if, for example, they had some legal trouble in a place like Japan or Russia.

I really don't want to be argumentative, but it sounds a lot like you are putting Japan on some kind of pedestal when you comment "for the sake of the Japanese--always remains the case)." and I don't know if I would do that. I'm no flag-waiving Bushie by any means, but Japan hasn't exactly been a beacon for freedom in the last century, if you know what I mean, at least until the Canadians...er..uh... Americans invaded.

You have an interesting take on the Jury system and I can only say that bench trials come with their own unique set of problems that I would hardly regard as a better option.

We should get back to a fruitful discussion on the merits of pounding the shit out of people's faces. Apologies to all. Osu.

Um....according to my E.U. passport, I'm neither Canadian nor American. As for "pedestals", I DID conclude a message--two postings back--with the caveat that Japan has its share of problems (having actually lived there, I've seen them with my own eyes rather than, um, reading about them or something)...but that they also had a good sense of determination and were fit people who live to an active old age. That's a matter of easily-found statistics, not "pedestals".

Meanwhile, those in my family who are in the legal profession will be glad to learn that it's been insinuated that I consider lawyers to be "bad". As well, I referred to the whole "lawsuit-prone" thing as a generally-recent, WESTERN phenomenon. I did not mention any one Western country ("americans") specifically...until YOU did. How about reading what people actually write, rather than making assumptions on what they write?

Want to return to the subject at hand? No problem. We have a Russian Karate teacher who teaches a level of "aliveness" in his classes that is on a par, in terms of impacts and damage, with a decent Judo class. All I can say is a hearty "hisashi buri desu!"

[maofas]

Sitting like that on the bench wailing away at each other isn't as crazy as it looks. Sitting like that, you can't get your hips into the strike, so you're basically just chain-punching. It's still pretty hardcore, but it's not as nutty as people think and imo it does teach the valuable "skill" of not turning your vision away while taking hits. I think I'd like to use that drill one day, though I'd probably pussify it with mma training gloves.

If you want to see real nutty though, IIRC there's a video of that same instructor making his students spar full contact for an ippon with wooden knives and no protective gear at all. You see several students sitting down with some pretty big gashes on their face after their round is up. I mean, honestly, would it be too wussy to let them put on goggles so they don't accidentally put out an eye? Yeesh.

[Soulrebel]

Good derail regarding litigation, guys, and I will resist putting my two cents in. (Hint hint - Russian born Swede now living in the UK)...

Regarding the chain punching, I do agree. It looks really bad-ass, but it's 20 seconds each, they are all wearing mouth guards and because of the sitting down, the exercise becomes focused on keeping up aggression and keeping your eyes on the opponent. What Kochegin says is that "as long as you keep looking at him, nothing bad is ever going to happen to you". Now, before everyone goes off the literal interpretation handle, I agree with the poster above - I can easily see this drill with MMA gloves (and mouth guard of course). 20 seconds sitting on a bench so you neutralize the legs and the hips - it all becomes on keeping the aggression up while being punched, not quitting, learning to feel what a hit feels like and keeping the eyes on the prize.

As with anything, it would also be easy to adapt to a somewhat lesser degree of contact, etc. Still, I could easily see this as a drill among many in a stand up regimen.

[sempaiman]

He says it's Karate but it seems more like MMA with a Gi...

[Rask]

Despite what many are saying I personally like the drill in which the two students sit facing eachother and punch each other as seen in the third video. The object is to stay focused and keep their eyes on their opponent even in the midst of a flurry of strikes to the head, when the natural response is to look away. One of my faults as a fighter is that if I get crowded with a lot of punches to the head I look away to protect my face out of fear.

[socratic]

We regard them as conformist and they regard us as individualistic. Another way of saying that is we think of our rights, and they think of their obligations to others. But there society is still a far cry from ours. There is not a fourth amendment. The conviction rate in Japan for crimes is about 99.8%. They do not allow plea bargains, they have no juries. Of course, that may be because they only bring cases they are certain to win.

You misunderstand the Japanese legal system. The police will torture you into signing a confession during your holding period following arrest and once signed it basically can't be repealed under grounds of torture. That's why the conviction rate is so high- the last place you EVER want to be in Japan is a police headquarters.

Remember that when he said in the vid "keep your eye on your opponent and you'll be fine" keep an eye includes tuck your chin and be aware of incoming attacks. It isn't usually the one you see coming that K-the-fuck-Os you.

[EdgeWalker]

He says it's Karate but it seems more like MMA with a Gi...

that's Kudo(Daidojuku)