Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Questions for all the Bujinkan guys?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Questions for all the Bujinkan guys?

    With a massive influx of new bujinkan guys asking "Why does nobody like bujunkan?" I have one question for you all.


    Do you spar?



    If so, how? Even better get a vid of you sparring. It will save you hassle.


    Though i shouldn't have to say it, use the search function and if your new, post on the newbie forum.

    << btw i used to do clinch sparring or back to back (a version of groundfighting with pushing on pressure points and light striking allowed) but even this seems to be dying - now i do bjj and am learning why everyone said to learn to spar>>

    #2
    nobel effort, but your pissing in the wind on this one bro.

    Comment


      #3
      We should make a bujinkan sticky so as to curtail all of the "whats wrong with the buj?" threads that pop up every other month.

      Comment


        #4
        Agreed. It needs a sticky, and if someone puts bujinkan in their style description it needs to automatically direct them there.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by mrgoshthereturn View Post
          ...if someone puts bujinkan in their style description it needs to automatically direct them into a vat of H2SO4.
          FXD...

          Comment


            #6
            Here's a serious question...
            Even if Bujies did start posting video of themselves sparring, isn't it likely to only generate variations of one of three responses:
            1.) You suck and/or aren't doing it "right" (i.e. It's not how I spar).
            2.) It doesn't look like taijutsu (i.e. what the reviewer believes taijutsu should look like).
            3.) If I were there, I'd kick your ass.

            Why do you think Bujies will open themselves up to abuse like that? What is the payoff for them?

            Of course, why do any Bujies bother posting anything here at all? An even more existential question...

            I think I'll change my tag to Tetsurin Bujinkido...

            Comment


              #7
              The emphasis here is on testing one's theories to see if they work.

              If I say "Eating five pounds of bacon a day will improve my vertical leap", but I never actually get around to measuring my vertical jump's progress (what with all the bacon-eating I'll be doing), I'll never realize that my premise was wrong.

              I may have a theory that a particular training method and/or technique will increase my ability to win fights. In this light, sparring serves two distinct purposes:
              1) It's one of several training methods that can increase one's ability to win fights if done properly.
              2) It's one of several testing methods that can allow one to assess the correctness of one's theories if done properly.

              You need to understand that the definition of "properly" in #1 and #2 are not necessarily the same.
              A properly-executed training method increases your ability to win fights.
              A properly-executed testing method serves as a fair test of your theories.

              As such, the lack of sparring in the Buj manifests in two separate problems:
              1) Practitioners who don't spar properly (#1) aren't increasing their ability to win fights as effectively as they could be.
              2) Practitioners who don't spar properly (#2) aren't verifying the correctness of their theories.

              Now, having said that, the main issue that is being raised is #2 - lack of testing.

              Originally posted by Styygens View Post
              1.) You suck and/or aren't doing it "right" (i.e. It's not how I spar).
              2.) It doesn't look like taijutsu (i.e. what the reviewer believes taijutsu should look like).
              3.) If I were there, I'd kick your ass.
              1a) If sparring - as a fair test - reveals inadequacies in one's theories, the theories need revision.
              1b) If the sparring, as performed, fails to meet the goal of being a fair test, the sparring needs to be rethought.
              2a) If the technique one uses when being tested in sparring does not resemble the techniques one trains, the training needs to be revised, either to provide better techniques or to ensure they're ingrained.
              2b) If the name of the fighting style being trained does not match the fighting style itself, the people using said style should probably find a better name to refer to it by.
              3) Bullshido has a process for handling challenges.

              Comment


                #8
                Yeah, there was a thread over on MAP where boojers are congratulating each other on some videos. I hoped they would be of sparring sessions, but alas it was not. I don't understand how people are impressed by demos. I've never been impressed by a BJJ demo no matter who is doing it.

                I don't really have a point, but if I did it might be that there is some fundamental difference between people who are impressed with only actual evidence (most of us) and people who are impressed with less than that. I think a lot of the latter group are attracted to arts like buj. Either that or they learn it there.

                Comment


                  #9
                  If someone puts together the post for a Bujinkan FAQ I'll sticky it. I don't have the time to do one at the moment

                  Comment


                    #10
                    I am all over it. P.M with relevant info incoming soon.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      @ TheRuss -- Thank you for a well reasoned post. I knew I was opening a big target with my post, but I'm pleased to see a good response.

                      I think this summarizes your main points:

                      HTML Code:
                      1a) If sparring - as a fair test - reveals inadequacies in one's theories, the theories need revision.
                      1b) If the sparring, as performed, fails to meet the goal of being a fair test, the sparring needs to be rethought.
                      2a) If the technique one uses when being tested in sparring does not resemble the techniques one trains, the training needs to be revised, either to provide better techniques or to ensure they're ingrained.
                      2b) If the name of the fighting style being trained does not match the fighting style itself, the people using said style should probably find a better name to refer to it by.
                      3) Bullshido has a process for handling challenges.
                      I'm in agreement with you in theory on 1a and 1b. No substantial issues. But that doesn't change my belief that some keyboard warrior with a jones for BJJ/MMA/Muay Thai will undoubtedly mock any Buj video just because it exists -- but that's entirely different from your points, which are well-taken.

                      On 2a and 2b, I lurked here a long time before I started posting. I'm familiar with the gist of the conversation on the Bujinkan. I've seen lots of comments that no one recognizes Budo Taijutsu in videos of Buj free-response/sparring. Or they say, "clearly this guy cross-trains, because I recognize X technique or movement." (I know, I'm suppossed to find a post and quote rather than set up a straw man -- I'm too busy and/or lazy to search through right now...) There seems to be a preconception that applied taijutsu will look exactly like the Kihon Happo (the "Eight Basic" kata, for the uninformed.)

                      Over the years, I've had seminars with several of the more advanced practitioners in the US Bujinkan. All of them have said that taijutsu does not look the same in a "real fight" as it does in a kata. I have seen Bud Malmstrom demonstrate this point by showing Ichimonji no Kata early in a seminar, and then later return to the movement (unannounced) and show what it looks like against a random punch. It doesn't look the same at speed and under pressure. But the essential principle remains -- step off the line of attack and counter attack. (I know: if there's no video, it didn't happen.) Am I trying to apply "Prearranged Defense #327" to "Attack: Punch to Face" or am I trying to apply principles of body mechanics and tactics to a free-flowing situation?

                      Look -- I'm not going to sit around defending the Buj all day. There's quite a lot that's indefensible in the Bujinkan; and my erstwhile brethren do it to themselves. We're like the second Star Wars Trilogy: there's no possible way to live up to the hype. I mean really: Overinflated rank, a penchant for silly outfits, Kukan Balls? And this somewhat disturbing over-reliance on the appeal to authority: "Sensei sez..." As if no one else can possible have a valid opinion or documented facts.

                      Still, I enjoy the Buj training. I'm comfortable with my group of training partners, and I try to keep a critical eye on how I'm training. We do spar in my branch of the Buj and I'm painfully aware of some of the deficiencies in our sparring. And yes, I do cross-train in an attempt to fix some of them.

                      To push this back on thread. I'm in agreement with the need for a sticky about the Bujinkan. I am tired too of seeing the same old threads started by Noobs (like me). Is there some way I can help write it, so it has some Bujinkan perspective included?

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Plasma:
                        p.m with relevant info sent.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I got it. I'll need to clean it up and add some information before I post it. I'll try to get to it this week however, being the end of the semester, it might need to wait a week or so.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Styygens View Post
                            Over the years, I've had seminars with several of the more advanced practitioners in the US Bujinkan. All of them have said that taijutsu does not look the same in a "real fight" as it does in a kata.
                            Why do you think this is?

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by TheRuss View Post
                              Why do you think this is?
                              I know you didn't address it to me but I'd like to give my opinions...

                              First off let me say I completely understand the argument that you should practice a technique as you would use it in a real encounter.

                              To be honest I think that the statement "it doesn't look the same in a real fight as it does in a kata" holds for a lot of traditional martial arts. The reason for this is two fold:

                              1) kata, from the standpoint of traditional martial arts, are like lists of techniques
                              2) katas teach fundamental principles

                              Both of those go hand in hand, really. You've got a bunch of techniques, so you organize them all together, and you wind up with something like a kata. Rather than saying, "if this dude does this, you do this, if he does this, you do that." you teach the kata so the student learns the general movements, then you go back and break it down into individual techniques. Or you break it down from the start, and at the end teach them how to string them together. But it's usually more for memory and book keeping (maybe even more so for memory if your MA has a history of illiterate masters)

                              And then, katas teach fundamental principles, not necessarily things that will happen in real life. So, let's take wrist locks. Wrist locks work by exploiting the fact that the wrist joint won't bend comfortably in certain ways. So, in a form, or a two man routine, you always bend the wrist a certain way. But, in application, ANY way in which you can bend the wrist, say, to the outside, is that technique. You could be grappling on the ground. You could be wrestling on your feet. You could be floating upside down in space.

                              A form, as a method of keeping a list of techniques, is not possibly going to be able to account for every single situation that might ever arise. A form is going to teach like, "ura gyaku", the principle of bending the wrist in a certain direction. It then falls upon the TEACHER to take that technique OUT of the form, teach it in isolation, then work with the student in explaining various ways you can get that technique to work in certain situations. It then falls upon the STUDENT to experiment with that technique to find out what works for them.

                              So, in a sense, the kata itself doesn't show techniques as they would appear in a "real" fight, but the training itself should. And I think many would agree that it's the latter part that lots of schools lack.

                              Comment

                              Collapse

                              Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                              Working...
                              X