Ai-uchi Ippon

[Usagi San]

Disclaimer: I searched the foruns and didn't find anything related to this question. So... here it goes:

Talking to Karaken the other day (he's been here in Lisbon training with us) he told me about (what I think is) a new rule in shiai. He told me that during shiai, come a situation of ai-uchi, and the shinpans MUST decide and give ippon to one of the competitors.

Something like ai-uchi being the equivalent of a tied action is over as we know it. I was in Kitamoto in 2005, and of course I had shinpam practice, and never heard about such thing then.
Can someone tell anything more about it? Not that I doubt the words of Karaken, but could I have misunderstood what he said???

[JSchmidt]

The thinking behind it is that there's no such thing as 'ai-uchi' ippon. One will always hit slightly earlier than other.

[nonamehandle]

The thinking behind it is that there's no such thing as 'ai-uchi' ippon. One will always hit slightly earlier than other.

hey JSchmidt can you be a little more direct? are you saying that what Karaken has said is correct?

[JSchmidt]

Yes.........

[Sakari]

[...] come a situation of ai-uchi, and the shinpans MUST decide and give ippon to one of the competitors.

Surely this is not in the 2006 IKF rules and regulations? If so I really really need to get it.

It is highly likely that the hits are not simultaneous like JSchmidt said. I would think that the problem is that it may be impossible even for the best judges to say which side was first. Yes, shimpan should try to see who was first, but if a shimpan would need to guess I would think that it is fairer to not to give a point at all.

One method I have at least seen to be used is check also the movement before and after the strike, the one with "better" seme and zanshin probably is the making contact first. The problem is that even if other side seems to display better seme and zanshin it is still possible that the actual shinai contact was later.

Electronic scoring would seem to be the only solution to this (and for the record I'm all in favor of it if I don't have to drag a cord behind me in the shiaijo)

[JSchmidt]

If you watch Japanese highschool competitions, you'd be surprised how close some of the calls are and they usually get it right.

[Usagi San]

The thinking behind it is that there's no such thing as 'ai-uchi' ippon. One will always hit slightly earlier than other.

I get the thinking behind it... but what bothers me is:

1 - the idea of ippon also sugests that it is supposed to be a "clean" hit... one that you feel is wright, and your opponent also feels it.

2 - And furthermore, isn't ai-uchi MUTUAL destruction? Two VALID STRIKES? Say again: VALID.
I mean, if both the contenders were using real swords they'd both be dead. Not one dead and the other injuried. Didn't matter if there was a 1/10 of a second of difference between strikes. They'd be dead.

3 - So how can one be more dead than the other?

[Karaken]

[quote=Usagi San;305402]I get the thinking behind it... but what bothers me is:

2 - And furthermore, isn't ai-uchi MUTUAL destruction? Two VALID STRIKES? Say again: VALID.
I mean, if both the contenders were using real swords they'd both be dead. Not one dead and the other injuried. Didn't matter if there was a 1/10 of a second of difference between strikes. They'd be dead.

Well, well Usagi san, I don't think modern Kendo scoring is like Shinken Shobu any more. I know of your purist quest but If there is a 1/5 second difference, they'll both dead in shinken shobu but there'll be no doubt in Shiai who got the ippon. Shimpans don't get everything right all the time anyway and AJKF's recommendation ( I don't think it's a rule written anywhere ) is to discourage shimpans from hiding behind Ai-Uchi and force them to make the call. At the end, if it's that close, it may not be that unfair anyway..:-)

[Usagi San]

I knew someone would pick up the "real sword argument", but that's besides the point. It was just a bit of folcklore... movin' on.
I'm not in a purist's quest, I'm just looking for logic, because I fail to see how if both are considered (again) valid strikes, both, because THAT is what ai-uchi is, so how come one can be more valid than other?
Unless, it's not ai-uchi. It may be simultaneous attacks but simultaneous attacks is not the same as ai-uchi.
Ultimately ai-uchi stands for (correct me if I'm wrong) simultaneous IPPON(S).
Rigth?

Now someone is going to say. no, no, ai-uchi in japanese means...

[ne0r]

Hm. It would be strange if it was a rule. But as a suggestion, it seems not bad to me.
But that's really hard to judge. Why did the guy here (http://youtube.com/watch?v=2-PX24NFL4k) (at approx. 0:50), for example, get ippon, and not the other?

Anyways, ai-uchi, that's beautiful stuff.

[kartoffelngeist]

Kendo dictionary says....


Ai uchi - "The situation in which each player makes a valid strike simultaneously during a match or keiko. In matches, these are not considered yuko (valid)."

I'd be tempted to agree with Karaken that it seems almost a policy decision by the AJKF. It also seems so common that I'd imagine there would be much fewer points scored otherwise.

[ben]

"Note also that hits manifesting "subtleness of technique" count as ippon even if delivered softly, so referees must be able to discern this "subtleness of technique" and not dismiss a technique as being inadequate just for being soft. Moreover, they should start from the assumption that, in general there is no aiuchi (both players hit at the same time so neither gets ippon); i.e., they must not take the easy way out by not making the call."

A Guide for Tournament Refereeing, AJKF Committee on Tournaments and Refereeing (chairman: S. Fukumoto), 2002-3, page 6.

(Emphasis above is mine).

Discerning true aiuchi from near aiuchi is quite easy. This directive is for shinpan, exhorting them not to be slack. It is not so much for competitors to worry about (unless you're also of a level to be shinpaning). It also helps change the mindset that true aiuchi is quite common. It is about as common as a dead-heat in a horse race.

I also think the concept of "subtleness of technique" is interesting. I believe it is 玄妙な技 (genmyona waza) in Japanese (?). These can be the really difficult ones for shinpan to perceive correctly.

b

[ne0r]

Oh, I have not seen Usagi San's last post^^

I usually would consider ai-uchi as two simultanous strikes (but not in my last post). But that's not important. I think if there were two valid strikes at the same time, the one that's better should be awarded. But I was taught that when hitting ai-men, the one with better center (etc.) will be the one that really hits men and gets ippon, whereas the other one couldn't hit men correctly.
Well, if both of them were not able to hit men correctly, no ippon, I'd say.

[enkorat]

Is this a case of translation evolution?

It would be fairly easy to go from "don't be lazy and always call ai-uchi" to "there is no more ai-uchi", particularly if there is a translation issue during a shinpan seminar.

I bet we've all seen the situation where there is a 5 minute Japanese explanation of a waza, and then the sensei turns around and in the non-Japanese host language goes "hit straighter" and moves on...

[Koki]

One cuts the skin... the other cuts to the bone... who's more dead?

[JSchmidt]

Is this a case of translation evolution?

It would be fairly easy to go from "don't be lazy and always call ai-uchi" to "there is no more ai-uchi", particularly if there is a translation issue during a shinpan seminar.

Nah, George (Kenshi) told me similar about shinpan-seminars in Japan. Again, looking at Highschool competitions, there's loads of what would be easy to dismiss as ai-uchi, but yet get called correctly. (I have to watch the slo-mo replay to see it, but the shinpans seemingly always get it right).

The problem, I think, is that the shinpans needs to be quite sharp to get it. I saw one at our internal taikai recently and by the time I'd replayed it mentally a couple of times to see what happened, it was too late to call.

I'm going to the European IKF shinpan seminar next month (as a "competitor") and I'll see if I can get the opportunity to raise this question.

[Winter516]

perhaps if its too close they can toss a coin? lol

[shred_lord]

I assume this still leaves the option of mudu-aiuchi. After all, if both cuts lack zanshin or something, neither are really valid ippon.

[Koki]

Well, actually i have heard of this for a while (at least a year ago). At a shinpan seminar, Hori sensei, the current All US Kendo Federation, said that there is no ai-uchi, some one ALWAYS hit first, and it's the shinpan job to see which one.

Shinpan must be able to read seme. Usually, they would focus on the kenshi who is applying seme and taking control at the moment. They know ahead what would happen. That's why they are able to see who hit first.

[dohrt]

I have no experience as a shimpan, and I certainly am a n00b, but I've heard MANY times the more senior judges (rokudan, nanadan, hachidan) say for a few years now that, "you have to choose" when there's an ai-uchi.

The problem is, you see a match go on for 5 minutes with a lot of ai-uchi, and the judges just don't call anything, or you get two judges calling each color, and the third can't decide, so it's a wash and no point. This exchange happens a few times with the two kendoka usually knowing who really had it, but this changes the rest of the match after a few times. The the kendoka can give up on those kind of attacks completely and start playing with crazy waza designed to "sell" a point, because they know the judges aren't going to call anything "close". Matches where the kendoka have confidence in the shimpans ability to make the call when there's ai-uchi versus those where they do not seem to be very different.

This is completely my unsubstantiated interpretation here, but my thought is that the higher up sensei want to encourage shiai play that is of a good quality; they want you to be able to win if you really win.

Yes, a some ai-uchi are "mutual destruction" but even at my crappy level, there have been countless times where I hit men and my opponent missed me (I felt it on my shoulder, not my men) and yes, that may well have killed me anyways, but I really did get the men and they didn't. Of course, even more times has it happened where I've received a solid, clean men and I myself was the one who missed. And 90% of the time, it seems like the judges just can't decide and no point is called.

Granted, if Kato-sensei is one of the shimpan, then yea, a point is given and it's right like rain. But most of the time, we don't have nanadans for shimpan... we have sandans and yondans, and while some are pretty good, many of them just can't see it.

Soo, when I hear higher level sensei chide the lower level shimpan by saying, "you have to choose" after an ai-uchi, I think the idea there isn't that it's a written rule, but that it's something they want to teach because 9 times out of 10, at least at my level, when there's an "ai-uchi", it really isn't mutual destruction; someone had control, had center, had everything, and the other person just wasn't quite there, all that criterion really having nothing to do with speed. But with the inexperience of the shimpan available, they just couldn't tell. Instead of letting those budding shimpan get glass-eyed over ai-uchi (they both died, next!), I think the motivation here is to get them to work harder to see it and really try.

Let me give you an example. Two kendo attempt to hit ai-men. The timing is about the same for the strikes, though Kendoka A starts later. Kendoka B starts sooner (doing debana, or receiving it? hehehe) but has a kind of sideways slant with their head and upper torso trying to avoid a counter-strike ahead of time. Kendoka B also hits with kind of a slapping sayu-men kind of stroke (though with good tenouchi), completely losing the center and trying to "go around". Kendoka A is later to start, but ends up just doing a straight, strong, crisp cut with great tenouchi and catching up to "land" the cut at the same time as Kendoka B. There is much loud kiai from both kendoka. There is only one nice clean "pop" sound of mono-uchi hitting men-buton. Then the two are in a pile together after smacking "do" with a split second of uncertainty before they both settle into tsuba-zerai.

Do you give a point? Do you say both killed each other? Do you say no point because there was no zanshin? But if you have to choose, then technically, both shinai did contact the other's men. Regardless of who you choose, you have to see what happened to choose. I think many times, the shimpan don't even have as clear of a picture as I just described. Could you see the sayu-men or was it on the other side of you? Are you even sure if which kendoka made the nice popping sound? Did the sayu-men get through or not? Were you looking so hard at the sayu-men that you aren't sure if the other kendoka's shomen was on?

Developing one's skill as a shimpan seems to be very very difficult and as long of a process as developing one's kendo. In that sense, if you don't choose one (right or wrong) in the ai-uchi situation, you are not practicing. I heard Kato-sensei once tell some shimpan that he can't see fast enough to see the fastest strikes, but he watches the whole picture, as it develops and so when the strike does happen, he already saw it coming, and just has to confirm with other visual and audible cues that it did happen, instead of having to "catch" a snapshot of blurred motion like the lower level shimpan have to do. Use enzan-no-metsuke instead of trying to focus on a specific point of the action. Don't lose sight of the forest within the trees. Stuff like that. Develop an intuition so that your hand is up with a flag and *after* that, you consciously replay it in your mind and feel correct, not before. So often, you see shimpan thinking for a few seconds trying to decide (and I don't mean when they are waiting to see zanshin), but by then, it's too late and many more things have happened.

So, I think of it not much different than I think of working with a kyu just into bogu (a low ranked shimpan); don't hestitate, don't wait, just attack (award a point to one of them). It doesn't matter if you get hit (if you pick wrong), it only matters that you attack (that you pick). If you constantly sit there not attacking (not ever choosing when ai-uchi happens), you will never develop your kendo (kendo). Practice ! Calling ai-uchi is practice for shimpan.

Again, I'm a n00bie idiot and I have no idea if something like this is actually in written rules or not, but that's what I've gotten from listening to comments made to shimpan (I try to listen, because years from now, if I can stay on the path, I too will someday be trying to make the call when I have no idea who really had it). As invariably happens, I've probably misunderstood a lot of things that were intended for other ears than mine. So take this from that perspective. It will be interesting to see me completely lost on all this anyways, once I do get to the point of having to take on being a shimpan someday. Hehehe.

[Kingofmyrrh]

One cuts the skin... the other cuts to the bone... who's more dead?

They are both disqualified from the shiai, that's for sure...

[Usagi San]

I have no experience as a shimpan, (... rest of the txt...) Hehehe.

Sorry, but your example sucks.
Again, one thing is simultaneous strikes, another completely different is ai-uchi.
Ai-uchi implies BOTH shiai-sha strike datotsu (1). Not slopiness in disguise of good strike versus good strike.
BOTH GOOD (2). It can happen. Sh!t, it happens everyday. And when it happens... well, that's the issue here.

1 - Get a copy of shiai & shinpan rules and regulations and see the definition of datotsu.
2 - Take a look in the japanese-english dictionary of kendo and search ai-uchi.

[Neil Gendzwill]

A strike that normally wouldn't qualify as a point can sometimes serve to disqualify what would otherwise be a point on the part of the other guy.

[Karaken]

Sorry, but your example sucks.
Again, one thing is simultaneous strikes, another completely different is ai-uchi.
Ai-uchi implies BOTH shiai-sha strike datotsu (1). Not slopiness in disguise of good strike versus good strike.
BOTH GOOD (2). It can happen. Sh!t, it happens everyday. And when it happens... well, that's the issue here.

1 - Get a copy of shiai & shinpan rules and regulations and see the definition of datotsu.
2 - Take a look in the japanese-english dictionary of kendo and search ai-uchi.

Yes, it SEEMS to happen everyday but AJKF's recommendation is it is NOT happening and it SHOULD NOT happen if Shimpan is good enough to see. If both point is GOOD, someone must have hit first.. so in a strict sense, there is NO AIUCHI.. Well, whether one can actually see the difference of 1/1000 second is a different question because in Martial Art, teaching of sensei implies a purpose that may not be always apparent to students however illogical that sounds..

[Usagi San]

If both point is GOOD, someone must have hit first.. so in a strict sense, there is NO AIUCHI...

I understand that, but there's a limit, I think, human limit.
Because if it's that accuracy one seeks... well then, by all means, let's remove the people out of the issue and start with electronic devices instead of human shinpan.
An it's all your fault Karaken :wink:

[Sakari]

A strike that normally wouldn't qualify as a point can sometimes serve to disqualify what would otherwise be a point on the part of the other guy.

Why would an unsuccessful strike nullify an otherwise valid strike? I understand that being hit can disrupt the persons own strike, but can it really invalidate a valid (datotsu-bu on datotsu-bui with zanshin) strike? A specific case where typically I have seen that this is not the case is a late men debana kote, if the men hits, I have nearly always seen the point being given for men.

I can somehow understand that if in this case the kote was just sligthly off then shimpan could feel that the men was not a point, but is this a correct attitude for shimpan? Or do you mean a situation where the person strikes debana kote properly but does not for example show zanshin and the other person gets men but that point is disqualified as the kote was in?

As far as I know there is no specific mention in the rules for this. Can you elaborate on this, what is the rationale and what would be an example circumstance where this would happen?

[JSchmidt]

I understand that, but there's a limit, I think, human limit.

Again, watch stuff like the highschool championships. Real time, first time, I can't tell, but the shinpans there can. Granted, these guys do it almost every weekend and have loads of experience, but people here wont get that experience if they aren't forced to call it.

[ahmed61086]

Even if its a true Aiuchi, meaning hit at the exact same time. The point can still be given to the kenshi who had better seme, zanshin, etc. (btw I know this is said so often it sounds cliche)

But, I have seen so many instances where kenshi hit first and "technically" should have got the point, but since the strike didn't look orthodox or "beutiful" or sometimed, didn't have a good sound, etc, etc, the other opponent was able to rensoku waza his way into a point. Or even get a point in an ai uchi situation.

[Neil Gendzwill]

Can you elaborate on this, what is the rationale and what would be an example circumstance where this would happen?If you stop the aite with a mune-zuki, you will nullify his men even if it is otherwise good. If your mune-zuki is weak or slides off and the men is strong, the men is in. Mune-zuki doesn't ever count as a point but it can be used to nullify a point.

Similarly, at least the way I judge and I may be wrong, if the aite picks off your kote or men when you're on your way in for men, if the aite's contact was good and clear but it's otherwise not a point, I'm not going to give your men. You have to make your point clearly and in my mind it doesn't take a full ippon to effectively counter. However (and now I'm getting into speculation) off-target hits probably don't nullify, because if you allowed that people would be swinging wildly in an effort to counter points.

These are all cases where the aite got there before you. If the timing is exactly the same, which is rare, I would tend to make the same call. I'm certainly open to correction as I do not shimpan regularly.

[MAZ77]

But, I have seen so many instances where kenshi hit first and "technically" should have got the point, but since the strike didn't look orthodox or "beutiful" or sometimed, didn't have a good sound, etc, etc, the other opponent was able to rensoku waza his way into a point. Or even get a point in an ai uchi situation.

Perhaps this is because the guy who hit first (which isnt ALWAYS the end all be all) was lured in. I think that is another peice to consider in Aiuchi. What may appear to be (and im going to use this term loosely) offesnive seme, could actually be reaction to good defensive seme from the oppnoent. Anyways, to judge all that in a split second is beyond my current career.

[Kagerou]

If you stop the aite with a mune-zuki, you will nullify his men even if it is otherwise good. If your mune-zuki is weak or slides off and the men is strong, the men is in. Mune-zuki doesn't ever count as a point but it can be used to nullify a point.



Do you nullify it because the attacker didn't control centre or because they were hit on their way through?

[Karaken]

I understand that, but there's a limit, I think, human limit.
Because if it's that accuracy one seeks... well then, by all means, let's remove the people out of the issue and start with electronic devices instead of human shinpan.
An it's all your fault Karaken :wink:

Ha Ha, yes it would be my fault. And we should call it a Martial Science not Martial Art. I see this difference in cultural sense. In Asian culture, there is this attitude of " You read it 100 times you'd understand, if not you read it thousand times you'd understand. If not, maybe your destiny is not to understand this" Whereas in Western culture, we'd say "Why don't you cut the crap and explain to me - that'll save a lot of my valuable time". I am an Electrical Engineer by trade but I am a martial artist from Asia. Paradox? You bet.

[Toshiro Mifune]

I think rarely you will see both competitors hitting will all the elements of yuko datosu at the same time. Those higher ranking kendoka with more judging experience can easily make the decision quicker. While those with less experience tend to judge more on this person hit first. Which often leaves them wondering sometimes when watching some matches with fast kendoka wondering why that person got the point over their opponent. But yeah if two people in a life or death situation struck men using swords there is no nullifying effect. Unless both of them hit at the same time and it is not ippon and doesn't have any elements of yuko datosu then I won't raise. But I try getting away from that not raising a flag because it was ai-uchi.

[mark]

If you stop the aite with a mune-zuki, you will nullify his men even if it is otherwise good. If your mune-zuki is weak or slides off and the men is strong, the men is in. Mune-zuki doesn't ever count as a point but it can be used to nullify a point.

Similarly, at least the way I judge and I may be wrong, if the aite picks off your kote or men when you're on your way in for men, if the aite's contact was good and clear but it's otherwise not a point, I'm not going to give your men. You have to make your point clearly and in my mind it doesn't take a full ippon to effectively counter. However (and now I'm getting into speculation) off-target hits probably don't nullify, because if you allowed that people would be swinging wildly in an effort to counter points.

These are all cases where the aite got there before you. If the timing is exactly the same, which is rare, I would tend to make the same call. I'm certainly open to correction as I do not shimpan regularly.

In a similar vein...
During an after tournament discussion, a senior judge explained that in the situation of dekote landing before a men...if the dekote did not include forward movement (from the hips) the men would be Ipon. Alternately, if the dekote had forward movement the dekote would be Ipon. Lastly, the dekote would be Ipon even without forward movement if the men does not land.
It was the first time I have heard that type of explanation. Is this common, or did I misunderstand the explanation?

[Neil Gendzwill]

Do you nullify it because the attacker didn't control centre or because they were hit on their way through?It's nullified because of both, although "controlling the centre" isn't usually an explicit qualifier for ippon. Basically, the guy is dead, skewered on his opponent's sword on the way in.


In a similar vein...
During an after tournament discussion, a senior judge explained that in the situation of dekote landing before a men...if the dekote did not include forward movement (from the hips) the men would be Ipon. Alternately, if the dekote had forward movement the dekote would be Ipon. Lastly, the dekote would be Ipon even without forward movement if the men does not land.
It was the first time I have heard that type of explanation. Is this common, or did I misunderstand the explanation?I've never heard that. I don't understand how the men landing influences your decision on whether the other guy had adequate zanshin, which is really what the movement thing is about. Typically, after dekote you should move somewhere, preferably forward. In my book, if the other guy cleanly hits your kote before your men lands, it's no point for you and might be a point for him. I'm of course open to correction on this.

[Nayuta]

If you consider like the below, you may be understandable.

1. Datotsu doesn't mean finish blow(to kill).
2. Zanshin means finish blow originally.
3. Purpose of Datotsu is to break opponent's posture for obstruct counterattacking.
4. Datotsu contains Taiatari that's to break posture originally.

In a word, that's Kirikaeshi. Sayu-Men is finish blow originally. Zanshin is needed instead of finish blow because Kendo doesn't need finish blow(killing). That's reason Kirikaeshi is standard originally.

Therefore person who keep posture and early hit should be win.

I'm not sure of how to say though, please anyone restate mine.

[Sakari]

It's nullified because of both, although "controlling the centre" isn't usually an explicit qualifier for ippon.


Surely it's nullified because of article 12, point 2 of the subsidiary rules, which says that "opponent is [...] touching the [attackers] upper front body with [kensen]"? Rationale for the rule itself has probably something to do with the idea of skewering yourself on a sword.


[case where nonvalid strike disqualifies a valid strike]

This I think is the interesting issue. I can understand Neil's reasoning and don't wholly disagree with it. On the other hand the rules do not give any specific allowance for this and I don't recall ever before having this principle spelled out.

I really could not decipher what Nayuta meant, sorry.

[Nayuta]

I really could not decipher what Nayuta meant, sorry.

Not necessary to sorry, just what I wanted to say is "what is Datotsu?" originally, only. I think that perhaps is expressed only by Japanese words though I did my best. Thanks.

[PhilMcLaughlin]

I Think theres a common misconception that the point of impact of the shinai on the opponent is the be all and end all of the cut

At the last ref seminar in the UK, Davies sensei (2 x WKC shimpan) explained 5 major and 5 minor points to take into account for every attack

When you see it from that point of view, Ai uchi is very very rare - try to do it deliberatley & youll see what I mean

hope that helps

phil..

[shred_lord]

Davies sensei (2 x WKC shimpan) explained 5 major and 5 minor points to take into account for every attackCan you post these points please?

[Nayuta]

Might you just want to know the rule officially? not concept(the reason, origin I understood, etc)? If that's it, I have misunderstood here discussion. Here must be in concept category I think.

Complete Ai-Uchi is not Ippon each other, though I think it's not possibility to do "complete Ai-Uchi" in the detail. Person who keep posture and early hit in Ai-Uchi obtains Ippon but complete judgement is not possible also, just only.

[Neil Gendzwill]

Surely it's nullified because of article 12, point 2 of the subsidiary rules, which says that "opponent is [...] touching the [attackers] upper front body with [kensen]"? Rationale for the rule itself has probably something to do with the idea of skewering yourself on a sword.Thanks, forgot there was an explicit rule for that. However, it's not sufficient to just be touching, if you go for the mune-zuki weakly and it slips off it can be countered by a strong men.

[Nayuta]

If you consider like the below, you may be understandable.

1. Datotsu doesn't mean finish blow(to kill).
2. Zanshin means finish blow originally.
3. Purpose of Datotsu is to break opponent's posture for obstruct counterattacking.
4. Datotsu contains Taiatari that's to break posture originally.

In a word, that's Kirikaeshi. Sayu-Men is finish blow originally. Zanshin is needed instead of finish blow because Kendo doesn't need finish blow(killing). That's reason Kirikaeshi is standard originally.

Therefore person who keep posture and early hit should be win.

I'm not sure of how to say though, please anyone restate mine.

I received some message from some person regarding this issue.

I want to express more thing without giving up but it's difficult, so I drew it.
Look at understandable figure I attached.

This figure can explain why you advance after hitting and keep Shinai position of hitting, perhaps regarding Ai-Uchi also. This is concept of Datotsu.

If you have any question about the figure etc, tell me.

[turboyoshi]

if you go for the mune-zuki weakly and it slips off it can be countered by a strong men.

What is mune-zuki? I don't see this term in my dictionary. And if it's not a valid strike, can you get hansoku called for that?

sean

[Kagerou]

What is mune-zuki? I don't see this term in my dictionary. And if it's not a valid strike, can you get hansoku called for that?

sean

Think tsuki except you aim for the persons mune. Watch your sensei and you'll probably see them doing it occasionally. One of the senseis in my dojo does it all the time if you don't break his posture. I'd say they strike there instead of tsuki because it's less dangerous and painful but still shows the same thing.

[Nayuta]

What is mune-zuki? I don't see this term in my dictionary. And if it's not a valid strike, can you get hansoku called for that?

sean

Mune means upper portion of chest. Zuki means the same of Tsuki(perhaps means stab). Of course Mune is not effective portion for Datotsu, so if it's too awful Hansoku will be got like the same of hitting other portion(not effective) intentionally.

Therefore when you try Mune-Zuki don't stab just push (only to stop opponent).

[Nayuta]

I received some message from some person regarding this issue.

I want to express more thing without giving up but it's difficult, so I drew it.
Look at understandable figure I attached.

This figure can explain why you advance after hitting and keep Shinai position of hitting, perhaps regarding Ai-Uchi also. This is concept of Datotsu.

If you have any question about the figure etc, tell me.

Postscript (additional comment)

In 1st Kata, Uchidachi shows wrong example easy to avoid by step back. Shidachi's Men is correct by Uchidachi's step back(becomes proper Maai). 1st Kata means teaching Maai and how to hit Men. Aim of Men is to stab forehead. If you hit proper Men using Katana(Bokuto also), opponent will bend back and cannot counterattack. Why you hit Men from upper side is to keep the longest range because just to stab straightly becomes short range.

1. hit Men (not make to counterattack)
2. do Taiatari (not make to guard also)
3. kill (finish)

The above is true concept of Kirikaeri and standard of killing each other using Katana. Not necessary to kill in Kendo, so 3 becomes Zanshin.

I can express all judgement at Shiai by my drawing figure. If you hit Men earlier than opponent, opponent's other Waza doesn't reach you essentially, Mune-Zuki also(in case of hitting proper Men without fearing it at all). So Men is given preferential judgement than other Waza. Only way to avoid Men is that you advance forward earlier than Men(example, De-Gote or Nuki-Do), though this might be exaggeration a little. There is no concept of defense in Kendo because true Men is not possible to guard essentially because of 1's purpose.

If you misunderstand that it's dangerous, so first of all I have tried to express "What is Kendo?" and already had finished.

[ZtefaNNN[K]]

I received some message from some person regarding this issue.

I want to express more thing without giving up but it's difficult, so I drew it.
Look at understandable figure I attached.

This figure can explain why you advance after hitting and keep Shinai position of hitting, perhaps regarding Ai-Uchi also. This is concept of Datotsu.

If you have any question about the figure etc, tell me.

Nayuta, could you please, explain more about this, I saw the picture and I think I begin to understand what you mean, it seems interesting as I´ve never heard that before, but I still have some questions. why are we told, and it´s been recently emphasized in the bokuto ni yoru katas, that we should strike men differently from the drawing you showed and pretty much the same way it´s done with a shinai? ..the 1st kendo kata also comes to my mind...

[The great I AM]

;305901']Nayuta, could you please, explain more about this, I saw the picture and I think I begin to understand what you mean, it seems interesting as I´ve never heard that before, but I still have some questions. why are we told, and it´s been recently emphasized in the bokuto ni yoru katas, that we should strike men differently from the drawing you showed and pretty much the same way it´s done with a shinai? ..the 1st kendo kata also comes to my mind...Because the bokuto ni yoru kihon keikohou are aimed at teaching shinai based techniques through using a bokuto, not using a bokuto better.

[PhilMcLaughlin]

Can you post these points please?


In theory they are going to be made availale via the website 'soon'

cheers

[shred_lord]

THEINORY
:smiley:
Cool, I'll keep an eye pealed.

[ZtefaNNN[K]]

Because the bokuto ni yoru kihon keikohou are aimed at teaching shinai based techniques through using a bokuto, not using a bokuto better.

...and the 1st and 5th kendo kata?

[ne0r]

Hm. This thing with breaking posture then kill sounds interesting, though I wouldn't fully transfer this into kendo your way, Nayuta.

What I saw in many videos from various kenjutsu ryu (so my references are not very good) was:
1) Person A hits
2) Person B counters
3) Person A counters the counter as he expected it and kills B
(You can see that here: video (http://youtube.com/watch?v=94i1kKe0fhE)
(in 2:13 for example)
(People out there practising kenjutsu, please tell me how it really is)

In kendo it's rather like this (as I unterstand it):
1) A breaks B's posture using seme
2) B reacts in any way
3) A hits

But
1) A breaks posture by hitting
2) A kills
is rather renzoku waza to me.

Zanshin = Kill seems odd to me.

Feel free to correct me.

[Neil Gendzwill]

Just watching the kenjutsu videos, you may not understand what is really going on. For example, if you watched a video of kendo kata #1 you might think

1) A attacks B
2) B counters A's attack and kills A.

When really it is

1) B applies pressure to A
2) A reacts by attacking B
3) B counters the expected reaction and kills A

[ne0r]

Yes, you're right^^ I might have mistaken Kata #1 because we often call the uchidachi "teacher" and the shidachi "student". That's not really adequate.

[Nayuta]

In kendo it's rather like this (as I unterstand it):
1) A breaks B's posture using seme
2) B reacts in any way
3) A hits

But
1) A breaks posture by hitting
2) A kills
is rather renzoku waza to me.

Zanshin = Kill seems odd to me.

Feel free to correct me.

Can you think like the below?

1-1) A breaks B's posture using seme; this is mentally.
1-2) B reacts in any way
1-3) A hits

2-1) A breaks posture by hitting; this is physically, and the same as 1-3.
2-2) A kills

[Nayuta]

;305901']Nayuta, could you please, explain more about this, I saw the picture and I think I begin to understand what you mean, it seems interesting as I´ve never heard that before, but I still have some questions. why are we told, and it´s been recently emphasized in the bokuto ni yoru katas, that we should strike men differently from the drawing you showed and pretty much the same way it´s done with a shinai? ..the 1st kendo kata also comes to my mind...

Can you think like the below?

1. Katana is Katana.
2. Bokuto is Katana of wood.
3. Shinai is Katana of bamboo.

The usage of all Katana is the same, only the effect is different.

However that depends with how to consider, and I have introduced one of the considering way by my picture. This is concept, not definite way at least for Kendo. There must be infinite way. Find definite way of yours by yourself. We should Keiko for finding each way.

[The great I AM]

;305959']...and the 1st and 5th kendo kata?Braining someone with a bokuto isn't clever....

I don't know about you, but I don't use a shinai the same was as a bokuto...with a shinai you can still have the physical effect of a small amount of "cut through" because of armour and the springiness of (most) shinai. Plus, although the objective is generally the same (hit the bloke on the head) the reality and process is very different. Also, you can't lump someone in the chops with a bokuto.

[Nayuta]

Braining someone with a bokuto isn't clever....

I don't know about you, but I don't use a shinai the same was as a bokuto...with a shinai you can still have the physical effect of a small amount of "cut through" because of armour and the springiness of (most) shinai. Plus, although the objective is generally the same (hit the bloke on the head) the reality and process is very different. Also, you can't lump someone in the chops with a bokuto.

My saying perhaps was wrong.

"Handling" is the same in each Katana, not "Usage".

Sorry for confusing you.

[ZtefaNNN[K]]

Can you think like the below?

1. Katana is Katana.
2. Bokuto is Katana of wood.
3. Shinai is Katana of bamboo.

The usage of all Katana is the same, only the effect is different.

However that depends with how to consider, and I have introduced one of the considering way by my picture. This is concept, not definite way at least for Kendo. There must be infinite way. Find definite way of yours by yourself. We should Keiko for finding each way.

I think I understand what you mean, I´ll take it as a personal interpretation, thanks for sharing it.


Braining someone with a bokuto isn't clever....

I don't know about you, but I don't use a shinai the same was as a bokuto...with a shinai you can still have the physical effect of a small amount of "cut through" because of armour and the springiness of (most) shinai. Plus, although the objective is generally the same (hit the bloke on the head) the reality and process is very different. Also, you can't lump someone in the chops with a bokuto.

I´ve heard many times that the way a bokuto, iaito and the alike should be handled is similar. I honestly don´t know, I don´t practice Iaido and I think that the way I use the bokuto is somewhat similar to what I´ve learned to do with a shinai (of course that doesn´t mean I´m clubbing everyone in the head with the bokuto), hence I´m asking, the explanation Nayuta gave sounded interesting, if you look at the picture, you´ll notice that it indicates a different way of using the bokuto/katana when hitting/cutting... so that´s where my question was aimed, because in the first and fifth kendo kata when we attack to the head, we stop above the head not in front of the forehead as the pic shows. hope I made myself clear (must get some sleep...)

[Kagerou]

Braining someone with a bokuto isn't clever....



depends who the target is....

[ne0r]

Can you think like the below?

1-1) A breaks B's posture using seme; this is mentally.
1-2) B reacts in any way
1-3) A hits

2-1) A breaks posture by hitting; this is physically, and the same as 1-3.
2-2) A kills

This is more or less what I think. In the end we mean the same, but I think hitting someone just to break his posture is a possibility, but in Kendo at least this should not be considered the aim; in Kendo you're hitting to hit, you're breaking the posture in another way. Or in other words: I wouldn't consider uchi only breaking of posture. I would consider seme breaking of posture and uchi as hit/kill.

Another thing you said I find very good:
"However that depends with how to consider, and I have introduced one of the considering way by my picture. This is concept, not definite way at least for Kendo. There must be infinite way. Find definite way of yours by yourself. We should Keiko for finding each way."
If I get you right, you're saying that there are many ways. And I think so, too. There's a guy in my dojo who did battodou before he came to Germany, and before that he had done Kendo. I got the impression that he still dislikes the aspect of Kendo that it is unrealistic. But, and I ask the kenjutsu/kendo people, isn't it all the same in the end? Isn't the concept behind everything the same?

[turboyoshi]

but in Kendo at least this should not be considered the aim; in Kendo you're hitting to hit,

Not to pick on you but I think it unwise to make such definitive statements until one has reached sufficient depth of knowledge to be certain of what one knows.

Hitting to break one's posture can be effective and as a tactic, is quite valid. If you were up against someone with a strong presence of mind, you would find it difficult to impossible to break their posture without disrupting them physically.

Regarding your friend's attitude toward the impracticality of kendo, I say ignore it. It's pointless to debate such things. To keep such negativity in mind though, will affect one's ability to learn.

From a certain perspective, all sword arts are impractical. The mental skills however, are always practical and they apply to all martial arts the same, IMO.

sean

[ne0r]

I meant to say that I see it that way, not that it is that way. Sorry for the misunderstanding, my fault.

I must say that the impracticality of kendo along with other things surely destracts me sometimes. I am still veeery young and lack maturity... So I am basically looking for a way to deal with these things at the moment. But your statement is very interesting and good, I'll keep it in mind.

[Nayuta]

;306050']so that´s where my question was aimed, because in the first and fifth kendo kata when we attack to the head, we stop above the head not in front of the forehead as the pic shows. hope I made myself clear.

I was thinking about better expression.

My thinking is that have been necessary to follow-through.

Even if using Bokuto, it means to stop action while stretching that aiming forehead from the beginning, Otherwise it's danger.
That should be to swing from my side to opponent's side, not action stops while swinging from upper side to lower side.

Can you mean...? (I'm not sure though.)

[rotmistrzb]

This has been a very interesting conversation because kendo scoring has always beat the heck out of me, pun intended. I really learned something new here today. I studied kendo for 5 years and never felt confident I understood what the criteria were – I mean not yoko datotsu, but rather any sort of ai-uchi situation. I asked for explanations and did not get them, and I’m pretty sure that was because no one else in my circle REALLY knew, including some high ranking guys, at least of those who could speak english. This was especially troubling to me personally because I had previously for 25 years been a modern fencer and fencing teacher and bout director, and knew quite clearly what constituted a score in that game, so I knew my ignorance. The point made earlier that all ai-uchi should be theoretically resolvable – amen to that! I had no idea. My practical experience was endless bouts where anything that the opponent did invalidated a good hit. A reactive late starting and late hitting Attack into an attack, an off-target hit sloppily delivered, anything. I actually thought that was the rule – you had to hit totally clean with the other guy totally flatfooted and stupid for it to count. I started to favor nuki waza just for that reason, not that there is anything wrong with nuki waza.

Actually, I got some of the explanations I read above, but if someone says one thing like: “grasshopper: do, DATOTSU with KIAI the right posture, and ZANSHIN and you shall score” and then practice and competition disproves the words with contrary deeds, then the words become so much mumbo jumbo. I would say the result was unfortunate, and I don’t speak for myself because I was the old guy and just having fun with it. But I watched hard working smart kids “make” one dan who really could not fence for s#*t because they would automatically attack into any attack in a most mindless way – the system rewarded them for that incorrect behavior because it forgot to tell them “that’s bad, that’s a loosing move”, and in my opinion did the kids wrong.

I mention modern fencing… the “ai-uchi ought to be resolved” rule is strongly practiced there. you may or may know that to do that there are fairly mechanical rules there about the extending arm establishing attack ‘right of way’ (if several other less mechanical conditions are met) and so on. I can perfectly well see the argument for not going that route with kendo, so no need to react here. However, when one person A is in good posture and so on and his shinai is cutting down and his body is moving forward, and the other person B’s late reaction to this is a counterattack to the head, there ain’t no way B’s counterattack is justified if A’s attack hits first and clean. You can say the counterattacker lacked zanshin or moral rectitude or however you want to make the case, but its the mechanical evidence of the movements that make the case to the observer/judge. I feel that my lifetime of fencing training and competition directing experience helped me recognize good correct kendo stuff when I saw it, even though to my confusion it often seem contradicted by my kendo practice leaders and I so never learned and did not understand ‘real’ kendo scoring.
-Retired from kendo, but still very interested

[ne0r]

You can say the counterattacker lacked zanshin or moral rectitude or however you want to make the case, but its the mechanical evidence of the movements that make the case to the observer/judge.

Nice. Very interesting and enlightening.

[Karaken]

Usagi-san, This is as close as Aiuchi gets - well they still called it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-PX24NFL4k&feature=related

[Neil Gendzwill]

I watched hard working smart kids “make” one an who really could not fence for s#*t because they would automatically attack into any attack in a most mindless way – the system rewarded them for that incorrect behavior because it forgot to tell them “that’s bad, that’s a loosing move”, and in my opinion did the kids wrong.It's not incorrect behaviour at shodan. We don't really expect shodan candidates to show us they know anything about making a point other than straight-up waza mechanics and spirit. If they have some understanding of opportunity, that's a bonus for them.


Usagi-san, This is as close as Aiuchi gets - well they still called it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-PX24NFL4k&feature=related
You're talking about the first point shown, right? I didn't watch it past that. That wasn't aiuchi, and it's one of those cases where the slow-mo replay makes it look more like aiuchi than it was. White got there first, furthermore he drove the action into the point and red's countering men was weak and late. I would have called that point, and I suspect it was more clear in person.

[Karaken]

You're talking about the first point shown, right? I didn't watch it past that. That wasn't aiuchi, and it's one of those cases where the slow-mo replay makes it look more like aiuchi than it was. White got there first, furthermore he drove the action into the point and red's countering men was weak and late. I would have called that point, and I suspect it was more clear in person.

I see your point that White initiated the attack and had better form. But had he not landed a clean point, I'd have given Red an Ippon had I been the simpan. We can still argue whether there is such a thing as Aiuchi or not, I was just pointing out every aiuchi looking action still need to be called. Also to me, Red was late in reacting to White but the attack landed at the same time. So the point probably was more obvious in person with regular speed.
In that circumstance, even if White's hit was later than Red by 1/100 sec, he probably would have gotten the point.

[Neil Gendzwill]

I see your point that White initiated the attack and had better form. But had he not landed a clean point, I'd have given Red an Ippon had I been the simpan. He wouldn't have gone if white hadn't initiated. White made him go, then hit debana men. It was actually quite a pretty point.

[Karaken]

He wouldn't have gone if white hadn't initiated. White made him go, then hit debana men. It was actually quite a pretty point.

Yes it is very handsome but I thought the Red was trying Debana.. It's close.

[nonamehandle]

i think this is one of those points where it looks much closer in video and slow-mo than it was in real life. sounds like an odd thing to say (esp. to our current tech crazy generation), but i'd imagine that when shimpaning this match, it was very clear who got the ippon.

judging from the reactions of the shimpans AND also the opponent, there seems to be no doubt who "got" the point. only by using replay technology does the point SEEM closer than it really WAS. i've noticed that when shimpaning, what might SEEM (to an observer) like a hard to call point is really not that hard and the call comes automatically-almost like "mushin" (aarrgh i don't like the expression, but oh well). only after i've raised the flag and have consciously looked at the others do i notice that in general, we must have seen the same thing (of course the mileage varies with the experience of shimpans, but like all things, with practice it improves).