A saber is a sword too, but quite different in use. We can say a primarily two handed sword (like the longsword and the katana) can only be used so many ways. The human body can only do so many things with a two handed sword.
It's interesting at 6:50 how the master almost flicks the 'blade' forward by starting with open palms and rotating both hands forward and backward, much faster than swinging it forward with his leading arm.
This is a very bare bones technique. No twisting or leverage. Just strike first or circumvent the initial exchange. More suitable on a battlefield than in a duel.
+TheRockdoctor54 I've done enough sparring to know that sometimes minimalist technique isn't enough. When your opponent's focus isn't divided feints and deceptions aren't always enough.
that's because kenjutsu (the martial art shown) was forged on the battlefields of Japan. It was what the samurai trained in for over a thousand years and they relied on it to avoid dying. it was straight forward and extremely practical. that's why.
Alexander Gunderson In a real sword fight the hands and forearms make the most obvious targets. They are always generally the closest part of the opponent's body to you and they are the part of his body he needs in order to strike you with his own weapon. Take a swordsman's hands out of use and he is in serious trouble.
This is fascinating. It's actually difficult to follow the movements of the master, even in slow motion. I wish I could understand Japanese, so I could follow what he's saying at least. Does anyone know who he is, or where this was filmed?
Not easy to see how good it works, because uke do not move his body very much. He is staying in the same place all the time, without moving his body from side to side. And then he is having a very sloppy way of using the shinai. If it was a real sword he would not even be able to cut a tomato in to slices, i think. He is using the shinai like a hammer hitting a spike instead of using it in a elliptical cutting movement.
Kenjutsu significa Tecnica(jutsu) da Espada(Ken). O ensinamento do kenjutsu explica como a espada era usada nas guerras, como manusear a espada para matar, usando tecnicas eficientes e rapidas de eliminar o inimigo. A espada que vc aprende a manusear no Kenjutsu é uma espada de madeira ( Bokutou ) praticando em alvos, a esgrima nao existe no kenjutsu. Kendo significa Caminho ( Ou o a forma de viver pela ) da Espada (Ken). Ao contrario de kenjutsu, no kendo pratica-se a esgrima q involve acertar o oponente e marcar pontos. Isso é muito bom pelo fato de vc treinar com um adversario de verdade, e nao um alvo. Porem,por ter sido simplificado, há poucas posições de corte comparado ao kenjutsu... E a espada usada é a Shinai ( Espada de bambu ) obviamente pra nao ferir ninguem. Se vc quer manusear uma katana de verdade, veja sobre iaido, q explicando brevemente eh o ensinamento de desembainhar, cortar o oponente e embainhar a katana.
why don't we see these techniques used in modern kendo tournaments? or is it just that they are moving too fast and there is no window to execute the technique? or just that my eyes cant follow cos they are just too fast?
+kaitachi Kendo is a sport. This is kenjutsu. Difference being, kenjutsu was designed for combat. To kill and maim as efficiently as possible. Kendo is designed for competition with artistry of movement. Which is why you don't see the moves. The point of Kendo is not to maim or kill.
+kaitachi First part is similar to a 出小手,but for dou tsuki or mune tsuki,well...... you can't get a point in a KENDO SHIAI by tsuki those part. That's why.
you are forgetting muscle and tendon attachments. also shock. many factors. also youre confusing techniques to practice with as defacto operations within a fight. lots of things to consider before making a comment such as you did.
I still disagree and I stand by my comment. Adrenaline can keep shock at bay for a while. In my 'do' example there are no tendons or such that would disable the fighter when cut. Are you prepared to deliver a blow and strike a pose without protecting yourself? That's the question. What do you have to lose by practicing good defense? If you read about people surviving sword blows then you'd understand this too.
How so? While a great looking and well executed 'do' cut would slice the belly open, that is not immediatly lethal. Think about how much adrenaline would be pumping through the persons blood. That is plenty of time for them to get one more stab in and kill the person right back. It all comes down to 'train like you fight and fight like you train.' What's the downside to trainning to protect yourself from the afterblow?
Not true. There are plenty of historical accounts of people having their heads split through the brain who still killed the person who cut them. One guy stuck his beard in his mouth to keep his jaw from falling off his face. So I reject any claims that a 'one-hit will always drop your opponent and therefore worrying about the afterblow is irrelevant.'
Not really the point or funny. =/ Of course that would work in this since they do not berserk and destroy they strike points that would halt the opponent and once that happens they stop like it would be in real life. more like a technique and reaction type of a thing.
Meh. I'd like to see the sensei or his students actually fence instead of just demonstrating techniques. Most the techniques don't protect against the afterblow.
so many opportunities for double hits if the partner was allowed to follow through or react, like seriously is the partner told not to move his feet? Also from a longsword perspective these chaps are starting far to close, need to stand out of range of quick thrusts... because a thrust is damn fast at that sort of range. The constant posta breve, of having the hands out in front is just asking for the opponent to snipe the hands. And what the heck is with the binding techniques, you're meant to feel each others blade and react not push against it pointlessly. People don't die instantly, and tend not to just let the other chap do what he wants without reacting. This silly first hit wins policy is stupid it doesn't count for much if you'd be killed before you can disengage.
Guess you missed the point. This is a learning environment, and when learning a technique you start in a position to perform it. Also even Fiore shows techniques first and only then shows counters, so demonstrating a technique against a "body" is far from unheard of. Similarly you don't show/demo/practice follow-up techniques and counter-counters when first demonstrating a technique. And yes, people don't die instantly, however cutting deep into the wrists will take a lot of agency out of your next few moments.
fair enough, I'm more of Liechtenauer and Talhoffer student. I don't think learning is translated very well from such a stagnant learning environment, they should at least practise a full exchange in slow motion, it needs to be one flowing action so teaching it in segments seems counter-intuitive. and yes I'm fully aware of the dangers of hand injuries, hence why I argue against the posta breve style middle guard practise.
The problem with teaching entire exchanges is that you then need to teach each and every possible exchange. If you teach individual techniques, you can string them in any order you need. Also do not be fooled by the "sterile" conditions that these techniques are learned in. My experience in Japanese martial arts has shown that you practice the technique to understanding and perfection, for muscle memory and a feel for the technique itself so that when you need to perform it in an urgent or fluid manner, you still perform the technique correctly (even more critical in unarmed combat where getting it wrong can completely neuter your attack or defence). That's not to say that fluid practice doesn't happen either. However you must first know the technique, and only then can you begin to apply it in a fight. It can also be seen in the difference between performing kata, performing kata with "static" assailants (performing their attacks to match your movements), and performing kata with "live" assailants (performing specific attacks in specific places, but in a much more natural way). One shows the techniques, then you see how those techniques apply, and then you see how it really works.
cool, I accept your points, I guess it comes down to how much weight one puts on sparring versus technique. I feel/have observed that too many schools put to much emphasis on drills because it is safe and easier to teach.
I think it's a lot to do with culture and teaching style and what you want out of your training. A strong foundation in technique is only going to really help you a long way down the line. It's the best way to learn if you're in it for the long haul, not so great if you're doing it because you want to hit someone. It's much the same in various arts, including instruments and such. If you want to play violin for a bit of fun, you probably want to pick up a violin and play it in the first lesson. If you want to play violin for the rest of your life, you're gonna spend the first few lessons practising bowing, long before you pick up a violin. Simplified of course, there's a lot of finer points. Ultimately it comes down to what you want out of your training, and how a particular teacher is teaching it (ie, opinion and personal preference). Generally it's at least a good idea to be aware of other ways of teaching/learning. Been a pleasure good sir, I bid thee a good day.
Oh not a doubt there. I'm just irritated with the cartoon and comic book idiots that think the katana is the be all and end all and there is no way a longsword can compete crap...
Disgusting. Bad technique based on terrible assumptions without any understanding of maai utilizing a patently worthless uchidachi. Mr. Kono seems to think he's reinventing the wheel.
Not 100% sure if there isn't a more practical version of this technique (I'm by no means a kenjutsu expert). Anyway, impractical techniques continue to exist if you don't test your moves in a sparring match against serious practitioners. Bullshit is allowed to persist because of an uncritical attitude.
***** True, all martial arts face this problem. However, the schools that test their techniques in a critical way during sparring, generally produce much better fighters than school that don't spar and simply accept anything the "master" comes up with.
Daniel Thompson To some extent I agree. If you practise your pre-arranged movements against an opponent who's really putting you under pressure, you can get a fair idea of what works and doesn't work. However, the downside is that in a pre-arranged pattern, you have the luxury of knowing what your opponent is going to do. Therefore, I think the best way to find out what really works, is to try to apply it in the unpredictable setting of a (controlled) sparring match. If you can still pull it off against an unpredictable, fast moving opponent, who's putting you under pressure, then the technique may be valuable. Consequently, you can teach and practise it in pre-arranged patterns, and at times use it in sparring matches, so you can learn to apply it in an unpredictable environment. Unfortunately, and this is my main critique, I have often seen people try an unproven, new technique on a slow moving, compliant opponent, when they knew what he was going to do. This is not a good way of determining what works and what doesn't. It only fools the person executing the technique into believing he's invented an effective new move, without actually having subjected it to critical testing (i.e., sparring or real life fighting, although I don't recommend the latter). As for the samurai only practising with pre-arranged forms, I'm not sure of that. I agree that practising combat proven attacks and defences in a pre-arranged pattern isn't bad as long as you're both trying to strike realistically. The downside is that you don't really train to react to the unexpected. Their lives depended on their sword fighting ability, so I can't imagine they didn't get into matches to test and further hone their skills.
SirPilkington samurai technique is not a berserk technique like mongols..i cant say the same about european knight but yeah the samurai is using these in battle but with more improvised movement
