Talk:Uechi-ryū

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martial arts Portal
This page is part of the Wikipedia Martial arts Project.

Please use these guidelines and suggestions to help improve this article
if you think something is missing, please help us improve them!

You may also wish to read the project's Notability guide.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents

[edit] Weaponry in Uechi

JJL, 28 November 2005: I don't think that Uechi-ryu places much emphasis on defense against weapons. Like most karate styles, it's principally, though not exclusively, for one-on-one empty-handed defense. I've tried to add compromise language here, however.

ZN, 04 April 2006: I somewhat disagree. Uechi Ryu places emphasis on controling your opponent, regardless if they have a weapon. The horse-stance elbow strikes in moant kata may be applied that way as can many of the block strikes. If an individual practitioner chooses to ingnore these area it should not be said to be a deficiency of the style but of the practitioner. Uechi Ryu puts emphasis on controlling the opponent entirely.

--Justin L. 17:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC): I also have to disagree. The end of seisan is meant to avoid a sword swipe and attack at the wielder. And the close blocks in konchiwa could be interpreted as blocks against overhead strikes.

[edit] Ikkyu seeking refresher on moves for kanshiwa up to seichin

You should probbaly try a web board, like the fora at www.uechi-ryu.com, or www.e-budo.com, or www.martialtalk.com. JJL 22:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Found 'em all at the U.Virginia uechi club's site, which was on the page; managed to work out seisan on my own, gonna sit down to rememorize Kansu tonight....thx anyway.Skookum1 04:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mantis and Cobra

Style animals are not restricted to the Tiger, Dragon and Crane. The big '3' is from older information; this article should reflect that. Uechi-ryu 08:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I do not believe that there is significant Mantis influence, and Cobra is not usually considered a Chinese animal (more Burman, say). What techniques are Mantis or Cobra? I also disagree on the kata names. JJL 06:23, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


The Mantis is the Sanchin position with palms facing up, it's in every form and very influential to the system. The Cobra is the final striking blow in Sansairyu. Commonly (and incorrectly) called the 'crane' technique (removes the lethal nature of the move by name alone!). Uechi-ryu 11:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I have know from a little child that the ending strike in sanseiryu is called the crane's beak strike and recently learned that in Japanese it is called the kakushiken, but it seems like a crane's beak striking downward in an attack to me and is the way I have always seen the seniors practice it. (MHK II)

I agree with the recent revision which removes these references. I do not believe that these are mantis and cobra techniques in origin, even if they do resemble such techniques. JJL 20:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
I was told that the Sanchin hand position is "crane" in origin. From what I've seen of Mantis, it's palms down - and fingers down, deceptively limp-wristed. Why User:Uechi-ryu thinks that a crane move cannot be lethal doesn't seem to understand crane, or ever met one up close (I have). Kill? Oh yeah, a crane can kill, and it's 5000 times larger than a praying mantis. Just ask Bodhidharma about it if you can channel him.Skookum1 17:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
I always thought the crane-strike sanchin position looked Egyptian anyway. Maybe it's "crocodile"?Skookum1 17:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

huh? The current (and accurate) history coming out of Okinawa clearly points out this information..read Kanai Uechi's book...he says this himself! What you believe is not the issue here; accuracy to this article is what is important. The choice is yours to keep editing my corrections....but I am not sure why the article is continually reverted to a less-than-accurate version. There is information here :http://forums.uechi-ryu.com/viewtopic.php?t=11267&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=eb1d6114e6d8ed25be2c783d34936e22 which helps confirm that Mantis is part of Uechi-ryu. Uechi-ryu 03:58, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

If you really want I'll call up Jim Maloney and get his opinion on the subject. But I'm sure he'll want to deliver his opinion in person.....17:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
The page mentions Chow Gar (Southern mantis). That is based on Dragon and some Crane, not Mantis; see its page here. JJL 17:53, 19 February 2006 (UTC)


Users; trying to have a logical debate here, with information that supports the modern insight into the systems history. Sarcasm (not to mention errors) and idle threats (Maloney? I'll take Kanai Uechi's version first)? What was that all about? Actually, I will let this go; it's certainly not worth the effort to be constantly bothered by this. FYI, the wrist strikes in Seichin are strict Mantis. Hopefully the accurate versions of Uechi-ryu will be explained to you, its quite interesting. Have fun with this article.

My apologies; the risk with text-only conversations is that intonation is lost; my comments were meant lightly, not as any kind of threat or serious sarcasm. I'm a hard-assed editor in other areas of Wikipedia where I have expertise, and my tone perhaps carries over. I'd never, for one thing, make a real threat invoking Sensei Maloney unless I knew he'd back it up; in which case he'd be making it himself, of course.
And I forget myself as a lowly ikkyu, and haven't been up on Uechi history in recent times, and certainly haven't seen the book you're referring to. To me, following up on the other editor's edits, which I was only reinforcing, the Mantis and Cobra references just sounded trendy - I live in a city with umpteen million flavours of martial arts (Vancouver) and lots of trends come and go; Chow Gar I remember as hands DOWN, but pointed in a similar fashion; and when the White Crane guy from Fujian came to Buzzard's Bay one summer ('96?) his forms had hand positions similar to Uechi Sanchin, not Chow Gar. Ultimately all martial arts can be traced back and into each other, in my unknowledgeable opinion, with a mix-and-match flavour that varies from school to school, even within Uechi-dom. Sensei Campbell no doubt, for instance, knows his Chow Gar independently of Uechi stylistics, i.e. in its own right; and while his own personal style must mix the two the long tradition, still doctrine in the 1990s, was that Uechi was Tiger-Dragon-Crane and that was it; so I was going on what I was taught; or rather had drilled into me (at peril of more pushups than I might want to do...and that was getting off easy).
I'm studying by myself now and while the historicities are interesting I'm doing the sanchin-solo thing, with what other kata and drills I can remember; the theory is not so interesting to me as the experience of actually practicing Uechi forms/warmups again; and rather than pick the style apart I'm more concerned with trying to get it to work for my own body (I'm 6'5", 255 lbs and 50 yrs old); finding what works, what feels good. Maybe it's because I'm overexposed to Asian culture here in Vancouver I'm less fascinated by its intracies and various schools of training, painting or whatever; the art is in the doing for me, not the book-studying; as someone just working with the forms as forms I find myself less concerned with any historical mystique or lineage and more with the actual doing of the craft. But what do I know? I'm just doing my forms.....
So again, my apologies; I spoke out of turn and too flippantly; but not in bitterness or contempt.....Skookum1 07:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Some Uechi folks can be very sensitive about comments made on the style, and will make childish threats to those who ask the wrong questions or form the "wrong" conclusions based on honest observations..

This lack of verifiable information is due to the fact that little or no first hand information exists to support facts on the subject or content of the style, save what individuals will assert, based on their observations, hearsay or what they make up themselves.

The style is said to have some from Pangainoon which is a non-existant style of kung-fu, of which there is not one shred of evidence to support that it ever even existed.

Mantis is not one single style, there are several Mantis systems. The one that actually emulates the Mantis itself in movement is Northern Mantis and is not the system thought to have similar movements in Uechi. The Cobra vs Crane is best left to both animals to decide, both Crane and Cobra are deadly in animal form or systemn form. 206.148.28.6 08:24, 20 May 2006 (UTC)(NOB)

It would not entirely be appropriate to use Kanai Uechi's book as a source for this considering the break in the style. It might just be better to leave it out completely.

[edit] Kata meanings

The kata meanings were incorrect; the out of date idea was that they simply meant a series of numbers (which don't add up in the kata) or that they only represent combinations of names. Uechi-ryu 08:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


Actually, the kata names for kanshiwa and kanshu do only represent the combination of names. The others are more involved, and I will edit this soon to show the meanings determined by Okikukai.

Bakarocket 18:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Have edited to reflect the correct meanings based upon the Kanji. Bakarocket 15:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Master rankings

The list showed the instructor rankings associated with a specific belt rank; this is not so....the rankings and the instructor levels are not linked. Uechi-ryu 08:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shohei-ryu & Uechi-ryu

Shohei-ryu is a completely different system, different Kata (No Uechi kata). Uechi-ryu 08:20, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

My sources say otherwise. I believe that Shohei uses the same kata. JJL 15:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Here in Okinawa Shoei-ryu is a direct decendent of Uechi-Ryu. They have incorperated some changes and a couple additional kata, but the techniques and the Uechi-Ryu Kata are exactly the same.

[edit] Uechi Ryū vs. Uechi Ryu

I believe that the form Uechi ryu or Uechi-ryu is much more appropriate than Uechi Ryū for the name of this article. This is the English version, and u would be more reasonable than ū. I suggest changing it back. JJL 03:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, but the Ryū form is the correct romanization of the 流　kanji. Maybe it should go back, but underneath the main title should be the correct spelling. (e.g. The Tokyo wiki entry) Bakarocket 18:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to chime in late, but please see the MOS rules on the subject of Japanese article naming conventions. I would argue that this article title should remain as is. -Sarfa (talk) 05:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Use of "traditional" or "traditionalist"

I just edited the parenthetical comment on shomen hajiki, from:

NB: some tradtitionalists consider this to be a throat attack

to:

NB: some consider this to be a throat attack

since I am aware of some master level (e.g. 8th dan) practitioners who will say that this was "originally" a very relaxed eye-strike, unlike the forceful tight-hand eye-strike that is often practiced. Most of the hojo undo and kata moves in Uechi Ryu are open to interpretation. I don't believe this is the forum to argue about what is a more "traditional" interpretation of a kata or hojo undo exercise, though. It should suffice to give some of the more common interpretations, without making claims about what is more or less "traditional". I believe such claims are more likely to rankle certain Uechi Ryu students than to inform the general audience for the article. Kblakes 15:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Uechi Ryu Sources

[This discussion began after I added a sentence to the main article about Uechi Ryu's Kenyukai group. I'm moving the discussion as it exists now to a new "sources" section of the Talk page. Kblakes 15:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)]

That sounds good, but who is Alan Dollar and why should we care about him? (I mean that if he is going to be included, there better be more references to him than his own website and his own book.)Bakarocket 10:48, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

If you are interested, you can find references to Master Allan Dollar on web pages by his students and colleagues. E.g.: [1], or [2]. Also, if you look at Master Dollar's book, you can see blurbs on it from well-known Uechi Ryu practitioners. He is a good source., especially for the Uechi Ryu branch that followed Seiyu Shinjo and is now widely known as the Kenyukai. The integrity of Master Dollar's writings is quite comparable to the integrity of the other well-known American authors who have written books about Uechi Ryu. Kblakes 18:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I'm not personally interested in him, but neither do I doubt his integrity. I'd just like there to be better sources than his own book and website for the information that was just added. According to the verifiability rule, sources are supposed to be "reliable". Saying "he is a good source" isn't enough. Also, "blurbs" he uses in his own book are by definition unreliable. In fact, Cherokee publishing seems to be a "self-publishing" publisher, so the entire book would be invalid. (Correct me if I'm wrong, please. I just did a quick google.)

Regardless, if you can refer to the reliable sources he used for the information in his book, I'd be perfectly happy. With that in mind, we'll have to delete basically everything you added unless you can put up some valid sources. (The above statement about "some traditionalists" was very well made. I mean specifically the addition of Dollar's sensei's dojo stuff. Prove that it is prominent.)

(For that matter, ALL of the sources used in this article have to be cleaned up. It's kind of a joke. We've got 7 websites and two vanity books, and at least 4 of the websites are directly connected to one or the other of the two vanity book authors.)

Bakarocket 11:22, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I understand the concerns about sourcing for this article. One major cause of the sourcing problems must be that, well, Uechi Ryu is a fairly small community, and not only that: it's highly factionalized. The section in Mark Bishop's "Okinawan Karate" is only 5 pages, out of 176, and it discusses only 2 of the factions. I will work on citing better sources for my information. My main source is the oral tradition of my Kenyukai dojo and the larger Kenyukai community. I felt that the fact that Master Shinjo has students world-wide and the fact that he won the Okinawa Uechi Ryu tournament 9 times straight was enough to legitimize the use of "prominent" in describing his dojo, but I may very well be showing my bias as a Kenyukai student. Most of my non-"vanity" sources are film. For example, a Discovery Channel special, and an Okinawan documentary about Uechi Ryu, Gojo Ryu and Shorin Ryu. What is the policy on citing documentary film as a source? I do also have some magazine sources I will have to track down. For example, a very recent article in "Okinawa Today" (or something like that). I'll track it down. Thank you for pushing this point about sourcing, Bakarocket. I believe it will make the article much stronger in the long run (kind of like kote kitae, which, by the way, I'm surprised is not discused in the article). Kblakes 15:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I actually edited my post a couple of times because I realised it sounded like I was attacking you, and that's not what I wanted to do.

I agree that most of the sources we will have for Uechi will be a bit flaky because of the size of the community, and I actually don't have a big problem with that. We really have to find some neutral sources, but it's not a "let's redo this completely" offence. My problem is that Kiyohide Shinjo is highlighted in the section on Uechi Today, but there is nothing on the Mattsons, nothing on Shimobukuro in Europe, and nothing on the various independant teachers who ignored the split after Kanei's death. This shows a very clear bias towards one teacher in an anarchic art that is packed with different teachers teaching slightly different things.

In Shinjo's case, his championship trophies and world-wide student placement are not enough to earn his dojo prominence, I think. Above him should be Mattson, who basically introduced the style to 400 million potential students, and Shimobukuro, who is one of the European Uechi Grand Poobas (in terms of number of dojos and students.)

Maybe a good compromise would be to put in EVERYONE we can find, and let the reader choose for himself who is prominent and who is not, and base it purely on the data we gather about each teacher. More specifically, we could add a separate subheading on the different "sects" of Uechi, under the Uechi Today main heading. So, the main entry would say what it says now minus the part about Kanmei and Shinjo (refering only to the split in the style) and then underneath that we can put all of the different organizations that exist. It would take a while, but we could note that it is a work in progress and invite new additions.

I think in the case of documentary film, it would be best to cite it by name, airdate, and production number, and then see if anyone complains. Film is just a little bit harder to verify than print, but in my mind it would suit the purpose of being a good citation. (Especially from a broadcaster like Discovery which is widely accepted as neutral.)

Bakarocket 03:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm still working on tracking down the sources I mentioned (recalling loaners of medi to some friends). I like Bakarocket's suggestion of somehow providing a good amount of detail in this article about what all the different factions are. I personally included info about Kenyukai only because I am privy to it. The point that it throws things out of balance is a good one. Master Mattson is mentioned in the "Early History" section, but it would be good to give more information about his legacy in the proposed section about current state of the divisions. I personally am intriged by the idea that different groups have different parts of the mysteries of Uechi Ryu to teach. I harbor no ill will nor disrespect for any one of the "sects" of Uechi Ryu. I would love to have the Wikipedia Uechi Ryu article be a place that accurately catalogues the various "sects", in the manner Bakarocket describes. Kblakes 20:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Nice work on the sources, Kblakes. Bakarocket 15:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article Promotion

I gave the article a Start class but it is already borderline B. A couple of pictures would tip it over the edge.Peter Rehse 07:59, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

It's in need of a serious editing and a consistent style. JJL 02:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adding photographs

I've been thinking about what photos would be good to use. I think any reasonably good quality photo of Kanei Uechi in a characteristic Uechi Ryu stance would be great. Does anyone have access to digital versions of such photos and good knowledge about where such photos stand in terms of usability? Or which image copyright tag should be used? It would also be good to have photos showing kote kotai, or kyu kumite, associated with the right sections. Kblakes 20:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

My teacher has got some negatives of Kanei and others from when he first started that we might be able to have scanned. I'll ask him about them.Bakarocket 11:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hojo Undo

I take this style of karate and the hojo undo is screwed up, it should be: Sokuto Geri (Side Snap Kick) Shomen Geri (Front Kick) Mawashi Tsuki (Hook Punch) Shomen/Seiken Tsuki (Reverse Punch) Shuto Uchi-Ura Uchi-Shoken Tsuki (Chop-Backfist-One Knuckle Punch) Hajiki Uke-Hiraken Tsuki (Tiger Paw Strikes) Hiji Tsuki (Elbow Strikes) Tenshin Zensoko Geri (Turn-Block-Front Kick-Forward Leg) Tenshin Kosoko Geri (Turn-Block-Front Kick-Back Leg) Tenshin Shoken Tsuki (Turn-Block-One Knuckle Punch) Shomen Hajiki (Finger Tip Strikes) Koi No Shippo Uchi-Tate Uchi (Fishtail Stikes up and down) Koi No Shippo Uchi-Yoko Uchi (Fishtail Strikes side to side) Please respond before i change anything, Thank you very much [Gravediggerfuneral]

I believe all the japanese names of the hojo undo currently on the page are correct. I have seen variations of the japanese name for Chop-Backfist-One Knuckle Punch. If you would like to list one or more variants of the japanese name for it -- e.g., "wauke shuto uraken shoken tsuki could also be shuto uchi-ura uchi-shoken tsuki", that sounds good, but I wouldn't just edit it outright. Your English translation of "Koi No Shippo Uchi-Tate Uchi" isn't quite right -- it is "Fishtail blocks in each direction" i.e., in four directions, not just up and down. I like your translations of the Tenshin techniques better than what's already there. Just today someone editied the translation of "Mawashi Tsuki" (a.k.a. "Furi Tsuki", I believe) to "Hook Punch" instead of the more descriptive "roundouse four-knuckle-fist punches" that was there. Also, "Sokuto geri (knife-edge kick)" was editied to "Sokuto geri (Side Snap Kick)", which is not as accurate a translation: "Sokuto" means "knife-edge". Also "Seiken tsuki (full-fist punch)" was edited to "Seiken tsuki (Reverse Punch)", which is not as accurate a translation: "Seikin" means "full-fist". Much of this should be reverted. Kblakes 01:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Not to argue in any way this data is not supposed to be an EXACT translation it is more a basic name for the move ,this data has been passed to my sensei (5th degree) from his sensei (6th degree) from Sensei Nakahodo (10th degree president of Okinawan Karate-Do Association, and student od Kanei Uechi himself. This is extremly accurate.As well Wauke shuto uraken shoken tsuki is incorrect, a wauke is a circle block followed by a strike to the collar bone and the solar plexus.Please write back and let me know if this helps at all. thank you [Gravediggerfuenral]

And I speak Japanese fluently, gravedigger, I live in Japan, and my teacher is a 9th dan Hanshi. We don't need to be quoting lineage, because frankly none of us can prove it on the internet. My translation might be a bit better than one that has passed through 3 people to reach you, however, considering my fluency in the language. Kblakes, the shippo uchi, tate uchi literally means out and in, up and in. But four directions would be fine with me. Bakarocket 11:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Bakarocket for clearing this up,one other thing I think should be added, is Geri Wasi (Kick Techniques)(not part of Hojo Undo) i think they are as followed: Shomen Geri (Front Kick), Fumi Komi (Side Stomping Kick or Side Kick to the knee), Yoko Geri (Side Kick [to the Ribs]), Ushiro Geri (Back Kick), Mawashi Geri (Roundhouse Kick). Please let me know if this should be added before i do anything! gravediggerfuneral

I don't think that everything should be added to be honest. There are a lot of different dojos doing different things, and personally I'd prefer to stick to the basics when describing the style. Anything that is pretty much done by everybody should be included, and everything that is not, should not. Kicking exercises belong to the latter group in my opinion, but it's a free world.

p.s. as an edit to my above comment, it looks like I'm saying that "shippo" means "out". I was lazy with my comment, and see that it looks bad now. The complete translation would be as follows: Koi (type of fish) no (possesive article) shippo (tail) uchi (inwards) tate (stand or upwards) uchi (inwards). Bakarocket 11:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


Hey karateka, I'm curious to know if it's only my school that does Bunkai (seeing that it's not mentioned in the artical) thanks gravediggerfuneral.

[edit] Photographs

I have some photos that I took at a recent tournament that, if no one objects, I will put up on the page in a few days. There are some kata photos and some fighting photos, and I've found a couple of good ones in the mix that show Uechi form. If anyone doesn't want me to put them up, let me know here. --Bakarocket 12:49, 9 September 2007 (UTC)