No problem you can call me Chris if you want. My username is a cunning amalgamation of my first name Chris and my surname Kavanagh. I'm not particularly bothered who knows who I am either and I'm quite happy to stand by what I say online. Yes. It is not Connovar's obligation to help anyone out. He is however free to offer his opinion on a video posted even if it be a critical opinion. Snide comments are not necessary or useful however and I agree that his first few posts call into this category. However, after I asked connovar to be a bit more reasonable in the thread he clearly did attempt to engage in discussion and explain his viewpoint. Now whether or not you agree or disagree or find his opinion ridiculous is up to you but there's nothing wrong with him voicing his opinion on the video. I'll take your opinion into account and I mean that honestly but at the minute I do not agree with you're assesment. I honestly believe that if you tried to engage with Connovar you would receive decent discussion. Maybe your experience says different but if thats so then I suggest ignoring him and if he is trolling the forum then report the posts and action will be taken. I think he already stated this in the thread? I don't dispute that Connovar's points aren't the discussion Adam had in mind and I wouldn't dispute that some of Connovar's points go quite far off topic. However, I would dispute that therefore he is trolling, his posts after his initial silliness seem to be clear attempts to discuss his POV and how it relates to the video. I'm not suggesting that I agree with all Connovar's points. I don't and I do think the stuff about Fallujah and so on is irrelevant. However, I also don't think your summary of Connovar's position is accurate. He really doesn't seem to be as negative as you portray. I think you are correct. And I also think having a pecimmistic mod would be a nightmare. Do you remember the zero tolerance era? Nevertheless, despite your usual optimism I think you'll find I will prevent people from 'crapping over a thread' if it turns out to be a serious ongoing issue. Again let's not count our chickens before they hatch!
The same way you are qualified to comment on how our methods compare to others. In order to accurately compare two things, you have to understand them both to a certain degree. Unless you have the experience you're demanding of him in whatever art he's comparing the Bujinkan to, then you have no more of a grasp on the discussion than he does, you simply have opposite halves of the equation. If this means you aren't qualified to compare two arts unless you practice both of them to some certain level of proficiency, then that stifles a lot of discussion, good and bad. I think there's enough parallels among styles for this to not be the case though.
The difference being that I don't try to impose my standards on others...well ok I do all the time, but only within the Bujinkan.
Hi Chris. True that - Let me be more direct with my thoughts: If you posted a technique video in the BJJ (flower sweep - for example) section of this board - would you expect to have to engage someone in a discussion about how it wouldn't work if the other guy had a knife (which is a reasonable, critical position). Or how it wouldn't work if there were two of them, etc. You see - the reasonable, critical position is uncalled for - because you posted it in the BJJ section - appropriately labeled with a name of a technique. Anyone from the BJJ forum would know that... I doubt that you would take kindly to someone coming into the thread and reminding you that the sweep would be inadvisable if you were against the wall in the corner of a room because it *might* happen that way. If you engage me in the conversation at all - you acknowledge the premise / foundation of my questions. So now you have to explain why you didn't take into account knives or room corners - at which point I will call you gay and remind you that the "real world" you can't have tatami matts and open space. THen I will give you a rundown on why the flower sweep is fundamentally / tactically / and technically wrong. First - what are you doing on your back. The first rule of fighting for your life is to not be in a situation where the other person can control your mobility. So tactically, you are already in the wrong. But who knows - crap happens and you end up on your back sometimes with someone between your legs.... right??? Secondly - if you are fighting for you life - you are probably sweating and bleeding - so gripping him to isolate the arm is unwise. Third - and most important - is that you are completely vulnerable to striking when you pass your hand under his leg. Headbutts, eye-gouges, etc. I can tell you a story about someone in a sandy place who had a guy on the floor and bashed his head in with his helmet. So in conclusion - you would have to be a complete idiot to do a flower sweep. Perhaps you put that video up as an idea of what not to do if you are ever caught on the ground... And that conversation is why you put a video of the flower sweep up, right? Still think that way? If so - let me know and I will (honest request here) I will make myself at home in the BJJ forum. Seriously. Unfortunately - and he knows this - he isn't breaking the 10 commandments of the ToS - so he is free. He skates just on the other side of the line... Again - the offer stands for me to visit the BJJ forum to discuss my POV. Fair enough. Time will tell. I am rarely wrong on these things - but who knows.... -Daniel
Daniel I see your point but i honestly think if you attempt what you suggest on the BJJ forum all you will receive by way of reply is folks being bemused and maybe one or two replies that ask you if you are serious then folks will carry on discussing things. As a BJJ practitioner I can comment that I wouldn't for instance argue against anything you said nor would I feel particularly threatened by you posting such stuff. I'd just think it's all pretty obvious and most BJJ folks recognise such things anyway. I don't really understand what you're saying here. Are you suggesting that unless I agree with you, that you will go and post in the BJJ forum with the goal being to annoy the folks there? Is it supposed to be a threat? Well, however it was meant, if that's what floats your boat I'd say go for it. It'll be up to the members and the mods to deal with your comments. Such comments are unlikely to bother folks especially if they are made aware of your posts here and already know you are intending to post there just to try and prove a point. I should also state clearly that I would have no hesitation pointing members to this discussion either. Just as I would have no hesitation pointing members here to the relevant thread if a BJJ forum member described how he was going to post random argumentative messages in the Ninjutsu forum to prove a point. And again, it's up to you as an adult to decide what your own actions are. If you want to post on the BJJ forum with the goal being to disrupt the discussion be my guest. I doubt the members or the mod will appreciate it but it's your choice.
Well if the person posted it as being sufficient against a knife or against two people, then absolutely such a response is appropriate. How does this relate to Ninjutsu? Because Ninjutsu practitioners will often state that they are training for self defence, and many of those who are critical of Ninjutsu do not think that many of the training methods represent useful for self defence training. So many of those who are critical of Ninjutsu do in fact see the claims of Ninjutsu as similar to someone claiming BJJ works against who people or against a weapon. In both cases the training does not appear to match the goal. We are probably in agreement that two people circling each other with fists up (like a boxing sparring session) is not representative of a real self defence encounter, which in most cases is either sudden, or starts with two people standing within arms reach. Starting a drill from this position is fine for self defence training, however once you both engage it has to become live, there has to be resistance in order for it to continue to reflect what a real street encounter looks like, something which we do not see in many styles that are marketed for self defence purposes. I would also add that boxing style sparring is not entirely useless for self defence; it teaches you timing, energy, working against a moving target that is also trying to hit you, hep you maintain composure when getting hit, etc. All apply to self defence. Yes, and they do. Your premise is that your training is for self defence, right? That is the very problem, as many people see it.
Which is BS. What claims? If you're unable to separate the art as a whole from a few of it's practitioners, then I at least understand why we're never going to understand each other. You can *NEVER* re-create a real street encounter with 100 percent accuracy. Sad but true. It's all about picking and choosing between various limitations. That's not your problem.
Most Ninjutsu practitioners that I have talked with, including many in this very thread, tend to state that self defence as their goals. It's usually in response to why they reject so-called sport style training. So yes, they will often assert that self defence is their goal. What is your goal/reason for training? Do you deny that self defence is not usually the most common reason behind training? If so, what is? The claim that they are training for self defence, which is what many practitioners will state is their goals. You're making it sound like training-for-self-defence-lot are some kind of minority crown within Ninjutsu. I never said you could, but the fact you cannot recreate a street encounter with 100% accuracy is no excuse for not including live training. There is no doubt that a resisting opponent--someone who is fighting back--is more representative of a street encounter (once contact has been made) than someone who just stands there and does nothing.
What? ??? What on earth are you talking about? For the sake of brevity - let me just repost the following... again. To wrap this up - again - I need to remind you again that at this point I *still* have Tshirts that have seen more time in the dojo than you have. I have also spent more time in groundfighting and MMA than you have. You bring NOTHING to the table that I haven't already done and done better. Let me repeat that - there is NOTHING you bring to this discussion that I haven't already done and done better. NOTHING. Is this clear? No. Wrong. Your problem ... well... one of your problems is that you assume too much. I have never said I train for Self-Defense... I will take a moment though to briefly respond to your inane thoughts :: Your statement seems to open up any thread in this sub-forum to your ramblings because of the "someone once said this is for self-defense" license. I can't visit a BJJ site with seeing the words self-defense on it (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=BJJ++"self+defense"&btnG=Search). Chris - shall I start visiting the MAP BJJ sub-forum now -- or is that not a carte blanc license to thread crap like your boy Topher here is doing. Topher - I am not interested in your Tacos and Beer. There are sub-forums around here for you to circle... well - stand around and pat each other on the back for how wise you all are. Find the door or we will help you. Oh - and come back and see me when you have more time training than my tshirts... -Daniel
Let me tell you something - you haven't spoken to anyone here who practices ninjutsu. Ninjutsu and Taijutsu are not synomous. You dig? The fact that there are elements contained within the system that can be useful for self defense, does not - repeat, does NOT - repeat, *DOES NOT* - mean that the purpose of the system and it's practice is self defense. The reason they reject that is because they signed up to practice Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, i.e. Italian and not Mexican. I want to learn the friggin' system. And I'm not alone (apart from when I have to tell well-known Bujinkan people to their face that they don't have a sense of humor worth a damn, or that I wouldn't want to try out the stuff they're demonstrating. And yes, perhaps you could say that it's me and Daniel and Kacem against the world, but we all live in different parts of the world). Self defense is not usually the most common reason for practicing Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu. I think the majority of the Bujinkan's members only have very vague ideas regarding their own motivations for training. Yes, those who train for self defense and mean it (the way the combatives crowd does) are a minority within the Bujinkan. Most of the time their taijutsu is wack, in my experience. The difference being that those who espouse ryuha kata as a method of training don't attempt to portray that particular type of training as more realistic than anything else... Who says we train with people who do nothing?
How about you avoid the ad hominem attacks and actually respond in an intelligent manner, otherwise why bother replying to begin with. I posted a reasonable response (not an irreverent rant) to your comment that you have to take into account the goals of training before critiquing that training. (e.g. your example that it would be wrong to critique BJJ for knife defence when that is not the goal.) My post was critiquing Ninjutsu training if and when self defence is a goal, which for many people it is, and is how many clubs advertise it. Well what are your goals? Regardless of whether self defence is a goal of yours, you have made the claim that "Self Defense is covered decently within the BJK." I'm not talking about the purpose of the system, I am talking about the goal of peoples training. Sorry but there is usually more to it than that. You will often see arguments that they train for real life encounters, not for sport fights in a ring/cage with a ref, which of course is a tacit suggestion that Ninjutsu/Taijutsu/Bujinkan is superior than these sport styles when it comes to real life defence. So for you learning it for the sake of learning it is more important than self defence, fitness, etc? Okay. I think you will find self defence, along with fitness and maybe competition, are perhaps the biggest reasons why people decide to learn a martial art. I'm not talking about serious hardcore combatives. I'm talking about the ability to defend ones self (among other things) being a reason for why people practice Ninjutsu or most martial arts. I'm not talking about kata I am talking about self defence drills... where someone [lunge] punches you, and you defend. I'm not saying do don't, but alive training is not a known staple of Ninjutsu.
How about you amass the intelligence necessary to differentiate between ninjutsu and taijutsu? People are sheep. Go ahead, flame on. Or it could mean that the people in question find more methods that suit their own particular needs within the Bujinkan. I train to learn the system, and at times there are fringe benefits to be enjoyed. Self defense is usually why people begin, but rarely why they stay behind. I'm not either, but unlike most MMA people AND Bujinkan people, they're the one who take the issue of self defense really seriously. As I've said, the fact that there are elements within the system that may or may not be useful in a self defense situation does not mean that the purpose of the system is self defense. Yes, we do that. I heartily agree with Crafty Dog's comments on Matt Thornton on the "Kali Tudo" dvd.
I do know. Taijutsu is a specific area of training (hand to hand combat) within Ninjutsu, which obviously means Ninjutsu therefore encompasses Taijutsu. Of course, however when they say they train in it because it is superior to sport style training for real life situations, it suggests that training to prepare for such real life situations is a goal of theirs. To repeat myself again... I am NOT talking about the purpose of the system, I am talking about why people train. The fact the purpose of the system may not be self defence does not in any way mean it's not the goal of some practitioners. Finally, we get there. It is these self defence drills which is precisely what I am critiquing. And what was his comments, and what relevance does it have?
No, ninjutsu is not an umbrella term, it's a specialized science concerning the gathering of information and putting it to use. It's all about choosing your limitations. I know, people are stupid. Based on what understanding? "Well, it goes back to...there's this certain famous student of Guru Dan Inosanto, I think we'll refer to him that way, those who know who he is know who he is, those who don't...it really doesn't matter. And...people kept coming to me saying that "so-and-so says that Guro teaches is a bunch of BS, a bunch of dead patterns, and what do you think??" He's an articulate guy, and he was famous for doing that stuff that Guro Inosanto teaches really well, and he's really quite impressive at it, so when he says it's no good, it carried a lot of weight with a lot of people. So they came to me, and it got me thinking, and I come to a different conclusion than he does, a very different conclusion. He's certainly free to follow truth as he sees fit, but he's also using it in how he markets himself in the martial arts world...'I can do that stuff, so when I tell you it's no good, you really know it's no good'. And that seems to me to be...inappropriate, and I think that as the years go by that will occur to him as well. But the question remains...it's the same question we got with the first series -where's the sombrada, where's the hubud, the thrust-on tapping, all these drills that people associate with the Filipino martial arts, and a lot of people were looking at our videos and saying 'see, that proves that that stuff doesn't work', or 'that proves the Dog Brothers don't have technical skills, they're a bunch of sweaty, smelly, psychopaths with sticks'. And at the same time, all of us who went deeper, and have the better results in Dog Brothers do have depth in that, and we were just doing the DVD conversion of the 'Power' tape, and there's that carenza that we opened with with you [Salty Dog]...a lot of dead pattern training to produce the skill setting that is so impressive today. And so, it's an interesting thing, we addressed it a little bit in the first series, Wild Dog was saying 'where's the technique that these people aren't seeing? There's a tremendous amount of finesse, and there's a tremendous amount of technique in everybody in Dog Brothers. It's just that it's happening really fast, and if you don't have any contact experience, you won't know what you're looking at'. And I think that's right, I think you see the skills developed by sombrada when Chris Clifton, True Dog, fights with staff. He gets into mid-range and he just knocks the bejeezus out of people because he's just more fluid and more flowing and more alive, because of the time he spent developing those skills. Not only those reasons, he's also one hell of a fighter and he brings a lot of other things to the party as well. But I think that we really do see the art there, and to the people who take our fights as proof that that's this is the more flowery stuff and that's the more cultural side to the art...I say no, it really does produce the skills, but you also have to get in there and mix it up, and that's where I think this certain famous person has profoundly missed the boat. Because he was so good at that stuff he expected to just sort of waltz in, and...ta-dah, and...no, it doesn't quite work like that, you've gotta spend some time, and you've got to look in the mirror when something goes wrong, not elsewhere."
I never said it was an umbrella term. I said Taijutsu was a subset (one of 18) of Ninjutsu. Why would that make them stupid? Self defence, fitness, competition, etc are all legitimate goals for training, you just have to make sure the training matches the goal. Exactly what is the purpose of Ninjutsu? Does it even have one? I would question whether most styles have a particular purpose. Based on what I have seen.
For what it's worth, Taijutsu isn't a subset of Ninjutsu at all..Ninjutsu is precisely what Kagete claimed it was, a system devoted to the gathering of intelligence, evasion, and "spying"...Taijutsu is Taijutsu..Ninjutsu is Ninjutsu..And I have no idea about "subsets", but it seems that you've been reading a little too much of the "ninpo" literature out there... Perhaps you mean the 18 martial methods "Bugei Juhappan" (武芸十八般)? But those are not taken to include "ninjutsu" as the main group in most instances.....http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8F%A4%E6%AD%A6%E9%81%93 Words mean things...No need to lose ourselves here, the words and their meanings may not be simple, but they are at least straightforward..
Ninja Juhakkei and ninjutsu are not synonymous either. Because, as has been said before, it's a bit like substituting a hammer for the butt of a screwdriver. Yes, and if you understood this as well as you try to make it seem like we wouldn't be having this discussion. Cannelloni is cannelloni and tamales are tamales. The gathering and usage of information. What I'm trying to say is this - all things considered, if you don't feel that it's worth it to learn the system, then you are wasting your time training in the Bujinkan. Self defense, fitness and competition are all adressed quicker and better in other methods. At least you'll admit that much, kudos to you.
