Re: Value of atemi
Again thanks for the comments!
I'd like to adress some things in no particular order:
We all fully understand that the atemi demonstrated were just that > for demonstration.
The only uses I have seen for atemi are ending fights via shattering bones or causing massive skeletal damage. The uses seen at the expo were along the lines of hitting uke 3-5 times then throwing him. I have never even heard of atemi being used to throw, and the concept actually is almost beyond comprehension. If you can touch someone and throw them then why hit them to throw?
I tend to agree with Ian in most areas. If DR was traditionally taught in three parts, which makes sense, then that is all well and good. But, by his own admission, Sensei is teaching us the way he wishes he was taught instead of the way he was. Ian's explination is quite probable.
I happily admit that there are no right or wrong answers to this question. One of the reasons I did not go to sensei is just to see what everyone else thinks and why. I am being trained the way that I am, I am happy with the way I am being trained, and I believe that with Sensei's past experience that he IS teaching us the way he would have liked to have been taught.
I understand that striking is a tool and has a purpose and IS worthy of being trained in. I spent the first 7 1/2 years of my total 8 years of MAs in striking arts in some shape form or fashion. I just wonder why strike when blending is easier and brings about greater affect without hurting uke.
Thanks for the great comments! Just to make sure everyone knows this, I'm not against atemi, just curious.
LOL I just looked at the link for the animated atemi. That is a far cry from the atemi I have seen. It looks as if no strike is really even applied, more a movement of center and a appropriatey placed cut.
Last edited by DustinAcuff : 06-14-2005 at 04:01 PM.