Re: Ni-Ju-Ni Jo Kata
many peolpe think that 31 jo no kata and 22 are the same. I would like to place the problem in another dimesion. We know that at the end of his lfe the founder teaches in Iwama as well as in Tokyo. We don't need to say that the pupils were very different in the capital than in Iwama. Saito sensei (in Iwama) was a meticulous, highly tradicionalist pupil. We can think that the pupils -who, in the end tought us both katas- saw different versions of the same kata. They saw what they knew, they counted according to their experience. For the meticulous pupil, every movement was counted, for the mystic one, the flowing was more important than the number of movements.
In some schools, kata 22 is tought as "kata 1".
I personally practice and teach a funny exercise: we have at least two common "moments" in both katas: mov. 12 and mov 17 (in kata 22) and 21 (in kata 31). Try to mix both katas!.
Try to start by performing kata 31 until mov. 12, then go on from there with 22 until mov 17 (of kata 22), then return to 31. Try also differente combinations of this practice: begin with 22 and turn to 31 and, finally, try to find another concordances between the two katas.
This is all to say that, in my humble opinion (I'm 4th dan BTW), the best we can do is to take the best from each "view" of the original and probably lost kata: from the 22 mov, the flowing of movements, from the 31 the accuracy of positions.