The “dirty” or more flexible techniques, the more holistic syllabus, isn’t missing from karate – a lot of it is hidden in kata, something I’ve waxed lyrical about in the past. But the fact that it is in there suggests that these techniques might have been taught once upon a time. Where Koryu Uchinadi has it strengths is that it aims to go back to before a lot of the controversial techniques were extracted from karate to make it more “palatable” to the audience it was intending to instruct.
So thus, it aims to present classical karate in a light that broadens the “formal” syllabus, teach application-based principles and asks the participant to open their mind to different ideas and applications. Just like Jeet Kune Do, it is as much a principle as it is a form of combat. The difference is that this has been achieved through anthropological research into old traditions and only after this, more contemporary experience and research has been used to formulate this into something coherent. In contrast, Jeet Kune Do applies the “melting pot” theory and takes various other forms of combat and applies their strengths atop a base created upon the principles of wing chun. While their method with which they reach their conclusion is different, arguably there is a similarity of parallel between the overriding rationale being presented by these approaches.
This ends the fourth part of this lengthy discussion – keep checking throughout the week to keep up with the latest, or simply check it using the Koryu Uchinadi/Jeet Kune Do comparison tag.