708 odpowiedzi w tym temacie

[budo_mtklub]

15 czerwca odbyły się Mistrzostwa Japonii w kategoriach wagowych (z uderzeniami na twarz). Najlepszym w tym roku okazał się team z Jonan Kamata Dojo prowadzony przez shihan Hiroshige

-60kg: Hashimoto (Jonan)
-65kg: Shibuya (Jonan)
-75kg: Shouji Ryusuke (Jonan)
-80kg: Kikuchi (Saitama)
+80kg: Natsuhara Nozomu (Jonan)

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych Użytkowników]

No, robi się ciekawie w Kyokushinkan( ciosy na głowę- w końcu) Kyokushin wraca chyba do żródeł. Walka będzie bardziej przypomunać tą prawdziwą

[budo_naczolemalowane]

iken to japońska odmiana opracowana przez kenji Sawai -tak wyczytałem w książce Jremicza

Iken to po prostu japońska wymowa oryginalnego chińskiego yiquan. Natomiast odmiana Iken opracowana przez Kenichi Sawai nazywa się Taikiken (lub w pełniejszej wersji Taiki Kenpo). Warto zwrócić uwagę, że niektórzy mylą Taikiken z Taijiquan (Tai Chi Chuan). Są to jednak różne rzeczy, i pisownia japońskimi (chińskimi) znakami jest inna.

[budo_shindojo]

Witajcie!
Taka formuła kumite jest dla mnie dużo ciekawsza niż knockdown. Czekam na otwarte zawody w tej formule organizowane w Polsce przez KAN. Jak wrócę do formy to może wystartuję... Trochę czasu mi to zajmie...
W parze z rozwojem fizycznym powinno się rozwijać wewnętrznie. Niektórzy moi znajomi prócz m.a. ćwiczą tai chi lub jogę i twierdzą, że nie tylko pomaga im to w treningu ale czują się lepiej psychicznie. Dlatego myślę, że warto ćwiczyć iken.
Wszystkie formy medytacyjne wymagają dobrego nauczyciela, bo można podobno rozproszyć energię wewnętrzną / chi - ki / i zwariować lub nawet umrzeć. Rozmawiałem kiedyś z pewnym Sifu z Modliszki i powiedział, że lepiej nie ćwiczyć tai chi niż ćwiczyć u złego nauczyciela i zrobić sobie krzywdę. Ja czasem robię sobie takie mini sesje medytacyjne, w trakcie których wyciszam się, skupiam się na oddechu. Najchętniej w wakacje, w karate gi po skończonym treningu kata na plaży...Wyjeżdżam 28 czerwca i nie moge się doczekać...
Zielona herbata jest świetna, rozjaśnia umysł i uspokaja. Poza tym wymaga chwili dla siebie w tym rozbieganym, zwariowanym życiu...a to też ważne.
Pozdrawiam i życzę owocnych treningów iken. :-)

[budo_mtklub]

słyszałem,że pierwsze zawody w tej formule już w listopadzie podczas mistrzostw europy juniorów

[budo_jan111]

MTklub , Shindojo
Ja nie mam zadnych watpliwosci odnosnie Iken i co. Regularnie cwicze ritsu zen z roznymi technikami oddechowymi i do tego jeszcze troche temu podobnych rzeczy. Powiem tez ze traktuje te cwiczenia bardzo powaznie bo czuje sie po nich swietnie i potwierdzam opinie ze bardzo pomagaja w "normalnym" treningu (nie trzeba tego chyba na tym forum wcale potwierdzac ) Na normalnych treningach pokazuje tylko naszym cwiczacym o co chodzi, nie ma na to czasu zeby przestac pol godziny. Ale staram sie zeby kazdy wiedzial co ma robic (przynajmniej te pierwsze kroki) i wtedy kazdy moze sobie wstac pol godziny wczesniej i pocwiczyc. A kto przez jakis czas pocwiczy ten napewno do tego wraca bo jest to bardzo dobrze zainwestowany czas.

A co do tych zawodow - nareszcie. Widzialem kiedys fimiki z walk Kan w Japonii, hm, bylo dosc chaotycznie i wymaga to jeszcze duzo, duzo pracy. Osobiscie uwazam tez ze kiedys nalezy dokonac wyboru bo walka na jodan + rzuty wymaga duzo wiecej czasu niz zwyly knockdown a tu jeszcze kihon, kata, kobudo... Wszystko wprawdzie troche sie gdzies zazebia ale tylko troche. I albo bedzie z tego ogolne dziadostwo tzn wszystkiego po troche czyli nic dobrze, albo specjalizacja poszczegolnych klubow, czyli niejednolitosc kierunku albo bolesne decyzje o cieciach w programie treningowym z tendencja w ktoras ze stron. Mimo wszystko zycze Kan powodzenia. Tak ja to widze.

[budo_jan111]

Iken itd. Zapomnialem dodac ze podstawa sa codzienne cwiczenia, niestety.

[budo_mtklub]

oj nie raz czytałem kiedyś ,że pisali tu o iken jak o jakimś mistycznym treningu ,a tu prosze nawet to sie przydaje do kumite w realu i w walkach z jodan. Chyba chwała Jeremiczowi,że pokazał ludziom z Polski to inne kyokushin niż było sprzedawane za grube pieniądze przez Kraków ( zresztą do dziś).
Szkoda,że odrazu nie trafiliśmy do KAn tylko okrężnie przez IFK i Tezuka- zmarnowane lata , które teraz będzie trudno nadgonić.

[budo_shindojo]

Chwała
Dobrze, że Shihan mieszka w Gdańsku a nie w Toruniu...Dwie sekty na jednym terenie. Byłaby rzeź a Moherowe to krwiożercze istoty :wink:

[budo_jan111]

Medytacja sama w sobie raczej mistyczna nie jest, pewnie ze towarzyszy temu pewien "romantyzm" i nikomu on chyba nie przeszkadza. Ale mysle ze w Polsce na temat Iken jako takiego najwiecej ma do powiedzenia Naczolemalowane.

Nie wiem wiele jesli chodzi o Kan ale przynajmniej na razie wyglada mi to tak ze wrzucono do jednego kotla rozne elementy, (skadinad, ciekawe i pozyteczne) ale odbywa sie to kosztem spojnosci systemu, oczywiscie nie wiem wiele na temat metodyki w Kan ale powiedzmy sobie szczerze ze Japonczycy dobrymi metodykami (przynajmniej w pelnokontaktowym karate) nigdy nie byli.
Prawdopodobnie "flirt" Royamy z Iken i walka "na jodan" potrwa dluzej i wplynie to jakos na normalny trening Kyokushin- w sensie metodycznym (co moim zdaniem bylo by konieczne) ale na dzisiaj widze malo punktow spojnych w metodyce Kyokushin z jednej a Iken i tego co potrzebne do Jissen kumite z druiej strony! Byc moze pracuje sie w Kan nad dopasowaniem tych roznych puzli ale na zewnatrz wyglada to dosc niespojnie i metodycznie niekonsekwentnie: "dla kazdego cos milego"

[budo_monk24]

Chyba niewiele wiesz o -kan, bo ( bez urazy ) piszesz jakies głupoty.
To co piszesz w ogóle nie zgadza się z rzeczywistością -kan.

Dobrze by bylo żeby zabrał głos ktoś z górnej półki -kan, a tak to mozemy sobie gdybać.

[budo_mtklub]

narzie dwa razy miałem przyjemnośc trenować w kan i janie powiem Ci jedno jak sie do tej pory zgadzałem z twoimi wypowiedziami tym razem żmiem twierszic ,że wielki z ciebie pierdoła nad pierdołami piszesz aby pisac i nic nie wiesz o tym co piszesz bo nawet nie byłes na treningu w kan. Na tych zajęciach w których uczestniczyłem miałem przyjemnośc zobaczyc jak wspaniałą wspójnością wykazują sie zajęcia począwszy od kihon, ido geiko , bunkai, kata, iken ,a na końcu kumite . Wszystko sprowadza się do jedengo czyli dobrego kumite. Każdy ruch , który tłumaczył shihan ,a następnie miał przełożenie jak w klockach domino.
Proponuję abyś trochę ostudził swoje zapały na wiedze o iken bo to powazna sprawa. Sam Oyama współpracował ściśle z K. Sawai wprowadzając w swoje treningi iken.To ,że potem troche wybaczyli to jego uczniowie i poszli w sport niczego nie zmienia,że starzy shihan zaczynają ponownie przyracać stracony blask karate.

[budo_khunag]

Ale mysle ze w Polsce na temat Iken jako takiego najwiecej ma do powiedzenia Naczolemalowane.

Najwięcej ma do powiedzenia p. Andrzej Kalisz (chyba, że to jego nowy nick na forum ).

[budo_mrozek]

Kilka wypowiedzi C. Quinna i K. Oyamy o k-kan i innych:

These days the karate they do in Kyokushin-kan is very different to Kyokushin. It is as though they have changed it on purpose to create a different identity. That's okay of course, if it is strong. But it isn't Kyokushin anymore.

There was some discussion years ago but Mr Royama decided to stay with his own Kyokushinkan and not come back to Kyokushinkaikan when the opportunity was presented to him. They actually took privileged information they received during discussions and used it against Honbu in court, to no success. I know their web page makes a lot out of a small court victory, but it is not realistic. They attempted to gain the right to 25 or 26 Kyokushin trademarks and received the USE of just one, but that was consequently also taken back from them by the courts. They have no legal right to use any Kyokushin trademark, nor do they have any legal connection with Honbu.

Recently Royama Shihan and the Kyokushin-kan group went to court to try and gain some control of the Shogakukai Foundation and some trademarks from Mr Matsui, but the court threw everything out and they even lost the one use of the trademark they ad won in court previously. So any reports you hear about that group having any rights or authority are totally bogus. When I was with them I did try to explain that they were heading in the right direction but assured me they knew what they were doing. The court judgment shows otherwise. They have no rights and no connection to Honbu or Sosai's Kyokushin.

The Kyokushin-kan group of Mr Royama also lost very soundly in court against Mr Matsui. They tried to gain control of some TM's and the Kyokushin Shogakukai Foundation but the court ruled they had no authority at all. So I guess that is kind of a positive in terms of reuniting under Sosai as one by one the breakaway groups are being shown to have no rights, no authority and no connection to Sosai.


Mr Tezuka no longer has any legal, moral or ethical connection with Sosai or IKO. He has consistently lied to his followers and continues to make life unpleasant for Sosai's family and Sosai's Honbu dojo. So if you can find an honest way to do Kyokushin as part of an organization that has no Kyokushin substance then go for it.

For clarity I wanted to address the recent verdict carried out by the High Court in Osaka. This was the case of the union vs Matsui- basically asking the legal system to stop him from calling himself "Kancho". And the union lost.

After Holland, we received many emails inquiring about our relationship with "IBK" and what was happening with European Kyokushin. Somehow, people felt betrayed that I was seemingly "uniting" with Jon Bluming who has in the past expressed much negativity towards Sosai. Given his books were published after Sosai's passing, we will never know how Sosai would have repsonded or what he would have said had the book been written when Sosai was alive.
My relationship, if there is one with IBK, is not... a political one. At least not yet. To be honest I don't know what IBK is. I never heard Sosai talk about it or frankly, anyone in the Kyokushin Honbu. I had heard of Mr.Jon Bluming sometimes.

[budo_mrozek]

Dużo czytania, ale trochę o wyrokach sądowych - ciekawe:

This past month in Japan saw the first round results of a long fought court battle between Mas Oyama's Kyokushin Shogakukai nonprofit foundation and Mr. Matsui Shokei over the rightful ownership of the Kyokushin trademarks. Totaling less than twenty, the contested marks include the multiple variations of the logos that we most associate with Kyokushin such as the red Kanku mark, the "Kyokushinkai" calligraphy that appears on all Kyokushin uniforms, and the name Kyokushinkaikan. Ever since Mas Oyama's death in 1994, as Mr. Matsui began to lose his grip on Mas Oyama's 12 million member organization, resulting in the multiple competing Kyokushin groups we see today, the ownership of the Kyokushin marks has been hotly disputed. There can be no question that at the time of Mas Oyama's death, "Kyokushin" was the biggest name in Japanese Karate. It was the name that commanded the most respect, and accordingly attracted the largest number of new members. It is believed that even today many of Mr. Matsui's supporters remain with him, despite discontent, out of a desire to stay with the group that bears the original name of Mas Oyama's organization.

In the mid-1980's, Mas Oyama began preparing for the protection of the legacy that would remain after his death by creating the Kyokushin Shogakukai, a nonprofit foundation recognized by the Japanese government and governed by 15 trusted associates, so that Kyokushin would never fall under the leadership of a single potentially-flawed director and so that the Kyokushin name could never be used for personal financial gain. It was in the name of this foundation that Mas Oyama registered the ownership of the Kyokushin logos with the Japanese Trademark Office. It was therefore the foundation that Mas Oyama trusted to safeguard the Kyokushin name.

Unfortunately, in the final years of Mas Oyama's life, consumed with preparations for the 5th World Open Karate Tournament in 1991, the Kyokushin Shogakukai's official nonprofit foundation status was allowed to lapse. In order to maintain its nonprofit status, time-consuming minimum requirements had to be fulfilled, such as biannual meetings of the Board of Directors and biannual reports filed with the Japanese Ministry of Education. Most importantly, however, and most critical to Mas Oyama, was the requirement that a foundation of this type support itself exclusively off of the interest earned from the minimum required sum of one hundred million yen (nearly one million US dollars), and without this enormous sum in the bank, the foundation lost its legal nonprofit status. Although the foundation didn't cease to exist, it went into suspension until it could reacquire the required savings. Meanwhile, since Japanese trademark registrations have to be renewed every 10 years, some of the Kyokushin trademark registrations were not renewed in the name of the foundation, and a vulnerability was created that would open the doors to Mr. Matsui's registration of the trademarks in his own name after Mas Oyama's death.

One of the most shocking revelations of this past year's court investigation, proven by evidence and accepted as fact by the tribunal of judges, was that Mr. Matsui not once, but twice, falsified documents in order to transfer the ownership of the trademarks into his own name. Mr. Matsui's initial application to register the trademarks was apparently denied on the grounds that the marks had formerly been registered in the name of the foundation. The trademark office further determined that the importance of the Kyokushin marks was too profound to place them in the ownership of a single individual. It wasn't until Mr. Matsui returned a second time with a letter from prominent board member, Mr. Umeda, granting him permission on the behalf of the Board, that the trademark office relented and registered the trademarks in Mr. Matsui's name. Mr. Umeda, who is Chairman of the Board today, was shocked to find out that his name had been used by Mr. Matsui secretly and without his approval, and this discovery finally led to the foundation's filing suit.

Also as a result of this discovery, the foundation started to doubt the letter which Mr. Matsui had used to transfer an earlier set of trademarks into his own name right after Mas Oyama died. Mr. Matsui had only been able to transfer these marks because of an earlier letter which had been word-processed in the name of Mr. Shiotsugu, the Chairman of the Board at that time. It was most difficult to believe that Mr. Shiotsugu would have actually allowed Mr. Matsui to transfer the marks from the foundation into his private name because it was explicitly against the wishes expressed for the foundation by Mas Oyama's Will. Mr. Shiotsugu, though mentally competent, was an invalid at the time and he would always consult with Mr. Umeda in any Kyokushin-related issues. Yet Mr. Umeda had never heard about Matsui's supposedly obtaining Mr. Shiotsugu's permission until recently, when he read Mr. Matsui's sworn statements.

In court, Mr. Matsui claimed to have visited Mr. Shiotsugu at his home far from Tokyo in order to gain his permission to generate the letter. It turns out, however, that at the time of Mas Oyama's death Mr. Shiotsugu's "hanko" (traditional wooden red ink seal used in Japan instead of signatures on formal documents) was in the safe in Mas Oyama's Ikebukuro office - the office that Mr. Matsui inherited - and that Mr. Matsui never visited Mr. Shiotsugu's home. As an invalid, Mr. Shiotsugu was constantly attended either by his wife or by his nurse. Both women testified in court that Mr. Matsui never visited Mr. Shiotsugu's bedside. It was thus determined by the court that Mr. Matsui had committed the crime of forgery in the process of obtaining the Kyokushin marks.

Unfortunately, it took time and negotiation for Kyokushin-kan Chairman Royama Hatsuo and Vice Chairman Hiroshige Tsuyoshi to reconstitute the foundation's Board so that it might regain its official standing and bring the issue of the Kyokushin trademarks to trial. Ten years had passed since Mr. Matsui's crime, and since according to Japan 's Statute of Limitations ten years is the time limit within which criminal charges of this type must be filed, the foundation missed its chance to prosecute Mr. Matsui for fraud. This year's court case, therefore, was a civil action seeking only to reclaim the trademarks.

Let us remember that Kancho Royama and Vice-Chairman Hiroshige put forth the effort to reestablish the foundation to fulfill the dying wish of Mas Oyama. The reestablishment of the foundation, after all, was laid out in Mas Oyama's Will as one of the tasks required of Kyokushinkaikan's new chairman, Mr. Matsui. We know that before his death Mas Oyama desperately sought to regain government recognition of his Kyokushin Shogakukai: He dispatched then Branch Chief Hiroshige Tsuyoshi more than once to the Japanese Ministry of Education with orders to exhaust every possible means to re-establish the foundation so that it might be there to watch over his legacy. Perhaps if Mr. Matsui had led the Kyokushinkaikan in a way that a majority of Mas Oyama's followers would have respected, Mr. Royama and Mr. Hiroshige might not have felt so obligated to step in and fulfill this dying wish of their teacher in place of Mr. Matsui, who had been charged with that responsibility. Since Mas Oyama's organization, however, was visibly disintegrating under Matsui's leadership, and since Kyokushin's reputation was suffering such damage as a result, the founders of Kyokushin-kan had no choice but to break with Mr. Matsui and activate the very safety mechanism that Mas Oyama had envisioned as a protection against precisely this danger.

Mr. Matsui was failing to safeguard Kyokushin. Mas Oyama's answer to such a situation had been the oversight of the Kyokushin Shogakukai nonprofit foundation. No wonder Mr. Matsui had taken no steps towards its reestablishment. And no wonder Mr. Royama and Mr. Hiroshige could see no other option. We at Kyokushin-kan are very pleased by this court decision in favor of the Kyokushin Shogakukai. Although the victory was not complete, it is clear that an irreversible course of events has been set into motion that will lead to the happiest of all possible outcomes for Kyokushin-kan and Mas Oyama's legacy.

The court returned ownership of the red kanku mark to the Kyokushin Shogakukai, but stopped short of stripping Mr. Matsui of the "Kyokushinkai" calligraphy and the name Kyokushinkaikan. To understand the bearing this court decision is likely to have in the future, it is important to understand the court's reasoning. Although we would often like courts of law to base their decisions on moral righteousness, a court's obligation is instead to interpret the letter of the law. This month's 50-page court decision was abundantly clear in its disfavor of Mr. Matsui, since it determined in no uncertain terms that he had obtained the Kyokushin trademarks through fraudulent means; however, its decision reflected its careful consideration of Japanese trademark law.

The trademarks that were returned to the Kyokushin Shogakukai were marks that were still in possession of the then sleeping foundation when Mr. Matsui made his fraudulent appeal for personal ownership of the marks. Remember that trademark registrations in Japan are only valid for 10 years and must be renewed. While the foundation's registration of several Kyokushin trademarks, including the red kanku mark, had not yet expired, the earlier registration of the Kyokushinkai calligraphy and the name Kyokushinkaikan had expired, and had not been renewed because the Kyokushin Shogakukai was inactive. Thus the court determined that whereas Mr. Matsui's fraudulent action (by means of the Shiotsugu forgery) had been injurious to the foundation in terms the red kanku mark and several other unexpired marks, his fraudulent action (by means of the Umeda forgery) in terms of the expired marks was in a sense injurious only to the trademark office. Since the case was a civil case filed by the Kyokushin Shogakukai against Mr. Matsui seeking reparations for the damage that Mr. Matsui had done directly to the foundation, the best the court could do in the context of this trial was to award the foundation the trademarks that Mr. Matsui had taken directly from it by means of fraud.

The true impact of this court decision, however, runs far deeper than the superficial fact of who owns the trademarks. For the first time, the Japanese public, and more importantly Mas Oyama's followers, have seen the extent to which Mr. Matsui's position of extraordinary power at the helm of Kyokushinkaikan was his own fraudulent construction as much as it was Mas Oyama's intent. Mr. Matsui's ownership of the handful of trademarks that he still possesses is far from permanent. Even if he can hold on to the trademarks through the Kyokushin Shogakukai's forthcoming round-two legal action to regain that which rightfully is its own, Mr. Matsui will lose the right to hold the marks when their registration expires. Though this court decision didn't return those last remaining trademarks to the foundation, it did determine that Mr. Matsui had no legal claim to them. And by returning the red kanku and other marks to the foundation, it recognized that the foundation does have a legitimate claim. Remember that if not for Japan 's ten-year Statute of Limitations, the court's conclusion that Mr. Matsui had falsified documents could have landed him in prison. That opportunity was missed, however, and Mr. Matsui maintains enough influence in Japan that he will likely survive and continue to profit as the chairman of his own organization.

Although Mas Oyama did have high hopes for the 33-year-old Matsui Shokei he appointed chairman of the IKO, it is also clear from the other stipulations of Mas Oyama's Will that he never intended Kyokushin to become one man's fiefdom. On the contrary, Mas Oyama created the independent Board of the Kyokushin Shogakukai to watch over any individual leader who might become corrupted by power or money, so that Kyokushin would never be thusly tarnished. Of course, as non-karateka, the Board members could never be expected to know more about karate than any karate instructor elevated to chairman, but they can most certainly be trusted as independent observers to watch for signs of corruption and to judge whether or not any chairman is proceeding in accordance with the foundation's mission statement as created by Mas Oyama.

It is important to emphasize that the Kyokushin Shogakukai is NOT one and the same as Kyokushin-kan. The Shogakukai is a 15-member Board of Directors - including several original directors appointed by Mas Oyama himself - charged with ensuring that those who use the Kyokushin trademarks are propagating ideals that would have met with Mas Oyama's approval. It is true that Kyokushin-kan Chairman, Royama Hatsuo, and Kyokushin Vice-Chairman, Hiroshige Tsuyoshi, were involved in convincing Shogakukai Board members to reconvene and seek to regain government recognition, and it is true that this board is currently supporting Kyokushin-kan as the group most representative of what Mas Oyama would have wanted. But it's also true that the Shogakukai is a separate organization that could someday strip Kyokushin-kan of its right to use the Kyokushin marks, just as it is currently working to strip them from Mr. Matsui.

So what bearing is this decision - and, we predict, the foundation's ultimate reclaiming of all of the Kyokushin marks - likely to have on the Kyokushin world?

During the past decade, Mr. Matsui has time and time again tried to prevent other of Mas Oyama's original fifty Japanese Branch Chiefs from using the Kyokushin trademarks on the grounds of the registrations that he held. The Kyokushin Shogakukai, however, will NOT attempt to prevent others of these fifty Japanese Branch Chiefs from using them, because the Kyokushin Shogakukai believes that Mas Oyama's appointment of these individuals and the permission that he granted them to use the trademarks in their designated geographical areas ought to be respected. It is hoped that this demonstration will be seen as the offering of an "olive branch" of peace and that some, if not many, of Mas Oyama's surviving Branch Chiefs will eventually return to the Shogakukai and re-incorporate into the single organization that Mas Oyama intended.

It is also clear, however, from Mas Oyama's Will that he did in fact intend for there to be only one Kyokushin organization to bear the Kyokushin name into the future. Accordingly, the Kyokushin Shogakukai is likely to prevent any of those 50 Japanese Branch Chiefs who do not join the unified organization supported by the Shogakukai from a) using the Kyokushin name or trademarks outside their assigned territory in Japan to promote any kind of national or international organization, or passing the name on to their students or descendants for use beyond their lifetimes. Additionally, the Shogakukai will steadfastly prohibit the use of the Kyokushin name, or any variation of the Kyokushin name, by anyone outside of the organization that it supports or those 50 surviving Branch Chiefs of Mas Oyama. Kyokushin-kan and Shin-Kyokushin, for instance, are examples of variations of the Kyokushin name that will NOT be permitted by the Shogakukai once it regains full rights to all Kyokushin trademarks.

[budo_mrozek]

Przepraszam za 3 posta z rzędu, ale to ze względu na objętość podanych informacji.


Komentarze do powyższego artykułu C. Quinna i K. Oyamy:

I think it is best to ask Royama san himself to clarify or verify?
I am sure they are doing what they think is good, though I do not at all agree with them.
I also think Nathan Ligo's web needs to be updated with sincerity and honesty.

Unfortunately, Mr Ligo spins a lot of 'stuff'. When I was with Royama group I was led to believe they had pure intentions. It became VERY clear that the motives were different to mine. Miss Kuristina said Mr Royama could be Kancho of the Kyokushinkaikan and he said he would do it under HIS conditions, being HE would decide who he would let in (to which Miss Kuristina reminded him that they are not HIS Branch Chiefs but Sosai's).
The things Mr Ligo wrote on his web page are either deliberately misleading or just uninformed. Remember that any Foundation Sosai had was a VERY different entity to the one Mr Ligo talks about now. At the end of the day I could talk a LOT about this but what is the point. The truth will emerge eventually in its own time.
If this foundation that is meant to be for truth and meant to represent Kyokushin was for real, where do the 50 or so Branch Chiefs of Sosai fit in? What role did they play in the restructuring and committee selection? What about Sosai's family's role in the Foundation? So many loose ends. All the others look at Mr Matsui and say, "Look at him! Terrible! Not me!" But the truth is they are only different in degree, not in kind. They are just not as smart or as successful as him, and they hate it. The rest is just spin.

[budo_jan111]

Monk24, MTclub
Dobra chlopaki, mowimy po prostu o roznych sprawach. Monk zauwaz ze niejednokrotnie na tym forum wypowiadalem sie pozytywnie o Kan, nie obraz sie chlopie ale chyba nie lapiesz w czym rzecz. Nie ma sensu chyba dluzej sie tu zaglebiac, ale nawet jesli tego nie widac to kwestie ktore poruszylem z pewnoscia zaprzataja glowy szefom Kan.
Chcac nie chcac przy tak szerokim programie jaki ma obecnie Kan: klasyczny kihon, kata, (w tym dodatkowe,"nowe" kata ), kobudo, dwie formy przepisow i na dodatek Iken pojawiaja sie problemy chociazby czasowe, kwestia rozlozenia srodka ciezkosci w szkoleniu itd, itp. Jesli Ty nie zdajesz sobie z tego sprawy to prosze nie zabieraj glosu.

[budo_jan111]

Ale mysle ze w Polsce na temat Iken jako takiego najwiecej ma do powiedzenia Naczolemalowane.

Najwięcej ma do powiedzenia p. Andrzej Kalisz (chyba, że to jego nowy nick na forum ).

Oczywiscie ze to Andrzej Kalisz, czy ty nie masz oczu

[budo_jan111]

Mrozek
Ales ty mnie zmeczyl, uff (bo duzo tego), ale rzeczywiscie ciekawe informacje!

[budo_mrozek]

Żeby była jasność - "Mr Ligo" o którym pisze C. Quinn, to autor tego długaśnego tekstu (drugi przeze mnie wklejony).


Krótki komentarz co do IBK:

Bluming i jego ludzie (w tym już mający swoje 5min. na tym forum dai shihan O.) utrzymują, że IBK to "prawdziwe" Kyokushin, Bluming to jeden z największych uczniów Oyamy etc.

A tu Pani K. Oyama (pomimo korzystania z zaproszeń Bluminga i dobrych słów o nim) mówi, że Oyama nigdy nie wspominał o IBK, a o samym Blumingu "kilka razy". Stwierdza też ona, że Bluming nie robi Kyokushin i że spotkała się z nim ponieważ Bluming nalegał na możliwość używania znaków Kyokushin - co K. Oyama określa "chwytem marketingowym".

Co do reszty. Huh... długo by komentować, staram się znaleźć jakieś info o tym czy k-kan przegrało proces z Matsui, wydawało mi się że dawno temu trafiłem gdzieś na necie na skan jakiegoś dokumentu w tej sprawie (ale nie jestem pewien).

Co do wykorzystania znaków - K. Oyama napisała, że tylko Shinkyokushin ma do tego prawo, ponieważ płaci kasę Matsui za licencję (nie wiem czy to info jest aktualne).
W Europie nikt natomiast nie respektuje praw licencyjnych bo się "przyzwyczaili", nikt też tego nie egzekwuje.

Co do kan. Cóż tutaj już jest wielka polityka
Czytałem gdzieś, że stara fundacja Shogakukai to co innego niż ta obecna.
Legalność znaków - trudna sprawa, przekopuję net ale każdy ma swoją wersję "prawdy".

Najbardziej obrywa się Tezuka Group, gdzie wprost nazywa się s. T. Tezukę oszustem.

Daleki jestem od pełnej zgody z poglądami K. Oyamy - w końcu ona i jej organizacja, też jest stroną w tym "konflikcie" - ale "fajnie" jest zobaczyć polityczne kulisy Kyokushinu, schowane za wielkimi słowami które przytacza każda organizacja: "jedno kyokushin", "nie robimy tego dla pieniędzy", "my jesteśmy Ci prawdziwi".

[budo_shindojo]

Czyli część informacji, które uzyskałem zgadza się z tym co przeczytałem... o Kancho Matsui etc. Cieszy mnie, że nikt już tu nie napisze, że fundacja =kyokushinkan.
Teraz ciekaw jestem jak zareagują ludzie / w tym w mojej organizacji / jak zakażą im używania kanji kyokushinkai i kanku
Symbole to czasem sprawa nie do przeskoczenia. Czas pokaże