Jump to content

mas4t0

Members
  • Posts

    920
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by mas4t0

  1. To clean up after my prior posts, I have no doubt that the court will find in Tony's favour (if it goes that far without being resolved). You are in excellent hands and will likely get this resolved before it gets to court. The questions I posed before are not real questions I'm asking you, just things it's worth ensuring you can confidently answer if it does go to court.
  2. The important information here is not to know the traditional handmade methods, but rather to know the machine processes, which falls within the purview of an engineer. The specifics of the traditional processes is not the relevant information to determine if something is hand made; rather a detailed knowledge of what is possible with machinery. This way we can pursue a null hypothesis. You cannot prove a negative, you cannot prove it is handmade with information about handmade processes, you can only conjecture. To let an engineer explain why the blade could not be made with modern machine processes, and that as such it must be made by traditional ones (to which the exemption applies) is a much stronger argument. The issue I'm addressing here is not whether the sword is a genuine nihonto, but how to establish that it is definitely exempt. The primary traditional hand forming techniques are forging and stock removal. It seems clear from the modern production blades available for sale in the UK (without the need for a licence) that the working interpretation of the legislation is: if the blade were formed by hand, the blade is exempt. Empirically we can see this to be the case as: blades with non-traditional heat treatment are not excluded. blades made from mill steel (monosteel) are not excluded on account of the steel not having been hand made. furthermore, there is no way to know if a monosteel blade was drawn out by hand or if the blade was formed entirely through stock removal on a belt grinder, with no forging by the "smith". Since none of the above are excluded from the exemption, we can conclude that hand forging, traditional heat treatment, and traditional steel are not required to qualify for the exemption. So what is excluded? Blades formed by means other than forging and stock removal by hand: which would be stamping primarily and stock removal by CNC or other machine processes. The rub though is that hand finishing will erase all evidence of non-traditional machining, other than in the case of a stamped blade. A stamped sword is very thin, as it's made of sheet metal. A CNC machining process could achieve the correct cross sectional geometry, and would leave behind tells, but you only need to run it on a belt grinder for a few minutes to remove all evidence. It could equally be argued that by completing the blade with a hand finishing process, the blade has been hand made by traditional methods. As the final stage was evidently to stock remove by hand, it's just a matter of degrees. Are you taking it from a billet to a blade by cutting it to a rough shape with a saw and then shaping it on a grinder, or roughing it out a CNC mill and then finishing on the grinder. Does this change whether the blade is handmade or not? There's no difference in the end product, so I would have to go with no. My point is simply that the legislation is not specific to Nihonto, and as such, specific knowledge of Nihonto is not necessary to prove the exemption. The only blade definitely not hand made by traditional methods is a stamped sheet metal blade. Ultimately the real restriction is on cheap, low quality blades, which are likely to be used as weapons. If we are trying to assess the manufacturing method of an item, "A", and I describe how it would be made by traditional methods and you (as the engineer) then describe how it would be made by modern machine tools; have I proven it was made by traditional methods? If you weren't there to explain how it could be made with modern machine tools, would I have proven anything in the above example? If, on the other hand, we are trying to assess the manufacturing method of item, "B", and I describe how it would be made by traditional methods, and you then explain that it could not have been made by any non-traditional method; has anything been proven? Would the same thing have been proven if the explanation of traditional methods had not been provided? I concur. This is the point I was making. It's not about who is really the expert, but rather who will be accepted as the expert and trusted by the court on that basis. Many people will fit the bill as an expert witness, but there's the issue of availability, rates and expenses. There's no need for a world class expert, but only for someone who is accepted by the court as impartial, trustworthy, and more knowledgable than anyone else in attendance. For clarity for the sake of anyone overseas accustomed to a different system, the UK system does not allow for each side to bring in their own biased experts, but rather calls for a single, mutually acceptable expert witness who's allegiance is to the court and not to either side (irrespective of who is paying him). In the higher courts there's a process by which you commission an expert report months in advance of the trial and provide it to the other side. They then pose their questions and seek clarification from the expert witness, and the answers to these matters are incorporated into the final report supplied by the expert at trial. This way there is no real need for the expert to attend the trial and both sides are aware of the expert testimony ahead of time, which is useful in reaching out of court resolutions. This type of system is seemingly not in place in the magistrates court and I'm not sure what happens if the expert is not available on the day to give evidence in person. I have no experience or knowledge of this, but my (uninformed) inclination is to seek an expert who can attend and give oral evidence on the day, even if they are a lower tier expert. This can of course be in addition to other evidence, such as a written report by a more esteemed expert who is unable to attend in person (which may or may not be accepted as expert witness evidence). How does an individual prove this authentication to the court? Wouldn't we need a trusted impartial 3rd party to confirm to the court that the papers were authentic and that they had been in touch with the NBTHK to confirm this? Presumably a legal professional could also have the papers authenticated and give his word, on the record, to having verified their validity. In the case of a litigant in person, it seems like low hanging fruit for the opposing barrister. I am of course not a barrister or a legal professional of any kind, but I would certainly look to undermine the papers if I were the opposing barrister and it would be quite difficult to defend if preparations hadn't already been made. I don't think radiocarbon dating would be accurate to determine age for the majority of antique swords. The half-life of radiocarbon is 5730 years, so the acceptable range would be from around 1/10th to 10x that length of time; approximately 573 - 57,300 years. It would be something, but papers, documentation, provenance and other standard historical records would likely be the best way to establish things. To be pedantic, you're really dating the wood, which was used to produce the charcoal, which was used in the tatara to produce the steel. Antique steel does not necessarily mean antique sword. I concur that NBTHK certificates and existing documentation are the key pieces of evidence, my point really was they they are not in English and they need some unpacking. It's entirely reasonable for the border force and the court to not trust a translation and explanation provided by the person wanting to import a (potentially illegal) weapon. A professor of Japanese studies (for instance) would be able to quickly get to grips with what the NBTHK is and explain this to the court; read and interpret the documents, etc. Most importantly they could be trusted to understand the documents and to communicate their content accurately and in an unbiased way.
  3. Keep in mind that this is an ongoing process and they may change their mind prior to court if presented with compelling evidence. Ensure that your indignation isn't noticeable at any stage (especially in court) otherwise it would be wise to consider legal representation. No matter how much you know, you won't be considered an expert witness. Knowing something is quite different from being able to prove it, especially when you won't be taken at your word due to having skin in the game. How will you authenticate the Japanese papers and prove they're not forgeries? Who will translate the papers, and how will the court know that your translation is accurate and unbiased? The court will likely lack the pre-requisite knowledge to judge the validity of any evidence or expert testimony presented, so will tend to trust credentials. To illustrate the point... a random member of the public; an Oxbridge history professor, who is a member of the Royal Historical Society and a recipient of the Cundill History Prize; a religious apologist; an ancient alien theorist on the History Channel. ...will each come to vastly different interpretations of the same historical evidence, and only one of them should be trusted to give expert testimony (with regards to the aforementioned historical evidence) in a court of law. The age is likely best "proven" in court by arranging the attendance of a knowledgeable staff member from a local antiques shop or museum. That way your can keep expenses to a minimum as they'll only have to travel a few minutes. The manufacturing techniques are likely best "proven" by arranging the attendance of an engineer, who has professional accreditation and can talk the court through the production processes involved.. This might be worth a look to add further clarity. The magistrates court is much less formal than the higher courts, but of course the same principles apply. An Expert Witness can be anyone with knowledge or experience of a particular field or discipline beyond that to be expected of a layman. The Expert Witness's duty is to give to the Court or tribunal an impartial opinion on particular aspects of matters within his expertise which are in dispute. A letter from Michael could of course constitute expert evidence, but you'd need to provide full disclose of any pre-existing relationship. If you were to rely on it as expert evidence, it may be expected that Michael attend the hearing (leave would need to be arranged) or else the evidence may be inadmissible. Section 30 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 states that an expert's report is admissible as evidence of fact and opinion, whether or not the expert attends court to give oral evidence. If it is not proposed to call the expert witness, the leave of the court must be obtained prior to introducing it. In considering whether to grant leave, the court will have regard to: The contents of the report; The reasons why it is proposed that the expert will not give live evidence; The risk that it may not be possible to controvert statements in the report if the expert does not attend;
  4. I helped a friend through a very similar matter a couple of years ago. His case was slightly different in that he brought the blade through customs himself; but he did so wearing an alligator skin jacket, python skin boots and an oversized gold chain - needless to say he aroused the suspicions of the border force agent and the sword was seized (all paperwork was in order). The case will be heard in a Magistrates Court, the process is simple and straightforward, so you're fine without legal representation. It'll likely run several thousand pounds if you hire an experienced solicitor to handle things and an experienced barrister to represent you on the day. If you have nerves about court you can sit in at your local magistrates court and familiarise yourself with the setting and process - it's all quite informal. In the case of my friend everything worked out fine in the end, but several thousand pounds of legal fees were incurred and no costs judgment made against the border force.
  5. Regarding the text size on the e-book... If you use a word document (as opposed to a pdf or jpegs) and convert that to an e-book format, the e-reader will be able to adjust the font size locally and reflow the text to fit the page, instead of showing whole pages as they would appear in the physical book. I don't recall the details off-hand, but Amazon have free software available to facilitate this. It's easily done and shouldn't take more than a few minutes to figure out.
  6. Their pace of innovation astounds me, before you know it they'll do offering virtual Shinsa in the metaverse. Thank you for sharing Michael.
  7. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    Given that treatment has been ineffective and you'd likely struggle with a normal strength training program, I'll offer some suggestions. Always thoroughly warm up. The viscoelastic behavior of tendon and ligament is highly temperature dependent. If it's cold, wrap up. When you're training, if you have long periods of inactivity, you can either keep the room well heated or wear a suitable base layer to ensure the tendons in your arms stay warm. I could provide plenty of elaboration on this point, but it would be a waste of time to do so. You're not a teenager; If you routinely forego a proper warm-up, this alone could be the cause of your tendonitis. The various issues you're having are of course related to one another. To address this we want to start at the most distal joint: the fingers. When my wife started running, she had knee pain whenever she ran more than 5 miles on a given day. The natural inclination would be to focus on the knee, as that was the source of the pain. But when I examined her, starting with the toes (most distal), I found that: The toes were inflexible and weak. The ankles had poor dorsiflexion. There were no issues with the knees. The treatment for the toes involved stretching, working on dexterity until she could control each toe independently, picking up marbles with the toes and using silicone toe spreaders. When the problems with the toes were resolved, the range of motion of the ankles increased and the knee pain disappeared. The first step in your case would be to ensure good hand health. Grip strength is notoriously difficult to train, but overall hand health is quite simple. I've been rehabbing a partially paralysed right hand for almost a year (nerve damage) and making slow but consistent progress. Nerve damage is very slow to heal and the muscles involved are paralysed until the nerve regenerates, at which point they're very weak due to a long period of complete inactivity. For me this means a permeant hand of benediction, for the time being, as the most distal muscles controlled by the damaged nerve remain paralysed. They should be reconnected to the nervous system at some point in the next 3-6 months and will slowly regain strength and dexterity. For restoring strength to the intrinsic muscles of the hand, I've been having success with therapy putty, digiflex exercisers, hand therapy eggs and elastic bands. Regular stretching and mobility has retained full ROM and for coordination and dexterity I've been juggling (I'm up to 6 balls as of today). A number of muscles in the right hand are still paralysed, and there's a lot I still can't do, but progress is good. I'd recommend you do the same. As you don't have nerve damage your progress will be much faster, and hopefully you'll find that your hands are in great shape already. After the hands are cleared, focus on the wrist, then move on to the elbow. Low volume and plenty of rest. For the wrist and elbow, loadable dumbbells allow for micro loading (for very gradual progressive overload) in a way not possible with resistance bands. If you use Olympic style dumbbells they can double as leverage bars if you load only one side. Rotating handles are best for curls, especially when dealing with tendonitis. I like Eleiko loadable dumbbells, Rogue and Gungnir are popular too. You'd want to start very light and work up very gradually. Once you've rehabbed your arms and your tendinitis is addressed, get started on an age appropriate full-body barbell strength training program.
  8. This gives a decent overview of the important considerations to keep in mind; most of it is quite intuitive, but there are some aspects that many wouldn't think of.
  9. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    Did you get to the root of what was causing the distal biceps tendonitis? Are you (for instance) holding heavy loads isometrically, lowering heavy loads eccentrically or otherwise using the biceps extensively in your daily activities in a way which would cause excessive wear and tear? Inflammation of tendons is generally the result of micro tears and sprains of the tendon. The solution is generally to rest and fully recover and then gradually build strength through suitable strength training. That would involve starting out with light weights and learning perfect form, then incrementally increasing the weight while ensuring to maintain perfect form and get adequate rest. Were you discharged from the care of the physiotherapist without the problems being addressed or any referrals being made, such as to an exercise physiologist?
  10. As Paz mentioned James Williams: The katana is not exceptional among swords as a battlefield weapon or dueling weapon. It excels at the draw cut, which is what Iaido is built around and is demonstrated in the above video. Cutting things with an already unsheathed sword is not generally dangerous to the one with the sword, but you can easily split your saya and permeantly disable your hand on a poorly executed draw cut. If you want to practice draw cutting, you should learn Iaido. If you don't intend to do so, why not just use a machete or an axe?
  11. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    Reading this back, it occurs to me that there's likey some confusion over what's meant by strength training, weightlifting, powerlifting, strongman, etc. They are not bodybuilding and are all focused on strength rather than aesthetics. The vast majority of professional athletes lift weights as a key part of their strength and conditioning training, especially in the USA, but this does not make them strength athletes. Explained in more detail here:
  12. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    @jeremy, I'm sure this will all have been covered by your physiotherapist, but how you use your arms and hands contributes to the tendonitis. Have you been able to isolate the root cause? An occupational therapist might also be able to help determine if it's caused by one of your normal day to day activities, and suggest a solution. If you'd developed tendonitis while starting a strength training programme, we'd usually bet the root cause to be where you're positioning the bar (during the squat) and how you're gripping it. From the variety of issues, it sounds like you have insufficient overall upper body strength or are utilising the joints and muscles of your upper body incorrectly. The main aim of the leverage bar and flexbar is to train neglected muscles. If these muscles are not used for certain movements, other muscles compensate (as best they can) and in so doing, exert undesirable forces on the joints. As with kinetic linking; mobility, flexibility, strength and coordination are all vitally important. A lack of adequate muscle flexibility for instance can cause the tendon to be regularly sprained; all the factors are important. The best approach is to tackle all these things and become a better overall athlete. To better understand the problem take a look at these videos:
  13. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    No. If the flexbar didn't help, it's because you're already too strong for it, a lever bar for low reps might still help. All your suburito is good for right now is exacerbating your tendonitis. You want a barbell and someone competent to teach you how to use it. Avoid weight machines too. At 40, if you're getting overuse injuries which weren't a problem when you were younger and you've maintained a similar activity level... It might be worth asking your doctor to take some blood tests to check your testosterone levels. If your testosterone levels are low, testosterone replacement therapy could be life changing.
  14. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    Have you been under the care of a physiotherapist and sports doctor? Depending on your strength level, a flexbar might be all you need to fix tennis elbow. If that's not enough, a loadable leverage bar/ Thor's hammer would be the next step. This is exactly why higher volume and higher rep ranges are not recommended. You get negligible strength gains which plateau very early and repetitive strain problems! Rest (properly, no Iaido) and then add in low volume compound barbell exercises like what's laid out above. Its the mostly likely thing to fix your tendonitis. Read Starting Strength ASAP and visit a physio and sports doctor, you'll not regret it. Strength training is not about exhausting your body, causing pain or wear and tear. It's about signalling the need for more strength so that your body rebuilds stronger. Ideally you want to signal as efficiently and painlessly as possible, which is what proper strength training methodology is all about.
  15. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    Michael, That is absolutely correct for anyone who gains weight without any corresponding strength gains. It's not the case though if we're doing any kind of strength training. Here's a link to strength standards for the major lifts. https://strengthlevel.com/strength-standards/male/kg None of the variables remain constant if you increase body weight and do so while engaged in proper strength training. The argument is only sound in the absence of strength training, so its really an argument for the necessity of strength training and not an argument against it. A heavier athlete (same training but different weight class) will generate more kinetic energy and more force. The speed difference isn't all that great, and it's important to remember that the stronger person is structurally stronger (more durable, less easily hurt or injured) in addition to greater kinetic energy output and force generation. I felt the same way too and enjoyed watching videos of Kaoklai and other small men (mostly Thais) who fought successfully against men far heavier than themselves. But when I started seriously training, I spent time sparring with natural heavyweights and came to realise that the fights Kaoklai won showed an immense skill disparity. He was fighting journeyman level opponents and performed very poorly when he fought a true contender (Yoshihiro Sato) at his proper weight class. Other than in a highly ritualised form of combat, such as Taekwondo, Kendo or Olympic fencing, I don't think speed is anywhere near as important as we sometimes think. There are many other vitally important factors. This is well illustrated in both; Julio César Chávez vs. Meldrick Taylor and Roberto Durán vs. Sugar Ray Leonard I. Even fighting with knives, the smaller guy might get the first hit, but then the bigger, stronger guy grabs him and mutilates him. If you're close enough to hit, you're basically close enough to grab, and if he's big enough to gladly take a shot from you in order to get hold of you... I think the best way to think about it is that a strength and size advantage grants a large error margin. Mike Tyson was very fast, but he was a natural heavyweight. Roy Jones Jr was faster, but in order to compete at heavyweight needed to add a huge amount of mass. He knew he couldn't hold his own in the heavyweight division when giving up too much weight. Roy Jones Jr was an exceptional fighter, but could only take the heavyweight belt due to a major lack of talent in the division at the time. In order to do so he had to gain a lot of weight. Similarly, several years ago, Alistair Overeem entered the K1 tournament, as a wildcard. An MMA fighter with very little kickboxing experience. Unexpectedly, he was significantly stronger than the other men, and manhandled the best kickboxers in the world with ease. It wasn't until others gained significant size and strength that they were able to hold their own. I'm not suggesting that Strongmen make the best fighters (they don't) just that strength and size are a huge advantage, all else being equal. In any combat sport its very rare for someone who fought (as a fully grown adult) in a weight class below light-heavy to take the heavyweight title. I've sparred with heavyweights twice my weight. It's nerve wracking. There's an ever present awareness that one strike landed with intent could easily leave you in the hospital, in addition to being unable to do anything at all in the clinch. You know you're outmatched when you perfectly defend an upwards angled hook (thrown with no ill intent during sparring), and are lifted into the air by it like something out of a comic book. Which has happened to me on several occasions. There's also the lovely experience of throwing a teep at full force on a big heavyweight's chest and instead of him being pushed back, he pushes out his chest and you lose your balance and fall backwards. Someone of a similar weight would be pushed over, but a big enough weight disparity will reverse the outcome and he'll barely even feel the kick. A middleweight fighting a natural heavyweight is like an average adult man fighting his 12 year old son. At a certain point, you might as well be fighting a dehorned rhino. A stronger man can more deftly weild a larger, heavier blade and manoeuvre it more easily and with less fatigue. He doesn't need to incorporate his whole body into everything he's doing. What you're doing through kinetic linking is using the joints of the body as a series of simple machines. A hook thrown to the jaw should have relatively little mass behind it, but travel at a very high velocity, in order to whip the head around. A hook thrown to the body on the other hand needs more mass behind it, so that it drills deeper into the abdomen and will therefore travel at a lower velocity. How you choreograph the kinetic linking determines how you use the force and K.E at your disposal; a bigger/ stronger man has more of each to play with. Maybe this will be of interest too, to illustrate how strength scales with weight with proper training. This is the Chinese national Olympic Weightlifting team. The limiting factor is actually neurological, there's a limit to the ability of the nervous system to activate muscle. This is why lifts as a multiple of bodyweight reduce as you move up through the weight classes, and at super heavyweight, you'll often see people add more mass to their bodies (in the form of muscle) from year to year than they add to their lifts. A heavier athlete though will have a lower VO2 max and therefore poorer cardiovascular endurance. The best way is to tire out the big guy, but the hard part is surviving that long. Even then, big, strong guys are very, very durable. When I had a real world encounter with a dangerous big guy, I didn't have the chance to tire him out as I'd always naively expected I'd be able to. If you have the space for a home gym, 30 minutes each day is enough time to allow for decent strength and cardio training.
  16. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    I realised I missed a significant portion. Why would you think a Weightlifter would have poor kinetic linking? As shown in the video, you need perfect kinetic linking to pick up >2x your body-weight and throw it over your head. Every fibre in the body needs to be perfectly choreographed, from the toes through to the fingers. A heavy sword will not increase strength in an ongoing way, and it'll load your joints and strain your tendons in undesirable ways.
  17. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    This is difficult to approach succinctly, but I'll give it a go. I'll try to keep it brief, but I can reference everything I'm saying, so let me know anything you're dubious of. The nature of the loading and the form of the stress is what matters. Structurally, the human body is similar to a suspension bridge. The bones are like concrete, strong under compression but weak under tension and torsion. The ligaments and tendons are akin to cables, strong under tension, but offering no resistance to compression. The muscles can be considered as motors attached to the cables (tendons) via winches. Strength training is how we increase the strength of these components, along with the torque and power of the motor. Not only does the power of the motor (muscles) increase through strength training, but also the tensile strength of the cables (ligaments and tendons) and the compressive strength of the concrete (bones). Clearly if this training is done incorrectly, we can cause damage. If you're genuinely curious about any of this, we can take it to PM. What I'll be saying (other than personal anecdotes) are supported by well established facts and are not my personal opinions. Injuries generally happen in competitive strength athletes when they're working right on the edge of their capabilities (often the edge of what's humanly possible), so it's hit and miss as to whether they have enough muscular strength to achieve the lift. Under those conditions, technique can break down leading to loading the joints in a damaging way. In practice, consider the knee, it's a complex hinge joint. It's imperative for health and longevity that the knee not be significantly stressed laterally or twisted. The joint doesn't work that way and you're reliant on the ligaments to provide support. There's no muscular support to ligaments, and they can be stretched or torn and the cartilage damaged; the bone can also be broken due to the torsion applied. The stronger the person, the higher the strength of their bones, ligaments, tendons, etc. As detailed in the explanation above regarding a sword; with greater strength (for a given material) comes a greater ability to absorb energy and resist stress (with minimal strain). If a structure is twice as strong as average, it can absorb twice as much energy without being plastically deformed (bent) and twice as much without being fractured. This strength increase is with regard to all forms of stress, so while a bone is weak in torsion, if you're trained and I'm not, your bones will also be stronger in torsion than mine. Clearly a heavier person will exert larger forces on their bones and soft tissues, performing the same task, but strength is not about adding body-weight. Strength training is about maximising strength at a given body-weight (hence weight classes). I'm not suggesting that people should aim to become super heavyweights. There's a major difference between adding strength and adding size, and there's a major difference between training and competing. I took up strength training seriously about a decade ago. At the time I was regularly getting injured. I haven't been seriously injured since other than an unfortunate incident involving something sharp. I firmly believe that I would have died at that time if not for being in such good shape, and the doctors seemed to share that view. In addition to combat sports, I've long competed in triathlon. Like any endurance sport, triathlon is catabolic; so some anabolic element is needed just to counteract the muscle wasting effects. When I started strength training I was around 70kg and my major lifts were: Bench Press: 45kg Squat: 60kg Deadlift: 70kg Overhead Press 30kg Around a year ago I was at basically the same bodyweight, but my 1RMs were up to: Bench Press: 130kg Squat: 170kg Deadlift: 190kg Overhead Press 80kg Muscularly, increased strength is increased force production. Lifting weights is the best way to train that. Force = Mass * Acceleration, so for a given mass (body-weight) you'll be faster and more agile with greater force production (greater muscular strength). The idea that being smaller is an advantage (in anything other than endurance sports) is not widely held. Proper technique with natural movement patterns are vital. With large forces, incorrect loading can cause a lot of damage.
  18. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    As far as I'm concerned, you perfectly described kinetic linking, so we're on the same page exactly. I hadn't thought to clarify that point, so thank you for doing so! Only an idiot would train only the upper body, and all the key strength sports (Powerlifting, Olympic Lifting and Strongman) are relatively lower body dominant. Someone with an underdeveloped lower body will perform very poorly in almost any athletic pursuit and especially in strength sports, they'll also place very poorly in any bodybuilding competition. A guy who goes to the gym only to bench press and bicep curl is most definitely not a strength athlete! The program I'd recommend for a newcomer to strength training would be quite lower body dominant, something along the lines of: Workout A 3 x 5 Squats 3 x 5 Overhead Presses 1 x 5 Deadlifts Workout B 3 x 5 Squats 3 x 5 Bench Presses 1 x 5 Deadlifts Alternating these workouts three days a week, for example on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, with the listed sets being only work sets after a thorough warm-up. I would also argue that Olympic Lifting would be a perfect accompaniment to JSA (at least in my experience they go very well together), as the kinetic linking requirements are very similar and Olympic Lifting will train the nervous system much more efficiently. I'm sure you can see how this would carry over to JSA (heavier weights at the end of the video). I would also add that training with an extra heavy sword or bokken is not a good way to develop strength. Strength is strength (in a given muscle) and you want to train in the safest, most effective and most efficient way. There's a strong desire to train in a way that resembles the sport you play, but this is the wrong way to approach strength training and often loads and stresses the joints and ligaments in damaging ways.
  19. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    I respectfully disagree, by which I mean that I don't really disagree, but feel the need to further clarify my position. Bio-mechanically speaking, the key to proper technique, in most cases, is kinetic linking; facilitated by adequate flexibility, mobility, co-ordination and strength. For clarity, the kinetic link principle is: The principle that body segments generate high end-point velocity by accelerating and decelerating adjacent links, using internal and external muscle torques applied to the body segments in a sequential manner from proximal to distal, from massive to least massive, and from most fixed to most free. The kinetic link principle is applied when different body segments rotate during throwing and kicking. These actions have been likened to the motion of a bullwhip. If segmental rotations are free to occur at the distal end, the body's base-segments in contact with the ground act like the handle of a bull-whip. Just as the tip of the bullwhip can be made to travel at supersonic speed, the small distal segments of the hand and foot can be made to travel very fast by the sequential acceleration and deceleration of the body segments. Poor kinetic linking (aka poor technique) can result from a lack of adequate: muscular flexibility joint mobility muscular strength co-ordination Assuming that the technique has been learned and the athlete is adequately strong, flexible, mobile and coordinated to properly perform it; the reason why technique falters is generally that one (or more) of the muscles involved in the kinetic linking is too fatigued to play its part. In many cases (across countless sports), force is supposed to be generated primarily in the large muscles of the posterior chain (as you describe). Unfortunately the kinetic linking through the core, shoulders and arms is poor in the majority of people due to muscular weakness or a lack of mobility, flexibility or co-ordination; and a lot of the energy is wasted along the way (with an accompanying injury risk). Additionally, many people are relatively immobile and even the muscles of the posterior chain are weak to the point of generating very little force to begin with. Low strength also goes along with poor flexibility, as the muscles tighten and reduce ROM in order to prevent injury. Muscles will fatigue more rapidly with a heavier blade. If the technique has been perfected using a light weight aluminium iaito, the added weight of a heavier shinken should not affect the technique beyond a short adjustment period. If the technique remains adversely affected or the blade is otherwise fatiguing or uncomfortable to use, there is a lack of adequate strength (to properly handle the shinken) and the iaito had reduced the strength requirement (due to its lighter weight). When the problem is the weight of something, additional physical strength is almost invariably the lion's share of the solution, and strength gains carry over to almost all other areas of life. In this case the opposite choice was taken; lightening the blade. As the issue at hand was the weight of the blade, it didn't seem necessary to address the other factors contributing to technique, but they are of course all of great importance and we can't neglect any of them. Assuming technique deteriorates during practice, this lack of endurance is really a symptom of a lack of strength. The muscle fibres being employed are fast-twitch, not slow-twitch, so it comes down to rep ranges at different percentages of your one rep max (the maximum amount you can lift for a single repetition). To illustrate this point; you can lift you 1RM for only a single repetition, but you would generally be able to lift 65% of that amount for 15 repetitions! With a greater 1RM, any given weight would represent a smaller proportion of it and you would be able to manoeuvre it with much less fatigue than if it represented a greater proportion. Barbells and compound movements work best for strength training and can be progressively increased in weight for years with consistent strength gains. Many other forms of training will stop giving any meaningful strength gains after the first few months of transitioning from inactivity to some modicum of activity. Not only do heavy weights lifted for maximal ROM bring maximal strength gains, but they also work every muscle involved and self-correct any weakness in the kinetic chain. If any particular muscle is limiting you, you'll not be able to progress until that muscle group has become adequately strong to facilitate progression. In addition to that, the neuromuscular junction also undergoes a training effect, thickening the insulation of the myelin sheath around your nerves, increasing nerve conductivity; thereby improving your muscular control (coordination). This training effect is not seen to anywhere near the same extent in any type of training not involving heavy lifting. As I understand it, your concern was with the lack of mobility and flexibility that can come along with significant muscle gain. Stretching and mobility work will prevent this, as will sticking to compound movements and focusing on strength instead of size as the training goal. Compound barbell movements also train the stabilisation muscles (vital for Iaido) which can be entirely neglected when using machines or isolation exercises (as are popular among bodybuilders).
  20. mas4t0

    Bohi question

    As Ken alluded to, I should clarify that the information I've given above is oversimplified and is really only illustrative. Every dimension of the blade will have an affect on it's structural properties. This will give additional outline for anyone curious. If I needed to cut a bo-hi, I'd model the blade in CAD/ CAE software and test it computationally. As Michael expressed above, the ideal would be to carry out such modelling before the blade is made, and include the bohi as an integral part of the design. In that case, a bohi could be incorporated to better optimise the properties of the blade at a given weight. Ken also mentioned dynamics, the importance of which can't be overstated. This might also be of interest, regarding the dynamics of a blade. As an aside I'd also suggest that, if at all possible, a practitioner would generally be better served to incorporate a proper strength program into their training than to have a bo-hi carved. For anyone who isn't strength trained, you'll likely be able to increase your overall strength by 50% in 6 months with a good training programme and age need not prevent you. At that, your sword will feel the same in your hands as if you'd reduced its weight by 1/3, and you'll likely find that your form, hasuji and overall coordination are improved.
  21. I completely agree, I'm not disputing that it happened, just curious as to what the repercussions of doing so were believed to be. I'm also curious now as to whether there were rituals or other practices that could be carried out to spiritually purify the blades. Would it have massively devalued the weapons otherwise? Would there have been consequences for possession of these items (among the lower classes) if they were to collect them with the intent to sell (presumably possession of polearms by those of lower classes would be punished)? The Japanese seen to have been quite a superstitious bunch, and I'd have thought that it would have been undesirable to have your troops armed with such weapons in the absence of some kind of purification ritual. Or does the bad karma fall solely on the looter and not pass along with the weapon? I'm not expecting answers to any of this, just thinking out loud.
  22. Could you suggest any references which an English person or an optimistic Japanese 4-year old might be able to understand?
  23. That's a very interesting point Ken. It makes me wonder if there was any social or religious taboo in Japan regarding such practices. I'm reminded of an influential early fifth century Latin text, authored by Prudentius, named the Psychomachia. Where looting from the corpses of dead soldiers is said to be abominable. I can't help but wonder if the Japanese had moral qualms and/ or superstitions regarding such things.
×
×
  • Create New...