- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 428
- Reaction score
- 0
I personally would rather see effective karate without any Japanese culture pretense, than see awful karate full of pseudo-Japanese culture.
Absolutely!
I personally would rather see effective karate without any Japanese culture pretense, than see awful karate full of pseudo-Japanese culture.
what you described is more or less what the karate combat league is going for, but I think they need to allow knees and elbows before they really get thereMy experience with karate is positive. My older cousin was training karate with a legit coach and I was dreaming one day to train to. They had lots of full contact sparing. Most of the practitioners were winning competitions. I think the coach still trains people.
Later in my teens I met a black belt friend and a blue belt friend. They were teachig me some karate. What I noticed immediately is shin and fore arm conditioning. We sparred some, but I did not really learn to fight.
A couple of years ago I sparred my black belt friend and he was no match. Although the guy was not practicing anymore.
What karate needs is a legit kick box sparring or MT like sparring and wrestling sessions or judo sessions as in my experience with karate it had many throws. Accordimg to me current kick boxing is what modern day karate is or should be.
And all these katas should be implemented in good shadow boxing, bag work pad work routines.
reading this post shows that you don't really understand how to apply kata to training other than simple kata repetition.I respectfully doubt that. Gonna give some examples why. (From ITF)
First, the techniques in katas are not something that i fighter will use instinctively. Even if they drill katas every day, there are so many different techniques, that the time spend on one of them is meaningless. Even the techniques trained in "1 steps" (self defense part) are not trained enough in comparison of matches/sparring techniques. There is no way i can imagine a TKD guy throwing an elbow, or a knee instead of a kick/punch in a confrontation. Even if he spend 10 years drilling the katas with them in it.
And it's not only how many times you did them, but also in what context you used them in. A match/sparring is a lot more close to a fight than a Kata. So the moves you would use in a fight are probably the ones that you have been tasting under fire. You will rely on something you know is working from your own experience.
But, even if you are able to use those techniques, i have lots of doubts about theire effectiveness. Against an untrained adverser, i agree, some may work. But lots of them are kinda dangerous for you own safety against experienced fighters.
If you take the basic straight punch in TKD katas: It's a very powerful strike. It has been studied to be the perfect punching technique for making the most of damage. It's the same technique they use to break boards in competition (not talking about fake ones in demos). But that thing is completely useless in a fight against a experienced person. The strike start with your arm by your hips longer path and rotation, you have to take a step with it to add the weight of your body, etc...
It leaves you completely open to any counter to the face, it's slow as fuck, has a huge tell, and they don't even train the reset. You stay with the arm extended and move to the next technique.
Another example is the horizontal elbow strike. Again, versus an untrained guy, it can make lots of damage. But the way they teach it is fuckin ugly. Huge raise of the elbow and huge motion of the arm instead of the rotation of the body.
The one they teach for self defense purposes, that you wont find in Katas is a lot better.
I dont believe katas are completely useless. Doing the proper technique, in slow motion, for a side kick, is very beneficiary. You learn good balance, proper breathing etc... But i don't agree that the techniques you only see in them, can and should be used in a fight/match/sparring.
Goddamn karate nerds, made me write a lot more than i expected too...
It's actually worse than that because it was Okinawan culture that gave birth to karate, bastardized in Japan and then further altered in the West.I think one of the biggest misconceptions/myths surrounding karate and holding it back is too much emphasis on imitating or recreating a culture that most here in the west don’t actually understand.
So many people try to create an enclave of Japanese culture within their dojo because that’s ‘traditional’ but 99.9% don’t actually know anything about the culture besides the limited exposure they got in the dojo they trained in.
Funakoshi documented 9 specific throws for karate.Positive experience is good, and I'm glad you got the chance to see karate that still incorporated older methods, such as throws. I will point out, though, that the curriculum of old-style karate is more like close-range MMA than kickboxing. The longer range striking was much less prevalent in karate, at the time, so the kickboxing approach to karate is newer.
Personally, I see it as a combination of circumstances that really led to the removal of those techniques. I do think that Itosu had started removing some of those methods--and may not have even known all that many, to begin with, given his training history--so his students would have learned fewer of them, but even with that, we have examples of his students teaching joint locks and takedowns, so they at least knew some. Even Funakoshi Gichin documented a number of those methods in his books, and taught them to his students--at least his early students. We do know that Funakoshi was on quite friendly terms with Kano Jigoro, the founder of Judo, and even used Judo dojo space on a fairly regular basis. I don't think it is a very big leap to suggest that he might not feel the need to teach things that his friend is teaching in the exact same place on the exact same day. That isn't to say that he did it "because Judo already existed," but more along the lines that he could just tell his students to cross-train with his friend and learn that type of material. Aside from that, we also know that the Japanese culture of the time was strongly nationalist and xenophobic, and had a tendency to consider their culture to be superior. That superiority was definitely in play when it came to Okinawa, which they considered to be a backwater country, so it wouldn't be much of a leap to think that the Japanese wouldn't be terribly interested in the grappling methods of backwater hicks, since they already had such great, proper Japanese grappling arts.
i am new to these forums do you have ANY karate background if so any outside of a mcdojo?
That's kind of my point--people should be sparring using the techniques in the kata, so that they actually CAN use them instinctively.
That is, unfortunately, how the vast majority of karate practitioners teach and train to use their strikes. I think the largest part of the problem is a misunderstanding of the hikite (pulling hand), or the "chamber." It isn't just there to look clean, or "set up" for the next technique--it actually has a function! If it is controlling the opponent, which is what it was intended to do, then you are decidedly less open to being hit on that side of your body. On top of that, you get to pull your opponent toward your strike, effectively causing them to run into it:
I train and compete in Muay Thai. The last 8 years, I started cross training in Taekwon-do ITF. Took part in some tournaments and in the nationals with no real expectations, but the real objective was always to level up my MT. Not gonna lie to you, Katas was never my primary concern, but after 8 training years them I believe I can talk about it.
I don't have much more to say than what I said before. I still believe that techniques you learn in Katas and that are not used in sparring are mostly useless. Not because they are not effective, but because you have not trained them under fire, against a fighting opponent. And that goes for all types of combat sports and TMA's. You can shadow box all you want, if you don't spar you wont be able to stand against an experienced boxer. Doesn't mean the hooks and uppers you trained are useless strikes.
Again, there are 2 types of techniques in Katas. The one you use in sparring, and the others. For the ones you don't use in sparring, I can think of 2 reasons. Either they are not allowed by the rules sets, or just that they are not effective.
-The ones not allowed by the rules sets may be effective, but again, if you don't train them in fighting condition, you wont persuade me that you will be able to use them out of the blue in a self defense situation, just by doing them in Katas.
-The rest that are not effective. For me it's simple, there is no other explanation why something that is allowed to be used, is not. Those techniques just don't work.
I still believe that techniques you learn in Katas and that are not used in sparring are mostly useless. Not because they are not effective, but because you have not trained them under fire, against a fighting opponent. And that goes for all types of combat sports and TMA's.
Not because they are not effective, but because you have not trained them under fire, against a fighting opponent. And that goes for all types of combat sports and TMA's. You can shadow box all you want, if you don't spar you wont be able to stand against an experienced boxer. Doesn't mean the hooks and uppers you trained are useless strikes.
Again, there are 2 types of techniques in Katas. The one you use in sparring, and the others. For the ones you don't use in sparring, I can think of 2 reasons. Either they are not allowed by the rules sets, or just that they are not effective.
-The ones not allowed by the rules sets may be effective, but again, if you don't train them in fighting condition, you wont persuade me that you will be able to use them out of the blue in a self defense situation, just by doing them in Katas.
-The rest that are not effective. For me it's simple, there is no other explanation why something that is allowed to be used, is not. Those techniques just don't work.
Do you really think MT would be different if they had some of the karate Katas in their training? Judging by KB, I don't think so.
Without actual
Without actual what? With out actual WHAT, MAN? How am I suppose to prove that MT is superior to your Karate if you don't finish your sentences? You understand that by the rules of the internetz, incomplete phrases give me the win by default? So until you correct/edit it, I AM RIGHT, AND KATAS ARE FOR LOOSERS.
I don't have much more to say than what I said before. I still believe that techniques you learn in Katas and that are not used in sparring are mostly useless. Not because they are not effective, but because you have not trained them under fire, against a fighting opponent. And that goes for all types of combat sports and TMA's. You can shadow box all you want, if you don't spar you wont be able to stand against an experienced boxer. Doesn't mean the hooks and uppers you trained are useless strikes.
Again, there are 2 types of techniques in Katas. The one you use in sparring, and the others. For the ones you don't use in sparring, I can think of 2 reasons. Either they are not allowed by the rules sets, or just that they are not effective.
-The ones not allowed by the rules sets may be effective, but again, if you don't train them in fighting condition, you wont persuade me that you will be able to use them out of the blue in a self defense situation, just by doing them in Katas.
-The rest that are not effective. For me it's simple, there is no other explanation why something that is allowed to be used, is not. Those techniques just don't work.
If you mean by changing the rule set to allow some of those techniques, I' m all for it. If you mean you are "forced" to use a specific technique during competition, I' am completely against it. But if you open your rules set as wide as possible, wont it be something like MT for standup and MMA for global fighting? Do you really think MT would be different if they had some of the karate Katas in their training? Judging by KB, I don't think so.
Pretty interesting. I don't know if in TKD it has the same purpose, since the opposite hand is there to help with the rotation of the body and pulling back the opposite shoulder making the punch more powerful. I say that because thats the way they use to break boards...
I have to agree and I'm a big supporter of kata. I remember the first time I tried a double leg takedown as taught in the kata outside of a karate class. I ended up on the wrong end of a guillotine headlock. And I didn't know how to get out of it.
Kata taught me the basic movements, the basic principles. Based on the kata, I could effectively demonstrate the technique, effectively teach the technique.
But I utterly failed to apply it effectively myself. But that's not because double leg takedowns are ineffective martial arts techniques. It's because only training them in kata isn't effective martial arts training.
I partly agree but would add a slight twist to that. The techniques that you learn in katas and don't drill are mostly useless. What I mean is that I don't think you have to use certain techniques necessarily in sparring in order to be able to use them. However I do agree that if the only time you practice a certain technique is in a kata without actually drilling it several times with a partner (drilling or sparring), you're never going to use it.
I'll take an example to illustrate what I mean. At my old Kyokushin dojo we did some Bunkai / Goshin Jutsu and used some of the techniques from Kata in application. We drilled several joint locks techniques including a standing Kimura. I never used Kimura in sparring because of the lack of grappling in the Knockdown ruleset of Kyokushin, but I still used a standing Kimura on a drunk guy that was trying to pick a fight and grabbed me by the front of my jacket. Very effective technique against an untrained guy that you don't want to hurt too badly but want to control and hurt enough for them to stop. I actually surprised myself that I naturally pulled that move while I had only drilled it a few times.
So I don't think you necessarily need to use certain techniques in sparring in order to be able to use them, but at least some drilling with a partner indeed. Of course sparring is even better. Without actual
I don't know how different it would be but there are definitely certain techniques from Karate Kata that you do not see in MT and are effective, especially when it comes to kicks and open hand strikes for instance. Also you need to take into consideration that a lot of the techniques in Karate Kata's are actually grappling techniques and not strikes as opposed to popular belief, so most of them would be pretty tricky to execute in a ruleset which has boxing gloves and doesn't really allow joint locks and submission grappling.
I was gonna edit and add another sentence to that paragraph, but then changed my mind and forgot to remove those 2 words. As it was disturbing you that much I removed those 2 words so you can transfer your focus to the actual post.
I partly agree but would add a slight twist to that. The techniques that you learn in katas and don't drill are mostly useless. What I mean is that I don't think you have to use certain techniques necessarily in sparring in order to be able to use them. However I do agree that if the only time you practice a certain technique is in a kata without actually drilling it several times with a partner (drilling or sparring), you're never going to use it.
While I agree with your first category...
So I don't think you necessarily need to use certain techniques in sparring in order to be able to use them, but at least some drilling with a partner indeed. Of course sparring is even better.
I don't know how different it would be but there are definitely certain techniques from Karate Kata that you do not see in MT and are effective, especially when it comes to kicks and open hand strikes for instance. Also you need to take into consideration that a lot of the techniques in Karate Kata's are actually grappling techniques and not strikes as opposed to popular belief, so most of them would be pretty tricky to execute in a ruleset which has boxing gloves and doesn't really allow joint locks and submission grappling.
I agree with you, although the definition of "sparring" can vary widely. I know plenty of karate practitioners who have spent DECADES practicing kata, who have no idea how to use them, and even if they have a general idea, they can't actually apply the techniques because they've never trained them with resistance or spontaneity.
In training, I'm an advocate...
It all boils down to how you train--the kata gives you a series of examples, and a framework for how they can fit together, and you are then supposed to train those with with partners, and with resistance and spontaneity, to develop the ability to actually use them.
That's a very common explanation for the use of hikite, but it's not a very good one. It is not necessary to pull the hand back in that manner to get the rotation necessary for a powerful punch, as we can see in basically every striking art. I suppose for some people, it could be a helpful illustration of how to rotate, but I don't find it necessary. The other common explanation is that it is used to elbow someone who is behind you, which it could certainly be used for, but that isn't exactly the most common thing. Hikite is primarily used to pull some part of the opponent (arm, leg, head, clothing, etc.) toward you as you execute a technique, although it also serves the purpose of extricating your arm from situations where it has become entangled with your opponent's, so that you can use it for something else. There are instances of hikite in kata being used as shorthand, as I mentioned before, to tell you that you simply don't need that hand to execute the technique you are using, so you are free to employ it as necessary, but I admit that can be confusing.
It all boils down to how you train--the kata gives you a series of examples, and a framework for how they can fit together, and you are then supposed to train those with with partners, and with resistance and spontaneity, to develop the ability to actually use them.
Child abuse. Reported.Random story - I was trying to teach my son the importance of balance and keeping himself under control while attacking. He wasn't listening, so I swept his foot out from under him.
The look of surprise on his face was priceless. Yes, Little Panamaican, you need to pay attention to your feet and your position or you're going back on your butt.
I tried it again a little later - he moved out of the way. Lesson learned!
as to why continue the katas? well i do think it is very helpful for passing on the multitude of techniques in karate, it seems to me like many of the arts like boxing, kick boxing, MT, wrestling, have significantly fewer techniques to be remembered i mean boxing is what? 5 or 6 techniques? KB, 10-12?Dint know if what was missing was important or not, so just wanted to make sure you made all your points before I destr..., I mean i answer them.
I probably agree, depending on the way and intensity the drills are made. Otherwise it sounds to me a lot like what we denounce on arts like Aikido etc... But again, what we have is Kata + Drills = Effective. What that tells me is more like: Drills = Effective. Katas don't add nothing to it. Take them away from the equation, I'm sure you would still be able to pull of that kimura.
To be clear, I said it before, I think Katas have some benefits, but they add nothing to learning effectively a technique, to what drills and sparring offer in that regard. And personally, I prefer to use my time drilling and sparring, than doing Katas.
Sorry, still not convinced. Just a lot more open minded about some use of techniques that are not explained properly, but still believe some of them to be useless, or simply wrong (the way they throw elbows, the way they hold the head to knee etc...)
I agree with that.
Is there any type of Karate tournament that allows grappling, submission etc and is done without gloves? (or MMA type of gloves)? Do you see all types of techniques from Katas in there? All the blocks and attacks and throws and subs?
I don't want to defend that particular point very hard, cause I don't know all about Karate Katas, and BudoNoah made me understand some stuff that I dint know, but still... I feel like there are lots of techniques in them, that are just kept for the "historical" aspect only and not for been truly effective if trained.
@panamaican
That's exactly what I mean (can you ban those who disagree?)
Agree that sparring can vary widely, but usually, if there is also organized competition, sparring tend to be more realistic.
I don't know, it's very hypothetical all that... "If they were allowed, they would do the stuff in Katas, if they wanted to fight in MMA and use them, they would have, they don't take techniques from their own art etc..." Maybe, maybe not. I am still on the "not" side
Just an idea: Why not skip Katas, and spend all this time just drilling proved effective methods? And don't tell me that you need a "library" to remember them.
Come at me Karate Guys... None of you seems to understand... I'm not locked here with you... YOU ARE LOCKED HERE WITH ME.
I probably agree, depending on the way and intensity the drills are made. Otherwise it sounds to me a lot like what we denounce on arts like Aikido etc... But again, what we have is Kata + Drills = Effective. What that tells me is more like: Drills = Effective. Katas don't add nothing to it. Take them away from the equation, I'm sure you would still be able to pull of that kimura.
Is there any type of Karate tournament that allows grappling, submission etc and is done without gloves? (or MMA type of gloves)? Do you see all types of techniques from Katas in there? All the blocks and attacks and throws and subs?
I don't want to defend that particular point very hard, cause I don't know all about Karate Katas, and BudoNoah made me understand some stuff that I dint know, but still... I feel like there are lots of techniques in them, that are just kept for the "historical" aspect only and not for been truly effective if trained.
Just an idea: Why not skip Katas, and spend all this time just drilling proved effective methods? And don't tell me that you need a "library" to remember them.
Come at me Karate Guys... None of you seems to understand... I'm not locked here with you... YOU ARE LOCKED HERE WITH ME.
I probably agree, depending on the way and intensity the drills are made. Otherwise it sounds to me a lot like what we denounce on arts like Aikido etc... But again, what we have is Kata + Drills = Effective. What that tells me is more like: Drills = Effective. Katas don't add nothing to it. Take them away from the equation, I'm sure you would still be able to pull of that kimura.
To be clear, I said it before, I think Katas have some benefits, but they add nothing to learning effectively a technique, to what drills and sparring offer in that regard. And personally, I prefer to use my time drilling and sparring, than doing Katas.
Sorry, still not convinced. Just a lot more open minded about some use of techniques that are not explained properly, but still believe some of them to be useless, or simply wrong (the way they throw elbows, the way they hold the head to knee etc...)
Is there any type of Karate tournament that allows grappling, submission etc and is done without gloves? (or MMA type of gloves)? Do you see all types of techniques from Katas in there? All the blocks and attacks and throws and subs?
I don't want to defend that particular point very hard, cause I don't know all about Karate Katas, and BudoNoah made me understand some stuff that I dint know, but still... I feel like there are lots of techniques in them, that are just kept for the "historical" aspect only and not for been truly effective if trained.
Agree that sparring can vary widely, but usually, if there is also organized competition, sparring tend to be more realistic.
I don't know, it's very hypothetical all that... "If they were allowed, they would do the stuff in Katas, if they wanted to fight in MMA and use them, they would have, they don't take techniques from their own art etc..." Maybe, maybe not. I am still on the "not" side
Just an idea: Why not skip Katas, and spend all this time just drilling proved effective methods? And don't tell me that you need a "library" to remember them.
That all goes back to that problem of poor instruction starting early. If people are always taught that the hikite arm is for pulling then so many kata sequences will make more sense to them. 3 of the 5 Heian opening sequences alone are based on the controlling arm and yet people aren't being taught that until years into their practice. It makes no sense to me.
That's a very common explanation for the use of hikite, but it's not a very good one. It is not necessary to pull the hand back in that manner to get the rotation necessary for a powerful punch, as we can see in basically every striking art. I suppose for some people, it could be a helpful illustration of how to rotate, but I don't find it necessary. The other common explanation is that it is used to elbow someone who is behind you, which it could certainly be used for, but that isn't exactly the most common thing. Hikite is primarily used to pull some part of the opponent (arm, leg, head, clothing, etc.) toward you as you execute a technique, although it also serves the purpose of extricating your arm from situations where it has become entangled with your opponent's, so that you can use it for something else. There are instances of hikite in kata being used as shorthand, as I mentioned before, to tell you that you simply don't need that hand to execute the technique you are using, so you are free to employ it as necessary, but I admit that can be confusing.
Could you give some video/photo examples of the kinds of techniques you're seeing that are wrong? It would be interesting to evaluate them
I see the "kata are outdated..."
I may not have worded that very well...
You could, if you wanted to. Some people have. As for being a "library to remember them," I would say that it is more a curriculum for how the instructor can structure drills--this one feeds into this one, and this one is for delaing with this counter, and so on.
All that said, if you don't find value in the practice of kata, no one is saying you HAVE to do it.
i mean boxing is what? 5 or 6 techniques? KB, 10-12?
the traditions of the past may not appeal to some, but some like it. to each their own.
There are some Karate tournaments which allow grappling and submissions and have MMA gloves, for example Daido Juku / Kudo is a perfect example, or even Shidokan to an extent.
Just an idea: Why not skip Wai Khru Ram Muay, and spend all this time just drilling fighting techniques?
(this is pretty much the same question)
The way I see it, it's a way to keep some of the traditions intact, while also getting some benefits out of it such as going through techniques properly, developing coordination and timing, learning breathing properly, and so on. I definitely don't think it should be a big part of the training though, but if you do Karate I believe it should not completely disappear. There are many different opinions on that.