Karate Myths and Misconceptions

Sounds interesting, but I am too tired and not really that committed to watch their fight, watch their Katas and see the actual application. I am kinda starting to burn out my involvement in the Kata discussion...

But with that remark, you just fueled my hate towards you kind... HOW DARE YOU QUESTION ANYTHING FROM MT?

More seriously now, you know it's not the same. And to be clear, i don't care about the Wai Khru personally. I've learned a couple of them for respect for some people/gyms, but I don't care to do them before my fights. It's not my culture, it's not my beliefs. So yes, I would gladly trade the time spending on them for other drills.

Now for the differences.
-You don't learn them from the start, only later when you are ready to fight. Katas are tough from your first day.
-Usually you only learn a couple for all your life, depending if you change gyms. Taekwondo ITF has 24 katas...
-You don't spend an insane amount of time during classes to learn it.
-You can add or take things out of it, modified it a bit to your liking. Katas are strictly done the way they are tough.
-Beside been a cultural thing, Wai Khru Ram Muay is a stretching/warm up method before your fight.
-My "level" is not decided on them. Your belts are decided on your ability to perform those katas.
-Not all gym (outside Thailand) are teaching them. So you can still learn MT in another gym if you don't want to spend time on it. Katas are an obligation for most styles of Karate/TKD that have them.
-It's not suppose to teach you proper fighting techniques...

With the Wai Kru Ram Muay question I was just pointing out at what you're saying with Kata. There are some traditional aspects in both arts that could easily be removed, but then we might as well just do MMA if you see what I mean.

Kata has many benefits, I just think there shouldn't be that much time spent on it. However in Karate one of the good things for beginners is how much time is spent perfecting techniques from the beginning while from my experience with MT you just get beginners to smash some pads without really going through their technique thoroughly individually, this is usually done slowly as they progress, while in Karate there is a lot more focus on proper technique from the start which I think is a great thing to focus on from the start.

Depending on the style of Karate, for instance in Kyokushin, Katas are only a small part of the grading and not the biggest part at all. Fighting capability and Kumite is a lot more important in Kyokushin, as well of course as the knowledge of Kihon and Kata, it all has importance. And Kata is not meant to teach you proper fighting techniques, so that's just your assumption here.

But again, I'm not trying to convince you that you should do Kata or that you need it for fighting, but I do see its benefits as well as seeing that it shouldn't be a big part of the training, only some part when doing Karate.

As you don't seem to know about Kudo and Shidokan I thought I'd include some videos for overall knowledge.

Kudo (you can see some grappling part at the end):

Shidokan:
 
Last edited:
@Tayski

Mostly agree, so i wont bother nitpicking small stuffs. Just one question for Kyokushin. Are you allowed to grade even if you don't learn katas at all? Or just that if you messed them up a bit, it doesn't really matter? For me this is a big deal, big difference.

I know about the fighting part of kudo, with their helmets and the rules that forbid them to block any punch to the head, or keep their guard high in any way, but i thought they dint have Katas... Curious if they have the belly down armbar in them...

I've seen that shidokan clip, but that's as much as I know about that style... You people have to many of them...
 
---
Holy shit that was a long post...
tl;dr: I am right, you are all wrong, even those who agreed with me.
i don't think anyone serious thinks they're 'necessary' to become a fighter, but i do think they're an important method of training, and a major factor in what makes a martial art traditional.

i can teach all the techniques of karate, and even the general fight philosophy of karate without kata kiso or bunkai. those things just create an easy core to build a curriculum around
 
@Tayski Just one question for Kyokushin. Are you allowed to grade even if you don't learn katas at all? Or just that if you messed them up a bit, it doesn't really matter? For me this is a big deal, big difference.

I know about the fighting part of kudo, with their helmets and the rules that forbid them to block any punch to the head, or keep their guard high in any way, but i thought they dint have Katas... Curious if they have the belly down armbar in them...

I've seen that shidokan clip, but that's as much as I know about that style... You people have to many of them...

Kyokushin gradings vary depending on the organisation. Generally though you're supposed to know the katas. Now if you make mistakes and messed some of them a bit but you excelled in the other departments like physical conditioning, sparring, breaking etc you might be able to pass anyway. The importance on Kata is not as big as it is for other more traditional styles, however if you don't even bother at all with them then you might as well not grade at all (there's nothing wrong with that).

Kudo doesn't have kata.

The rules that forbid to block any punch to the head or keep their guard high in any way in Kudo? What? @Azam can you elaborate on that?

There's actually not that many styles to be honest once you know the main ones.

Shidokan is essentially a branch off Kyokushin where they also train Muay Thai and grappling. Yoshiji Soeno was a student of Mas Oyama (founder of Kyokushin) who fought in Muay Thai in Thailand and in Japanese Kickboxing in Japan so knew this had to be integrated as part of the training, and he also knew the importance of grappling from his experience in Judo during his youth. So he combined Kyokushin + MT/KB + Grappling and created Shidokan after disagreements in the Kyokushin organisation. Essentially he combined those styles to create some kind of mix martial arts style more than 10 years before UFC1.
 
I am not sure if it's the same in Karate as TKD, but almost every time the second hand is not used for something, it goes down to the hip. Strikes, blocks etc... It's explained the way a told before, as a help to add rotation, power etc... And the proof to that, is that when they break boards, they use that method. It does add power, you can really feel it, but it's completely wrong for sparring/matches/self defense...

And It's no way an elbow to someone behind you. Actually in the TKD katas, there is a strike like that (elbow from the hip height) but its a completely different technique/set up.

I can see it the way you explain it, for a strike, while holding/pulling the opponent. But not for every move in the katas like blocks.

The rotation thing is commonly taught in karate, too, but my point is that it isn't worth much--you can teach the rotation for power just fine without pulling the hand to the hip. I break boards, cement, and coconuts without pulling my hand to chamber, just fine. The power you are feeling from pulling your hand back isn't coming from your hand going to chamber, it's coming from the fact that you are rotating your shoulders more, and telling people to pull their hand to their hip is just ONE way to help get them to think about that.

As for the elbow behind you, I said that it can be that, in some cases, not that it always is. There are very few instances of it in kata, but they do exist, so I mentioned it.

When the "blocks" are employed as strikes, limb controls, joint locks, or takedowns, the pulling application of hikite works just fine. If you're applying those movements as the typical basic "blocks" most people learn, then yes, the pulling hand makes no sense. I did point out, however, that in some cases the pulling hand can be removing your hand from entanglement, so you can get back to using it, or that it could simply be shorthand telling you that you don't need that hand for the technique you are doing, so you can then use it however you wish in application.


Oh man, you really gonna make me work? Most of the blocks with the "proper stance", the elbow strikes, the way they show you how to put your hands over the imaginary head to pull him down while you knee...

I was lucky, first video i found has lots of stuff from the ITF katas + the elbow i told you that look like the pull back hand to the hip we discuss (around 1,20) Take anything you want from there and tell me if and how you would use them in a self defense situation...



I try not to hate on TKD too much, but I can't help but mention that it is several very large steps removed from old-style karate, so it isn't really the best example for me to use for pointing out old-style karate methods--they make movements larger and (to my eyes) more awkward than they should be, and in some cases have messed with the stances and postures so much that they just no longer work very well for what they should be doing. Still, if I trace those back to older methods, I can bring up some things.

The grabbing backfist is a pretty common technique to use while someone is grabbing your clothes, generally as a pre-emptive strike. She's doing is much larger than necessary, but the concept is fine--trap the hands grabbing you, smack them in the face, then do something else as necessary.

The "U Punch" in that video is one that is often mentioned as being useless, and if you apply it as literally a "double punch," then I would tend to agree. Funakoshi (founder of Shotokan) demonstrated it as a method of trapping one of the opponent's hands down while throwing a punch over the top. Interestingly, I've seen Goju-Ryu practitioners apply the top hand in the same way Jack Dempsey describes his "corkscrew punch," so that it not only acts as an overhand right (or left), but also gets in the way of an opponent's counter punch. I've used those approaches in sparring, just fine. I've also been shown using the top hand to push the opponent's guard up and into their face while the lower hand acts as a body shot, which isn't my favorite, but it can work. Depending on context, it can also be used while grabbing the opponent with both hands to off-balance them backward, in a similar manner to the start of o-soto-gari in Judo.

The "high backfist strike and low block" in the video, if used the way that text describes, is completely stupid. That posture has two main functions in old-style karate--catching a leg and throwing the opponent to the ground, or catching an arm and dislocating the elbow across the chest. There are some other possible applications, but those are my go-to ones.

The elbow strikes to the rear that you brought up are fine, although you would not do them simultaneously in actual application, and so the other hand would be doing something else. That said, she does go on to show a "mid section elbow strike" that is only done on one side, and is supported by the other hand pushing it back. That works okay, although the position the hands end up in when she does that is generally something we apply as a joint lock, not an elbow to the rear.

The "high section double elbow strike" she shows is generally applied with one hand controlling one of the opponent's arms, while the other hand does the elbow strike. If she was actually trying to elbow two people with it, it would be stupid. The double chops are the same thing--one of those hands should be pulling an arm as the other does the strike.

The weird inward double punch that she does isn't something I've seen in karate, so it's tough for me to assign much application to it. The best I could figure is using it to grab the opponent, or potentially strike an opponent who has grabbed you with both hands and can't block without letting go.

The double uppercuts to the body are also something I haven't seen in karate, but the end position is similar to one we have, so it could just be a variant of that, in which case it would be a grab, depending on the context the kata puts it in.

The double inward ridgehands she does could work on somebody who has grabbed you with both hands--not my preference, but doable.

Jumping backfists are stupid, and not in kata

Superman punches are fun, I suppose :p. There is something similar in kata, but it doesn't have a jump, and works better as a leg sweep like o-soto-gari, when done the way the kata does.

I dint meant it that way, that they were useful back then and not now. The ones I am talking about were probably always useless, but no one "dared" to take them out of the Katas for whatever reason: Misplaced respect, misinterpretation, keeping the tradition...

That could potentially be the case, although it is pretty rare that I can't find a practical use for a movement in an old kata. Newer kata tend to be more of a problem.

Maybe it was me who dint explain my self better, cause what you say now doesn't really change my answer. Your explanation why some techniques of the Katas are not used may be valid, but I am not sure about it. So until we are able to watch how it goes in the format you propose, I will still be doubtful about it.

Fair enough

Well there is one of my big problems. At least in TKD ITF, you can't skip them. Its a big deal, and a big part of your evaluation for belts. You can't advance without learning new Katas for every stripe/belt. Now personally, I don't give a fuck about belts, but if you want to compete you have to. And it's a huge amount of time spent on them during classes...


I find some values in them, just not the ones that sparring and partner drilling offers... That's my main problem. And I also find them to take to much space in a martial artist schedule for the benefits they give...

If you are actually training in a "traditional" style under an official organization, then yeah, you're going to be required to know any of the kata/forms they have in the curriculum. I just meant that you can go train somewhere else, or in something else, if you don't like the kata practice. Sorry for the confusion. I will say, though, that I do think too much CLASS TIME is spent on perfecting kata in the air, instead of drilling the application of its movements and letting people use the kata as supplementary training.
 
@Tayski
I know about the fighting part of kudo, with their helmets and the rules that forbid them to block any punch to the head, or keep their guard high in any way, but i thought they dint have Katas... Curious if they have the belly down armbar in them...

Kudo doesn't have kata.

The rules that forbid to block any punch to the head or keep their guard high in any way in Kudo? What? @Azam can you elaborate on that?


There are no rules forbidding the blocking of any punches to the head lol.

The reason why there isn't much blocking in Kudo is because of the ruleset. Matches are typically short - we're talking a few minutes with the additional extension rounds in case of no clear winner.

Rounds are short - so kudo competitors will tend to be overly aggressive and not so great defensively (it's a drawback of Kudo I will openly admit as someone that trains in it). The goal being to dominate your opponent in those few minutes. The fight is very intense and fast paced & with the addition of the gi - you will get mashups.

As Kudo is fought in a tournament setting - the final rounds of the tournament tend to be the most technical where you will see guys being more defensive. The reason why is because towards the end of the tournament - multiple fights have been fought to get to the final 4 and damage has accumulated. So fighters will pick there shots more, be more defense minded and not rush in unless an opportunity is there. Result is very good fights:




You also have to factor in Kudo tournaments will usually have amateurs of varying experience including newbies competing alongside professional fighters. So there are always huge mismatches where a pro fighter smashes an amateur - in which case you see amateur eating shots like no tomorrow.
 
@JohnPJones

OK, fair.


The rules that forbid to block any punch to the head or keep their guard high in any way in Kudo? What? @Azam can you elaborate on that?

There are no rules forbidding the blocking of any punches to the head lol.

The reason why there isn't much blocking in Kudo is because of the ruleset. Matches are typically short - we're talking a few minutes with the additional extension rounds in case of no clear winner.

I was trying to be a smart ass, and make fun of the fact that they rely to much on their helmet, and don't really bother blocking anything to the head... But nice and more "realistic" fights on the last Kudo video posted.

Anyway, thanks to both of you for giving some more details about Shidokan and Kudo (you bunch of humorless Karate Nerds...)


@BudoNoah

Speaking of Karate Nerds... Holy shit man... Ok, ok... I admit, you changed my mind in the uselessness of the techniques found in Katas. But that makes it worst, since not only they are not drilled enough in more realistic scenarios, but they are not even properly explained. But I think we all agree on that, so I'm going to put an end on this discussion from my side. I think we made the important point clear: MT is the only worthwhile martial art/combat sport/self defense...
 
Just stumbled across the WGKF, and they have both light and hard sparring competitions, but the rules seem slightly confusing as written.

It talks about an excessive contact penalty is that only for the light sparring or is the hard sparring medium-hard sparring rather than full contact sparring, is anyone familiar with them?

For reference if no one is and wants to give the best answer they can (reading through at work so maybe I missed something)

https://www.sportdata.org/karate/ausschreibungen/3832/WGKF-Irikumi rules abridged.pdf
 
@BudoNoah

Speaking of Karate Nerds... Holy shit man... Ok, ok... I admit, you changed my mind in the uselessness of the techniques found in Katas. But that makes it worst, since not only they are not drilled enough in more realistic scenarios, but they are not even properly explained...

I know ARIZE is done with the conversation, but for the benefit of others, I feel I should mention that it is absolutely appalling that the techniques of kata are not properly drilled by the vast majority of karateka. There is a movement in the karate world to change that, but it's still a minority compared to how many people seem to love competing in WKF/JKA/USKA/etc. tournaments, to the exclusion of any methods not allowed within those rulesets.

Just stumbled across the WGKF, and they have both light and hard sparring competitions, but the rules seem slightly confusing as written.

It talks about an excessive contact penalty is that only for the light sparring or is the hard sparring medium-hard sparring rather than full contact sparring, is anyone familiar with them?

For reference if no one is and wants to give the best answer they can (reading through at work so maybe I missed something)

https://www.sportdata.org/karate/ausschreibungen/3832/WGKF-Irikumi rules abridged.pdf

I'm not super familiar with the WGKF's rules, specifically, but I do believe that the "excessive contact" rule is for Irikumi-Ju (soft/gentle inside fighting), rather than Irikumi-Go (hard inside fighting), especially given that one of the win conditions is knockout. Irikumi-Go is, if I recall, where Oyama got the idea for his approach to kumite, as well. Even so, there are still a good number of things that are prohibited that, personally, I feel need to be included in an old-style approach to sparring.
 
I know ARIZE is done with the conversation, but for the benefit of others, I feel I should mention that it is absolutely appalling that the techniques of kata are not properly drilled by the vast majority of karateka. There is a movement in the karate world to change that, but it's still a minority compared to how many people seem to love competing in WKF/JKA/USKA/etc. tournaments, to the exclusion of any methods not allowed within those rulesets.



I'm not super familiar with the WGKF's rules, specifically, but I do believe that the "excessive contact" rule is for Irikumi-Ju (soft/gentle inside fighting), rather than Irikumi-Go (hard inside fighting), especially given that one of the win conditions is knockout. Irikumi-Go is, if I recall, where Oyama got the idea for his approach to kumite, as well. Even so, there are still a good number of things that are prohibited that, personally, I feel need to be included in an old-style approach to sparring.
Ya looking at the rules, I don’t like the prohibition on knees and elbows to the head, and well kicks to the knees should be allowed since they feature so heavily in kata, not to mention I didn’t see a prohibition against strikes to the elbow (particularly an out stretched arm.)
 
Good post.

I tried Karate briefly as a young kid in a mixed age class. It was ridiculous.
No kind of sparing of any type, just standing in lines shadow mimicking the instructor and katas.
Just the basic front kick and punches to the body, with the other hand held at the waste.

I quit as even then I could see this was no good for self defence. The black belts were doing this too, only with more complicated katas.

Oh and the instructor had a bigger beer belly than Nelson.

Sounds like a McDojo to much Kata mang.
 
Sounds like a McDojo to much Kata mang.
We all had this little booklet each that gets signed off by the instructor when you go for belt grading.

In the book it explains how your instructor is accredited as part of a much larger uk karate network etc etc.
 
We all had this little booklet each that gets signed off by the instructor when you go for belt grading.

In the book it explains how your instructor is accredited as part of a much larger uk karate network etc etc.
yep, McDojo.
People who spend too much time trying to establish their credentials are typically trying to over compensate for an actual lack of skill.

(It’s one thing for advertising and what not, but feeling the need to constantly remind your students/subordinates/etc shows a lack in self confidence)
 
I’m still not able to make my own topics, so this seems like the most appropriate topic for what I was thinking about.

I think the big issue in karate is a lack of centrism for lack of a better term.

Imagine rating all dojos on linear scale, left 10-0-10 right

Left 10 is no contact ever, 10 right is kata bunkai and kiso kumite only, but with force (aka no competition at all but very traditional)

For example I’d rate WKF as L7 or L8, WGKF L4 or L5 karate combat L1 and what I’ve seen kyokushin as R4

I’d rate the dojo I came up in at around R3 or R2 (pre-2011 now I’d rate it like L6)

Hope that makes sense.
 
I’m still not able to make my own topics, so this seems like the most appropriate topic for what I was thinking about.

I think the big issue in karate is a lack of centrism for lack of a better term.

Imagine rating all dojos on linear scale, left 10-0-10 right

Left 10 is no contact ever, 10 right is kata bunkai and kiso kumite only, but with force (aka no competition at all but very traditional)

For example I’d rate WKF as L7 or L8, WGKF L4 or L5 karate combat L1 and what I’ve seen kyokushin as R4

I’d rate the dojo I came up in at around R3 or R2 (pre-2011 now I’d rate it like L6)

Hope that makes sense.

I think I understand where you're trying to go with it. I might label your left side "Budo" and your right side "Bujutsu," in this case, although even then that doesn't guarantee the types of material being employed, only the level of contact. I would like to see the scale have an additional y axis to factor in the incorporation of the five elements of old-style karate--striking, locking, takedowns, chokes, and grappling skills (the control/positional kind). Obviously, all of the karate styles still incorporate striking, so that would be the base level. Even within that, though, there are the strikes that are used to score in point kumite, and there are the wider array of strikes available in the kata. The same variance exists within all the elements. There would need to be a sort of sliding scale on the y axis of this chart for how much of what material is covered. It would be an interesting rating system, but you would either have to have some sort of central evaluating body, or have schools self-evaluate, and neither would be easy to accomplish.
 
I think I understand where you're trying to go with it. I might label your left side "Budo" and your right side "Bujutsu," in this case, although even then that doesn't guarantee the types of material being employed, only the level of contact. I would like to see the scale have an additional y axis to factor in the incorporation of the five elements of old-style karate--striking, locking, takedowns, chokes, and grappling skills (the control/positional kind). Obviously, all of the karate styles still incorporate striking, so that would be the base level. Even within that, though, there are the strikes that are used to score in point kumite, and there are the wider array of strikes available in the kata. The same variance exists within all the elements. There would need to be a sort of sliding scale on the y axis of this chart for how much of what material is covered. It would be an interesting rating system, but you would either have to have some sort of central evaluating body, or have schools self-evaluate, and neither would be easy to accomplish.
i include the takedowns/grappling/locks on the right side because traditional old school karate taught those techniques while the new style of competition karate focuses on light contact and a very limited number of techniques.

I also had an idea for a BBB type organization for martial arts schools, but for now it will only be a thing I use myself based on my own opinion, and I could use it occasionally in blog posts or discussion videos for my non-profit website and YT channel
 
Another myth / misconception which needs to be squashed!
Fresh video from Iain Abernethy.

 
Another myth / misconception which needs to be squashed!
Fresh video from Iain Abernethy.



Absolutely! That is something I've mentioned in a number of posts, and feels like beating a dead horse to me, but I keep coming across it, so clearly it needs to be mentioned, again. There are definitely people who cling to hikite as a power generation method for dear life. I did have one friend who studies literal rocket science explain that it actually does use centrifugal force, which can generate power, and that's the way they look at it from a power generation perspective in his style. I will admit that I don't know enough about physics to contradict that claim on the basis of science/math, although I have not found it to be beneficial in that regard, at all--I can generate more force without pulling my hand to my hip. What I can say is that using it as a power generation method is a poor tactical choice, regardless. Using it to control limbs, clear obstructions, pull opponents into strikes, and set up various follow-up techniques, is a MUCH better use of hikite, even if pulling your hand to your side with nothing in it DID generate power.
 
Absolutely! That is something I've mentioned in a number of posts, and feels like beating a dead horse to me, but I keep coming across it, so clearly it needs to be mentioned, again. There are definitely people who cling to hikite as a power generation method for dear life. I did have one friend who studies literal rocket science explain that it actually does use centrifugal force, which can generate power, and that's the way they look at it from a power generation perspective in his style. I will admit that I don't know enough about physics to contradict that claim on the basis of science/math, although I have not found it to be beneficial in that regard, at all--I can generate more force without pulling my hand to my hip. What I can say is that using it as a power generation method is a poor tactical choice, regardless. Using it to control limbs, clear obstructions, pull opponents into strikes, and set up various follow-up techniques, is a MUCH better use of hikite, even if pulling your hand to your side with nothing in it DID generate power.
It goes back to the primary issue related to teaching karate. That what is taught to the new student is not what is intended of the high level student.

The pulling motion of the opposite hand is used to help the student develop rotational power. It teaches the student how to rotate the hips with a very reliable physical cue. It also teaches the student how to steady the non-striking limb while the striking limb is in action. All very true and important for someone learning the art.

But it's not ultimate purpose of the movement - which about limb control as the video points out. Something that's not explained until later in your training.

All throughout karate (or at least Shotokan), we see this repeated. One explanation for beginners, a different explanation for experienced karateka.

Another example is when they talk about different timing for the same techniques. Many of the movements, especially in the pre-blackbelt kata that can be applied in 3 different ways. 1) Block then Counter with the other limb. 2) Parry and counter with the same limb. 3) Parry and strike at the same time.

It's the same sequence of physical movements but the instructor's belief about the student's skill level determines which explanation the student gets. This is a big part of why Western karate lagged the Japanese for so long. Some of the higher level teachings for the movements weren't taught to the non-Japanese in those early years for a variety of reasons (some intentional, some unintentional). It took years before the gaps were known and even more years before they could be learned and then taught.
 
Another myth / misconception which needs to be squashed!
Fresh video from Iain Abernethy.



I really respect Abernethy. He changed my view on what kata is decades ago now, and I fully support everything he says in this vid. But how many cups of coffee did he have before filming this? Surely half would still have been too many :)
 
I really respect Abernethy. He changed my view on what kata is decades ago now, and I fully support everything he says in this vid. But how many cups of coffee did he have before filming this? Surely half would still have been too many :)
It's just his youthful passion! OSU! :D

giphy.gif
 
Back
Top