Kirves

Cool! I only recently tried Kyokushin. Where's Moldova?

Whatever happened to "Rest In Peace" ? In the golden old times we let the dead people R.I.P.

Good! Truth and truth. Truth is some karate changed a lot, some a bit. Truth also is that karate was never stagnant in history either, it always evolved. There are several organizations that preserve their respective systems as closely to the old teachings as possible. Hohan Soken (grandson of Bushi Matsumura) has talked about the old ways, also about how the ways have changed and why, and also why he didn't join the big organizations (he didn't want to water the system down too much). Seibukan Shukunaihayashi is an organization that was founded to preserve the teachings of Chotoku Kyan in a 100% unchanged manner, and so on. Based on some other sources (like Hohan Soken's interviews), the book Tales of Okinawa's Great Masters by Nagamine, the history of Seibukan and so on, I'd say it was all about self defence. I am. Many, not all. First of all, I never said I study old style. I have in the past, and still have close friends who continue to do so. I myself prefer full contact sparring and "aliveness" as Matt Thornton puts it. BTW, Hohan Soken often talked about how tough the fighting was in the old way of teaching - he has repeatedly said how karateka would sometimes be killed or crippled for life in training and that would sometimes ruin the lives of their families as well. That was how serious the "old-time" training was. What I have gathered from the sources I have looked into: 1. First karate was a tough fighting/self defence art, training was rigorous and often dangerous. 2. Later the training was modified into less rigorous, as the modern life doesn't fit so well with karate that often kills or cripples people. So contact and dangerous practises was limited. As karate became more popular, with girls, weak men and children attending, it was watered down even more. People who studied karate during the first half of the 20th century, and some who did it in good dojos even as late as 60s (like Joe Lewis) say that back then nobody cared if you could take the training, the people in the dojos were 18-30 strong males and even many of them dropped out. But after those times, it was softened so anybody could study it without being afraid of injuries. 3. Some people started noticing that karate had become too soft. The people who studied it in these new soft schools, couldn't fight anymore. So these people started making modern contact karate styles to make it work again. For example, Mas Oyama - the founder of Kyokushinkai, said that he made his karate tougher so it would amount to what karate used to be, and in his opinion should be. So, now that we are talking about "old karate" we must define are we meaning option #2 here which is softer and weaker than the "modern karate" of option #3, or are we talking about the "real old karate" of option #1, which was, if possibly even tougher than the modern tough styles. But, I feel we're getting a bit off topic here. The original post was about how karate was not designed with the idea of defending against muay thai fighters on the street, and I agree. When someone says that style X won't beat style Y in K1 or UFC or whatever, my first thought is, are these people really that afraid that some MMA champ from K1 or UFC is coming at them on the streets? Most people who study a martial art for self defence, do it a couple times a week for a couple hours per session - that's it. Of course he won't beat the local MMA champion, but I don't think that is the reason he's studying the martial arts anyway. Ahh, what a rant.

I'm sure too.

Marco Lala (full contact Kyokushin champ, who later studied grappling too to great extent) believes in strength training and wrote a book about it "Phenomenal Strength Training". His website is http://www.fightingsecrets.com/

Why only speculate? Why don't you try one, they're out there in public. Just go past the modern styles, especially the known McDojos and you'll easily find good old fashioned karate.

Now that Sherdog.com was mentioned, I might add that one of the best discussion forums for those specifically interested in K1 (and other MMA sports) can be found there. And now that K1 has been part of the topic too, here is the K1-FAQ from the Sherdog.com forum: http://www.sherdog.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51771

Try http://www.sherdog.com/ but I'm not sure if you'll find exactly what you're looking for.

Definitely! All karate have more or less the same basics (the stances, kicks, blocks and punches only have minor differences). The differences in the styles come from the strategies, tactics and the beef (that is, how the methods are used for self defence). In Japan, more focus has been shifted to simple use of kicks, blocks and punches in tournament type fights, after the masses learned the basics in school, that is what they wanted to do. On Okinawa, most of the focus is on studying the old interpretations (a.k.a. tichiki) of the kata for self defence. They (most of them anyway) never got so interested in tournaments. So, the kicks and punches are the same, but they focus on different ways of using them. And as the tournaments in Japan don't allow grappling, throwing or wrestling, those aspects seem to get less attention in the Japanese styles (though there are exceptions, like Wado ryu which added grappling from jujutsu to it's curriculum, when they wanted to have that stuff too, but didn't know the original tichiki of their kata).

Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu is as said, a mixture of 9 schools from feudal Japan. Six of them are samurai schools - i.e. they are just plain koryu bujutsu/jujutsu. That is a very good thing, it means you learn six battlefield tested jujutsu schools at once! The three ninpo schools are usually only taught to very advanced students, as far as I have understood. So in my opinion, it is not very correct to say one is studying ninjutsu if one studies the Bujinkan curriculum, especially when one hasn't risen to the advanced ranks.

See for yourselves: http://www.battle.at/koga/

Usually the grab also includes something else, like a punch or (in the case of attacking a woman) a strong pull (in order to drag the victim somewhere). Just plain grab of the wrist as the only unarmed attack without pushing or pulling won't happen that much, but did in the old age (no pushing or pulling because they attacked with their own swords, the wrist grab was just to stop the enemy from drawing first). True, the principles and mechanics work. But traditional Japanese arts base way too much focus on defending the wrists, in some people's opinion. When more common attacks on the streets are different kinds of tackles (traditional jujutsu has very few responses to these, some styles have none), headlocks, pushes/shoves, punches and chokes. Even if wrist grabs do happen, they are rare compared to these, and certainly easier to deal with, i.e. not so dangerous. So it would seem wise to study an art with more focus on the other attacks as well. PS. As we were basically talking about the MMA (more specifically JKD, but the point was on mixing different arts) people mixing several arts, let's have a look at the NHB/MMA tournaments: how many tournaments have been won by a wrist grab? Or won by a counter to a wrist grab? It would seem logical for someone training MMA and training for NHB tournaments to focus on other aspects of fighting. At least IMO.

Well, I would dare to say, the kata bunkai of Seibukan is from another world when compared to the bunkai of Shotokan. (I'm talking about the official bunkai - of course you can do the same bunkai from any style's kata, but we're discussing the official curricula of the styles)

No, they aren't "extreme athletes" (whatever that is), but every time I see a pic of one of them without a gi, it seems they are more muscular and fit than most people I know or see on the streets. What makes a huge difference between the Gracie brothers and the rest of us, is that they are a huge family born to a family with a BJJ master father. Then the guys have wrestled with each other several hours a day since they were 4 or 5! How can you beat that with the usual "I started going three times a week to the local karate class when I turned 15" -story? When we were sitting in the playground, poking matchbox cars with sticks, they were already wrestling with each others while their father showed them the intricacies of BJJ.

Culture and history of an art mean a lot. Traditional Jujutsu, for example, was created by and for the samurai (or bushi to be more exact, samurai was jut one of the bushi classes). What this means, technically? It means quite a lot: 1. Samurai often wore armour and helmets, so the techniques were designed with that in mind. 2. Samurai were always armed, they didn't leave their swords even when they bathed. So that had a huge impact on the techniques. The most important unarmed technique for the samurai was that of countering a wrist grab. Why? Because when you were attacked by someone, your first thought is to draw the sword fast. So they try to stop you from doing that by grabbing your wrist or arm. That is why all the japanese arts (jujutsu, aikido, aikijujutsu, and so on) focus so much on defending against someone grabbing one or both of your wrists. Now, how often are you attacked on the modern streets by someone coming up close and holding your wrist? Or in a bar - does the mean looking tattooed biker come yelling at you and then take a hold of your wrist? 3. Samurai on the battlefield worked in groups and were armed to the teeth, and wearing armour. This meant almost certain death if you were to fall on the ground (hard to get up, when you are in armour, lying on a slippery rice field and five armed warriors are trying to cut your head off), so groundfighting was rarely practiced with any seriousness. So, here just a few thoughts about how the culture and environment can determine what kinds of methods are developed and why the Japanese arts aren't always the choice number one. Compare these with warriors of the Philippines who were poor people with no armour, no fancy weapons (grab a stick from the ground and start pounding), so the methods developed are quite different. One has to choose which methods suits one best.

Exactly. The biggest difference between a regular hobby-karateka and the NHB pros is that they are pros and we are hobbyists. It is so common for people to talk way overboard about what one has to do to be a good fighter. First you have to know how to fight stand up. So take 3-4 weekly lessons of Muay Thai, or Kyokushin or whatever. Then you also have to know groundwork, so take 3-4 weekly lessons of BJJ or Submission Wrestling. Then for real life self defence you need to know about weapons and defences against them, so take Kali/Eskrima for 3-4 weekly lessons. Then you have to get athletic, go to a gym and start pumping iron 2 hours every other day. Then go to the GNC and get huge packs of protein, creatine and all the powders you can find. Then you need to spar in as many rings and with as many tournaments as possible. And train with all kinds of equipment (bag, mits, ...). Now just start calculating how much time, effort and money all that is going to take. If you are not a pro fighter, you need to get the money somewhere too, so add a job to that list. A job with high income, because all that activity will cost you quite a lot. And forget about family life... You wake up, go to work after the day, you go to one club for a two hour session, then you go to another club or the gym for another hour or two, then you mix all your concoctions and spend the rest of the evening trying to digest the stuff. Most of us aren't that dead serious about martial arts. Someone who is, must be rich (so no need for a job) or become a pro fast. Another option is to become semi-serious, that is limit what you do to either standup (focus on K1 and the like) or do groundfighting (focus on BJJ or Submission Wrestling and the like). Or remain a hobbyist and just do what you enjoy and don't go nuts about it. If you spend some years studying "for the K1" and get good at it, maybe then it is easier to focus on groundwork for a while to round it up. Or vice versa. But to start from the beginning, already focusing on all this, you need to be dead serious or it won't work. One can always go for a single style that "has it all" (and what style is that), but you won't be that good (can't get 6 hours worth in two hours if the stuff is essentially the same). So, in my humble opinion, those who claim that unless you train all the ranges with the best of them you are "not skilled" enough for the street or the ring, are in my opinion unrealistic about life in general (unless they are talking about millionaires or professional fighters with nothing else to do but train).

With all due respect, comparing these two is not that good an example, because they aren't really that much of different styles, Japanese Goju was formed more because of a drift from the Okinawan instructors than any technical renovations (which though happened too). What I meant with my response earlier was that the completely new styles founded on the mainland, like Shotokan or Kyokushinkai. And compare them to the Okinawan styles like Seibukan.

This is stereotyping, as both have exceptions, but what the neck, let's shoot! Okinawan styles focus on kata bunkai. To them, kata is the focus of their training and when others are sparring, they are drilling self defence tactics from their katas. Japanese guys took karate to schools and military, effectively creating a large base of people who know how to kick and strike, and this started to turn their focus on tournament sparring. Many people in Japan never actually studied the kata that deeply, as they first learned a diluted school version of the art, only desiring to do some kicking and punching. So most of Japanese styles are sparring based, and most of Okinawan styles are bunkai based. But both have their exceptions to the rule.

Thanks for the laugh!

I had a period of two years when I didn't actively train. All the knowledge and info remained in my head and it was a big shock to find out that I couldn't actually perform at all, even I knew from experience how it was supposed to work. Luckily, it all came back quite rapidly once I was training actively again. But this just shows how a belt rank means nothing if you don't keep it up.

Does it just take eons to download or is the site down?

Duh!

My suggestion is Shootfighting. But there is no one single answer. I recommend one thing, someone else recommends something else. Listen to what people recommend and then go see some schools that teach these arts. Then choose one that has the schedule, location, fees and atmosphere that might make you stick to it for the long term.

Many people think "brown is almost black". Weird but so it is. Also, older people are often suspicious until you earn their respect. A high belt rank may help, but the best way is to just show them. When you spar in a class, spar with each one of them among the class and when they see for themselves that you are better than them, they will begin to respect you and feel you are "worthy" of instructing them.

Well strength always helps, no doubt about that. All things being equal, if one guy is stronger, he may use it to his advantage. It's not a given (but then again, nothing ever is). Size itself helps less, but it can help in techniques where your mass is delivering the power. A stomp kick, or when you lie on top of the opponent's lungs and so on, it helps the heavier you are (unless you are so fat it inhibits your movement, ).