Wastelander

I absolutely agree. Plus, you can be an excellent instructor without being terribly skilled at applying things under pressure, yourself, or having a competition record. Unfortunately, competitive success is still the majority of people's method of measuring the effectiveness of a martial art, for better or worse.

You've already had some good responses to consider. I would add to that the recommendation that you don't name it after something that exists in fictional media, and if you intend for the art to be taken seriously as a fighting or self defense art, then you need to prove that it works, somehow. Competition is the most popular way to do that, but you would also need to do it in a competition format that has credibility in the type of martial art you are trying to build (eg. point fighting competitions will not give you any credibility as a self defense art).

I do practice Sanchin, but it's been an evolving kata for me. The version I first learned in Shuri-Ryu had been modified pretty significantly from the Goju-Kai version it originated from. After I left the style, I started trying to adapt what I had learned to fit the Jundokan Goju-Ryu version. Recently, however, I've been working on the Bugeikan's Shuri Sanchin, and that will probably become my default version of practice. I honestly prefer Tensho, because it combines not only the structural development but also softer muchimidi components.

I've done a wide variety of tactile sensitivity drills and exercises, and I think they are incredibly important, if often out of context. Karate has a variety of kakie/kakidi drills for this purpose, which build up to kakedameshi, which is a free-form sticky hands type of sparring. You can also press a ball against a wall and move it around the wall just with pressure from your body, or work sticking and moving with a swinging bag, or tie a rope to something and manipulate it without grabbing it or letting it fall, etc.

This topic sort of revolves around the Shu-Ha-Ri learning concept. First, you learn by copying (Shu), doing exactly as you are told and shown, until it comes naturally. Then, you start to adapt (Ha) what you learned to be more suited to you, personally, which is where self expression starts to come in. After a while, you learn to break free (Ri) from what you were taught to be able to come up with your own material, while still holding true to the fundamentals that you built up over time. This is a process that is constantly happening as you learn; not just in the overall process, but in every individual technique and nuance, as well. After a few years of consistent training and learning, your karate should begin to take on its own unique flavor, without violating the overall principles you've learned.

To add to Wado Heretic's response, I would say that the kata in the video is nothing I have seen before, either. It does have bits and pieces of several kata put together, and they are assembled in a pseudo-Naihanchi style enbusen, but structurally and mechanically, it doesn't look anything like the Shorin-Ryu that I learned. I would tend to agree with the theory that it was a modern creation.

I learned the KishimotoDi versions of Naihanchi, Passai, and Kusanku, which are definitely recognizable but quite different from the versions I learned in Chibana-lineage Shorin-Ryu. I also had a sort of reverse situation, where I learned weirdly modified versions of Wansu, Sanchin, Tensho, and Seiyunchin, and then later adjusted them to be more like the versions I had seen in other styles that I preferred.

Welcome to the forum!

I know that some people see "old-school karate" as referring to what is affectionately known in the US as the "blood and guts era" of karate here in the States, which was mostly the 1970s. They talk fondly of the hard training, with Sensei that were almost abusive to their students, and point karate tournaments where people lost teeth and broke bones. Personally, that's not "old-school," to me, at all. I see old-school karate much the same way that Spartacus Maximus describes; Okinawan methods that primarily carry over from before karate's introduction to the school system and mainland Japan. It's superficially characterized by having more angles/circles than straight, hard lines, along with higher stances, but beyond that it tends to include a great deal of grabbing, locking, and throwing. It also tends not to incorporate point fighting, but since that's the popular karate thing, most schools do it, even if they teach otherwise-old-school methods.

Well, you could wear instep pads, I suppose, if you want to keep kicking with your instep. That's a sport karate tactic for getting more reach, though, not for power--if you want to kick hard, you should really be hitting with your shin. You may also be kicking a bag that has sandbags that have shifted to the outside, so you're hitting packed sand instead of padding. Eventually, your body will adjust, but if you're doing full contact, I don't see the extra reach of kicking with the instep as being that beneficial compared to the added power you can put in by hitting with the shin.

I'm going to disagree with you, here, Bob. It seems, to me, that you are conflating "size matters" with "size trumps training," just judging by your reasoning that if someone believes that size matters then they shouldn't bother with martial arts. That isn't really an accurate connection to make, in my opinion, and I think that to say that size DOESN'T matter can be doing a disservice to one's students by not effectively communicating the importance of training to overcome a size difference, or the fact that starting training doesn't instantly overcome size difference. You can teach methods for doing it as a standard part of your curriculum, but it's still up to the student to take responsibility for their training and the effort and time they put in, and without a proper understanding of the context and possible hurdles they are training for, how can they be effectively motivated to train appropriately? Why does size matter? Because any given level of technique and tactics can only overcome so much size and brute strength. As you improve in martial arts, the amount of size and brute strength you can overcome increases, but there is still a tipping point for most of that journey. You can't tell a 90lb white belt that size doesn't matter, because they haven't had the training to overcome a size/strength disadvantage. Even a 90lb blue or green belt should understand that, while they might be able to overcome some size/strength difference with their training, there still comes a point where they can't. Sure, they can beat that 120lb untrained person, even if they are grappling, but they may not be ready for that 200lb untrained person, yet. Even once you have reached a point where you have the technique and tactics down so well that you can use them to overcome an opponent of any size, that doesn't mean you will always be successful in doing so, depending on what happens in the fight, because fights are chaotic. One mistake can leave you in a bad position where the opponent's strength or sheer size can stop you from doing anything, technique or no. Understanding this possibility is vital to ingraining a sense of urgency and the right mindset to do everything to avoid such problems.

Well, a lot of my world is hinging on getting a house sold and moving to a new one, at the moment. Provided that happens, though: 1. Get back to working on my fitness, as best I can while dealing with Ehler-Danlos Syndrome 2. Open my dojo in my new city of residence 3. Continue to refine my practical-focused karate curriculum for that dojo 4. Train with various instructors in several styles, including Shorin-Ryu, Goju-Ryu, and Uechi-Ryu (already going to hit KishimotoDi when my instructor comes out for a seminar next month)

Welcome to the forum! Looks like you've already been given some solid advice, too

Brown belt is 7th kyu in your dojo? That seems backwards, to me. To answer your question, though, I have trained in both Shorin-Ryu and KishimotoDi, simultaneously, and I work some Goju-Ryu kata, as well. The thing is, I maintain Shorin-Ryu as my core style, and my instructor didn't have a problem with crossover. By training two styles at once, they are going to bleed into each other, no matter how hard you try to prevent it, and if your instructor isn't okay with some of that happening, you're going to have trouble.

Welcome to the forum!

Congratulations to all the winners, and thank you very much for the votes!

That is what I do in private lessons for people who want to work on their sparring, a lot of the time, and I do it here and there in sparring classes. As you mention, it does take up a lot of time, and the more students you have in class, the more time it takes, but it's definitely really valuable. It's absolutely the approach I would take for anyone training for a fight, especially.

Welcome to the forum! And yes, you will bruise less as time goes on

Well, when I start my program in the Spring, I will just have general classes, but that's because I'll still be getting it off the ground. I will probably add in some specialty classes, over time. The dojo I have been at for the past 9 years does quite a few specialty classes, because it has so MANY classes per week, divided up amongst the various instructors. There are "little warriors" classes for the 3-5 year olds, and then we have youth beginner classes and adult beginner classes. Intermediate and advanced classes are all ages, but limited by rank. There are separate classes that specifically focus on kata, kobudo, and kumite, as well as one tournament-focused class per week. Every now and then, they run extra specialty classes for several weeks, such as a "CrossKick" or "Boot Camp" type of class. Soon, one of our brown belts will be running a specialty class for the deaf and HOH.

I would definitely like to go to Okinawa, again, but this time without the shackles of the organization I have been a part of, so that I could actually do a lot of training while I'm there. Since I can't pass medicals to fight, anymore, it would be cool to start coaching some students for MMA fights. I'm starting my own dojo when I move in January/February, so that's a goal I'm close to meeting, as it is. There are a bunch of people I would like to train with, of course. If it helps, you don't need to know the kata to learn things at Iain's seminars--he refers to the kata, of course, but you don't have to perform the kata, or anything, so you're really just learning drills. Toward the end he also has you do some padwork, and a bit of light resistant training with some of the content from the seminar.

I think that all martial arts training tends to be rather proprioceptive, in nature, because it is all about controlling the body. That said, at least in karate, proprioception can also be used to more quickly identify what the opponent is doing, through contact with them. That's where exercises like kakie come into play, and sparring methods like kakedameshi and randori.

As I alluded to some of this is also about tradition and an organizations syllabus. If you want to teach under certain organizational banner you must teach that syllabus at a minimum, but you are more than free to add on. For many of us that is certainly a factor on some things we do. One other thing is that is it possible that we are not seeing the full benefit that was intended? How many times has this been said about kata or certain katas and then you have someone like Ian Abernethy breakdown and explain the moves that people performed like a dance routine for years? I understand that they are a requirement in many organizations--I will be leaving one such organization at the end of the year, in fact. When I have had to teach such drills, I explain that I don't like them, and they aren't realistic or practical, but required by the organization. Personally, I care little for traditions that do not serve to improve my karate, and the typical, formal step-sparring drills would fall into that category. I have had very knowledgeable and skilled instructors from 5th Dan up to 10th Dan explain what these drills are meant to teach, and I understand what they are saying, but I also disagree on much of it. Even where I agree that it teaches something, they have failed to convince me that such drills are the most EFFICIENT method of teaching those things. As to one of your earlier points, I have found no issues with teaching practical drills as part of a large group--even withing the organization I've been a part of for 9 years, which is one that does step-sparring.

The process you describe can just as easily be done with drills that use realistic attacks and defenses, with sound tactics. That's kind of my point--the drills I'm talking about don't do anything that another drill can't do better.

Completely agree that this is the best answer to Wastelander's question. In our organization we recently had some leadership changes that came with some training changes that seemed very strange. For instance we change many of our kyu level katas to one count for each step regardless of how it used to flow before. As well as other changes that didn't seem to make since. For a months we thought this was just the new way things are going to be done for all ranks. New leader new rules, right? After the next seasonal training camp it was explained that the new ways were set up so the instructors could see each step and make corrections in a large crowd and it was also mainly the new way to teach beginners. It seems that the multiple moves being done in some katas were very sloppy and not even the correct move. The instructors couldn't see it and fix that in" real time". So yeah it did not seem practical to practice this way but there was a good reason for it. If you translate this into how things were done years ago think about the pictures of Okinawan and Japanese training sessions with huge groups. I could see sparring getting chaotic to the point that these one and three step sparring drills were necessary. In both of the styles I have trained in these types of drills get more and more advanced. You walk before you run. As I mentioned, before, I'm not against structured training and using pre-arranged drills; it's the specific approach to drills that I have problems with. Breaking down kata into counts so you can check postures does make sense for a large crowd, but your example for sparring does not. If the "step sparring" drills were meant to break down sparring into drills that were easier to check and make sure people are doing them right, they would actually contain sparring techniques, which the vast majority of such drills do not contain, if you compare the drills to the kumite they do. I have learned and taught sparring drills for years, and while they are definitely pre-arranged and done step-by-step at first, they are still recognizable as things you would actually do in sparring. The formalized "step sparring" or "yakusoku kumite" drills do not, in any way, resemble such training methods. They are the karate version of busy work.

1 Shuri-Ryu 2 Judo 1 Shorin-Ryu Starting my own in the Spring, if that counts?