Wastelander

It does tend to bother me that "bunkai" is used to describe what is actually "oyo," but I will admit that I generally consider "bunseki" to be part of the bunkai process. As far as I'm aware, even in Japan this is the case. Of course, with regard to kata application, I suspect the Japanese and Okinawans are using bunkai the way they hear Westerners use it. We could go with "tichiki" instead, if we wanted to be more "authentically Okinawan" by using Uchinaguchi

Tie it back, braid it up, or cut it off. I'm afraid that there isn't any magic fix for this issue

I was referring to tegumi/muto as a separate practice, rather than a component of karate, in this case. I do suspect that there was some degree of crossover over skills, but I would agree with you that such things are not part of the kata, however. I suppose Unsu could be seen as having a bit, with the drop to the floor and kicking up, but that's about it. There are a few examples of techniques done on the ground, such as can be seen in Itoman Morinobu's book, or even in the original printings of Funakoshi's. They aren't associated with kata, for the most part, though.

I tend to simplify the explanation down to positions and movements of the body that are as structurally stable and efficient as possible. Of course, you can get into things like chinkuchi lines vs. chinkuchi points, and the like.

Well I would say you are a huge leg up on us. I hate to admit this but it's included into our applications. It is taught as if you're executing the Kata on the ground. We are told that this was passed down and no one older than I will admit any differently but in my assessment someone at some point decided that a ground element was needed and made the Kata suite this need rather than it actually coming from the Kata. I will say some of the applications work and are effective but I don't buy into it being extracted from the Kata nor does my research support this. It is basically a hodge podge of techniques to get back to your feet. There is absolutely no viable techniques that would allow you to stay on the ground and battle an experienced grappler. I completely agree with that. I've seen a number of people insist that kata are passing on groundwork techniques (mostly Naihanchi), and my research does not support that as being historically accurate, nor does my experience with grappling support it. Now, there are certainly techniques and postures in kata that can be applied on the ground, but the mechanics are different. I don't mind people going "this grappling technique is like the one from this kata, but you do it this way on the ground." That's different from "Naihanchi is a groundfighting kata." There are some historical examples of groundwork techniques from karate--Itoman's book has a few, for example--but nothing nearly as involved as you see in Judo, BJJ, or wrestling. That's what tegumi/muto was for. Agreed. I assume that your reference to Muto/ Tegumi is in reference to throws, take downs, sweeps, off balancing techniques and the like and not ground fighting? If you do mean ground fighting I am definitely missing something and would love if you could point me in the right direction as my art and my research has never given me an example of ground fighting in terms of Muto/Tegumi. If this is the case I am very excited to learn how this translates and how wrong I've been in terms of my art not containing any real ground fighting skills. Can you clarify on this please? If I recall correctly, either Nagamine or Funakoshi, or possibly both, included mention of "pinning the opponent to the ground" in their description of tegumi, which would indicate at least some degree of groundwork. I could be wrong--I would have to dig through the books again.

Well I would say you are a huge leg up on us. I hate to admit this but it's included into our applications. It is taught as if you're executing the Kata on the ground. We are told that this was passed down and no one older than I will admit any differently but in my assessment someone at some point decided that a ground element was needed and made the Kata suite this need rather than it actually coming from the Kata. I will say some of the applications work and are effective but I don't buy into it being extracted from the Kata nor does my research support this. It is basically a hodge podge of techniques to get back to your feet. There is absolutely no viable techniques that would allow you to stay on the ground and battle an experienced grappler. I completely agree with that. I've seen a number of people insist that kata are passing on groundwork techniques (mostly Naihanchi), and my research does not support that as being historically accurate, nor does my experience with grappling support it. Now, there are certainly techniques and postures in kata that can be applied on the ground, but the mechanics are different. I don't mind people going "this grappling technique is like the one from this kata, but you do it this way on the ground." That's different from "Naihanchi is a groundfighting kata." There are some historical examples of groundwork techniques from karate--Itoman's book has a few, for example--but nothing nearly as involved as you see in Judo, BJJ, or wrestling. That's what tegumi/muto was for.

We actually do include a degree of newaza in our karate training, as well--mostly how to fall and how to extricate yourself from a variety of scenarios on the ground so you can get back to your feet. We do have a grappling program for those interested in more in-depth grappling training, although it is still supplemental for us. If someone wants a full grappling program, they would want to go cross-train, and we have some people who do.

As a Shorin-Ryu guy who does a handful of Goju-Ryu kata, I'll let a proper Goju-Ryu practitioner cover that one

I certainly do. Mawashi-geri isn't present in any of my Shorin-Ryu kata, although it is implicit in the Seiyunchin kata of Goju-Ryu, and can also be seen as an angled mae-geri, if you really want to justify it. Regardless, I enjoy it, and it suits a purpose. I'll occasionally work some other techniques for sport fighting, for fun, despite them not being in the kata. Most of my time is spent on the techniques found in kata, so occasionally working some things for fun isn't the end of the world. I also work some hand formations that aren't present in any of my kata--ipponken variants, for example--since they can easily augment my kata applications.

We do practice several lock flow drills, although it isn't a huge part of training. For me, the big value in them is developing the reaction to resistance to be able to transition to a different lock that is more appropriate for the situation. There are some that are good for transitioning to simply attack two joints in a row, of course, but my preferred approach is the transition based on resistance.

Congratulations, Danielle! I hope you enjoy the dinner, and your recovery goes well!

I think I know what you’re talking about, but I’m not 100% sure. Could you post a link for an example? If it’s what I’m thinking about, it’s for power generation. Why was it rejected by Funakoshi? It is for power generation, although it is often exaggerated in training, both for biomechanical study, and to account for the shrinking effect of stress/adrenaline. Not all Shorin-Ryu people use the hips that much, and some use it more. Just as an example of the range you can find, below are videos of Uema Yasuhiro, myself, and Shinzato Katsuhiko, all running Naihanchi Shodan, but with drastically different hip usage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBKAZ3WxX78 https://www.instagram.com/p/BbCed1qlJUW/?taken-by=karateobsession Plenty of Goju-Ryu people use the hips that way, as well. Also, some of the hardest punches I have seen thrown by Kyokushin fighters have been done with very effective "hip quaking," as we call it in our system, despite them not doing it in kata. To the best of my knowledge, it wasn't rejected by Funakoshi, and you can see some evidence of that in old Shotokan footage. Now, it is possible that Funakoshi Gichin didn't learn how to use the hips in that way, or wasn't very good at it, or simply didn't like it. I tend to think that, if he did know how to do it, the stances are what killed it in Shotokan. As we can see from his books, Funakoshi Gichin used the more natural Okinawan stances of Shorin-Ryu. It was his son, Funakoshi Gigo, that lowered and lengthened them to what we see today. The trouble is, once you make your stances as long and low as modern Shotokan has become, you CAN'T move your hips the way you are referring to. The hips simply don't have enough range of motion left. These stances also cause a lot of strain and wear on the hips and lower back, which is why so many senior practitioners of styles of karate that use such stances have bad hips and back pain, at least in my experience. That actually goes to your second post regarding their ability to kick--it's hard to kick well if your hips are in pain. Now, that is easily adjusted by going back to higher, more natural stances as you age, regardless of the style you practice, but I know plenty of dojo where such compromise isn't acceptable, so that could be an issue in that regard.

For those who aren't familiar, Sylvie von Duuglas-Ittu (aka "Miss Gangster Knee") is an American Muay Thai fighter who moved to Thailand to live and train several years ago, with the goal of having 100 fights in Thailand. Yesterday, she completed her 200th fight--it was a kard cheuk fight, which is where the competitors fight with rope hand wraps instead of gloves, and you can only win by knockout (anything else is a draw). Before Sylvie, there had only been one other female kard cheuk fight, and she has now had three of them, I believe. I just thought some folks here might find it inspiring. https://www.facebook.com/sylviemuaythai/photos/a.134623809905091.17999.127492557284883/1801935283173927/?type=3&theater

I would absolutely continue trying to teach everything, for the very reason you mention. I would rather have the possibility of sparking someone's interest and dedication to the art, then just assume they are going to leave and abandon them.

Everyone is going to have their own perspective on that, and it will also change depending on the person performing the kata. For me, you have to bear in mind that I practice Shorin-Ryu, so from my perspective Shotokan took the kata I practice and did weird things to them. Now, that is nothing against Shotokan practitioners--I am friends with a number of them, and they are dedicated, hard-training, knowledgeable people, and they are very good at Shotokan. Shotokan just doesn't look that good from a Shorin-Ryu perspective, at least to me. My opinion doesn't matter, though, to anyone but me in this regard. I hope that everyone practicing Shotokan enjoys it, and feels good about it!

Obviously, material has to be taught in a certain progression in order for understanding to really be developed, but I don't consider that holding back. If someone asks a question that would result in an explanation they may not be able to understand, I'll still show them, or at least give a basic explanation, and tell them that we will build up to that eventually. Personally, I think the "hold things back until a successor is chosen" is a bad idea. The situation with Oyata Sensei and Logue Sensei, for modern example.

You certainly fight how you train but, as I mentioned, self defense situations are quite a bit unlike sport fighting and the way most people spar. The longer, lower stances are often used in a very close-range context--standing grappling, or clinching, for example. Sometimes, they are used to take the opponent down, or move the opponent, or prevent yourself from being moved or taken down, for example. The kokutsu-dachi you point out as being someone nobody would use in a no-holds-barred fight, for example, is absolutely a stance I have seen used in mixed martial arts, as well as judo, sumo, wrestling, boxing, Muay Thai--the list goes on. Next time you watch an MMA fight with lots of clinchwork or fighting against the cage, take some time to watch it frame by frame, and you will be surprised just how many karate stances show up. As I said before, though, the stances of karate are NOT meant for you to just stand in and move around. They are snapshots of positions used to make your techniques work, and you may only be in them for a split second.

I used to train in a style that was very exacting with positions--feet had to be at exact angles, body parts had to be at exact distances from other body parts, etc. This is something I have found to be a very Japanese approach to karate, and is mostly for aesthetics, or for their understanding of the mechanics of a technique, which is often (as Wado Heretic suggests) based on the wrong context. Now, there are certainly some important angles and positions in Okinawan karate, and they will be checked and corrected as needed, but I have found this to not happen at the same extremely granular level that Japanese karate does it. With regard to application, specifically, it's important to remember that the "stances" of karate are not like a "fighting stance" that you use in sparring. You aren't supposed to maintain the stance and move around like you do in jiyu kumite. You are much more likely to have to transition from a natural standing/walking position quickly into one or more stances as you perform defensive techniques that require certain types of weight distribution or structure. The stances are meant to facilitate the applications, which means they are transitory, and meant to tell you how you need to move your body in order to get the technique to work. They are also often exaggerated in order to ensure that the student moves their weight in the proper manner without losing structure. It's also important to note that, under stress, movements tend to get smaller, whether you like it or not, which means that some degree of exaggeration in training is needed to account for that and make sure the technique will still work.

Welcome to the forum!

Not to sound ignorant but what is a Kane and wilder book? Lawrence Kane and Kris Wilder, who practice and teach Goju-Ryu, and both have a good deal of experience doing security work of various types, wrote a book called "The Way of Kata," which goes over some fundamental concepts for bunkai.

Everything has its place, and "sparring" is a pretty varied category of training methods. I would agree that too many people train to deal with unrealistic attacks, or even if they work against realistic attacks, they may not move from compliant drilling to resistant drilling to free practice. We have some formal drills in our organization that use the typical "step back, down block, step in, lunge punch" types of attacks to introduce some basic concepts and techniques, but we don't limit ourselves to that in our practice of those drills. Additionally, since we have a heavy emphasis on bunkai and kata application, we do a lot of training with that material using some simplified attacks for introduction purposes, and more realistic attacks as well. From compliant drilling, we move on to semi-resistant drilling, where the uke may block, or fight back out of the joint lock, or not fall down, etc., so that the technique was mostly successful, up until the very end. This gives students an opportunity to learn how to counter such resistance, and how to continue if their technique fails. From there, we increase the resistance in two ways. Sometimes, we simply have the uke attack again in some way after doing what I previously described, so the student has to learn to deal with that type of failure. Other times, since we know the technique they are trying to do, we will do something to stop it earlier, or throw it off--moving differently, grabbing when there wasn't a grab before, throwing an awkward strike, or a flurry of them, etc. From these, you get a pretty good base of skills to work with. This feeds into kakedameshi, kata randori, and "bully sparring" as I call it, as well as giving you the skills to cross over some of that material into more MMA-style sparring. These are sparring methods that allow you to work your techniques against resisting opponents in relative safety. Of course, everything I've described can only work in conjunction with supplemental training methods for developing the skills to actually use the techniques you learn in these types of sparring. I find that this varied approach addresses a lot of the shortcomings that come from more rigidly-structured methods.

Welcome to the forum! Personally, given that your current options seem to be "current dojo" and "nothing," I would stick with the current dojo until you move. When you do move, I would try out all of the schools you are interested in--do a couple classes and see what you like. You may find that you love Uechi-Ryu, or hate Goju-Ryu, or the Muay Thai school is a great fit, or you just want to go back to Shotokan, etc. You'll have to try them to figure that out

That would be the "block/punch/kick" type of application, yes. Old-style Okinawan arts commonly use the elbow movement you use to block to apply an armbar, as a comparison.

Some instructors did not teach the applications and others would not teach them until a student was awarded Yudansha. This was for a multitude of reasons, for which I've heard plenty. We teach along with the kata. Hachikyu start learning Pinan Shodan, and immediately learn the applications and are taught two person drills so they can apply what they've learned. To each their own. I feel that teaching the applications while learning the Kata gives the student a deeper understanding. Just for the sake of information... Oyama was reportedly nanadan (or possibly hachidan) under Gogen Yamaguchi when he left to start the Oyama dojo. I highly doubt Yamaguchi would bestow that rank on anyone who didn’t have a through understanding of bunkai and how to teach it. Why he abandoned bunkai really makes me wonder. Oyama had hundreds, if not thousands of high ranking yudansha under him at the time of his death. Yet there’s not a single report of him teaching bunkai that I’ve seen nor heard of. Everyone’s got their own philosophies and methods. For what it's worth, some people simply don't care about bunkai/oyo. Oyama liked his kumite approach, and perhaps enjoyed the practice of kata for health and personal development, but didn't care about how the movements were supposed to be applied. The modifications he made to the kata certainly seem to suggest that, since the motions no longer fit Okinawan methods. It's also possible that Yamaguchi didn't care that much about the application, and didn't teach much of it. It's also possible that Yamaguchi didn't learn much application in his time with Yagi and Miyagi, and therefore didn't teach much of it. There is a whole chain of possibilities, but I doubt we will get a definitive answer. Even within my organization, you can ask the head of the organization what the application for a move is, and he will show you a practical self defense technique, and you can ask one of his Okinawan 9th dans and get a basic block, or some such thing.

Just as different instructors do things differently today, different "founders" did things differently back then, too. Was kata a huge part, historically? Yes! The thing I feel the need to point out is that the 3K division (Kihon/Kata/Kumite) was not a standard practice back then, and certainly nowhere near as popular as it is, today. Many instructors considered kumite to simply be part of kata training, because the kumite came from the kata. Kihon was similar. Some instructors chose to heavily focus on physical development before ever getting to the fighting methods, which is what you have essentially described with Miyagi. Others did not, although you will often see statements about having to study certain kata for a long time before learning anything else--as I mentioned, though, that kata study INCLUDES application and kumite, rather than being separate from it. Each instructor had their own reasons for doing things the way they did. Some focused heavily on physical development. Some focused heavily on the practice of solo kata with no application. Some focused heavily on kumite of various types. Etc.