Wastelander

For me, learning the bunkai unlocked the kata, unlocked the intensity needed, unlocked the intent for movements I didn't understand and it gave the understanding of why this stance with this strike, why a certain timing is necessary. Without bunkai, it's strictly a blind performance. It's essential for me. Kata is one of those situations where it's way more than meets the eye. The only way IMO to perform it well (not necessarily for aesthetics) is to understand the application. I see what your saying here, I really do. What I'm trying to help others understand is that there are some systems out there in which applications aren't taught with the forms. The ATA forms were designed as teaching tools for the techniques assigned to each level, and thus, each form gets a bit more difficult physically. They weren't built from a self-defense application aspect first. So for me, trying to discover ways of training applications is a bit of a different adventure.This is important to keep in mind--there are some forms, primarily newer ones, that were never intended to be used to transmit self defense methods. It can still be interesting to try to work out applications for them, but some just aren't meant for that. There are also some newer kata that were designed to transmit modern sport fighting methods, and those will be rather different from self defense oriented kata, as well.

It sounds, to me, that you're worried about the "slippery slope" problem. Not being on the board, I don't know how granular your organizations guidelines are, but I would think it would be possible to write the bylaws in such a way that the slippery slope was prevented, or at least diminished. For example, creating the guideline that instructors be allowed to accept students under 16, but that they cannot be forced or in any way coerced to do so, and making it mandatory would require unanimous approval by the board. Something to that effect. As I said, I don't know if that's something that could be done with your organization or not. Personally, I don't see modernization as inherently bad, nor do I see much benefit in carrying on tradition for tradition's sake. There are certainly some problems with modern practices, though, and some benefits to traditions. I don't see a problem with allowing instructors to take students younger than 16, provided the rank guidelines stay the same. Adding some ranks before black belt also isn't that big of a deal, as long as it doesn't become a Crayola box of 16 colored belts. We use the Jun-Shodan (basically Shodan-Ho) rank for students who are excellent, and know all of the black belt material, but are 1-2 years too young to test for Shodan, and we've only done that 4 times. I also don't see any problem adding classes that focus solely on self-defense, because that's valuable and important material, and can keep students engaged in the rest of the system. There is always going to be the possibility for abuse of any system, and because we teach, which is providing a service, customers have some level of impact on what we do. Even if we don't rely on teaching for our income, it's possible to simply not have any students if they aren't accommodated to same degree. That doesn't mean you have to bow to every bit of pressure, though, so as long as the organization supports the instructors' rights to teach and reject students, that should be fine.

Congratulations, Brian, and thank you for everything that you do! I was hoping to be able to make it to the livestream, but it was during my work hours and I wasn't able to get away with a webcam at the time. I hope you enjoy your dinner!

Well, that is certainly an interesting turn of events! Honestly, though, I can't say I'm all that surprised that it turned out that way--many instructors have already decided that a person is going to be promoted before they ever test, so the fact that your instructor had already filed your promotion suggests that he already knew you would pass. High praise, in my opinion. Congratulations!

It sounds to me as if you've made up your mind, already. You simply don't want to continue training in Goju-Ryu at your current dojo. You have to do what is best for you, so make the switch. That doesn't mean you can't still be friends with your current sensei. Maybe someday, after you've gotten the competition bug out of your system, you'll switch back.

Welcome to the forum!

Welcome to the forum, Gus! I'm glad you have decided to come back to karate--too many people try karate as a kid and don't get the fullest/best experience, and miss out on something great. It's awesome that you've kept going with other martial arts, too! As it turns out, I know of three solid karate schools in the LA area: World Budo Arts, Santa Monica, CA Kaizen Dojo, Torrance, CA Machida Academy, Lomita, CA World Budo Arts is a joint operation between Tom Callahan Sensei (Kyokushin) and Vassie Naidoo Sensei (Goju-Kai). They train very hard, and do knockdown-style sparring, but are friendly people who will work with you at whatever level you need. Kaizen Dojo is run by my friend William Ford Sensei (Shorin-Ryu), and he also has a BJJ instructor that teaches classes there. He teaches traditional Okinawan karate, with a somewhat MMA-ish approach. Very nice man, too! Machida Academy is kind of an obvious entity in this list--it's run by Lyoto and Chinzo Machida, both of whom would be familiar to you. I have not personally gotten to train with them, but I do know a few people who do, and their feedback has been nothing but positive. From what I gather, you would be learning Shotokan karate with a blended self defense/MMA approach.

Well, personally, I would say to stay with your current dojo and ALSO go train kumite at the other dojo, if that's what you want. Of course, you also seem to be taking the opposite approach to my own, when it comes to karate. If you are not happy with training in Goju-Ryu, and you are wanting to develop skills that are not developed in your current dojo, then you should switch to a school that fits your needs.

In my experience, not at all. They don't even know the difference between judo and TKD, most of the time. That's one of my biggest complaints with Olympic karate, and why I don't think it will stick around

My style has drills that are essentially like ippon/sanbon/gohon-kumite, but they vary greatly in length, so we can't really number them that way, so we call them "yakusoku kumite." Originally, Nakazato Shugoro created 21 of them, but pared it down to 7, which are the ones I first learned. His son has since added 21 of his own. The original 7 are generally longer than the new ones, but the formula is the same--do the very basic ippon/sanbon/gohon-kumite stuff for a while, then end with a practical fighting/self defense technique, albeit still done against a karate attack. I like the endings--particularly in the new set, as they all come from kata--and we actually regularly break out the endings as their own drills in our dojo, working them against realistic attacks with resistance. Most people do not do this, however. Personally, I hate the rest of the techniques in the drills because of the same reasons you point out in your article. I think time is better spent on realistic drills, just slowed down and with expanded distance for beginners. Now, I will admit that I happen to support the idea that "non-directly-applicable" drills can develop useful skills. With that in mind, I do think that these types of drills, despite not being directly applicable, do still teach concepts of distancing/timing/reactions/etc. It isn't a matter of them teaching those concepts for a particular context--just that it teaches them, at all. Even so, I am in complete agreement with you that they are an inefficient method for conveying these concepts, if we are training for practicality. I have to practice and teach ours as long as I am in the organization, because they are required. It doesn't mean I have to like it

Personally, when I am asked to teach a seminar, I ask them what type of material they would like to be covered. Do they want to learn a new kata? Do they want to learn drills, and if so, what kind? Do they want bunkai? Etc. From there, you can build a curriculum for it. Now, sometimes they will come back with: "whatever you want to teach!" That can be a little frustrating, but usually I mix some fundamental drills that may be different from what they do, and move that into kata applications, which I can either connect to kata or not, depending on their experience with the kata.

Well, athletes, generally, are significantly more athletic than they used to be. Between the natural evolution of the species, modern supplements, and medical sports science improving training methods, I think that's to be expected. It's also impossible to deny that this has happened--just watch any of the Olympic events from 30-40 years ago, and compare them to the most recent ones, and you'll see a significant improvement. With that in mind, comparing any athletes from the 70's and 80's to modern ones isn't exactly fair. Now, to speak to JKA and WKF, specifically, we can look at recent footage and compare a bit more evenly. I would say that, on average, the WKF competitors are, indeed, faster. Now, that could simply be because faster competitors are drawn to the WKF competition format. It could also be that because the WKF has been pushing for the Olympics, instructors coaching WKF competitors have incorporated more modern training methods to improve speed than the more traditional JKA competitors. It's hard to say without experiencing both training approaches for a comparable level of competition.

For our students interested in competition, we have switched from USKA-style kumite to WKF-style kumite. We only have one class a week dedicated to that, though, and aside from the occasional focus on it in other sparring classes, that's it. The rest of our sparring is either the way you describe, or more MMA-style, or kakedameshi. The parents definitely like the WKF approach--it's clean, structured, and gives the kids a relatively safe way to compete. Personally, I suggest you simply set up an additional class, or transition an existing one, to spar this way for those who are interested in it. It's worked out quite well for us. Our students don't clean-sweep WKF competitions, but they pretty much always medal, and we still have a reputation as a tough fighting school when we do other competitions.

Welcome to the forum!

I suppose I could send a letter to our honbu dojo and ask for the number of registered yudansha, as they would have that information. Unfortunately, I can't answer that, at the moment. I can say that my Sensei has promoted 8 people to Shodan in the time I have known him. He has done some Nidan and Sandan promotions, as well, but those aren't "new" black belts, so I'm not counting those.

I don't mean to say that discussing different teaching methods is silly--only that "arguing" about them is silly, as there simply is no such thing as the "best" teaching method, which can be applied to all students. To be fair, I suppose the distinction between discussing and arguing is pretty blurred. In any case, I can see Kusotare's point in that too much application too fast can lead to poor performance of the kata, but I also agree with wildbourgman that not enough (or no) application can lead to a weak or useless kata performance. There has to be a balance, as with all things. Now, with regard to Naihanchi being for internal mechanics and structure, instead of practical application, I can't agree completely. Admittedly, the Naihanchi passed down by Itosu was altered to place more of an emphasis on mechanics and structure than before--older versions have different structure and are more "flowy." That said, I'm of the opinion that EVERY kata develops body mechanics and structure, but that they do so specifically in order to support the applications. Without knowledge of the application that the mechanics and structure are supposed to facilitate, they don't serve much purpose. Mechanics and structure for their own sake exist in dance, already, for aesthetic and athletic purposes. No need for that in kata.

I think Kusotare's point is not that kata were created before their applications, but that they should be taught in their solo form before their applications are taught? That is a pedagogical opinion, so we are bound to have people on different sides of that issue, and they can all have quite valid points. There are benefits to learning strictly the solo performance of kata before ever learning applications, just as there are benefits to learning applications before ever even seeing the solo performance of the kata, and everything in between. Honestly, I tend to think that arguing over the best teaching method in this situation is a bit silly, because I have found that no method works for every student. Some students learn better by focusing just on solo kata, while others learn better by focusing on bunkai, and everything in between. I am of the opinion that we should teach to the student, not expect the student to learn the way we want them to. Now, I know that is not the Eastern/Asian way of teaching, but I am not Eastern/Asian, and just because I practice and teach an Okinawan art does not mean I have to teach it in that manner.

I agree!! Does anyone know his rank?? I know he's of no particular core style anymore, according to his writings. He's a 4th Dan. I would like to know which style. It's one of the original ones, but it could be either Okinawa or Japanese. Okinawan Karate. I believe he has studied Shito-Ryu as his Base Style. His father and primary instructor is Leif Hermansson, if I remember correctly, and he teaches a blend of Shindo-jinen-ryu, Goju-Ryu, Shotokan, and Shorin-Ryu.

Which tournament will this be? Our dojo may have people competing in it, too, depending on which one it is If it makes you feel any better, it can be tough for us to adapt in tournaments, as well, since we only do tournament sparring in one class per week, and the rest of the time we spar in ways that would get us disqualified . The biggest benefits that I see are that it forces you out of your comfort zone, and you have to keep your wits about you instead of fighting on "autopilot," so to speak.

If your Sensei has seen that you struggle with applying the moves of the kata, then it makes perfect sense that he or she would make you focus on precisely that. If you avoid the things you are bad at, in favor of the things you are good at, you'll never get better, and you'll eventually get bored. Now, any time you are concerned about the way your training is progressing, you should talk to your instructor! If you want to get in more practice on just the kata movements, then tell them! That doesn't mean the bunkai will go away, of course

Goju-Ryu does, indeed, have both a Japanese version and an Okinawan version, and yes, Gunnar Nelson did train in Goju-Kai, the Japanese style of Goju-Ryu. Different instructors will approach their styles differently, though, so it's hard to say that a style is watered down, when instructors within a given style can vary widely in their methods, from hardcore to weak. Even within my organization (which teaches Okinawan Shorin-Ryu), we have instructors who teach knockdown kumite, and instructors who ban sparring/contact, and everything in between. These methods aren't dictated by the style or organization, and that is true for the majority of karate styles out there. Now, as far as how to know in advance what you are getting, the answer is quite simple; ask and watch. I don't understand why people have the desire to know all there is to know about a school based on never having spoken with the instructor or visited to watch classes. You will never know if the school is a good fit if you avoid it. Go to the school, talk to the instructor about what you are looking for and what they do, and watch some classes--both the beginning classes you would be in, and the advanced classes to see where they go with it. Watch more than one of each class, as well, because the instructor's focus will likely shift from class to class, and you shouldn't expect what you see in one class to be what is done in every single class. Once you've done these things, you'll be able to form an educated opinion on the school. Not before, based on what other people say abou the style they teach. All that will get you are generalizations that may or may not be true of a given school.

Hello, everyone! I think the majority of karateka are familiar with koshi, and some are familiar with gamaku, so the use of the hips and core in karate is pretty well known. That said, I've found that beginners and people from systems that don't use the hips this way can have a hard time figuring out how to move their hips. That led me to developing this drill, which we just published as a Waza Wednesday video this week, since a viewer actually requested that we show some hip engagement exercises. The drill is very simple, and doesn't address the more subtle components of koshi/gamaku, but it's a good starting point for beginners. Sometimes, it can be hard for students to see the instructor demonstrate hip motion and be able to replicate it. By using a staff, as I show in the video, to expand the motion, it makes it much easier to see what the instructor is doing, and for the student to replicate it.

Congratulations!

Happy Holidays, everyone!

Welcome to the forum!