Wastelander

Glad it's working out well for you! As for turning the BOB to mimic body positioning in different stances, I completely agree with you--for self defense combinations you really don't need to turn him much, but for sparring combinations I usually have him turned to an angle like an opponent would be. Now if only he had poseable arms!

It definitely sounds like the pants are too large for you, so when you tighten the drawstring the waist is bunching up and, because the fabric is stiff, it is causing irritation. I am not an expert in gi alterations, but I think if you can get a tailor/seamstress to widen the vents at the top of the pants then you can probably fix that problem--just make sure they don't make the vents longer!

I did judo for 4 years, and both styles of karate I have trained in include breakfalls in their curriculum, and I have NEVER been taught to put my hands down as shown in Roll 1.

We wear white or unbleached karate gi, although the cut is up to the student as long as the sleeves go below the elbows and the pants go below the knees. Once we reach brown belt, you can wear a black gi instead, or some combination of black and white/unbleached. Alternatively, the uniform color for our kobudo system is brown, so a brown gi is also allowed if you practice kobudo. Personally, I am fond of the just-below-the-knees/just-below-the-elbows look, and I have only ever worn a white or unbleached gi, although I've been considering trying out a black one.

Well, my dojo has an after-school program with a van to pick those students up from their schools, so I wouldn't say that, in and of itself, is a bad sign. If an instructor is teaching for a living, the youth programs are what keep the doors open and the lights on. What is important is that they teach what they say they teach. I'm more put off by the outlandish claims of teaching secret "tactical systems" and ninjutsu, and by the fact that I didn't see anything on the site about who taught the instructor.

I can't watch the video you linked to, since I'm at work right now, but I remember hearing about someone saying that they never learned kata bunkai from Miyagi. This is interesting to me, because I recently read an interview with another Miyagi student that included old photos of his training, in which you can clearly see them practicing bunkai. The same interview alluded to practicing bunkai, but didn't call it such. In addition, Toguchi Seikichi explains in one of his books that Miyagi taught him kata application and outlines the rules for breaking down kata. I think that part of the problem of discussing these things is that the Okinawans didn't call it bunkai (ti-chi-ki, or just ti, was more common if I remember correctly), so they may very well have been teaching bunkai and calling it something else (or not calling it anything at all) and teaching it differently than we would expect. From what I have read about the way training was conducted back then, explanations were not often given, so it was up to the student to connect the techniques they were working to the kata they came from. Did any one karate master know all the applications to all of their kata? With the possible exception of Sakugawa Kanga, I doubt it. There is just too much to learn in kata to truly know every application to every movement of more than a couple of kata, and so when people start learning more and more kata they are bound to miss out on some of the applications. We know from several accounts of various Okinawan masters that bunkai was most certainly taught, and was an integral part of their training, but the amount of bunkai knowledge varied from teacher to teacher, as one would expect. As I understand it, some of those karate masters of old simply admitted that they didn't know an application to a movement and let that be the end of it (Chibana once said that Itosu admitted to not knowing applications for everything and so he just didn't teach any applications for those movements) while others sought to learn the applications that they didn't know by cross-training and experimenting (Motobu and Mabuni went this route). If being able to apply your kata is important to you, then you will find a way to learn practical applications for it. I think that Itosu was more concerned with being able to teach a wide array of kata to fit a wide array of people in the hopes of growing karate, and so he was less concerned with learning and teaching applications for every single movement, figuring that dedicated students would cross-train and experiment enough to fill in the gaps for themselves. ETA: Regarding Japanese vs. Okinawan karate and the prevalence of kata bunkai, I believe that many branches of Japanese karate do neglect kata application because it doesn't fit with their concept of "do". Some people in the Japanese karate community certain do practice practical kata application, but it seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

I think that, for the most part, the techniques in kata aren't "hidden" so much as they are simply not understood. Given the history of karate, I suppose it is certainly possible that some things were hidden, but most likely they were simply hidden by the fact that it is hard to tell what someone is doing when they practice movements in the air, as well as through the use of "shorthand" in kata--the fist touching the arm of your gedan barrai in Passai, for example, can be an indicator of where you are applying the gedan barrai. To illustrate the difficulty of determining what movements mean, I like to perform a tight mawashi-uke and ask the beginners what I am doing with my hands. Most of them say I'm blocking, and I tell them that I was envisioning turning the steering wheel of my car, since the movement is virtually identical. We do a lot of kata bunkai (analysis) to break down applications for the movements, and sometimes they can be simple enough for a new white belt to do and sometimes they are difficult enough that only the more experienced students can do them. The nice thing about breaking down kata is that it grows with you! While I agree with Sheephead, in principle, I think it's important to remember that not all instructors know or teach kata application because it isn't what they are interested in. We may think it is vital, but many people don't, and that's fine because it's their karate. Normally, I take most of my kata application drills from the Naihanchi kata--they are simple, powerful and effective. That said, lately I have been playing around with our Passai Dai (Tawada Passai) and recently found an application from it that I can actually apply to nearly any attack originating from my attacker's upper body. The funny thing is that this versatile application comes from a section of the kata that a lot of people think is there to just look pretty

Vince Morris is often mentioned as one of the people responsible for reviving kata, along with Iain and Patrick McCarthy, so when I saw that he was going to be teaching a seminar about 30 minutes away from me I decided I had to attend. My first impression of him is that he is a friendly but rather rowdy person with a bit of a strict streak (which probably comes from teaching military, police and government organizations?) and he has a very direct and practical outlook on karate. The seminar was supposed to go from 1pm to 3pm, but instead went from about 1:15pm to 4pm, and we covered quite a lot of ground, I feel--I did a full write-up here, if anyone is interested. Has anyone else attended Mr. Morris' seminars, or watched his DVD's, and what did you think of his applications? Overall, I did like a lot of what he taught, and much of it was similar to things I have seen and done before so it shouldn't be difficult to work into my training. There were a couple things I wasn't thrilled with, and a few historical things he said were a little off (primarily, he mentioned Okinawan bodyguards carrying daisho, which I don't believe was the case, and said "No one in the world was teaching this stuff 25 years ago when I started doing it," which doesn't seem right to me, either) but otherwise I was quite happy with the seminar.

5 years ago I was 1.5 years into my martial arts journey and a freshly tested brown belt in Shuri-Ryu with a green belt in judo. Since then, I spent 2 years training judo at a dedicated judo club while only practicing my Shuri-Ryu on my own and doing a great deal of research online, which opened my eyes to a great many things I had never considered before. From there, I joined my current Shorin-Ryu dojo and kept building my personal style and my knowledge, which I continue to do now. In 5 years, I will likely be a shodan in Shorin-Ryu, and possibly a nidan if I am skilled enough. I hope to continue teaching at my dojo training as much as possible, including going to as many seminars as I can. In 10 years, I might make nidan if I didn't in the first 5 years, and I would like to be teaching some of my own students somewhere, in addition to teaching and training at my instructor's dojo and going to seminars to keep expanding my knowledge. In addition, I would like to get some cross-training in another stand-up style--probably Goju-Ryu or Silat. In 20 years, I hope to be running my own dojo, but otherwise the same things as above are true. My instructor is constantly learning and cross-training, so there is no reason that I shouldn't be able to keep learning under him. I would still be going to seminars and cross-training, as well. The general theme is that I plan to keep training and learning! Teaching is an added bonus because I enjoy it and learn from it, myself, but mainly I want to keep training and learning.

I'd agree with that. Also I think in a way it'd be a poor investment of your time. You'd end up having to constantly correct all the subtle differences back and forth and your progress in either style would be hindered because you'd confuse yourself. Probably ok if you wanted to create a hybrid style for yourself but even then, how many alternative ways do you need to kick and punch? IMHO better to invest that time into something that offers a different focus, like a grappling art, to cover the gaps in your current training. I agree with some of this, but it is like this: I'm taking two styles at the same time. The first couple of weeks, I had some issues with the differences in the basics. It quickly got to the point where now I can switch back and forth between styles seamlessly. It just takes a lot of focus. One thing to remember is "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." Don't bring the chamber to the inside like in one style when your instructor wants you to bring it up to the outside. I did that once and got yelled at. Never did it again, though. You would be the first person I have known to be able to do this successfully. I transitioned from one style to another, and know several others who have done the same, and that is difficult enough to keep straight. I know of a couple people who are trying to train more than one similar style at a time and they are still having issues nearly a year down the road--it's holding them back more than it's helping them, honestly.

I agree with you that all of them are important, but I picked "learn a skill" because I feel that it encompasses several of the other features listed. That skill, in my mind, is self defense, but in the process of learning that skill you need to be disciplined or you won't learn it effectively, and you need to try to become a better person as part of avoiding conflict so you don't have to defend yourself, and those things are challenging .

Changes are made to kata for a wide variety of reasons. Here are some I can think of off the top of my head: - To make a movement "fit" the way they think the style should work - To make a movement "fit" the way they think the style should look - To make a movement more interesting-looking for competition - To make a movement easier to do in their old age or with their injuries - To make a movement easier to teach to large groups - To make a movement safer to practice - Because they forgot how it was supposed to be done - Because people in the organization disagree about how it was supposed to be done and had to compromise

Welcome to the forum and the wonderful world of cross-training! Since your profile says your area is Ashford and you said "uni" I assume you are in the UK? I believe judo is fairly popular in the UK, so you should be able to find a judo club in your area and there you can learn throws, locks, chokes and groundwork (although some instructors don't do much of it) to supplement your training. Karate and judo fit very well together, in my opinion, but I am biased since I train in karate and have cross-trained in judo. BJJ would also be great to train in, although it may have less of an emphasis on standing grappling and throws. Sambo is a great option, but I'm not sure how common that is in the UK.

Wow. I went philosophical with it and here everyone is answering based on actual bunkai--man, did I read that question wrong! Good answers, everyone!

Ah, I see. Well, I don't train in Muay Thai or Kyokushin, so I'll go on what I know about them. A Thai roundhouse kick is generally done with the supporting leg standing on the ball of the foot, and with the hip turned all the way over so that, at full extension, the kick actually lands at a downward angle, and the toes and foot are pulled back to tense the muscles of the shin. In karate (can't say for certain that this is how Kyokushin does it) we tend to keep the supporting foot flat on the floor to provide better balance, and we usually kick at an upward angle or horizontally with the toes and foot pointed. Both hit with the shin, but the toes being pointed in the karate version gives us a little extra reach because we can land with the ankle and instep, too. I've learned to kick both ways, but I get knocked off balance pretty consistently if I stand on the ball of my supporting foot, Thai style, so I try not to do that part. Another feature is that the Thai kick is usually done by stepping to an angle first in order to help generate more power, while the karate style kick is typically launched by just pivoting on your supporting foot.

Shadowboxing and bagwork would be a good idea, but I think the best thing you could do is spar a lot (make sure you go lighter the closer you get to the tournament so you don't injure yourself). How often do you spar at your dojo?

Kyokushin has lots of kicks, but since you mention the "Brazilian kick" I assume you are talking about the fake-front-kick setup for the roundhouse kick with the same leg, also sometimes called a "question mark kick" because that is the shape it draws in the air. I've never heard it called the "Kyokushin kick," though. If that's the technique you are talking about, the kicking leg comes straight up, as if to throw a front kick, but then whips over to throw a roundhouse kick--usually to the head because the fake-front-kick should have brought their guard lower. Alternatively, the front kick portion can be an actual front kick instead of just a fake. The kick developed in sport karate, Taekwondo and Muay Thai pretty much the same way, and I don't know where it was first used for certain. In any case, the benefits of learning more than one way to do it are likely going to be limited unless the subtle differences between those methods is enough to overcome your opponent's defense to the way it is normally done in your art.

Well, I was always told that kata start with a block because it signifies the defensive nature of karate--a physical representation of karate ni sente nashi (karate is not the first strike). Of course, the thing we call a "block" isn't always really a block, as you mentioned, so it can also play into Motobu's take on the same concept--karate wa sente de aru (karate IS the first strike). Either way, the kata starts by responding to an attack in some way, which still represents the idea that we should not try to start fights but should defend ourselves from harm with vigor.

I'm not from the UK, but I know that Amazon has some, and this is what came up with Google: http://www.google.co.uk/#q=martial+arts+belt+display&hl=en&tbo=d&source=lnms&tbm=shop&sa=X&ei=WUD_UNCuOMag2gXzmoCICA&sqi=2&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAA&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.41248874,d.b2I&fp=683782c9a6b3589f&biw=1366&bih=602

I'm currently on track to reach shodan after about 8 years of training.

Well, it is definitely possible to launch those kicks from those stances. I'm guessing these are part of your kihon training for conditioning the legs?

Welcome to the forum! First of all, you need to talk to your instructor and tell him/her your goals, and explain how you want to be treated in the dojo. The instructor sets the tone for the class, and if he/she is on board with you then it will be much easier for your training partners to treat you the way that you want to be treated. Second of all, at your size you are never going to be more powerful than a man twice your size, but that doesn't mean that you can't be effective in defending yourself. Train for accuracy, speed and explosiveness in stressful situations and that will serve you very well--as JusticeZero mentioned, most attackers outside of the dojo are going to be untrained and looking for a weak target. If you are accurate, fast and explosive then you will hit plenty hard enough to stop an attacker like that. In pursuit of becoming more explosive and developing striking power, I would recommend that you research strength and conditioning programs the focus on explosiveness, and work your strikes on a makiwara, heavy bag and punch mitts held by your instructor. This should also help you develop the speed of your strikes, but be sure to do footwork drills to make sure that your entire body moves quickly and smoothly. For accuracy, mitt work, using a BOB and sparring are going to be your best bets.

It's a commercial school, certainly, but not necessarily a McDojo from the sounds of it--the instructors are teaching martial arts to earn a living, and that will be reflected in how they market their school, but as long as they teach well and invest in their students then I don't see a major issue. I will point out that it is not unusual for black belt ranked instructors to be under 40 years old, and most "traditional" martial arts focus on forms/patterns. In any case, it sounds like you like the instructors, who seem like open, accommodating people, the fees are quite reasonable, and feel of the environment is a good one, so you don't really need to justify it any more than that. Enjoy your training!

I will go ahead and respond to the points that you brought up in your reply to me, OP, but before I do that I will say this--you don't really want to train in Okinawan karate. You have made it abundantly clear that you think Muay Thai and boxing are superior fighting arts, even while you are criticizing them. I think that you actually just want to train in MMA, which is fine. Maybe you do have an interest in Okinawan culture/tradition, and maybe you do want to throw on a gi and practice a kata every now and then, but it seems to me that you aren't really interested in Okinawan karate as a whole. I am not saying that your experience is incorrect, I simply disagree with your knowledge of how the "blocks" in Okinawan karate are meant to be used. You are thinking that the movements called "blocks" are only able to be used one way, and the way you have seen doesn't work well for that purpose. Look at it this way--mime what you would do with your hand to turn the steering wheel of your car one-handed, then mime what you would do with your hand to wax that car one-handed. The movements are very nearly identical, but accomplish two completely different things. I know this seems very Karate Kid (wax on, wax off) but it's true. All that said, there ARE ways to use the traditional blocks of karate and make them work. Dan Djurjevic has done some great posts on his blog about that very topic, if you are interested. I think you are thinking of renzoku kumite and yakusoku kumite, which are choreographed fighting sequences with a partner. The "iri kumi" that I am referring to is not choreographed, and doesn't seem to be any more restricted than MMA sparring. I will also note that while an MMA fight is full contact, it is not "no-holds-barred" (there are something like 50 rules in place for professional MMA, and even more for amateur MMA) and when MMA fighters spar, they don't do it full contact--if they did, they would always be too beat up to train consistently. Fighting at mid-range is stupid if your opponent is better at it than you--mid-range isn't just where they can hit you, but where you can hit them, too. If you are bad at that range then yes, you should get in close to nullify their striking or you should stay at long-range to make use of your kicks. This isn't a matter of style so much as personal ability and preference--you should always play to your strengths, if at all possible. As far as standing in front of your opponent and trading strikes, I would agree that is a bad decision unless you are a seriously tough fighter, but Okinawan karate, in general, doesn't promote that anyway. As for boxers taking the most brain damage, that is largely because of the rule set used in boxing--it promotes head-hunting and allows fighters to continue fighting after receiving a concussion, making their brain injuries drastically worse. Depends on how you define "real fights," and I wouldn't say that Okinawan styles are more practical than Japanese styles--both can be practical, but only if it is taught and trained in a practical way. I would agree that a lot of martial artists don't like seeing MMA because they feel that it is an attack on something they have dedicated their lives to, but that isn't the only reason. I know of a lot of martial artists who don't watch it because it goes against the values that they were taught in their arts--primarily that one should avoid violence and not seek to harm another person with their skills. Personally, I like MMA and watch it frequently--in fact, I just won the UFC fight prediction pool at my work. I will point out that karate does, in fact, have a "jab" and the technique that Machida used to KO Couture wasn't really a crane kick, it was actually a fake front kick used to set up a front kick with the other leg, and that technique is found in the kata Kusanku/Kanku Dai.

I really like BOB for working specific targets--because he has a human shape, you can contour your strikes (hard-to-soft and soft-to-hard) and work strikes to individual targets (eyes, pressure points, floating ribs) much more effectively. I have actually seen people draw pressure points on their BOB in Sharpie to give students a better idea of where they are so they can work on how to strike them.