cross

I have nothing more to contribute without restating old information, my opinion has been made clear in my previous posts.

You hit the nail on the head. At the moment i only include 2 kicks(not including stomps) in my training. The thai round kick and the teep(i just call it front kick).

You might have had trouble finding info with that spelling, most of the time ive seen it spelled "teep". Heres are couple of links that should help you out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSRsRKYXhVI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPorL7_DzCc http://www.thai-boxing.org/2006/03/20/muay-thai-techniques-push-kick-thaiboxing/

If the instructor is relying on the money made from gradings to pay his fees etc doesnt that mean he will push people to grade even if some are not ready just to reach his amount needed?

Like the majority of traditional martial arts schools, that one seems to place an emphisis on a large number of techniques. And probably the time working on tactics and principles would be limited by this. The majority of schools where you get a higher belt though learning more and more techniques is rarely an effective way to learn self defence. But it depends what your goals of training are. In regards to paying for gradings, expect that from the majority of schools, although its often hard to see what the money goes towards, surely belts arnt that expensive, and unless they are flying in other instructors to oversee the grading then the cost should be for a normal class, plus the price of the belt itself. In my opinon.

Found this interview with Iain also, its a good read: http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/Traditional_Karate_Interview_May_06.asp

Thanks again, ive read alot of Iain's articles in the past.

Thanks for the link.

Some would say his acting stings 2. Im not sure stings would be the right word though... hehehe.

Traditionally your correct, karate without kata was probably not karate. However, the relevance of kata in the 21st century is what we are discussing. Perhaps those modern "masters" who changed the kata did realise the specifics of the kata, and also realised that the kata where in fact specifically designed for the circumstances at the time of their creation. Times have changed since then, everything has evolved and moved forward. Why not kata? So without actually asking the person who made these "hidden" meanings, any interpretation is just speculation. No matter how educated it may seem. However, take 1 person, who wants to learn how to defend themself, if they train kata the same way the majority of traditional schools teach it, along with the other training they do applicable skills will be limited. Take the same person and teach them a system that involves alive drills, scenarios, shadow boxing, bag work, partner drill, resistance from partners and in the majority(if not all) cases, you will find the second offers superior results in terms of self defence training. Sure, doing kata you might be able to learn effective defence skills over an extended period of time, assuming your school looks deeply enough and practices enough of the applications against pressure and resistance from opponents. But what happens until then, you have a false sense of security and ability because you do martial arts, but when it comes to the crunch your skills are very limited. I dont mean this to be disrespectful in any way, its a serious question. If you dont have that killer instinct or are not interested in defeating people, did you ever think perhaps you would be better suited to something other than martial arts? Im not saying people shouldnt do martial arts for arts sake, if thats your deal then i have no problems with that, has long as the person doesnt claim anything different. One of the main reasons that people dont have alot of respect for black belts particularly, and martial artists in general is because of the watered down training methods and the gradual move away from the combat aspects.

Does any of that help little kicker?

Thanks for the info. Could you explain in more detail the partner work you do? For example, what kind of attacks are you defending against, do you work on the techniques in isolation and then in series with other things including your partner reacting and resisting? etc.

Hey, To those who practice bunkai regularly, how do you drill it? What steps do you take to build up the applications and what methods do you use to reinforce the ideas? Thanks for any info, Cross.

It would be interesting to find some clubs that would take part in some research or experiments. For example, the club could replace all time spend doing kata related work, with doing a different activity e.g. shadow boxing, bagwork etc and see what kind of improvements and backward steps they notice from the change in training. May be a bit tricky to organise to find conclusive results, but id like to see it none the less.

I agree with this, dont get me wrong, i do weights, run, skip etc. But when it comes to combat training kata doesnt cut it for me. I agree with this also. However, most schools dont treat kata this way, it seems that kata is one of the major focuses, not a training aid, but rather the training.

Thats solid advice.

While it isnt possible to completely prepare for a self defence situation. Some ways of preperation have proven to be better than others. Some replicate the nature of a survival situation better than others. I would say it DOES matter how you train. Im not talking about a magic pill when i talk about tactics. The things im talking about are ideas that have worked and provide the best chance of survival against unarmed, and armed attacks. Id say there is no debate that if you face any kind of violence expecially when weapons are involved your chance of getting out uninjured or alive is nothing to write home about. But does that mean your just gunna give up because your chances are low? Or wing it and hope for the best without REALLY training to prepare for such circumstances. Im not talking about sparring based skills either. Im talking about things that work against training partners who attack full speed full force with and without weapons in scenario based drills. They are still drills, but they will prepare a person much better than they majority of training you see being passed off has self defence these days. Alot of people are afraid to add that pressure to their training, or dont want to because they think they will get injured. The reality is, if you cant stop a person fully commited to attacking you in the controlled environment of a class, your already low chances are even lower in a real situation. Train doing what? that seems to be alot of peoples answer to "do your best" and i completely agree. However what are people doing to address the reality of an all out attack, rarely will the majority of martial artists train against this, even though for most its the very thing they are training to stop. The do your best, or "wing it" attitude is easy enough to pass off because everyone knows that fights are unpredictable and rarely end well for the parties involved. But does that mean you should neglect to train specifically for the type of situations you can face?

The dreaded adrenaline dump. Something most martial arts training doesnt prepare you for. The answer doesnt lie in working harder on technique or use this technique when he does that. He is obviously physically larger and stronger than you, what happens if you do pull off an "arm bar" will it stop him from attacking you in future, maybe. Will it make him angry and want to attack you more until it spirals out of control. maybe.

The best advice i can give is call the cops. Anyone trying to tell you otherwise is setting you up to get hurt again and again. There is only so much that you can do in terms of self defence. The best one is remove yourself from the situation, unless you can think of a way of doing that other than involving the police then thats your smartest option.

Im all for precise and consistent movement. Whats taught in kata needs to be modified significantly to be used against a resisting opponent. How is that consistent? Im glad you mentioned wresting and jujitsu. They are great examples of realistic training. In wresting and jujitsu a position is a position and a submission is a submission. You dont roll around on the ground by yourself stringing a series of movements together and then rarely train those against a partner. The majority of technique practice is with partners first allowing you to do the technique and then resisting to make sure you can do it under pressure. Thats the complete opposite of kata based systems. Im not against having precise movements at all or saying you shouldnt work on technique. Im all for it. To say that i underestimate the importance of good technique is quiet presumptuous on your part. I have a very well thought out AND practiced gameplan for self defence situations that will and has worked against the constantly changing nature of a self defence situation. Everything is planned and trained, from the pre fight conversation, to the aftermath. Everything used including the "blocks", strikes, "stance", and movement is all precise and trained to be that way. At the same time its adaptable to the majority of situations and will still hold relevance and practicality.

Not to mention x blocking any kind of kick is a great way to get some broken arms.

It makes more sense to me to make what we have work. Not try and change thousands of years of human evolution. And im not just talking through my hat, i have trained for a number of years in traditional karate before i came to these conclusions. What proof is there regarding its effectiveness has a fighting system? Since the few masters you mention below, there has not been alot of evidence to suggest that traditional karate is still relevant has a fighting form. This seemingly simplistic approach to traing leaves alot of gaps that need to be filled in if you want to learn effective self defence. More recent styles have "kata" but they are practiced from a fighting stance with guard up and have direct application to fighting. e.g. Ashihara and Enshin. So the more progressive styles do have something they call kata, but its nothing like the originals. What they did made great sense for the time period they were in. How they trained would have reflected the resources they had and the type of attacks present at the time. Even kata would make sense considering a training hall would have been a rare luxury in those days so they needed a way to practice by themselves without equipment. However these days the techniques have little use considering opponents are bigger, healthier, stronger, and often used weapons. So i have alot of respect for the masters of old considering they trained to fit the situation they were in and the training reflected their access to resources and the most common attacks they would experience at the time. The people who follow their lead and train for the situations we experience today, using the resources we have available to us will be the masters of our time. Kata is not the way to move forward. Who are the real masters of today? Those trying to pass on the tradition of what the old masters did by do exactly what they did? You can practice breathing in kata all you like, but its not going to translate directly to how you will breath and the emotions you will experience in actual combat. The principles may have been applicable at the time of the katas creation, but hold little relevance regarding how people are attacked today.

Interesting analogy, however i would think comparing modern training methods to kata would be more like comparing cars, buses, etc to traveling in say a horse drawn cart. The techniques i practice are just tools, not the end objective. They fall in place with correct use of tactics. The techniques themselves can work effectively for anyone, in a reasonably short time. If the tactics related to their use are understood and followed. That means no learning the technique and stances and trying to get everything perfect, then once youve got it doing a completely different technique in terms of application.

The thing is to not try and get over technical with it. Principle over technique. Start with 1 grip. Learn to hit hard from the 4 main angles. Dont get to caught up in fancy disarms or alot of parrying etc. When defending dont wait. After the first strike close the distance and control the stick arm, and body of the person. Just some thoughts.

If you are purely concerned with learning weapons for self defence there is alot you can do with only some basic knowledge of sticks.