Jissen

Some good posts. My take on Ikken Hisatsu is 2 tiered (like everything Japanese) On one level it means you should have ill intentions on every single strike that you throw. On another level it explains why. Karateka (martial artists in general) tend to be, or at least strive to be peace loving people who have a great responsibility that comes along with all that power over other people (the ability to kick their *ss). So when the situation is dire enough for me to actually strike someone....the time for diplomacy is over and it's time to get down to business, so I'm going to try to "kill you" (metaphorically) with each and every strike. As has been said, it's a philosophy and mindset. The "one strike" portion refers to you being clear minded enough to know when that one strike (whether it was the first or 12th) has "killed" the situation, so you don't actually kill someone needlessly. In other words treat your fists as if they were guns. You wouldn't pull a gun out unless you intended to, or were at least willing to use it because the situation has gotten that out of hand. Thus it also stresses the importance of being aware, and of de-escalation, or escape when possible...so you don't get in that situation in the first place.

A teachers job is to teach. He doesn't have to be a good fighter or superior athlete to accomplish his goals. Look at Don Familton and half the other boxing coaches in the world, they're frail old men....with TONS of knowledge to share with those who don't worry about trivial things.

I only do a couple of kata, not a karateka persay but... To me saying "kata" (rather than 'this or that kata') refers to the level of training you're at. For instance beginner kata are not finesse kata, they're usually for developing a strong foundation for power and are pretty straight forward and simple. Your entire training regimen should reflect the same idea that "the kata" you're doing dictates. the techniques will be simple, direct, and powerful. The drills, the sparring, the bag work...all will reflect the same idea..eg...simple, direct, and powerful. If you're doing a kata that's designed more for speed, finesse, or agility...than you're regimen (and performance) should generally demonstrate those qualities. In other words, your beginner kata should reflect the qualities they're trying to instill in you...simple, direct, and powerful in application, as well as performance. For me it's not very important to master "the kata" ...it's much more important to take the lessons contained in the textbook and put it to practical use. Just my two cents, for what it's worth.

there is no such thing as a pure system.

My opinion. 1 the "panther' days are over. you can learn from a well produced and thought out video program, even the Gracie's offer one. but the key is well thought out and step by step taught by belt level. I've talked to many of these instructors and they all say the same thing, their long distance students usually advance faster than their regular students. 2 feedback, 99% of these courses require you to video yourself in a predescribed manner and send it to the instructors for examination. most of them are also available by phone and email. some even require attending occasional seminars, and almost all of them require you to test for black belt in person so they can "feel" you out so to speak. and all of them require you to have at least one training partner...which leads to my next point. 3 you can learn from videos if that's your only alternative (notice i used the word alternative)...but it says nothing of how "good" you will be at it. mainly because you'll be practicing with the same 1 or 2 ppl all the time. make sure the program is designed from the ground up to be instructional, not just a demonstration. make sure you have access to the instructor for corrections. make sure they have good credentials and aren't trying to rip you off. Stephen Hayes' are good. Karate Connection kenpo are good (a good intro to home learning too, only 1 "kata") .. they also have free vids on their site of their teaching process. Chuck and Vic were direct students of Ed Parker. Kobukan has good credentials Van Donk (he and Hayes were both students of Hatsumi Soke) has credentials. Kenpo Legacy also legit background. (if i remember correctly this guy was a direct student of Ed Parker) Shintai Ryu < stay away from these guys!!! it's not the 1900's anymore and you can earn a degree online. why couldn't you learn the basics of a martial art online or through video? that's what a black belt is supposed to represent afterall...you've got the basics down. it doesn't make you some sort of master or expert. in some ways home study can be better for some. but it's not for everyone. the biggest problem with it is that you don't have a multitude of partners to confuse you into learning new things all the time, you'll get used to your partners and be able to read them, thus you'll possibly short change yourself...but you don't care anyway.

You're right, too many people think they (along with kyusho) are some sort of magic formula for winning. They should be used to enhance your art, not replace it. But the same can be said of people who think the UFC is the ultimate in streetfighting. Sport arts have many limitations as well. I don't get why everyone thinks it has to be "one or the other" ..I think both have legitimate gripes about the other to be honest. I have found many useful things from both, however...I think the idea behind these dirty tricks is to end the confrontation and escape BEFORE it escalates into a FIGHT. Some guy gets in your face pointing his finger and running his mouth, wham...eye poke, knee to the balls, take out their knee, slam them into the wall, and I'm already on my way out the back door hopefully without having to "fight" him. I guess that's one of the biggest differences...the goal. Sport arts are concerned with "winning" Self defense is about getting to safety, not vanquishing a foe. Completely different mindset. I agree with them being another tool. But I believe they can sometimes render grappling ineffective, not all the time, but nothing is guaranteed. Last time someone tried to armbar me I bit their leg and they were startled and let go. You can see groin kicks and eye pokes being effective in alot of MMA fights...and they're accidental...with groin protection, and they still work. If the ref didn't stop BJ when he poked Matt Hughes in the eye, BJ likely would have trounced him. That 3 minute time out sure is convenient lol Some, but I prefer not to pidgeon hole everyone together. My purpose is hopefully to not have to "fight" with anyone. Just take em out or avoide it. So far I've always been successful with this approach. I could really care less if I can outgrapple a trained grappler, or out box a boxer. But even so, and the point I think people are trying to make is that the only way I could ever hope to beat Frank Mir or somebody is to cheat, because he's a way better fighter than I am. I think it unwise to say either side is the ultimate only correct way. "There are many paths to the top of the mountain, but we can all see the moon once we get there" Okinawan saying.

I agree with Shorikid. Just because something can't be practiced at wide open throttle doesn't mean it's useless. It means it works. Small joint locks, eye gouges, groin shots (and others) are illegal in just about every competition in the world, including the UFC "as real as it gets" They're illegal because they work, not because they don't. One problem is some people think they can rely only on these 'dirty tactics'...which is of course ridiculous. If you don't have a solid delivery system from which to launch them, they're next to useless. But if you take away weight classes, rules, safety gear,referees, and instead inject PCP, alcohol, insanity, multiple attackers, possible weapons, and a sincere desire to harm another individual I suddenly find myself wanting to kick said person squarely in the pills, and would definately not teach my daughter or sister to fight fairly with this person.

In my sometimes not so humble opinion....a majority of your applications of kata should be some sort of grappling. The striking part is basically out in the open for all to see..not necessarily understood, but seen nonetheless.

It's not uncommon for people to know 30 kata, but keep 3 or 4 as "their" kata. The ones they study deeply.

That's like saying Mike Tyson shouldn't be able to beat his coach in boxing. There are doers, and there are teachers. Rarely do you get both in the same person.

A 'ball of the foot" roundhouse kick, is basically just a front kick turned on its side. Not literally, but it's a good way to begin. It does not go sideways on impact, it goes TOWARD (into) the opponent like a spear. Infact it's easy if you start throwing a front kick...then just pivot on your support leg, allowing your hip to turn over. Btw...Uechi Ryu has always used their shins as well, even though it's not part of their kata

Personally I think everyone should loudly shout their intention to attack me before doing so.

Actually Tuite in karate is not so different than that taught in Jujutsu. The body movement is different but a joint lock is a joint lock. Kata is a great tool for remembering the lessons associated with it. as well as practicing "quality of movement" without a partner. Karate when taught in its entirety is a great art for teaching equal emphasis on striking, and locking/throwing. I don't view karate as a striking art, I view it as a do what needs to be done art. Never met a jujutsu instructor (who doesnt also study a striking art) who could teach the finer points of striking however. It's more of a specialized art, for good reason.

Cool thanks

Ashihara's idea of kata, and what I'm referring to are not the same thing as far as I know. Am I mistaken in thinking Ashihara has no "kata" other than their 2 person fighting kata? For intance you guys don't do Sanchin, Naihanchi, Chinto, Pinan's etc etc.