Wado Heretic

Most early American Kick-Boxers came from a Competitive Kumite back-ground, which in 1960s/70s America, meant a format where sweeping and throwing were allowed. I would say, yes. Boxers were at a disadvantage in not having a kick offence, however, several elements made this a moot-point: 1. High Kicks to the head and body, are readily avoided with head-movement and body swaying; something boxers are skilled with. Thus, they entered the American Kick-Boxing ring with a defence against high kicks. 2. Clinch fighting was forbidden as it is in Boxing; thus, so were sweeps, and throws. Boxers did not need to learn to fight in the clinch. 3. With the clinch eliminated, and range control, still isolated to the use of head-movement, body swaying, and foot-work; high kicks were moot as a weapon, except as one of opportunity. As such, American Kick-Boxing is Boxing with high-kicks. Therefore, boxers had significant success in American Kick-Boxing when it emerged in the 1970s. You can evade high-kicks with the same body movement you defend against punches with. This can even be seen in contemporary Muay Thai, and other kick-boxing bouts. Thus, boxing skill became the pre-dominant skill over a more rounded kick-boxing acumen.

It is important to distinguish between stances in a combat sport such as boxing or wrestling, and stances as they are contained within the kata. As Wastelander, and I, have alluded to, and to reiterate: the stances facilitate techniques, they are part of a technique, not a free-fighting stance. If one looks at them from that perspective; you can witness them in combat-sports from Kick-Boxing to Judo. I have used neko-ashi and kokutsu-dachi to shift my weight as a distance controlling movement in Kick-Boxing, and Shoot-fighting, to give examples from my own experience. In self-defence, I have used them to set up sweeps, when I worked as a doorman. Some very good Karate in MMA videos out there where you can also witness said stances being used. What I would say though, is not all stance work is in fact practically minded. Many stances, in several disciplines, have been modified for aesthetic reasons, or other impractical considerations. Therefore, I adopted the Shorin-Ryu Kata over the Wado-Ryu kata, because the stances (and the Kata in general, broadly speaking) of Wado-Ryu had become removed from the way I was being shown to perform applications, and general Bunkai theory. In contrast the Shorin-Ryu kata are essentially performed in the manner one does the inferred application. There is plenty of reasons to criticise stance work; but I would be wary of using one experience, and then to generalise it to a whole range of disciplines. Some karateka place little emphasis on stances, whereas others make a huge point of it. I try to stick to the middle; the stance must fit the individual, not be artificially deep or wide, and facilitate the application effectively against a resisting opponent. I do make people go slightly deeper than I believe they need to in the kata; but that is because I find people quite naturally find the right width for their stance, but will make the mistake of staying too up right.

Familiarity helps; you are probably more used to the range you have when you punch as per you were taught in Karate. That is what I found any way. I would some times throw a right straight, or left cross, in the manner I got used to in my competitive kumite participation. Old habits kick in, so when I saw opportunities; what I practised for longer came through.

Funakoshi also wrote: “Fixed positions are for beginners: later, one moves naturally.” Also, Itosu, Funakoshi’s primary teacher wrote the following: “In Karate training, one must determine whether a specific application is suitable for defence or for cultivating the body.” Ultimately; the inference is that there is an element of physical rigour added to the kata. After all, both Itosu and Funakoshi in their broader writings insisted on intensity in training. Thus, I believe it feasible that several kata movements are largely for exercise. However, with the above said, it is also important to contextualise the differences between fighting and Self-Defence. The kata were developed to practice methods for civilian self-defence, unlike Jujutsu or the Hand Forms of Chinese Martial Arts, as such they should be analysed in this context. In self-defence; the primary concern is the collapse of distance, and one is often confronted by an attacker trying to isolate and restrict your movement, not necessarily injure you. A mugger is not trying to fight you; he/she wants your money, to give an example. As such; one should look at the kata in the context of: 1. The distance between you and the attacker has already collapsed, or is about to. Several stances are well adjusted to counter an attacker whose weight is already on you. 2. You are not necessarily being attacked from the front, and may need to orientate yourself to the direction you are being attacked. Several stances make this easier. 3. Your attacker may not be making use of sophisticated martial arts, but rather, sheer brute force and shock tactics. Again, several stances are well adapted to giving you a tool to resist said brute force. 4. Several stances facilitate certain techniques, or tactical opportunities, in close distance fighting. 5. Stances can be transitional; in actual application they are not positions you would stay in, but quickly travel through. With all the above said; that is not to argue that all stances are by default purposeful, simply because we do not understand them at a glance. One of the reasons I now practice the Shorin-Ryu kata is that I feel the stance work is purposeful; I have encountered a lot of stance work which is unrealistic, and did not scale to inferred application or made sense as physical exercise. We tend to, I would argue, get absorbed with the notion of mono-a-mono fighting when trying to examine kata. That is the nature of the world, because people tend to watch combat sports such as Boxing, Kick-Boxing, and MMA and so that becomes their image of “fighting”. Sadly; karate training itself does not assist in this. We tend to emphasise fair sparring, and kumite drills traditionally emphasise facing the Uke. This makes sense from a safety perspective; but the kata techniques never presumed fairness. It is better to examine the stances in the context of the habitual acts of physical violence, and scenario based drills; for example, being caught against a wall. This can help explore the intent of the stance work, in the context of the original purpose of kata; civilian self-defence. If working from quotes, Motobu Choki once claimed that there are no stances such as Neko-Ashi, Zenkutsu, of Kokutsu in his karate. Which is true, in that you will not see the modern exaggerated versions in picture of Motobu Choki; however, if one looks at his kumite drills, you will see how he places his weight, and how the body mechanics very much follow such stances. Similarly; Funakoshi, in his twenty precepts did state: “Kata is practised perfectly; real fight is another thing.” Thus, it is important to be critical of your own kata practice. However, it is also important to keep in mind that you only get out of kata that which you put in. To quote Itosu again: “Handed down by word of mouth, Karate comprises a myriad of techniques and corresponding meanings. Resolve to independently explore the context of these techniques, observing the principles of torite (grappling/joint locks) with the corresponding theory of usage – and the practical applications will be more easily understood.” Which means; without an informed, critical eye, you will never fully explore the benefits of kata practice. A kata is not a fight; it is a training mechanism. A training mechanism is only as effective as how it is utilised. Traditional kata were designed for civilian self-defence, not free-fighting against a foe with sophisticated martial arts in mutual combat. As such; the traditional kata do not fit that latter context. Kata designed specifically for free-fighting are practiced by Ashihara, and Enshin karate, and their off-shoots. If one is looking for free-fighting kata; those are systems to seek out. Similarly; the solo kata of Shorinji Kenpo, and Nippon Kenpo, are essentially extended sequences of combinations, and thus readily applicable to free-fighting. It ultimately comes down to one’s end goal to their training: 1. Self-Defence: The traditional Kata are useful, if you approach them properly. 2. Free-Fighting: The traditional Kata were never intended for mutually agreed combat, and thus do not facilitate training for said fighting. Be wary of barking up the wrong tree, and make sure you have a clear vision for your continued journey.

You fight how you train, and you need to train for your intended fight. I would argue that is where many karate schools fail; trying to be a whole package, which does not in fact exist. If you intend to compete; your teaching regime must be geared towards the competitive format you intend to participate in. If your goal is self-defence, you must consider the self-defence needs you are catering to; do you need to focus on civilian self-defence, or combatives? Many karate clubs/dojo, I have found, have that misunderstanding of cause and affect. Which goes back to Sensei8's sentiment that it is down to the Chief Instructor. It also goes back Wastelander's argument regarding the nature of drilling; some are unrealistic, but effective drilling a proven building block on developing fighting skills. Being independent, and only part of the BKA for insurance purposes; I have a lot of flexibility in what I do. I tend to question students very early on regarding their ambitions and goals. If they are just along for the journey, or wish to study self-defence; then they are put on a training regime suited to self-defence. If they intend to compete; I coach them, and give them a regime suited to competing. Drilling is a huge part of both, as is sparring; but both have to be different. For example; no point making someone who wishes to compete do regular Mass Attack Randori, because that time would be better spent drilling wrestling or kick-boxing skills. So, I would argue that it is the rigidity of grading syllabi that causes many problems, but also a failure to appreciate the end goal of training regimes. Many instructors teach karate, but without an eye to the end goal except karate for the sake of karate. As such, they are stuck in a cycle of rigidly teaching what they were taught. Never evolving, or being flexible, and arming students with the tools most appropriate for that student.

No kick-boxing gym in the area, so I was rather stuck for choice. This was about eight-ten years ago, and my town did not get a dedicated martial arts facility until just over four years ago. There was a Kick-boxing club, but not a gym, so I preferred the boxing gym for the access to equipment, and the flexibility to train at my own pace. I was also pretty confident in my kicking, and kick defence, acumen from my point-fighting and knock-down experience. So the other reason I focused on my boxing is because of my lack of fighting experience in gloves. I would always say follow your passion. I enjoyed boxing, and still incorporate a lot of what I learnt into how I train, and what I teach. However, it was never my passion; it was a means to an end in my desired martial arts career. Did not pay off; I hit a wall I could not get past due to my health, but I would do it again.

Came down to the range; I am a switch-hitter, so I often swap between orthodox and south paw to fight. Sometimes I would stand up a bit more, as in a boxing stance, if the range made it make more sense. Depended on the rhythm my opponent tried to set; I would just employ the foot work that seemed most problematic for them. Though, largely, yes, had to use a kick-boxing stance/stances.

Largely complementary; in that it allowed me to explore a lot of aspects of fighting you only find in combat sports, but not necessarily in self-defence. Started me down the road to exploring various ways to generate power, and the differences in punching techniques, and the end goals. In boxing sparring; no, I tried to avoid using any karate based foot-work. When it is hands only; and your concerns are not necessarily kicking or shooting, being too squared up, or having your stance low, does not make one necessarily slower, however, it does make you less agile in the ways you need to be in boxing. Plus; I was there to learn to box, so I tried to discipline myself to stick to what was taught. With that said, I probably let some of my competitive kumite habits slip in when sparring, but never consciously. It helped me be competitive in kick-boxing, and in kick-boxing I had to make more use of my karate foot-work. So, they can complement each other under the right circumstances. Depends ultimately on the end goal; if one's goal is to compete, then boxing is a must. It is a weapon in most competitors tool box as kick-boxers or free-fighters. From a self-defence end goal; it helps to have some awareness of boxing, but if only to avoid being ignorant of a weapon you could in theory encounter. In the same sense it is advisable to have some grasp of wrestling because in theory you could encounter it. The lateral movement of Karate stance work can be useful against an in-fighter, and can help set up for counter-punching. However, a relative beginner, versus a seasoned boxer is probably not going to be able to make this count in a boxing situation. The North-South movement, can surprise, but if you do not follow up with a good combination it is wasted energy; so you need to practice swiftly moving from that extended lunging stance into a proper boxing stance to unload from. So there are ways to use karate foot-work in boxing; but boxers move the way they do for very good reason. It's worked for the last century quite well in the boxing ring.

So long as the critique is objective, and is based on empirical observation and robust sources; it is a fair critique. From that perspective; the critique can even be constructive, and useful to the recipient. It is when we fall into just making a negative remark, without being open to discussion, or demonstrating the virtue of our critique that we enter the realm of being "rude". I would say I feel most people have made valid, and supported critiques about Wing Chun in this thread; I see very little to take offence at, but I am not a Wing Chun practitioner. I have a moderately positive view of Wing Chun, when compared to other Quan Fa (The majority of which I have not had positive experiences of, but that is also true of a lot of Karate I have witnessed), but I would say that TJ and Tempest have both made valid criticisms of the failings of Wing Chun. In this day and age, with numerous sources available to us, and training gear that makes isolated training much more effective, there are few excuses for not trying to evolve. Working from youtube videos on a grappling dummy is not ideal, but it will get you further than doing nothing, and there is no real excuse if you make the effort to save and make space for it. Similarly, on the training floor; there is now a lot of gear out there which makes sparring relatively safe, compared to even a few decades ago. There is no reason to rely on Chi Sao anymore as a safer way to do resistance training. If anything, I would say the greatest criticism to be made of Wing Chun, is that a lot of masters refuse to evolve, not simply fail to do so.

I would follow Sensei8's advice; go with the person who is in charge. With that said; I have never found a "traditional" round kick method in karate. After-all; it evolved for competition, or was adopted from Muay Thai, depending on the system. There are many ways to perform a roundhouse, and none are necessarily "wrong", although there are some which are objectively worse when compared to other methods. Personally; I would fix the foot, just because it is safer in a full-contact context, but I tend to aim with the shin, compared to the foot as used a lot in Sport Karate circles. One can snap the foot, and do so safely, and having the foot relaxed can help with speed; but it's very dangerous if you connect and get the timing wrong. So, I understand the black-belts advice; he isn't necessarily wrong, even if he is advising differently to the head instructor. In this case; I would argue going with your instructors advice, because you are his student, or experimenting and seeing what gets the best results for you.

Largely; a high kick is far less likely to connect regularly in a fight. If a high-kick lands plumb, it is often a fight stopping strike. Yes; there is a single moment of extreme high impact, but it is done. Comparatively speaking; allowing punches to the head introduces several unique problems: 1. Levels of head impact are dramatically increased. Punches to the head land more often, and though they might not always stop the fight, the cumulative effect can be detrimental. Especially, in a tournament setting. 2. Small bone fractures in the hand, and wrist, are likely if you hit the skull at the wrong angle. The skull is twice as dense as the hand. Again, detrimental in a tournament where you might win, but have to drop out because you broke your hand. 3. Bleed/cuts/bruising and so on and so forth, are more readily caused by punches to the head and face. All potential causes for a Technical Knock-out to be called. Also, injuries that are difficult to continue forward with in a tournament. 4. Amateurs do not benefit from a fighters visage so much as a professional. After a tournament, most have a day job to return to some where, and so they do not want to be in a state where they cannot present themselves. No head punching does not stop injuries, but it does help prevent too many visible ones to the face. 5. The law; most countries have explicit rules about bare-knuckle boxing. A loop-hole existed in most definitions of bare-knuckle: so long as the hand did not connect with the face, it was not bare-knuckle boxing. This reason is rather dated, with most authorities now having far more informed laws regarding combat sports, but was an early influence. So those are some reasons for disallowing head-punches under tournament conditions. Most are to do with the fact punches to the face greatly increase chances of an injury, where as a kick to the head is thrown far less often, and if it does connect is likely to put the recipient down. In terms of training; I like to use an Engine analogy. The more an engine is used, the more it is worn down, and regardless of maintenance is eventually going to fail. The more head impact you receive in training, the less you can take in competition, because you are wearing yourself down. I do allow head-contact in sparring, but I use the Kudo Space-Style Helmet; I find it absorbs a lot more of the force than a lot of other designs. However, I also insist on Bogu, because I like to have a good sparring session at least once a week, and with some level of contact. We do, coming up to grading, or to introduce people to it, occasionally spar hard to full contact without armour, but only to make sure my students know what it is. I do not find excessive, regular, hard sparring (from a striking perspective) useful just because of what it takes out of you.

A few tips: 1. Focus on the rotatory muscles of the core, those that focus on the turning on the trunk. They are key in generating the power needed to get the hip up, and into position. 2. Work on explosive power for the thighs; again, the more strength there, the better the final form. Weakness, and tightness, in the thighs is the downfall of good form. 3. A splits stretching routine; you do not need to get to the point you can do the splits, but unless you work on flexibility in the groin the muscles will always hold you back, and keep the kicks low. 4. Good form every time; video yourself with a way to judge the height of your kick when you have good form. Meaning you are stable, have power, and speed, and accuracy. Do as many kicks on each leg, and calculate the average height of your good form kicks. Then, you are going to get an object just below that height, that you will practice clearing each time you kick, with the aim to just skim it. I tend to hang a tennis ball down, just over the log I kick above, so I can make sure I am kicking with speed and power. 5. Kick the heavy bag; start low, and work up. No good having good form against the air; if that high kick does not move the bag. 6. Knee raises; the higher you can chamber your knee, the better your high kicks will be.

My primary teacher had experience in several forms of Karate; so got to learn some kata from styles aside from Wado-Ryu and Shorin-Ryu. My secondary teacher also tended to borrow exercises from different systems he encountered, and ideas he picked up on courses, and he tended to incorporate them into lessons. It was helpful in that it helped to learn different ways of generating power, and also different perspectives on the receiving techniques, and fighting at different ranges. Yet; they never really touched on anything else to distract from the main style. Really; I think it comes down to how well the incorporate their different knowledge bases into a systematic approach. Also, if they have a depth of knowledge; where they can identify the parallels and which concepts are mutually exclusive. Otherwise; I have found it just being taught several different ways of doing things in the time you planned to learn one thing. So multiple-styles incorporated into a comprehensive approach, or high-level expertise in one system, would be my personal preference.

Depending on the suplex; it, strictly speaking, can be interpreted as being against the rules regarding spiking in some sports. This does include the Unified Rules used by most MMA promotions. It is probably rarely seen in Jacket Wrestling, barring SOMBO, because the emphasis is usually on a rule which a suplex does not necessarily target, or on transitioning quickly to the submission game. As seen by Fedor, and others who have received and survived the suplex; if you know how to take a suplex, or practice rolling/uki waza it is easy to defuse the force. The greatest danger is to those who never wrestled; which what made a lot of wrestlers dangerous in the early years, but as other competitors started to pick up a wrestling game the defence against such tactics became much better. It is the same with Muay Thai and it's low kicks; an easy go to strategy when kick-boxers first entered the world of free fighting, but now rarer to see despite more competitors training in kick-boxing. I used to have an okay suplex game, back when I was regularly working on my wrestling and submission skills with a Greco-Roman wreslter and Judoka respectively. I still pull them out occasionally when sparring my students; but I tend not to get much air on them, and just use them to put them on the ground. Which is what I suspect is what most suplex attempts look like in MMA; a drag to the ground from the back.

I would say that Wing Chun has several visual cues: 1. The use of the “Blitz” tactic, as best represented by chain punching, to overwhelm an aggressor’s senses. 2. Striking at the obvious vulnerable points along the centre line; the groin, throat, and eyes. The places people are most afraid to be struck. 3. The use of the goat clamping stance, and movements from said stance, to get inside an attacker’s stance and to undermine their balance. 4. The use of twisting, through presses and deflections, on an attacker’s torso. As such; Wing Chun arms itself, from appearances, almost exclusively to fight in the “trapping” or “Clinch” range. This makes perfect sense in self-defence; where in civilian self-defence you are usually responding, or pre-empting, a confrontation and often at said mid-range. One can see a similar methodology in many Karate Kata, or other traditional martial arts forms. Similarly; one usually wishes to disengage, rather than street fight, so doing maximum damage in the minimum amount of time makes sense, and is the basic explanation for striking at such a short range. It is to avoid getting tangled up with a potentially stronger attacker, or to allow the moment of opportunity to an end a fight to pass. However, to address it from a competitive point of view: From a kick-boxing perspective; the striking does not lend itself well competitively. One can argue that chain punching is inefficient against a trained opponent, and the extreme range neglects other consummate striking strategies. The extreme range severely limit combinations that can be thrown, and against a skilled pugilist, opens one up to suffering significant damage before getting into said range. From a grappling perspective; one can argue that fighting with percussive techniques at such a range is redundant, when it might be more efficient to attempt a takedown, or a throw from a clinch. Especially against an opponent more likely to try and draw you to the ground, and into guard; such as a Jujutsu player. With the above said, however, on local sanshou circuits; Wing Chun Practitioners can report success. For example; many Hong Kong Sanshou champions have been students of Wing Chun. I suspect the distance closing techniques of Wing Chun, and the tumbling techniques, lend themselves to a rule set where striking and throwing is allowed but not ground fighting. Overall; I would rank Wing Chun among the top three traditional schools of Chinese Martial Arts. To be specific; the Wing Chun of Wong Shun Leung. I would rank it amongst the Baji Quan of Liu Yun Chiao, and the Yiquan/Taikiken of Kenichi Sawai. I say this; as all three systems have produced combatants able to achieve results in some field; Wing Chun Fighters in Beimo and Sanshou, Baji Quan as a staple of several body-guard training regimes, and Taikiken had a significant early influence on Kyokushin and Kenka Karate. Sadly; none have yet to produce a top MMA fighter, and so they remain much maligned. I think a major problem is traditionalism, and a loss of the sense of the KISS principle. A lot of Wing Chun ideas are adhered to without “alive” training to explore and pressure test said ideas. Similarly; I believe a lot, to maintain appeal, have latched Qi Gong concepts onto Wing Chun which were originally not part of the pragmatic self-defence system. To be fair; this critique can be applied to a lot of martial arts traditions. So in competition; I would argue it looks very misguided. However, from a self-defence perspective it ticks several boxes, but definitely not all, and only if practised with self-defence in mind.

I admittedly try to exclusively compete outside traditional karate circles. My go to styles of competition are Combat SOMBO, Kudo, Combudo, Nippon Kempo, or Irikumi Go tournaments. It can be hard to find open tournaments, aside from Combudo, but they are also not impossible to find. I also like to participate in folk wrestling when I get the chances. Have done some Sumo as well. Did once participate in a Karate Grappling tournament; but I felt the rules didn't actually emphasise the grappling priorities of karate, and was a grappling tournament for people too afraid to take on actual grapplers. It was a bit of a feel good affair in that respect. Have once in a blue moon tried the National All-Style Tournaments. They are not too bad and they do draw people from a multitude of Karate styles, Tae Kwon, Kenpo, Quan Fa, and even some kick-boxers. The rules are pretty similar to the WKF, but I find the disparate styles makes it worthwhile just for the experience of facing different styles of striking. I would say it is actually a rarity for me to compete inside my "style" than it is to not.

I must admit; it has been a few years since I read Manga, and I am somewhat of a social gamer at most. If someone does not offer to play a fighting game with me, I am probably never going to play said fighting game. With that said; I find reading fictional works about martial arts can sometimes give an insight into an attitude one might not have as a martial arts enthusiast. After all, novelists are looking to appeal to an audience, and more often move with the times, where as one can tend to get stuck in their own bubble. So sometimes it is useful to find out what pop-culture attitudes about martial arts are. Below are what I remember, with a little research to jog my memory where needed; I have tried to include a short synopsis about why I feel it is an interesting representation in Karate in said work of fiction, as well as a general opinion about the work it appears in. Koukou Tekkenden Tough (The protagonist is somewhat of a Jerk, and his motivations can be hard to reconcile with. The earlier nearly superhuman feats, but still grounded in some level of reality, made possible through training from hell are also slowly replaced by super-natural feats justified by special genes.) Kenjustukan: A homage/parody of Uechi-Ryu, which focuses on an extreme Hojo Undo regime to make the karateka capable of delivering devastating strikes, as well as able to absorb incredible amounts of trauma. Tetsuzan Kuramoto, the fictional founder of kenjutsukan, even has the nickname of Superman like Kiyohide Shinjō, although he perhaps derives as much inspiration from Mas Oyama as he does Shinjō. His primary student is also shown as incredibly dangerous, and gives the protagonist of the story one of his hardest fights. Shinku-Kai: A fictional analogy to Tani-ha Shito-Ryu. Not much is revealed beside that about the style, except that it hosted open, knock-down tournaments; one of which was part of a character’s background. Sekishin: Little more than a story telling device; all that is revealed about the style is that it was intended to face any type of attacker, including grapplers. However, considering its founder, and strongest members were both defeated by masters of sophisticated grappling styles in story; my guess is that it was a parody of how Kenka Karate schools, during the Japanese Vale Tudo craze, desperately tried to catch up on grappling skills. Daido-Kan: A thinly veiled fictional analogy to Daido-Juko. There is even a reference to a tournament in-universe where the use of the iconic “Space-Helmet” is shown, and an early translation error where one translator had it called Daido-Juko in Universe. Karate Shoukoushi Kohinata Minoru(Has a few tasteless, and politically incorrect jokes, which can be hard to ignore, and admittedly is why I gave up on reading it) Koudan Kaikan: A homage/parody to Kyokushinkaikan, in that it is a Japanese school of Kenka Karate, although it takes many narrative cues from the history of other schools of karate. For example, it is the sponsor of a kick-boxing organisation called King of Strikers; an allusion to Seidokaikan and its connection to K-1. Similarly, many of Koudan Kaikan’s early champions were also pioneers in Japanese kick-boxing in Universe; not unlike Kyokushin Gym in the sixties and seventies. There is also a subtle reference to one of better known controversies in karate history; Ohtsuka Hironori’s forced exit from the Wadokai organisation. In Universe; Kaburagi Juuzou was the original head of Koudan Kaikan, but was forced out by his student Izumi Koushou, which lead to the formation of Kaburagi-Ryu. Kaburagi-Ryu: Like Koudan Kaikan, it is a homage/parody of Kyokushinkaikan, and in some ways even more directly. It’s founder Kaburagi Juuzou is alluded to have engaged in inter-school competition, and to have been a legendary instructor and coach of fighters; not unlike Mas Oyama. Furthermore; it is shown to largely be inspired by Goju-Ryu, with regards to Kata alluded to, with some elements of Shuri Te just like Kyokushin. Beside Kyokushin, Kaburagi-Ryu references other schools too. Its tournaments use extreme rules closer to FSA Kenshinkan Pro KarateDo events; where bare-knuckle punches to the head are allowed, and like the real event in Universe this is considered extreme and dangerous. Similarly; there is also references to Daido-Judo, with the use of the iconic space helmet during tournament qualifiers. Also, the eventual shutting down of Kaburagi-Ryu due to tax evasion charges mirrors the real-life arrest of Kazuyoshi Ishii, founder of the Seidokaikan karate organization. Shiryuukan/Doryuukan (The naming is inconsistent): A parody of various “Vale Tudo” karate systems. Shown to essentially be Mixed Martial Arts in tradition keikogi; the question is even raised in Universe about whether it can still be called Karate without practicing kata. Considering how badly the Shiryuukan team does in the Team MMA Battle between it and Team Reinan (Kaburagi-Ryu), I believe it is supposed to be a “take that”, at those karateka who abandoned karate in favour of the flavour of the day, and still did badly. For example; the failure of several Daido-Juko fighters in the early Vale Tudo Japan events, and then Wajyutsu Keishukai’s showing against the poorly considered Kenkagei Koppo at Koppo VS. Keishukai, marred the reputation for such systems for a good while. Garōden(I prefer the earlier version of the story more commonly called Garouden) Hokushin: Perhaps the most straight forward homage/parody to Kyokushinkaikan I am aware of. The founder is based heavily on Mas Oyama, though given comic and peculiar characteristics derived more from the character in Karate Baka Ichidai than the historical figure. The founder is shown as having a history of dojo yaburi, and is hinted at having near super-human fighting prowess even in his advancing age. Little is shown about Hokushin beside the fact it is school of Kenka Karate, and its tournaments follow traditional Jissen-Kumite rules. Interestingly; they host an open tournament in the story, which has rules giving an edge to karateka, not unlike many of criticisms made of the first Kyokushin Open World Tournament. Although these rules are put aside in the story itself to have a proper-free fighting tournament. Hokushin fighters also appear in events sponsored by the FAW, an in-universe puroresu promotion, not unlike how Kyokushin fighters appeared in works for NJPW in the 70s and 80s. There is also an ongoing rivalry between Hokushin and FAW, mirroring the propaganda war for the title of strongest between NJPW under Inoki, and the “Strongest Karate” of Kyokushin in Japan in the time before MMA and Vale Tudo. Indeed; for fight fans of that time, the great unanswered question was how would Mas Oyama in his prime have done against the all-conquering Antonio Inoki, and Garoden seems to be moving towards the Author’s answer to said question. Shiseikan: Again, a parody/homage of Uechi-Ryu; with its practitioners engaging in extreme Hojo Undo to develop a body capable of near inhuman feats. Interestingly; Teruo Kataoka (the sole practitioner seen fighting) is defeated via Suplex in the story, after being inadvertently drawn into a work by his pro-wrestling opponent. He faces his second defeat by falling victim to street fighting tactics. My guess is that it’s a badly communicated morale about how conditioning your body only goes so far if you never actually train to fight. Shamo (Not for the faint of heart; I read it but I don’t know if I could recommend it due to its violent depictions, and the darkness of the story.) Banryukai: At first glance; a very straight forward parody of Seidokaikan and Kyokushin. It models itself as the Strongest Karate, has branches across the world, and runs the Lethal Fight; a kick-boxing organisation inspired by K-1. Similarly; it is shown to have influences from both Naha Te, and Shuri Te, mirroring Kyokushin and its descendent arts. The main character primarily uses it in self-defence, and no rules situations, and thus fights “dirty” more often and not. As such, it is a pretty violent representation of what karate techniques could do to a person if one did not care for the target’s welfare at all. The school itself has its own arc very distinct from other examples, in that it rarely takes its narrative cues from the headlines or the history of Sogo Kakutogi, and there are some novel ideas regarding its history and organisation though they can be farfetched. Kenji (Probably one of my favourite manga due to the depth of martial arts knowledge. The author gets a few things wrong, and of course leans on Kung Fu mythology a little much, but nothing an informed eye cannot deal with.) Takayama ha Shotokan: A school of Shotokan developed by a character called Takayam Sohachi; in story he incorporated tactics and skills from Kalarippayattu, Boxing, and Daito-Ryu Aikijujutsu, and is implied to have studied numerous arts unnamed in story. In story, it is largely shown to be quite conventional karate; emphasising Kihon, Kata, and Kumite. However, significant differences from conventional Shotokan are implied, and there is use of Bogu Kumite, and multiple attacker drills more consistent with Aikido. The character, and his school are used largely as framing devices for the protagonist to learn more about martial arts, and combat sports, in general during the early part of the story. Holyland: (Fairly realistic, but has some farfetched elements. The author makes some astute points about street-fighting, but again gets some things wrong.) Hakusen: A form of Kenka Karate, which practices traditional Jissen Kumite. Little is said about the style, but one of the key characters, Shougo, practices it, and one of the minor story arcs involves the school. Aesthetically; it takes its cues more from Shotokan, with regards to its main representative who focuses more on movement in unusual spaces, striking vital points, and being adaptive to different fighting styles. Oddly; the other members of school fight in a more conventional Kyokushin tournament style. In some ways; this representation of Karate is like Shamo, but is far less violent, and the author spends more time justifying his depiction. All-Rounder Megura (One of the few I am keeping up with; a very realistic depiction of Shooto, and the world of martial arts. Has a secondary story arc which is a little absurd involving Yakuza, but it does not detract from the slice of Life feel the rest of the story has.) Sagawa Karate: Practiced by the main character in his childhood, and the base of his rival Takashi’s MMA skills. It appears to be inspired by Goju-Ryu, but might have been Kyokushin, as a character states how Sagawa used to state how karate was for fighting. The style of Sagawa karate seen in the manga right now appears to be a form of traditional, no contact, karate. Not much else is revealed about it, and it largely exists as a framing device.

That was not my intended inference; I was speaking strictly in the context of the competition format. You fight how you train; if you train to be effective in your competition format, while neglecting other aspects of fighting; that is dangerous. However, I did not intend to infer that training is always directed by the competition format. I believed the context, that is the discussion was about competition fighting, sufficiently illustrated what the point I was making was about. That the competition formats, not the styles in of themselves, neglect head-strikes. With that said, in the broader sense, it ultimately comes down to the dojo/gym/club as well. If it is competition focused, and spars only according to the competition rules exclusively; then the argument could be made that the training regime neglects head-strikes. That though, is not what I was talking about; I was talking about the competition rules. Plus, the above scenario is incredibly rare, if not in fact nonexistent. Hopefully that further clarifies the meaning of my post.

I find it helps with preventing sweep attempts; if you have some awareness of how to deal with what your opponent is doing with his arms below you. Not that grip fighting is necessarily reflective of this, I just find grip fighting trains a certain awareness for this aspect of fighting. In particular defences, and controlling an opponent's defence. As I said; I am not a hugely knowledgeable grappler so I would take my opinion with a pinch of salt. It is just something I have observed. Edit: I think I read some where that Jean Jacques Machado made a similar assessment about learning to defend effectively, with regards to 10th Planet Jujutsu, and the emphasis on No-Gi. Top of my head, that is the only real authority on the matter I can think of that somewhat supports my basic assessment.

To be a pedant I would not say they reinvented Pancrase; that was open palm strikes to the head standing. Technically; there was no rules against striking on the ground, besides the no closed hands to the head rule. Something that can be seen in the infamous Rutten-Frank Shamrock fight. However, a gentleman's agreement between the competitors, and the expectations of the fans essentially made striking on the ground non-existent. With that said; I have to say I tend to agree to an extent with regards to the criticisms. My grappling is not spectacular; I have only gone through the technical blue-belt material (GUU), Bart Vale's particular version of Shoot-fighting, and a few ranks in Judo. However, I have found my defence sufficient to roll with submission only fighters, and my offence enough to cause No-Gi players a headache. I rarely get a result worth writing home about, but I tend to find I enjoy (from a trying to learn how to win perspective) rolling with Submission only players the most. This, to use the Pancrase comparison, was very true of even Pancrase's aces. Without striking on the ground, they neglected positional work and emphasised an aggressive catch inspired approach. Similarly, as they practiced without Gi, they never developed grip fighting skills which can be critical when dealing with the mount; both offensively and defensively. This caused both Ken Shamrock and Bas Rutten, arguably the most dominant Pancrase champions, to falter when they entered Vale Tudo, and MMA, contests under rules more consistent with the modern standards. All that said; I tend to find points fighters are more aggressive, and tend to work at a pace I currently struggle to keep up with. However, I also find they tend to struggle to lock in the submissions when they finally get the catch. It does not matter so much as they tend to work from a good position, but it is one flaw I have noticed. I have to say I only get a chance to roll once in a blue moon, and only with a very small sample, so I would take my observations with a pinch of salt. I do think they are some what consistent with what we see with certain transitions from other combat sports, in particular grappling ones, to the world of Mixed Martial Arts. I do think adding in striking on the ground is an interesting move forward, and should hopefully encourage use of positioning that has been lacking.

Most elite martial artists who compete in Mixed Martial Arts usually cross train in a way that isolates particular skills. When practising boxing; you have to box. When practising your jujutsu and wrestling game; you grapple and you wrestle. I do not believe McGregor is in any danger of accidentally reverting to his free-fighting skills during the match; though, there is always a difference between sparring and a competitive match. In the heat of the moment, or a moment of punch-drunkenness, then maybe McGregor might try a manoeuvre illegal in boxing, but I doubt it will prove a real problem. Honestly; if it was under shoot-boxing rules the I think it could have been an interesting bout. McGregor would not be so disarmed as he is, but he could not avoid having to face down Mayweather's boxing skills.

Considering that you can potentially continue your TKD training, and also become involved in BJJ in one fell swoop; I would argue that you take up Brazilian Jujutsu. You know the instructor so that is always a benefit, it is conveniently located compared to the Matsubayashi-Ryu class, and has training available everyday which maximises your training possibilities. It sounds as though you are largely concerned about your weight being a factor; and to be frank it will be. However, that will be true for both locations. Training as often as possible will help with weight loss, and I would also recommend organising for yourself a daily work out routine, and a diet plan. I am a Shorin-Ryu practitioner, and have taught Tae Kwon Do veterans; and there are enough significant differences that yes, you can learn something new by practicing karate. So from the martial arts perspective both have something to offer. However; I do think you might benefit more from the sophisticated grappling of BJJ at this point, than you would Matsubayashi-Ryu, and I think convenience alone and the possibility of continuing your TKD training has to win out. With all that said as well; you can always explore the karate routes by attending courses. If you are willing to travel 2 hours for one lesson a week, I would recommend putting that willingness towards going to courses instead.

It would depend on the rules of the tournament; open tournaments do not usually have many restrictions on kata, but I would say you should contact someone involved with organising the tournament you are interested in entering.

To clarify what I meant by neglecting head-strikes; as you have stated, punches (or any hand-strikes) to the head are prohibited in knock-down rules. Also, only a single point is awarded for a successful hand strike to the head under current WKF rules, compared to the three awarded for a successful kick to the head or two for a successful kick to the body. In free-fighting, kick-boxing, and self-defence effective hand-skills are fundamental for success. However, the above rules change the Mai-ai used; they encourage a distance where delivering high kicks is adopted, which is not reflective of actual self-defence. This is why I stated that they neglect head-strikes; boxing skills, and effective use of the hands to control distance, have proven to be necessary in sports such as MMA, but are also key to many effective self-defence strategies. When you cannot punch to the head, or the rule set makes it less advantageous to do so; even if you allow strikes to the head of some sort, you are still neglecting head strikes.

I believe it will come down to who walks into the ring with the right strategy, and the best defence. McGregor is a very mobile fighter; who is very hard to pin down, and is a hard hitter for his weight. Mayweather has a solid defence, and knows how to shut down an opponent's offence, and also has proven knock-out power and indeed is one of Boxing's great knock out artists. Now, Mayweather is the significantly older fighter, and has not secured a knockout since 2011, while McGregor continues to finish fighters regularly and also has a reach advantage of two inches; enough to make a difference when it comes to the knock-out game. I think it should be a more interesting bout than some have been predicting, myself included, with some of the comments made by established boxers who have trained with McGregor. I still give the win to Mayweather, but I am also optimistic McGregor might in fact survive the distance.