Spartacus Maximus

To answer the question about Uechi-ryu: no, this style is one of the main schools of Okinawan karate but compared to Shorin-ryu and Goju-ryu it is not as old. It is closely related to Goju-ryu as it shares some of the core kata such as Sanchin. Both styles seem to have the same Chinese origin and historical accounts strongly suggest a common source. Uechi-ryu has retained much of its Chinese characteristics and is almost more like a Chinese system taught by Okinawans than an Okinawan system with Chinese influence. Ryuei-ryu is another such style and most of the kata are not found anywhere else. This style was nameless for years and unknown outside Okinawa less than 15 years ago

Competing and sport matches are great, but what is wrong with it and what many traditionalists and purists dislike is the confusions and willful distortion of training purpose. If the purpose of training is to win a sporting match, then it ought to be clear. Training for the ring requires a completely different method and focus from training for self-defense. Training one way for one purpose(sport or SD) absolutely does not prepare someone to deal with the other. Some aspects of training can and do transfer, but generally it is impossible to train for both at the same time and it is a great disservice to claim one is training SD when one is practising sport or vice versa.

This is an interesting question and quite a challenging one. Considering that every single style of karate existing today are derived from either Goju-ryu, Shorin-ryu, it is really difficult to say. In the best and most detailed resources on the subject, kata are always classified into Okinawan or Chinese origin, and then into Naha, Shuri or Tomari Te. Styles of a more direct Chinese origin or styles more recent might have a few kata not taught elsewhere. Lastly, there are undoubtedly a great number of new "modern" kata created in the last few decades by founders of newer karate ryu ha. Coming up with something completely unique is a rarity and every style can easily be linked to its origin by examining the core kata. Unfortunately, the style I train has nothing specially unique. Every single one of the kata are found in one form or another in many styles: naihanchi 1-3, pinan 1-5, passai dai/sho, kusanku dai/sho, chinto and gojushiho.

Breaking boards, tiles or bricks is meant as a training exercise and nothing more. There is a correct way and a wrong way to do it just as for every single technique in martial arts. Injuries happen when there is the slightest mistake in technique, mechanics or other vital points. It is possible to break with power alone, but to strike efficiently without injuring oneself requires more than brute force. Breaking is much less about destroying the boards or tile. It is about learning how to use one's body to its full potential efficiently without injuries. For what use is striking if one cannot do so without disabling oneself?

A little each day goes a long way. Stretching and practising to the maximum every day is the only way to improve and this is regardless of age. Seeing is believing and I have seen it.

The gentleman who teaches explained that this was how he had been trained in his native Okinawa by the master who taught him. He mentioned something to the effect that this was how karate must be done to really develop useable techinque. Ranks or belts were of little concern, as most did not have any. Students trained every day, sometimes twice and the master would often teach only two or three things for months. Only after basics were understood and performed satisfactorily was any kata taught. Then he said if he tried to teach exactly as he was taught, he might have maybe three regular students instead of a dozen, which is still a small dojo. Maybe that is a sign of our times and the general attitude.

Today in the dojo the only thing practised was front kicks....mostly with the left leg. For the entire two hours. Every step, all the details at different speeds. This is just the third consecutive session spent on a single technique or set of techniques. This is probably only possible with semi-private sessions or small numbers of students. Obviously children could not be expected to keep up, but adults might also respond to this with frustration if this was done for longer than a couple days. Doing it for longer seems even more difficult.

People who have ADHD can learn to concentrate. They just need to train for it longer than others. As each case is different there is a huge variety of activities that are beneficial and the key is for the ADHD to chose one he or she can enjoy. Martial arts is only one of these activities and has the advantage of also spending physical energy. There are quite a few ADHD people who have overcome or controlled their condition and achieved great succes in academics and sports. If they like doing martial arts, take it slowly just like with children who naturally have shorter attention spans. As long as there is a challenge, they will continue.

Being out of shape is not what most people would imagine, nor is it always obvious by one's physical appearance. In fact, most people living a modern urban or suburban lifestyle are out-of-shape because of sedentary life. The average person just does not get nearly enough physical activity. These habits combined with over-eating and consuming too much energy that is left unused makes everything a whole lot worse. The best recommendation is to change slowly. Diet can be changed easily, nothing complicated. Balance, variety and quality over quantity are the best guidelines. As for activity, breathing rythm is something to practise. It can be learned from a good teacher or coach. Finally, Drink! Never underestimate the role of water.

This confirms the idea that there are much more intelligent and effective ways of training than just getting hit. Contact is an important part of complete training but it ought to be done with the aim of learning. If contact is the sole purpose or if it is done to dominate others, it loses its effectiveness as a training and teaching method.

If an instructor had young students(maybe many adults too) do nothing but punching, kicking and blocks for the entire training session how many would still be there after a month? It is doubtful any would remain long enough to be taught anything else. Teaching this way used to be normal but , from a business point of view it would certainly be difficult. Perhaps it is not suitable for teaching larger groups.

Knowledge must be applied to have meaning and shared to have value. If one knows something it serves no purpose until that person makes use of it. It becomes valuable when that person shares it, and the more it is shared the more desirable it becomes. Knowledge must also be applied, tried and experimented with so that it can grow and lead to improvements and more knowledge. Imagine if the first human to learn how to make fire just kept it to himself and never taught anyone. Without application there can be no progress and without sharing there can be no improvement. There are many ways to apply knowledge, one is experimenting and trying it and the obvious next step is passing on to another person. If one does neither one will never know the limits, flaws and potential of said knowledge. First learn, then understand, next try it and finally, teach someone.

This is difficult to answer with any certainty. Some techniques have never been allowed for kumite and some have fallen out of use. One of the possible reasons is that there are very few people who spend the time training their hands to make certain strikes usable. Especially ones like spear hand or one knuckle strikes. Another reason is that, barring some exceptions, most kumite is done with gloves or other equipment that prohibit or make it difficult to properly shape the hand correctly and securely. Finally, the set of rules is probably the biggest factor in determining what will be favoured in competition. What is allowed and trained in one dojo will probably be forbidden in another and illegal depending on the venue. Even the hardcore full contact kumite such as kyokushin has limiting rules and favours some techniques over others.

Children and youths are probably more likely to actually ask the question in the topic. Adults, not so much but the attitude and mentality of instant results is still widespread. In general, the time spent on learning and practising a given skill or a single kata is much shorter than it used to be. Very few dojo or instructors focus on a single thing in detail. This leads to wonder if an average student would be willing or able to train in that way. Just blocks, punches and kicks for a year, for example. A year is not so long, but would they stay or give up? I tend to believe few would stay if any at all. Personally I am no fan of instant. I don't even like instant noodles....experience has also proved to me that attempting to learn too much too quickly yields poor results. It would be interesting to experiment with this, but I am not in any position to do so.

The phrase in the topic title and variations of it are probably the single most often heard question from students of all ages. Everyone seems to expect instant results or progress at a rate that is not realistic for a minimum of effort. Worse, they give up when they fail the first few times and give up before making any progress. Martial arts were not meant to be learned quickly. One cannot expect to make significant progress by practising two or three nights per week. How many would have the patience to continue if students were taught in the old way? Nothing but basics and for six months, a year? longer? Maybe this kind of teaching is not feasible in this discussion ay and age, or is it? No doubt many students would quit if they were not shown something new every so often. Surely there must be a way to find a balance and show the value of patience and practise.

There never was, nor will there ever be a unique standard in martial arts. There are as many standards as there are schools, styles or governing bodies. Again, those who flaunt their titles or present themselves as "master" usually do so for publicity's sake and marketing. It is a gimmick to attract and impress potential students/customers.

Excellent! I was hoping it would come back for a few more episodes.

Yes indeed. There is no point going to a dojo if the instructor one wishes to learn from is not teaching on a regular basis, especially if said instructor is supposed to be the MAIN instructor. This kind of situation is very disappointing to prospective students and for someone teaching publically it should at least be explained from the beginning if circumstances prevent the main instructor from being there regularly.

According to the bits of information available online there seems to be an organization overseeing it called Koshiki Karate World. The apparently also have their own version of the kata Naihanchi and Kusanku. They use full face mask type head protection and body shields like in Olympic TKD but no footpads or gloves in their kumite. Does that sound familiar, Wastelander? Their logo/patch says world, so on could assume a presence in USA, but it does seem to be a newer style, perhaps an offshoot of another better known school?

A martial arts instructor, as any teacher should not be held to any higher moral standard than anyone else trusted with passing on knowledge or skills. No matter what level of skill or depth of knowledge they may have gained, they are still people with qualities and flaws. Expecting them to be different is just not realistic. Only a fool refuses a diamond because the vessel containing it is stained. If an instructor is skilled and can teach well, the rest should be of no concern.

Has anyone heard of koshiki karate? It seems to be a contact sporting style focussed on free sparring using protectors. How does it compare to other sporting styles or organization such as JKA, WKO?

If it is of any reassurance, Higaonna sensei of Goju-ryu who is listed is probably an exception. Every one of the Okinawan experts I have met or heard of are not concerned with being on such a list. None of them speak nor read English and are not familiar at all with the internet. A quick search also showed that many well-known and referenced experts who can be found elsewhere in various sources(books, etc) are not mentioned either.

Training in ordinary, comfortable clothing can be good in some circumstances. The white cotton dogi has only been around for the last hundred years and in general use for much less time. Karateka today take it for granted and many might be surprised to know that until the sixties, karate training was done in with nothing more than one's shorts. Even now, in Okinawa it isn't unheard of for some of the old-timers to train with something on other than a gi. Some of these never owned one until later. A good one can be expensive, but will last for years if it is well maintained. Recycling them is a great idea for young students and those of modest means. Cotton/polyester blends are also cheaper and more suitable for youths.

Maybe it is a similar phenomenon to how in the early days of martial arts, every and any exotic Asian system was called "judo" and later on "karate". That combined with marketing. To popularize something for which most people have little to no reference, it is always best to try to make that new thing fit into a definition likely to be the understood by most. It matters little to the public if that assigned definition is not exactly true. Back in the day before Taekwondo was widely known, many advertised it as "Korean Karate". When judo and jujitsu were first taught outside Japan it was called Japanese Wrestling and so on.

A title is something other people use to address someone or acknowledge that person's accomplishment. It is not intended for self-referral and those who use it in that way will generally give an impression of self-importance, inflated ego or peculiarity at the very least. In China and many other asian cultures it is unthinkably rude to call oneself by one's title. Even in the Western world, it would be a safe wager to assume very few people refer to themselves by their title when they have one, nor do they expect or demand to be called so by everyone they meet. One who is truly worthy of being called a Master need not be concerned with titles. A master is one who has reached an almost intuitive level of skill and understanding, yet continues to seek betterment.