DaveB

Cathal, my own training in Shotokan was superb and never a problem, my gripe came from training with a wider Shotokan community. From reading articles and books by practitioners. Regarding the perfect punch, I'm not saying it is an expressed tenet of Shotokan but striving for perfect technique is part of the culture. Some dress it up in philosophy more than others but there's no confusion or misconception in what is write. Ultimately you're attempting to make the "no true Shotokaner" argument, where your brand is the real way and the others either don't count or don't really exist. Well they do exist and they are as true and valid members of the Shotokan community as any. There may be less of them these days as a result of the kata application band wagon, but even when books like Burgars were being published every other week and website were springing up all over, there were still plenty who thought a basic wrist lock was something super advanced and that the only way to use the art was the way taught for tournaments. 5 years one kata was a great book and a good example of what karate can (and to me should) be, but it was neither the norm nor was it a historically representative approach of Shotokan (ie the mid 20th century style of Japanese karate). Nor is any of the pseudo philosophy you espoused. If an individual wants to make that way of doing things the heart of their training that is their choice. That person should be under no illusion though, that entire way of viewing karate was an invention of Japanese karateka who while advocating decades of training had themselves no more than 10 - 15 years under their belts. It was an invention designed to cover the lack of knowledge of what karate really was because they'd only been taught the surface form. It was a reason for people to keep training when there was nothing more to teach. Much as the bushido code was a means of keeping the relevance and distinction of a samurai class in an age where constant warring had ended. Karate is a way of hitting people who have tried to hit you first. It can be other things, but if your assessment of your karate kungfu etc has elements that won't assist you in a fight (like balancing your Ki or other mysticisms) then you can be pretty sure they were bolted on by someone who really really needed a girlfriend.

And another thing! (Did I mention this topic winds me up)? The over-focus on technique as a result of the notion of perfection causes karateka in particular to fixate on what a punch or kick or blockng should be not what it can be. I firmly believe karateka got the rep of punching bags because they went into fights trying to be the karate perfect poseurs they thought they should be when the truth of all fighting arts is that they have to mold to the person and situation. If perfection technique says the reverse punch is thrown from a front stance, what do you do when you're leaning and turning in half a crane stance because that's where your dodge reflex put you? Much like with beauty, the notion of perfection tries to standardise something, to crystallise that which is both subjective and ever adapting. It benefits only those who claim to have the keys to finding it, even as they claim that you can never get there.

.But why can't anyone ever achieve perfection? It's just a punch, not neuro-surgery. The phrase rolls off the tongue as if it's as obvious as the colour of the sky, but it's utter nonsense. It's just a punch; a few muscle activations timed together, probably less complicated than smiling. The perfect punch to me is the one that lands when and where you want it to and endless practice of basic technique alone will never achieve this. Even by that definition; one involving all the variables of a moving target, perfection is not impossible. And if perfection is unattainable why do we even allowing the idea into the dojo? What good is an unattainable target, other than to get the logic-impaired to keep paying up indefinitely? Lastly if we can do away with the bovine fecal matter that is the notion of unattainable perfection, then what is wrong with saying, "actually I can do that"? Why does egoless honesty offend? Jealousy perhaps? Show me one top level athletes who became the best by telling themselves "I can never do..."?

That should have read "kyudokan". I surmised that since both them and Shotokan have the retreat at the end, albeit in different forms, that it must have some practical application.

Chinte and Chinto are different kata. Some think they are from the same family but it's just a theory. Shotokan renamed Chinto, Gankaku. I'm a firm believer in the idea that the JKA added the hips to return the karateka to the start. They probably hop rather than step because it's a higher rank kata and hops provide an extra challenge as far as balance. It's not our idea of a sensible use of kata but apparently that was how the JKA did things. There is a more modern version in a Shorin ryu school, Kodokan I think, their methods look more functional and they don't hop, they step.

Interestingly my pet peeve is the false or over inflated modesty particularly present in Shotokan that makes students unable to progress because of some vague idea of perfection that they can never achieve. It's that level where they will magically understand what kata mean and be able to use them even though they spend all their time working out how to wiggle their hips just so after yet another seminar on basic technique. I've seen it in other places but Shotokan is built on it. If people stopped bowing to the notion of 20 years of training to learn how to punch and kick, the Traditionalist dojo's around the world would empty.

My understanding was that 5th dan denotes mastery. Mastery to me involves being able to practically apply all the principles of your art during combat, not just drills like 1-step. Being able to apply principles beyond technique, ie not being limited to the set pieces in the kata but being able to create new combinations on the fly that adhere to the principles of the style. How much of a change this would be from 4th dan depends on how close your training in that rank took you to that goal. That being said mastery may be something different to you. Would training to meet your definition of mastery be a big change for you?

For any technique a balance must be struck between our innate abilities or lack thereof and the traditionally taught form. Ultimately what matters are the mechanisms of the stances and techniques, not the external form. So long as you are ingraining and learning to apply these then your stance is correct.

First thing to note is that if you get more power from one method over the other, it most likely means you have trained it more or are just more comfortable with it than with the other. The main difference between the two methods is that 'heel up' gives you a little extra reach while 'heel down' makes you more stable. Consequently 'heel up' is more natural when you are attacking. When you are in pursuit of your opponent that extra inch or two can make a difference. It also changes the focus of your punch, moving the peak of your power slightly further forward as well. 'Heel down' on the other hand is more geared towards the counter attack. Now you are not so much moving forward with a big lunge to make distance, rather you are turning yourself into a sharp heavy rock for the advancing opponent to break himself on. Your power output is less important as it is magnified by the opponent's own momentum. The focus of the punch is closer to you as the opponent is closer to you. As well as being more stable the flat heel forces you to not over extend your body weight which is of vital importance in combat. The karateka never over-shoots! As a training device you are forced to focus on rotating the hips and you are aided in keeping your weight low. Both methods are valid and important but heel down is more in line with karate strategy/philosophy. If heel down is significantly less powerful for you, I suggest getting slightly closer to the target. That and practice more.

A kata is just a kata. One is not really more or less advanced than any other. If your worried about not being ready or something, just don't worry about it. That being said, it's my personal feeling that a focus on skill development is a better use of time than just piling on more kata. You have a large amount of kata under your belt. I would try and get practice using them, doing two person drills at faster speeds with heavier contact in closer range and against more natural attacks. If you do this already that's great. There is always a deeper level to go to but if your really happy that you can use every part of all your kata to defend yourself then another kata is a natural progression. If you don't think you can do that, maybe do some research into bunkai and bring the drills to your sensei. See if he'll go that way with you instead. Assuming you are interested of course. My preference doesn't have to be yours. Good luck whatever you decide.

The closest I've heard of is in Farnborough I think, not too far from bromley.

Nah, it really is that simple. The kicking is Korean the rest of the traditional form is Japanese, the modern manifestation is independent evolution. The most complicated part is that some things were changed just for the sake of being different to what the Japanese taught, e.g. TKD uses a back weighted fighting stance as opposed to afront weighted jiyu dachi. Karate does derive from a mix of southeast Asian fighting methods, but there is nothing concrete as to precisely origins. Jujutsu and the related samurai arts are believed to have developed independently.

Gichin Funakoshi wrote that long stances are for beginners and he was right. There is no reason to do karate in long deep stances once your legs are strong and you understand the principles of movement and weight transfer that underlies such training. Traditional Shotokan folks are often fixated on keeping things the same, but evolution of technique and practice are the only real ways to improve and stay healthy as we age.

Ball of the foot is very effective and can be done without injury. In TKD they break boards with the ball of the foot round kick. It's about precision. The muay thai kick is a baseball bat, the karate kick is a nail hammer. Thai, power comes from the swing, karate power comes from the snap. As for training it, I never mastered the ball of foot round kick. I think it was genetic, but I could just never get my toes back. I will kick with the ball only in hard shoes. Had similar trouble with sidekicks, using the blade edge of the foot. Never could do it well so I just use the heel. To get the front kick I did a lot of walking on tiptoes, which despite the name is actually walking on the ball of the foot. I think that stretched out the muscles so they could actually contract and pull the toes back. Other than that it was just practicing pointing the foot while pulling the toes back.

Uni clubs win everything. Usually subsidized, all adult membership, very social, usually connected to competition circuits etc etc. No idea about the orgs, but as was suggested, it has little bearing on the club, less than the teacher and other students.

Nor do I. No one advocates not having a guard ever. The message is this: TRAINING IS NOT FIGHTING. HAND ON HIP IS TRAINING. Virtually no one "fights" with a hand on their hip. The only environment in which this happens is sport kumite, ie a game based on a training exercise. To answer the question of how they fight without getting knocked out, they do their best to use distancing and timing supported by simple parries and traps to enter when the opponent is vulnerable and escape when he counters. Basically what Lyoto Machida did.

Thinking about things is fine. The problem comes when we think we know enough that we stop trying to do better and change things so that they get easier. Look back over the posts: the guiding message is that this particular aspect of the art is part of training. You don't lift weights in a fight either but it doesn't mean weight training is not useful for fighting. Traditional ma are holistic training. You are not just learning a couple of useful habits you are relearning how to move. Fighting strategy and tactics is a different aspect of training, traditionaly dictated by the kata but always based on what works. Instead of worrying about getting knocked out for the lack of a guard, challenge yourself to fight without one, pulling your hand to the hip and keeping it there. How would you have to fight to make this work? What skills will you work on for the next few months to ensure victory? You will learn more and become better from taking on tasks like that than you will mimicking kick boxers.

Thanks. I don't mean to labor the point, but here's a quick example. Say you block last second, a heavy straight punch. Your block was so tight that your fist is up by your cheek, similar to where it sits in a boxing guard. Your block on the inside has your opponent wide open to a powerful counter with that same blocking hand. Do you think Anyone anywhere would ever drop their hand to their hip before throwing that counter punch? There is no karate without the person, so there is no karate without the mental faculties needed to employ it. Hikite is another option in this example, but it's not an absolute requirement. There are no absolute requirements except winning.

The other side to this question is about fighting guards. Strictly speaking karate doesn't have one! Karate was designed for self defense and not dueling. The nature of karate training, (ie big simple mechanically efficient movements to start then refining down to more nuanced technical elements) reflects 3 key facts about real violence. 1. Under pressure (adrenaline) refined movement goes out the window. Your big simple block and counter punch will keep you alive. 2. You will start in or find your way into all sorts of weird positions and angles during a violent encounter, and you need to be able to produce effective offensive and defensive techniques despite this. As has been discussed, pulling the hand to the hip in basic drilling helps with awareness of the mechanisms and connections within your body, which down the line will help you understand how to yank someone off balance while maintaining your own, or how to convert a successful parry into a strike that can actually damage at close range. 3. Real fights don't have people square off in a fighting guard at a neat distance. They happen while you are talking or walking or whatever so your techniques have to come from the same nowhere that the attacker came from. This is both a physical and mental concern, but physically, like point 2, karate starts from neutrality and focusses on understanding how to move so that movement will be correct in any situation. On the other hand, karateka do fight each other and always have. In that case, no guard becomes all guards since no limits are set to this aspect of the art. The key message in all this is flexibility: adapt to what is happening. Thus where you place your hands in a duel is based entirely on your understanding of the dueling environment and the strategy you wish to employ.

Another problem with trying to use direct comparison is that we develop our muscles and coordination along the line of our individual practice. There is no objective way to properly compare methods other than to devote equal time and energy to developing our use of them. In this regard I agree with Sensei8.

There are variations in technique that can produce differences in power. For example a Thai round kick uses larger muscles and pushes more body weight into the movement than the standard TKD technique. That said a 6ft 300lb male power lifter will get more force into the TKD kick than a 90lb female Thai boxer. Equally a ten yr TKD vet will likely kick harder than his twin after only 1 yr of TKD. Power alone is only one factor in a martial encounter, there are many other reasons to keep a particular technique variation.

Great post Sparticus.

I had a brief skim of your blog. From the little I've read I would trust your sensei.

You've given a perfect example of the downside of having rank at all, and assistant instructors. I have to say, you state that you hate politics, but with your questioning and back room discussions about another student you are likely creating an atmosphere of political discontent. In life we are always compared to those around us. Suck it up and worry about your own development before your dojo falls apart in a quagmire of jealousy and bad feelings. Your teacher either knows what he's doing or he doesn't. If he does stay, if not go. Fact is, you won't know for sure until you and this guy are years down the line, so you either deal and enjoy your training or go with not a word said (if you care about the School I mean). But the kind of griping you are doing will kill your school if unchecked.

You've given a perfect example of the downside of having rank at all, and assistant instructors. I have to say, you state that you hate politics, but with your questioning and back room discussions about another student you are likely creating an atmosphere of political discontent. In life we are always compared to those around us. Suck it up and worry about your own development before your dojo falls apart in a quagmire of jealousy and bad feelings. Your teacher either knows what he's doing or he doesn't. If he does stay, if not go. Fact is, you won't know for sure until you and this guy are years down the line, so you either deal and enjoy your training or go with not a word said (if you care about the School I mean). But the kind of griping you are doing will kill your school if unchecked.