Prototype

I can actually do a power version of this kick, but it's even less conventional. It involves me pushing of the kicking foot like a donkey kick at point of impact. But I would never do that as a formal kick. I don't know how it works in breaking. I would never kick that height.

If possible you still want a higher chamber even when kicking lower. Better to come down onto the target than kick upwards. Try breaking with the kick. Ideal technique comes out horizontally but slightly downwards is ok. Upwards and you will struggle to break the boards. I would also say that a higher chamber is better for sparring. A lower chamber and a kick that travels up is easier to jam and come over the top of. Higher chambers are much harder to tackle as it's more difficult to stop the knee. That's because of the height. A mid section kick from me usually travels vertically. Why would the directon of the force make a difference on breaking? I am sceptical about the physics claim

how well do I kick compared to an average student? I would think I'm better than average, because flexible students aren't necessarily mastering forward momentum, twist and snap. I have seen guys doing the splits who can't get much power or snap out of their sidekicks.

I think you hit the nail on the head. my hip does not allow a higher chambering. I'm a red belt so if it's not higher now then I think body mechanics has spoken. But does it matter if I have good control over my body nonetheless and power? I think it's still something you can improve on. Stretching will help you get to that position and practice practice practice will help develop the control. I have tried and tried. Dedicated stetching beyond classes stiffens rather than makes me more flexible. I have been on rigid stretching schedules, and my body is totally non response. My muscles just get tired. I am most flexible when I don't stretch much. And that leaves me around the current level. Also, I would rather chamber lower and get the desired snapping motion, than a higher chamber which slows me down.

We chamber high even if we kick to the knee. Yeah but that doesn't answer my question. ITF chamber is preferrably high too due to the power, the only difference is that it's semi circular. Mine is lower because I don't have the flexibility to chamber better. But I do get a nice snaping motion anyway and plenty of power from my big legs. my point is that you can't read where the kick will will land if it's low chambering. I don't know what technique you meant kicking to the knees, That's not aan allowed sparring technique. Do you mean low kicks?

Also, isn't there a trade off benefit of disguise if I chamber low? How could you know which height the kick will land at? If I chamber high, it will be mid or high section for sure

I think you hit the nail on the head. my hip does not allow a higher chambering. I'm a red belt so if it's not higher now then I think body mechanics has spoken. But does it matter if I have good control over my body nonetheless and power?

Which forms do you do?

Yeah but ITF Taekwondo chambers circularly. I suppose you do WTF/Kukkiwon style?

Note that I have been sidelined by injury to my instep and shin, so I lost a lot of explosiveness and stiffened a bit. Unable to stretch for weeks. That said, do I kick like a conventional Taekwondo guy? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n7vKAxgEthA

Yes, but there is nothing to infer unless you ARE savvy. It's like pointing at a hawk and saying "that's a bird." It's not wrong. It's a hawk, and it's a bird. Both are correct, and there is no obligation to stipulate that it is a hawk if you're talking to someone who doesn't know the word "bird" yet. A "layman" now and what a "layman" was 65 years ago are very different. While the video is very technical, the voiceover was clearly aimed at an American audience that was not very savvy. Americans had to be told why they should care about karate in the first place, before they could be expected to listen up long enough to learn about the different ryu and organizations. This was the former, not the later. Despite your obvious disliking of shotokan (not sure why), it is karate. Similarly, if someone was doing wadoryu and called it karate in a documentary, they would also be correct for doing so. Are you're suggesting that shotokan should not be called "karate"? I don't don't dislike Shotokan. However, Shotokan and Kyokushin are about as similar to each other in level of intensity as "generic military training" and Navy Seals. Granted, Shotokan was not yet named, so that naturally answers my question. But I don't think it would be a Shotokan labelled promo anyway, even if Funakoshi was dead when it was made. The first thing you learn when starting martial art, whether you know anything or not, is which style you train. I don't think it would be too hard for the viewer to grasp that they are watching one very specific branch of Karate by Gishin Funakoshi.

As others have said, the first few seconds of the clip actually says "Nippon Karate Association," or "JKA," which was the largest shotokan organization then, and is now still among the largest inside and outside of Japan. So actually, it does stipulate. Funakoshi was opposed to the use of the term "shotokan" as he believed in keeping the styles of karate more connected and easy to train across, the way it was when he was a young man training in Okinawa. "Shotokan" was therefore used much more after his passing in 1957. This video, if I'm not mistaken was among those made in the mid 1950s by the Japan Karate Association. This video was, I believe targeted at a broader international audience, as the JKA under Nakayama was in the process of planning for an international expansion project (the International Shotokan Karate Federation, ISKF). Kyokushin was founded by Oyama in 1964. Therefore, it's unlikely any videos from this time period reference Kyukushin just yet. I mean, what about this video is immodest? It's basically just saying "Men and women both practice karate. Sparing and basics and forms exist." It's not shamelessly promoting shotokan over other ryu. It was just made by the JKA... so why would they show anything other than JKA karate, which is shotokan? It seems to me that the targeted audience of this video are 1950s Americans who didn't know a judo chop from kung-fu grip. First things first: "Karate = from Okinawa" "There are kicks and punches and blocks" JKA is not a style of Karate even though it's exclusively a Shotokan organization. An inference a layman would not be able to make. As for the other Karate styles during that time, Wado Ryu was prevalent and bares little resemblence to Shotokan. Any Taekwondo style is closer to Shotokan than Wado Ryu is to Shotokan

Kanazawa was great for his time, but he is no way comparable to the best kata performers of today. You just mentioned him because he is famous. Watch Mirces tsuki and stance age 55+. There is no comparision.

Your link is worse. In what way is my link worse?? The karateka in my link is Kanazawa Sensei, a recognized Master of impeccable lineage and the like. I picked that particular video because you were asking..."Is he too stiff or is it according to the book?", and imho, Kanazawa Sensei is a recognized authority on Kata, including the Kata in question. The guy below, Shihan Mirce Opeloski, is a far superior, explosive Karateka even well past his prime than prime Kanazawa

The difference between full contact Karate styles and Shotokan are in my opinion fundamental. You are conditioned to kick with the shin in Kyokushin. Not one punch one kill. Techniques, tactics, everything is different apart from some shared kata sequences.

Your link is worse.

This is clearly a promo for Shotokan Karate, evident by some footage of Gishin Funakoshi and Nakayama. Why was it not made clear that this is one of several Karate styles? https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=471s&v=Pnaf665v9mU I know Funakoshi refused to separate Karate into formal styles but they could have mentioned it anyway.

Since I don''t know how Karatekas evaluate kata performances, could you give your opinions on this guys delivery. Is he too stiff or is it according to the book?

My Taekwondo guys always complained that I don't throw enough kicking combos, taking power away from the first shot in order to do a sequences of kicks. I do not possess the light feet and flexibility to do that however. My question is if Muay Thai instructors are more lenient on this matter?

Why am I moved down a level when I dominate secondary level guys who apparently block with their head and can't parry a jab?? Why aren't they moved down? Isn't it more important if you can actually fight? I have seen their bag work, and some of them where quite good and fluid. It didn't matter one bit once we sparred.

My bag work is terrible mostly due to the fact that I am not used to the material. I have no problem at all popping guys with power shots in sparring. This notion that the bag resembles a human is false.

I'm not sure they do, though. Some do if they are less competition focused. A lot of schools I know follow this format of sparring for gradings. For what it's worth, under the same rules that enforce "2 punches", you can use back fist, ridge hand and knife hand in tournaments. Back fist gets used a lot at international level. How am I supposed to use a knife hand with gloves? Only punches are allowed. I have never seen a back fist thrown, ever.

Why not? It depends. How long has he trained. Is he talented? Which style of a boxer is he? Is his reach greater than mine? If he is not particularly talented and has a reach disadvantage, I expect to steamroll him. He can pop me a few times but that will be all she wrote. He is sparring a red belt who prefers using hands. I don't mind not kicking.

The thing is, we don't work on the heavy bag in beginners group, so how am I supposed to be good at something I was never taught? Did he mean that he will teach me privately after X amount of time? I don't get it.

The bold bit might be exactly why he's asked you to take a step back and work fundamentals. In the long run a good solid foundation will more beneficial to you despite previous training. In addition to the hands, its the footwork which is important as well. In TKD it's very different because you'd also be concerned about using kicks. I didn't have to make any adjustments to boxing sparring.. I mainly do jab combos in TKD sparring anyway. Throw in a few mid section round kicks here and there.