DarthPenguin

Honestly, if I were in the GMs shoes then as long as he brought me some beer then it would, in fact, be fine. Haha, yeah it would have been the same with me too, but this guy was mega old school - he had a lot of rules that must be followed (eg no stubble; suits immaculately ironed; short hair etc) so not the kind of guy who was likely to accept the beer!

Understandable, but also then should be more pleased with the success!

Congratulations, sounds like you approached the process with integrity and were not just wanting to be "given a belt" which is always important! At the skill level you will have going for your Yondan it seems reasonable that they can assess you this way - realistically your technique should already be very good or you wouldn't have made sandan, so if they have things they are watching for / want to observe they can just watch for them. Also, being in a video could even make it harder - there isn't the chance of someone else being tested at the same time splitting attention / something else in the environment distracting them - they will be solely focused on you. If they are unsure if something is correct they can actually rewind and rewatch it, rather than having one chance to watch it in person and either make a decision or ask for a reperformance. You've put in the time and the work, satisfied a panel of grading instructors, and obviously performed to a high standard. So well done!

A lot of the high level ufc fighters also had their initial exposure to martial arts via a traditional martial art such as Karate or TKD and then subsequently added more skills. I remember when Rory MacDonald was coming up through the ranks in the UFC they kept talking about him as the first of the new breed of fighters that had solely trained in mma all their life and not transitioned across. They kept saying that it would be the wave of the future but it doesn't seem to have been. Look at the top fighters now. Most had a background in some "defined style" rather than just mma. Lots of them are black belts in karate and/or tkd. A lot of the grapplers are bjj black belts and also judo black belts etc. I think people used to keep their background quieter though for some kind of "cool factor". They would talk about their BJJ BB but not other styles etc but that is now changing. For example Robert Whittaker. Excellent fighter, but for years they didn't really mention his karate bb, now they mention it a lot. I think the success that MacGregor had using his slightly unorthodox striking, as well as that of Machida made it cool to talk about again. (MacGregor seems to have lost a step in his stand up since he switched to a more Thai style). Going back a few years the only fighters i can think of (i am likely missing a couple) that actively mentioned their karate background were GSP and Machida. Now quite a few more do. As someone mentioned above the slightly unorthodox style of striking, compared to the predominant thai style, might just be an advantage to some strikers and throw off their opponents timing. Might just be that people were not confident to try these techniques until they had seen someone else have success with them - think how many more calf kicks are seen now etc.

Admittedly, I may not be explaining my questions properly, myself. I'm a bit confused, because--and this is just my interpretation--you've essentially stated that the movements of kata are not combatively applicable, but you're saying that you see kata as developing the ability to flow between martial arts techniques, like shadowboxing with pre-defined combinations. Shadowboxing, though, is intended to be directly combatively applicable, and if the techniques of kata are not, then I'm not sure how they can be likened to shadowboxing in a meaningful way, nor do I see how they even qualify as being "martial" techniques, at all. Additionally, what value is there in practicing combinations of techniques that don't have combative applications in the first place? And we agree that practicing kihon is important for learning to perform techniques properly, but what is "proper?" I would argue that, if the techniques are martial in nature, then combative functionality should be the measure of what is "proper," but if the techniques aren't combatively applicable, what, then, is the metric by which you judge a technique to be "properly" performed? Am I making sense, or just muddling things further? Sometimes, I can't tell, lol! I think we actually have a similar view but are phrasing it in a totally different manner (and both not phrasing it the best!) I think there can be a benefit to practising combinations of techniques that don't have a pure combative application in the first place, if you are clear that you are practicing them for other benefits such as co-ordination, improved movement etc in a way that would directly transfer into other more applicable techniques. In this instance i would view it similar to doing weights or some other exercise to improve a specific quality : best example i can think of from other exercises is i personally found i noticed an almost immediate benefit to bjj from performing the barbell snatch as the hip explosion was directly transferable) I agree wholeheartedly on the "proper" definition too. I had an interesting conversation on this topic with my old bjj coach years ago after a seminar with one of the Gracies. He performed a few techniques differently from my coach (who is a bb under him) and i found it interesting. My coachs response was that there is a theoretical way to perform a technique but they should all be adapted for our own body and what feels comfortable to us/works for us. Simple example he gave is that he is 5'8, i am 6'4, so we will naturally end up in slightly different alignments when performing arm bars etc For combative application i personally think/find that only drilling against a resisting opponent and/or sparring let you really develop the timing, distance and confidence in your technique (though admittedly my time in bjj might have coloured my perspective on this) for it to be reliably combat applicable Is always interesting to get different perspectives, and i think we actually do have the same view, we are just expressing it totally differently - reminds me of one of those conversations when you say "but i mean this" and someone says "ahh, when i said X i meant Y but yeah if it's that way i agree with you, i'm just referring to that in a different way"

I've got one that has always stuck in my mind (more because the guy was a little mental tbh). This was years ago (and when i was part of a uni club) and a guy appeared at training one night with nunchuku (similar to the story above) and a little bit strange. He stuck around for a bit though and tried to learn. Two things he did always came to mind : 1) we were travelling to a tournament and he appeared with a 'carry out' (Scottish vernacular for a lot of alcohol in a carrier bag) and when we all asked him in a shocked fashion what did he think he was doing he casually responded it was fine, he had brought a beer for the Grandmaster too! 2) He suddenly vanished one day and i then saw him a couple of weeks later on crutches. I asked him what happened and he said he had been out for a training run and came across a 20ft or so wire fence. He then decided to climb it and when he got to the top he just let go and dropped to the floor. To quote him direclty he did it because "i felt invincible". He shattered both of his legs, breaking them in multiple places, and was on crutches for ages (though he eventually didn't need them anymore and recovered) He has always stuck in my head as one of the crazier people i ever met in the martial arts!

This is an interesting take, however, not the first time I've heard it, either. I'm kind of the opposite; I really like finding some applications to apply to techniques from the forms. I don't know which one's you don't particularly care for, but I've seen some that are very similar to the techniques done as they are in the forms. I take it you're not a fan of Iain Abernethy? I think his stuff is good (and he is much much better than i am!!) but i do think some of it does seem to be adjusting the kata to demonstrate a bunkai. This isn't saying that the techniques he is demonstrating are not effective etc just that i think they could be taught as techniques / sequences in their own right rather than as being lifted from a kata. Again though is just a personal view. I would like to note that i am not disputing the validity of what is being taught - more disputing the 'packaging' of it

This may be getting a bit off-topic, and I'm not trying to be inflammatory or confrontational, but I can't help but ask the question; what do you think kata were designed for, and why were they built the way they were? If it was just for body control, awareness, and coordination, then why would they bother to design the kata the way they did? Gymnastics/acrobatics accomplish the same things--arguably far better--so why not simply do that? Weightlifting, too, has proven to have the same benefits. Seems like a waste of time to do kata if they have no other purpose, especially given the fact that the Okinawans who developed karate had plenty of access to both gymnastics/acrobatics and weightlifting, and many actually did those in addition to their kata. Kihon training also accomplish the same things, but the basics are essentially just movements already used in the kata, which you've already said aren't useful for application, which then brings the practice of basics into question, entirely. What, then, makes karate a "martial" art, exactly? Sparring? The only sparring most karateka do, nowadays, was invented in the 1940's/50's, more-or-less, so that certainly doesn't get back to the intent of the art. I have seen it argued that the kata and kihon improve your sparring, but really, the skillsets used in the vast majority of modern kumite are completely different than the movements, postures, and mechanics you use in kata and kihon. That, again, begs the question of why not just do gymnastics/acrobatics or weightlifting while training sparring, if they essentially serve the same purpose as the kata and kihon, but more effectively? That's what modern competitive fighters tend to do, already, in fact. I possibly didn't phrase it the best (and i knew it would be a controversial view!). By co-ordination i meant more body co-ordination and awareness when flowing between different martial arts techniques. I think of it as more like planned shadowboxing in a sense, though where you don't pick the techniques. I have always thought that katas/forms are designed to teach the practitioner to 'free up their movements' and learn to have greater freedom to perform different movements/techniques in a sequence than they would have possibly done themselves as an example of a combination from a pattern in a former style you threw a head target backfist, then dropped to a lower target backfist with same hand then back up to head backfist with other hand. In reality it is a combination i doubt i would ever throw in a fight or have tried myself, but it teaches movement and hip rotation. I think basics / kihon are important to learn a technique and make sure you are performing it properly either in isolation or short combinations; then move into kata which helps you practice techniques in larger sequences and then onto sparring which lets you see if you can actually perform the technique properly under pressure. Everyone is going to always have different views on this one and is very much a personal opinion with no right or wrong answer tbh

Personally i think Kata is good for picking up body control and awareness of where your limbs are / how your weight is shifting etc. It is good for co-ordination etc too. I especially think it is good when you are having to perform it at a tempo that isn't your personal natural temp for performing a combination. What i am not a huge fan of is the bunkai tbh. This will likely be controversial but it does seem rather contrived / shoehorned it often. It looks like take this technique in kata X, change it so it is a totally different technique and perform it like this. This is the application of the technique for fighting. No it isn't, it is a different technique that is superficially similar. It is especially apparent (in my view) with the 'hidden throws' etc that when performed look noticeably different to the technique performed in the kata This isn't me saying the bunkai are not decent and are useless, just that they aren't in the kata (in my view!)

Totally agree with the above. Myself i got an extremely bad arm injury that took 1.5yrs to get full motion back. what i would say is that all gyms are different - if you think you are getting hurt a lot then maybe a new academy would help Myself, i just got back on the mats relatively recently and i decided to move academies. My old academy was an excellent school but too many 20year old killers for me now and was an injury waiting to happen. I found out a former training partner from years ago is a BB now with his own school. Much more chilled environment (though standard is still high) but feel less like someone will injure me!

There are a LOT of injuries in pro wrestling though. Whether or not it is 'real' they are extremely tough guys. Easy ones that come to mind from years ago as Steve Austin's broken neck; Brock Lesnar's broken neck; HHH's badly damaged quad etc. What makes it even worse is if possible they finish the match!

Who do you have winning the big grudge match? Personally i can't see anything other than a Colby win. Ignoring his personality he just seems a much better fighter. Masvidal, to me, just seems like a hype job. He has never really impressed me much and when he steps up in class gets found out. Only thing that would be good from a Masvidal win would be if he won and was forced to put his BMF belt on the line vs Chimaev. With a belt like that if you turn down an opponent you should be stripped!!

Personally i have always thought of a belt/rank as something that tells your opponent when sparring how hard they can go etc. to prevent injuries. Obviously once you start to spar you make adjustments accordingly but it gives a good starting point. Technique wise i think a technique needs to be correct in the sense that it achieves the end result and is within a reasonable range of how to perform it (this sentence probably doesn't make much sense without an example : i recall being at a bjj seminar with Royce Gracie and being taught the classic scissor sweep. He went through the details of the technique and how to perform it. As a high degree bb he obviously knows it. I then a few years later attended a seminar with Rickson Gracie where he taught the 'same technique' but totally differently and there were a few differences in how it was performed. I remember speaking to my instructor at the time about this and he said that each is correct as it works and they have merely adapted the technique to what works best for them, and that as people get better they do this). For me applicability always comes before looks in a technique. Plus i have never been in favour of just awarding belts because someone comes a lot/tries hard. That is fine at junior grades but i am sure everyone has seen the obviously unfit individual, struggling to perform the techniques, with a dan grade (obvious caveat here of people who were capable and then got hurt etc). I get embarrassed when i see that and it can cause you to re-evaluate a school etc

Sounds like fun and the right attitude too! BJJ belts take so long to come that anyone who takes it up to chase a belt is likely just to be disappointed! Sounds like a reasonable school too, and when you get that belt/stripe you will be sure you have earned it

People can have many reasons, work/kids etc can all have an impact. A lot of people nowadays are also conditioned to believe that they are 'special' and 'can do anything' so when they go for a while and don't instantly become a world class martial artist then they quit, since it is the styles fault not theirs. Personally i prefer to work on what i am bad at : i started out in karate then fell away from it and when thinking what to go back to i thought that since my kicks were always weak i would go to a kicking based style (so went to a tkd offshoot with a particularly good instructor). Then i remember trying some groundwork and being absolutely destroyed by someone i must have out weighted by about 4stone (56lb for americans) and been about 6 inches taller than. That made me think that i should do some groundwork and i then spent years being crushed until you eventually manage to hold your own a little. Not everyone likes that though, so it might be for the best for everyone if people leave rather than feel obligated to stay. Also, some styles just don't suit everyone e.g. the stereotypical short, squat powerhouse might be better suited to judo than tkd etc

Sounds good, and i bet you were extremely pleased when you earned/regained your second dan. Feeling like you deserve a grade always feels a lot better, in previous styles i always liked waiting until i knew i should be a higher grade to go for a grading

Can't understate how important this is. Too many people can have a macho view of i won't tap to that / to that person and then they get hurt. As someone in their early 40s myself who does bjj (and recently took up judo too) you do need to understand that you have to take certain things more easily and should watch out for the ufc wannabees but they get weeded out pretty fast (at my club meatheads who came in trying to punish people usually had a fun sparring session with a brown belt who would make it rather uncomfortable..) Also get used to "losing" to someone smaller/weaker than yourself. i'm reasonably large (6'4" and about 225-230lbs roughly) and was used to being able to hold my own reasonably well whenever i tried a striking style but when i first tried grappling i got utterly destroyed by a guy who must have been 5'5" and 140lbs! It just demonstrated the importance of skills and training, plus how different a world it is. Personally i liked the fact that someone who had trained longer is usually better etc, there are no shortcuts to time on the mats Have fun though - grappling is a lot of fun, though get ready for some interesting aches the next day!

if money isn't an issue and it is solely storage then you can also get rollaway mats that could be brought too and from training. That would allow for some ground work/throws/takedowns to be practiced. Would agree with the other comments on focus pads, gloves etc. I've also trained in similar places before and we were able to get access to a locked cupboard or add a lock box and leave mats etc in there. Decent padlocks and a sturdy storage box did the trick.

I think you are probably right thinking about people going through the ranks for the first time and finding it tough to understand. I think over time i have just gotten used to thinking of people's length of time spent training as being more important than their belt level (obviously there are exceptions) Pleased to hear that it isn't as unusual as i thought though!

I've recently returned to karate after many years and have decided that since i was away for so long it was inappropriate for me to just start again at my old rank. I was given the option of doing so or restarting and i chose to start from scratch at white belt. I thought that it would take a substantial period of time to get used to the karate way of moving and regain some (limited) competency in the katas and that it would probably take the same time to just start again and make sure i was learning it correctly. I have noticed though that people have been looking at me like i was mad for voluntarily doing this. I've always thought that it was more important to be at the skill level you are representing with your belt rather than display a skill level higher than yours (obviously allowing for age/injury related skill atrophy). To paraphrase "i'd rather be a black belt in skill wearing a white belt than a white belt in skill wearing a black belt". I think it is the safer option and i always let people know i have trained before for safety reasons (when i started judo i let them know i had several years bjj experience so they paired me up for newaza accordingly etc) I'm curious what other people think on this. Am i just really old fashioned?

Thanks Once again apologies for the tardy response / acknowledgement - i'm not usually so ill mannered! (i think!)

Thanks (and as above apologies for the tardy response!)

Thanks (and apologies for the tardy reply!)

One reservation i would have is with the concept of a 'testing video' . I've always been told that one of the important parts of a typical grading is how you deal with the pressure of the grading itself. A testing video allows the student the possibility to edit the file if needed or reperform and only send the good segment to the examiner. If it is to be done remotely then i can't see anything other than how a live video chat could be used. This then would allow the examiner to view it in real time. There would be issues with the angle potentially, but there will always be issues with the view even in person. Another approach would be to use a more 'bjj' style assessment for junior grades whereby the coach/instructor decides that the student is of sufficient standard and promotes them on that basis. (i recall my bjj blue belt promotion being a tap on the shoulder followed by a 'wear a blue belt to class next time'). Your coach sees you every day and knows your abilities and when they promote you you are representing them. Can see how this could be an issue for senior grades but should be fine for the first few belts i think

Thanks