Shorin Ryuu

I am a traditional martial artist and I believe strongly that training kata can lead directly to increased fighting skill. However, in order for this to happen, you must have kata that are worth doing, you must fight the same way you do kata, and you must have a teacher who knows the meaning behind the kata. One easy way to judge a kata's effectiveness is observing how simple both the explanation and the movement is. Advanced karate isn't a matter of advanced techniques, it is a matter of how advanced you can perform the basics. Chibana Sensei always used to say that if you had to change the movement of your kata to match your meaning, then your meaning is wrong. (For background, "meaning" or "imi" was the word most commonly used to describe what a movement meant in a kata. The word bunkai is a relatively newer phenomenon.) In other words, how you move in the kata is how you move in a fight. There is no point in continuous repetition of a move that you are going to do completely differently in a fight. There is the obvious slight modification due to your opponent's size, etc., but the core movement is the same. The core process of what you do and how your body does it is the same. Chibana Sensei taught three different levels of technique within the kata, pretty much intermediate, high school, and advanced. The thing is, even the "advanced" techniques weren't mystical pressure point strikes or 3-step grappling manuevers. The advanced part usually meant the technique was just more vicious and permanently injurious/fatal than the "basic" techniques. What people fail to ultimately realize is that there are no advanced techniques, only advanced execution of basics. A lot of times, that block is just a block, that punch is just a punch. What made them worthwhile to practice was that the kata taught you exactly the proper posture, stance, movement, and timing necessary to give you a punch that would knock someone out cold or a block that would literally floor your opponent. The sad part is, most people can't punch or block with enough effectiveness to end a confrontation with a single technique. It has got to the point where even the idea itself is considered ridiculous. Most people give up on the idea entirely. Therefore, they have to invent new meanings for moves in the kata, since their attachment to kata remains, even if they can't fight effectively using it. Currently, there is an intense interest in grappling, so you see all these hidden grappling techniques taught, some of them bordering on absurdity in their complexity. I'm fairly sure the Pinan kata weren't formulated to end up with an armbar on the ground. But you will find many enlightened kata analysts who can modify the technique in a kata so it bears a passing resemblance to the movement, but is something entirely different altogether. Again, if you're not going to train the same execution as you would use in a fight, you're doing something wrong. There is grappling in karate, don't get me wrong. We have a fair number of throws, a few joint locks, and the odd choke every now and then. But usually a "super secret hidden technique" is more often a simple grab to the ear with one hand, the throat in the other, and a turn which facilitates the throw. Very simple and effective, yet often overlooked because the meaning couldn't possibly be that basic. Like it or not, the mainstay of karate is striking. Grappling is just a bonus used upon convenience or necessity. Again, because there is the lack of ability to generate pure destructive power from very simple techniques, people insert extra things into the kata, both analytically and physically as they alter the movements or how they do them. At this stage, the kata lost connection with their roots and anyone attempting to keep the kata simple would only have weak basics. It is a sadly vicious cycle and not one that anyone can mend other than having the fortune to train with those who truly learned the basic methodologies of those who have passed down the kata with only minimal individual modification. If one reads between the lines, you can guess how much I feel even the majority of traditional karate meets my above criteria. I have my doubts as to how many people are afforded even the opportunity to learn good kata under an instructor who can teach what needs to be taught. However, there is no doubt in my mind that kata is an effective training tool for fighting. Don't know who this Chibana Sensei is? Check out my best friend's (and inactive board member's) site: http://chibanaproject.blogspot.com/

When I was learning iaido, we did it left first for this reason.

Actually, the o in Japanese is just a long o, like hope.

Again, I take issue with this faulty logic that training kata is not training to fight. There seems to be some sort of logical error that assumes just because many people who do kata cannot fight, the reason why they cannot fight is because they do kata. There is never even a single thought assigned to the possibility that the kata they do are simply bad or that they don't know how to train their kata properly. I do understand the temptation to mistake correlation with causation. It is a common statistical fallacy. This thread is about the uselessness of kata as a training tool, regardless of the quality of the kata is. From my perspective, most people are choosing as example people who are supposedly great at kata, but in my mind aren't. What passes for great kata both in jazzed up demonstration kata as well as even the most "traditional" schools usually isn't. It's not enough to have good forms to learn; you must also have a good teacher. Furthermore, the student must be competent as well. There is a rather simple analogy that can explain this. Crap In = Crap Out In -> System -> Out Crap -> Good/Bad System -> Crap Quality -> Bad System -> Crap Quality -> Good System -> Quality Statistically, there is a lot of crap out there. But that's not going to convince me to turn down quality when I see it.

I think you already know your answer. You seem to have focused not only on just kicking, but kicking to keep the enemy at bay. You need to adjust your mindset to fighting at all distances. Since you're adjusting, you have to especially focus on close distance to make up for what you have been doing.

I much prefer doing Atkins. You don't have to combat the most basic human instinct (hunger) by taking in less calories than you consume. If you read his book and understand the nutritional science, you will see that it isn't just a weight loss program but also a maintenance approach. It is a scientifically supported nutritional approach that employs controlling carbohydrate intake, vitamin and nutritional supplementation, and exercise. I got on Atkins despite not needing to lose any weight and I don't think I'll ever go back to eating the "healthy" way I was earlier (I gave up junk food over 7 years ago, ate almost no fat, had zero cholesterol). My blood pressure is doing far better than it ever was under my low-fat diet and my energy level is beyond what I even had before. With even just a measly 30 grams of carbs a day (I'm slowly ramping up the carbs until I figure out my "individual max" per day), I'm getting around 15 servings of vegetables, which is arguably more than most non-Atkins people. But I'm not here to defend it against criticism, I'm only here to suggest a look. Dismiss it as a fad diet if you want; it doesn't really matter to me. I recommend at least reading the book before you do.

Sometimes, I think people who train are not aggressive enough. By this, I mean there is so much focus on being passive and of good character, that their training lacks that kimochi, that spirit, that feeling. There is a lot of propaganda and feel-good philosophy out there regarding passiveness and martial arts. Bear in mind that the masters of old did not hesitate to use their martial arts when they had to, even if they were "quietly confident". They focused more on purely training than trying to inculcate passivity in their students. If you pride yourself in your passiveness and calm learned from martial arts too much, you may start to lose your fighting spirit. Good fighting requires absolute confidence. What you do with your confidence depends on your character. The timeline between gaining confidence through fighting skill and requiring confidence to gain fighting skill isn't all that clear. Rather than thinking of having a sort of aggression switch that must be turned on and turned off or a sword that is sheathed or unsheathed, I prefer to think of it in terms of always carrying a sword in hand, but using it only when you have to. This of course is my own personal preference.

A good point, but let's not forget that even the most well-meaning and fighting-focused student who is learning poor technique (read: bad karate) will not get too much fighting ability out of his or her training. But I agree with you. There is something to be said about having a fighter's mentality. I once asked my instructor about how people in developed countries who train in martial arts rarely have the opportunity to experience true fighting and how real fighting experience is hard to get (I don't consider sparring to be real fighting experience). He said the answer was simple. "If it walks like a duck, if it looks like a duck... So if you walk like a fighter, if you train like a fighter, if you think like a fighter, then you will be a fighter." Looking at it, most people act like a fighter as opposed to being a fighter. I will. He's actually living on Okinawa now.

I think far too many people delude themselves into thinking they have mastered the basics of their style. These people are so eager to branch out and become so well-rounded that they end up being mediocre in many things instead of just one.

I'm sorry, my old friend. I'm going to have to disagree with your point. When it absolutely comes down to it, karate is about fighting. Perhaps I just get leery when people use too many terms like life protection when discussing karate. You may have some semantical disagreements with the term "war-like" and "warfare". However, I believe warfare, and perhaps more accurately stated, personal combat, has much more in spirit with the practice of karate than do feel good terms such as life protection or improving one's character. You mentioned the heavy involvement of martial arts masters in security. For the Okinawans, the Confucian Order of Things was very important as they were heavily influenced by China. Karate was used as a method of combating any disruptions to the Proper Order of Things. Therefore, it was a tool of violence wielded by just authority. It was meant to be used morally, but it was very much a tool of violence. So... how have you been? It's been a while since we've spoke. Again, I don't like too much of the feel-good philosophy that gets in the way of good training. I don't learn to fight so I don't have to fight. I learn to fight so I can fight. I don't need any training to teach me when not to fight. That is what common sense is for. Why is it that so often in the stories of the old masters they only accepted students with good character? It is because karate is value-neutral. It is up to the person to decide what to do with it. Otherwise, the masters would have taught anybody and karate would magically transform them into good people. Don't get me wrong. I believe there are many good things a person can learn from karate that have nothing to do with fighting. But unless you train karate with fighting in mind, these extra, non-fighting-related benefits will only be minimal. Let me put it another way. People can gain things like self-discipline and control by practicing karate. How do these things come about? It comes from doing karate. It comes from the continuous pursuit of fighting technique, not the continuous pursuit of character development. Without the emphasis on fighting, one merely moves appendages in the air as a strange form of exercise. By shifting your emphasis to character development away from the skillful application of violence, your practice becomes impure. I dislike using terms like purity because it sounds too philosophical when in fact it is very simple. In other words, when you practice karate to grasp for character development, it will slip through your fingers. When you do karate, when you train only for fighting, that is when your character is forged. Does this sound like "we learn to fight so we don't have to fight"? Yes. But those of you who know the difference know what difference I am pointing out.

Practice doesn't make perfect; practice makes habit. Perfect practice makes perfect. Because of this, you will find many people who have trained many years in any style that really aren't that good.

I've submitted an article on this very topic. You'll see it some time in the future, perhaps. I do agree that most martial arts teach it either of those ways. But we don't do either of those methods. And as I said before, the way we punch in kata is the way we punch in fighting. I may go into it some day... not that I'm evading the question... I just have to get motivated to explain everything since it is pretty detailed. I prefer to keep my techniques simple because even simple techniques require a lot of training and understanding for them to work.

In the karate dojo I train in, we train only for fighting. We have no belts or rank structure, only teacher and student. We train primarily kata with supplementary training in hitting a heavy bag and a sand bag. We also do a few walk-in drills. Hitting the bag focuses more on form and timing rather than speed or endurance. I'm not going to turn this thread into a "usefulness/uselessness of sparring" thread. We choose not to focus on sparring because we get better results doing otherwise. Kata training is useful only if you understand every moment spent doing kata. That includes how your stance is structured, how you move, how you step, where your weight is, how your posture is set, and the proper timing. All this has nothing to do with how well you memorize a kata for belt promotions, performances, or what-have-you. It has everything to do with how well you do the kata. Keeping the kata simple is the best way to do your kata well. This kind of understanding is pretty rare, and requires both a teacher who is skilled and a teacher who can teach. I am a strong supporter of doing kata. At the same time, a lot of the kata I've seen people do are very weak. This applies to traditional, modern, or any other type of karate. I also think there are a lot of people in many martial arts who lack understanding about the mechanics of generating power. Bear in mind this has nothing to do with the sincerity of their effort or their longevity of training. I myself was squarely in this camp until relatively recently and am doing my best now to make my way out of it. Does this make me sound arrogant and elitist about the karate I do now? Probably. I know of no other way to describe it, and for that, I apologize. It is certainly not my intent to come across that way.

I'm not going to get too deep into this groundhog day argument that seems to cover old ground again and again, but if you do not punch the way you do in the kata, either your kata itself is impractical, you don't know how to do your kata properly, or you shouldn't bother doing kata at all. Some people fall into several of these categories at once, as the fault may lie with the kata, the teacher, the student, or some combination thereof. There are effective fighters that fight the way they train kata. The common theme among these is focusing on how simple techniques are executed rather than making up fancy explanations for everything. Unfortunately, the trend nowadays in karate (traditional or otherwise and whether they realize it or not) is to make up fancy explanations to compensate for an inability to simply generate power or to make the kata look more glamorous and marketable to students interested in how to fight using kata. This inability to generate power usually has its roots in a misunderstanding or simple lack of understanding of the kata. It is far more impressive to me if you can end the fight with a single basic technique rather than knowing ten different striking/grappling/pressure point meanings for each of your moves in a kata.

It means absolutely nothing to me. Of course, we don't use rank, so that is only to be expected.

What is most important in your punches is timing. Timing is a function of speed, but the fastest speed won't necessarily give you the best timing. In some cases, you can be "too fast". From good timing comes power. Unless you are unbelievably slow, the speed difference between two individuals in actual punching speed isn't all that great and the true deciding factor is something else. With our methodology, our fist is kept tight during the entire motion of the punch, but the upper arm is completely relaxed. What's more, the tighter you keep your fist, the more relaxed you can keep your upper arm. This allows utmost smoothness while still having a devastating punch and causes your opponent to react less to your punch as it comes in (a side benefit, but not what the technique relies on). It does no good if you can hit the opponent but can't put him away. By keeping proper posture and understanding distance, you don't have to be a speed demon to win the fight. The power of a punch comes not from the speed at the release or even during the forward motion of the punch. All that matters is the acceleration at impact and your ability to transfer power into your opponent without any recoil or energy lost (ideally). Therefore we don't worry about a strong hip torque at the beginning. In fact, we actively discourage it. The hip torque happens at the very end as you impact, which is also when you actually start to turn the fist (there's no point doing it before) and drop the knuckle down. I apologize for not talking much about speed, but we don't worry too much about speed. If you master the closing of distance and have power, speed is just a bonus.

$30 a month (but it isn't enforced... I'd pay more if he'd let me). Classes are held Monday through Friday and are 2+ hours long, often running over. Afterwards, we tend to hit the bag, work on other stuff and talk story. Free use of the dojo when other classes aren't using it.

I used to do Shorinkan. The official empty hand kata for Shorinkan are the following: Fukyuugata Ichi, Fukyuugata Ni, Fukyuugata San Kihon Shodan, Kihon Nidan, Kihon Sandan Pinan Shodan, Pinan Nidan, Pinan Sandan, Pinan Yondan, Pinan Godan Naihanchi Shodan, Naihanchi Nidan, Naihanchi Sandan Passai Sho, Passai Dai Chinto Kusanku Sho, Kusanku Dai Gojushiho The official weapons kata for Shorinkan are the following: Shushi no Kun (Yamanni Ryu - Shorinkan) Sakugawa no Kun (Yamanni Ryu - Shorinkan) Kubo no Kun (Yamanni Ryu - Shorinkan) Sakugawa no Kun Dai Ni (Shugoro no Sakugawa no Kun) Nakaima no Kama (Shorinkan no Kama Dai Ichi) Shugoro no Kama (Shorinkan no Kama Dai Ni) Shugoro no Tonfa (Shorinkan no Tonfa) Shorinkan no Nunchaku Dai Ichi Tonaki no Nunchaku (Shorinkan no Nunchaku Dai Ni) Nakaima Kenkou no Sai Dai Ichi (Shorinkan no Sai Dai Ichi) Nakaima Kenkou no Sai Dai Ni (Shorinkan no Sai Dai Ni) Shugoro no Sai (Shorinkan no Sai Dai San) Shugoro no Eku (Shorinkan no Eku) Now there are extra ones I had learned in association with Kyoshi Doug Perry or his students (my teacher was Sam Ahtye), and they are as follows: Hakutsuru Rokishu Takemyoshi no Nuntebo Dai Ichi Miyazato no Tekko Dai Ichi Miyazato no Tekko Dai Ni Takemyoshi no Tekko Dai Ni Tanbo no Kata Hamahiga no tonfa There are more extra "optional" kata, but I never learned them. (I also had more kata learned from other styles, but I haven't listed them here) Now that I am sort of "nonaligned" and under a different teacher, my kata syllabus is much, much smaller and I really do prefer it that way. At some point, you turn into a kata collector and it is hard to refine the ones you already know.

The tinbei is a small shield used in conjunction with a small spear, the rochin, and originates from Okinawa. The "style" would just be weapon arts of Okinawa, such as Ryukyu Kobudo. The origins are straw hats coupled with potato diggers (short sticks). Alternatively, pot covers were also used. As a result, this tended to be more of a farmer's weapon, but there were a few in Shuri who would specialize in it. I've seen a lot of people use machete-like blades, but that's pretty different from how it used to be. You can get fancy with buying it, such as Shureido, but you can make them pretty easily. That, or buy yourself a big Chinese straw hat and use a short, sharpened piece of round wood.

Yes. We do the Kanigawa no Timbei form. Edit: Originally, I accidentally wrote "Anigawa." It is indeed Kanigawa.

Karate ni sente nashi.

I think it's pretty obvious that people who continually beat themselves up like that will have health problems. It's just common sense.

I have a Shureido pair that are pretty nice... I didn't pay for them though, my instructor gave them to me. I also have a pair from Murasaki Kobudo which are pretty nice, I merely outgrew them. You can call up or email Sensei Gordon there and he will make them a custom fit provided you give him your measurements. It will end up being less than the Shureido pair. https://www.murasakikobudo.com

In that case, forgive my assumption... on the internet, how one types certainly gives an impression that may or may not be true. It definitely is biased against those who don't have to use a computer everyday on the job or who grew up with one. As far as titles and trophies go, I have none and I don't desire any. Titles are easily invented or given and trophies are the result of sport competition. I don't feel sport karate or competitions are taboo... I just don't feel any desire to take part. However, I do respect the fighting mentality that is present in some individuals who take part in those competitions. Because they continually "put it on the line", they have a better fighting mentality than a lot of people in traditional karate that do not engage in these competitions. I'll mention one last segment about this issue, since it's obvious that we will just respectfully agree to disagree. What you learn from kata isn't a preprogrammed curriculum. I don't advocate the "If opponent does X, I will always do Y" approach. For one thing, that is a "reactive" approach to fighting. Putting that aside... the manner in which we execute techniques is designed to cover a wide variety of situations. As just one brief example, it is irrelevant if the opponent punches high, middle, or low as the block is directed at the upper arm/shoulder. But in the end, technique is technique. One of the biggest benefits of kata is learning how to move from technique to technique and what transpires in between. That is something you can't get from simple repetition drills. And finally, the simpler you keep your kata, the more realistic it becomes. This makes it much easier for your kata to become fighting applicable. I recently submitted an article to this forum about the two main fighting mentalities that I've noticed over the years. I look forward to hearing your feedback when it comes out.

If an instructor had to resort to simple pushups and situps and couldn't explain to me logically (or physically via demonstration) why a certain movement would work and how, then I wouldn't care to train with that instructor anymore. Besides... having to resort to pushups and situps seems like a way to deal more with teenagers or kids rather than rational adults... I don't mean to pry, but how old are you? Or does he make adults do pushups and situps as punishment as well? No insult intended, I am just curious as to how he runs the class. And if you are thrown out, what's the worst that could happen? If I don't believe a teacher is teaching me practical fighting methods, I'm not going to train under him. Kata is at the heart of traditional karate, so I'm not going to train with an instructor who does not have fighting applicable kata. Fighting applicable kata is kata that will work in a fighting situation without having to modify it. I am a strong proponent of doing kata, as you can tell by my article. I do the kata my instructor trains me in because he explains to me very logically how it works, demonstrates how it works, and doesn't resort to simply saying "because I said so." Worst comes to worst, he can show me rather painfully how it works. Do I challenge him on every movement? No. Do I ask him every time I have a question? Yes. Does he appreciate that? Yes. The vast majority of my training has been on the mainland... that isn't the issue whatsoever. It is ironic that we disagree, then. My movements are just like the movements in my kata: direct. I don't add anything, I don't take anything away. Again, if the moves are too flashy or impractical, then the odds are there is something wrong with the kata or you don't understand it well enough. Perhaps I need to clarify. The way you step in the kata should be the way you step in a fight. The way you punch in the kata should be the way you punch in a fight. So on and so forth. Will the height be perhaps different? Certainly, if you are fighting an opponent of a different height. What's the important thing you glean from the kata? It's how you do things. If I have to modify how I do my movement, then I'd be better of practicing the movement the modified way. Bottom line: Why waste time doing kata if you're not going to fight like you execute in the kata? Paying respect to a master isn't good enough for me.