kivikala

I recently came across KF by happenstance and seems like an interesting place to hang out. So, I guess an intro is in order... Most folk just call me Ed. I have only been training for a little over forty-seven years so I am still a beginner at all this. I've been known to dabble in Gojuryu, Shitoryu, Shotokan, Katori Shinto Ryu, Aikido and Pwangainoon.

The previous post pretty much nails it square on the head regarding differences JKA vs SKA. However, the disharmony between the two groups is more intense than a few sneers, but I won't go into the mud with that. Key points are there are fundamental philosophic and technical differences between the two. If you have experienced both the physical differences are quite outstanding and are somewhat like oil and water in that they don't mix well at all. Philosophically the training mentality appears to be radically different also. I know in the early days of SKA all back belts coming into the fold were hand picked by Ohshima and are all very like-minded. SKA also maintained close ties with Shigeru Egami (Shotokai) and often arranged co-practices. As for following Karate-do Kyohan, it more "exactly" rather than "closely". The book always has the final word. Personally I have found JKA to exert a looser influence on the student whereas SKA seems to have a stronger closer influence on them. This is an example of how SKA students might seem a bit more zealous. For what it's worth...

Similar to many previous replies, I would plan on backing off, my motivation is not to fight anyone if at all possible. Defenses range from emotional and psychological attempts to control the opponent to more physical means of blocking, trapping and dodging. I would prefer to wear down my opponent by having them constantly pursue me and have them expend maximum energy. Once they are tired, I can just walk away. If backed to a wall by attacks that are superior to my defenses I would have little alternative but to turn the tables.

Since you are a student trying to help a fellow student this is quite commendable. The sad fact of the matter is that a person must *want* to train and *want* to learn. Until that motivation is there, there is little you can do to help your fellow student. If you take on the other students burdens you will have hard time carrying your own. Once you become a senior in the class then it is your responsibility to help. But at your level (I am presuming you are not a senior) your job is to train, train and train some more. The other student must find their own way for the moment. (Also not knowing what the sensei's plans and methodology are it would be improper to question or try and second guess the situation.)

Drop out rates for my school have been pretty consistent on percentage basis and rather predictable. I have a very small school so the actual numbers swing wildly from moment to moment but over the years (46 years next month) some statistics have fallen out which seem to match national numbers that I've read about. Now my numbers reflect primarily adult students. I never counted kids in any statistics unless they became an adult. Predictably we will lose 50% within the first 6 months. By the end of the year we will lose another 25%. Of the remaining 25% only 1% will make it to Black Belt. I also teach MA classes for a private high school and even there the numbers from semester to semester, year to year, seem to be similar. Of course after 4 years they are predictably gone and each year seniors are leaving. But the statistics seem to be about the same 50/25/1 even though the program is not the same as a regular dojo. I've often asked why? Responses from students have varied from life situations preventing their continued training, lack of interest or "gee I want to try something else like soccer". Money has never been a reason. Marriage (or divorce) has been a predominant cause for adults but usually in a few years their kids magically appear at the doorstep. In several instances I've trained 3 generations of a family. (At that point I knew I was getting old.) But most overwhelmingly people wanted to "try it out" and found out it was more work than they anticipated or did not want to make a lifetime commitment to the art. (Which I can understand.) The saddest thing is when I lose a student due to some fatal accident, war, or just old age. Particularly when they have been training for 15 or more years. I feel I've lost too many this way. But, I have learned not to take it personally. I have no control over this as each person has free will and I encourage that it be exercised. My first teacher always harped on me about making sure my life's priorities were correct. I am still hanging in there, so, I know there is at least one student that isn't going to drop out anytime soon.

In answer to "Is Shotokan weak style?", I am not sure I completely agree with statements about "good" or "bad" schools. But I'd like to say "different". There have always been schools that deviate from the "norm". Some of these will gain acceptance, others will fail by being shunned or cast as unpopular. Even in Funakoshi's time he recognized that karate had "gone to the dogs" (my quote). And in that instance karate was just beginning in Japan. The establishment of "michi-dojos" or street schools where anyone including charlatans opened up a school to make a fast buck (well uhhh... yen) was a rampant problem back in the 1920's! Part of the problem is social, another is academic. The social end from a "traditional school" view is to remove any non-conformity. This in itself is a oxymoron as karate in the eyes traditional Japanese Koryu practitioners was certainly non-conformist! I hope you see the irony in this situation and find it as amusing as I do. From the academic standpoint Funakoshi's karate (Shotokan) was in its roots a rather brutal set of styles (Nahate and Shurite). However, I believe Funakoshi's aim was to civilize it and introduce it to the masses. This necessitated a certain "de-fanging" of the tiger (If you allow me the artistic license). I think Jiguro Kano (Judo's founder) had much influence in the concept of this adaptation. What realistically came about was in my view, three major Shotokan interpretations. The first was the Shotokai (under Shigeru Egami) which lead off on what I believe is the direction Funakoshi's vision saw. Whether they have continued that concept I can not say. My exposure to Master Egami was they are ultra hard core extremists with adaptability and change as their agenda. The Second is the JKA (under Nakayama) This was in my view to be the scientific approach to karatedo. From my exposure I'd say hard core people with the goal to popularize and to introduce more scientific (modern?) and sport aspects (seen as a necessary evil to popularize). And the third, The SKA (under Ohshima) who's initial ideas were to keep the "purity" of Funikoshi's teachings. That is to be the "benchmark" for other schools to look at and adapt and modify. To the best of my limited knowledge the three groups have kept to their ideals. What falls out from there is all the hybrid schools that take a bit of this and a bit of that. Are these schools "bad"? No, to me just different. As a result, anyone coming from what I identified as one or more of the three main interpretations (of which here in the US there are hundreds if not a thousand such schools) will see the "difference" in these non-conforming schools and may have nightmares because of it. Now schools with poor instructors or poor business practices, yes those are bad schools. But they can be found under most any rock and certainly not limited to any one style. They also are not new to this era, so the more things change, the more they stay the same.