Teaching Combat Skills

[SenseiMike]

Absolutly 100% of every technique in karate has combat value. I know this sounds harsh, I wish there was a way for it not too, but it's a topic that distresses me. Karate is art that must be examined, the teacher must lead the student to discovering the many secrets the art holds. Anyone who advocates discarding anything over examining the potential is wrong. You should examine everything, the wrist locks present in the "chambers" the sweeps that can preformed via "low blocks" the shoulder throw potential of "high blocks" etc...

You will only weaken yourself by discarding technique, but you can only benifit from exploring the posiblities.

I teach Shotokan Karate, I teach soley from the kata, & my students are 100% effective @ distance, clinch, and ground fighting. Kata is karate, karate is combat, you just have to understand the complexity of the art and know where to look.

[USCMAAI]

Absolutly 100% of every technique in karate has combat value. I know this sounds harsh, I wish there was a way for it not too, but it's a topic that distresses me. Karate is art that must be examined, the teacher must lead the student to discovering the many secrets the art holds. Anyone who advocates discarding anything over examining the potential is wrong. You should examine everything, the wrist locks present in the "chambers" the sweeps that can preformed via "low blocks" the shoulder throw potential of "high blocks" etc...

You will only weaken yourself by discarding technique, but you can only benifit from exploring the posiblities.

I teach Shotokan Karate, I teach soley from the kata, & my students are 100% effective @ distance, clinch, and ground fighting. Kata is karate, karate is combat, you just have to understand the complexity of the art and know where to look.

Mike I would have agree and disagree with you. I have seen techniques that at one time may have had a use in combat, but now don't apply. An example of this is a stance that was called a "fire stance". A gentleman came into my dojo claming he was a 3rd dan in Ninjitsu. Durning the course of our work out, he seemed to be fairly well trained. He offered to show me some of the "secret fighting techniques" of his style, and as always I am open to learn. Well, he took this stance (crossing his left leg behind his right leg then twisting his weight down into almost a sitting position). He then asked me to attack him, stating that no attack could penatrate his defense. I delivered a low front snap kick to his right shin, and then rushed him, taking him to the ground, assumed an open mount, and began to pummel him. Now I don't know much about Nijitsu, am sure that many Ninja stylist would never expose themselves like this. But this is an example of technique that should be discarded. I have seen other techniques that are not combat effective, but this is mainly due to mis-application.

I am sure that your students learning soley from kata is a wonderful thing, but I would have to witness them defending themselves from fully committed attacks from all those ranges to actually be convinced.....No disrespect intended, but what I call effective and what others often call effective is not the same.

As far as finding the complexities and "hidden meaning" of karate kata, My sensei (6ht dan Shotokan,Kenpo (American and Shoji-Ryu), and Jujitsu) would often say that there is nothing mysterious or hidden in kata. Application of technique is passed down through the generations. Besides most Kata Shotokan kata being taught is less than 80 years old. Gichin Funakoshi only practiced the Heian katas (sho, ni, san,yon and go dan), all the others were developed later. If this is true then why would there be "hidden" or "secret" techniques in these kata?