Shotokan a weak style?

[SenseiMike]

I'm not going to disagree with this statement, the more I look at other schools (shotokan), the more I agree with it.

I trained shotokan, with kicks to the legs, sweeps, ground fighting, etc...All pulled from the kata. I can identify 2 distinct throws in Heian Shodan. I hit the makiwara untill my hands were bleeding, to me that was karate do.

But the more I look around on the web, it looks like my beloved art has gone completely sports related......

Anyone outhere other than me who practices shotokan the way I do?

[Meguro]

The more I communicate with practitioners of other styles of martial arts, the more circumspect I've become regarding the different styles out there. All styles start with the same raw material, the human body, and through various training regimen spit-out a product conforming to its own ideals.

It is not my impression that the Shotokan ideal is to produce stone-cold killers. Shotokan karateka are steeped in tradition, have a lot of technique and vocabulary to master, and talk an awful lot about the stability of their stance and correct form. These are not bad things, and may in fact turn out a nice combination of martial artist/scholar or the odd killer-karateka. Then there are styles like Muay Thai, or BJJ, Kyokushin that emphasize knocking-out, tapping out, or knocking-down your opponent. With these objectives in mind, training regimen are different, as are techniques, and in the end, product. Of course I generalize.

If you compare karate to the automobile market, there are cars that excell in straight-line acceleration, others in handling, still others in high mileage. Rarely do cars excell in all things. Karate styles are the asme way. Of course with cars there are plenty of after-market tuners that'll turn Honda Civics into Porsche-killers-this is where cross training comes in.

My two cents.

[makiwaraman]

I'm not going to disagree with this statement, the more I look at other schools (shotokan), the more I agree with it.

I trained shotokan, with kicks to the legs, sweeps, ground fighting, etc...All pulled from the kata. I can identify 2 distinct throws in Heian Shodan. I hit the makiwara untill my hands were bleeding, to me that was karate do.

But the more I look around on the web, it looks like my beloved art has gone completely sports related......

Anyone outhere other than me who practices shotokan the way I do?

I can identify with what you are saying, I too train in the old ways and do shotokan, But as with all styles there's good shotokan and bad shotokan, No one can tar them all with the same brush, Its up to the individual to seek out the good clubs, if we all do this the Mcdojo's will go out of business, and then we should be left with the good shotokan clubs.

Regards maki

[Sauzin]

There's definitely good Shotokan and bad Shotokan. Much like other arts. However if you are looking for truly old Shotokan, try looking into Shorin-ryu. This is the style Shoto (Funakoshi) practiced before he went to Japan and you might find some interesting things both in the similarities and the differences. Like Shotokan there is bad Shorin-ryu and good Shorin-ryu, however for the most part you will find less sport in Shorin-ryu.

The style I practice takes a lot from Shorin-ryu for example. And one thing I might mention is in the style I practice there are a lot more then just two distinct throws in Pinian Nidan (Shodan in Shotokan). Of course the word "distict" is subjective.

[1st KYU]

If you compare karate to the automobile market, there are cars that excell in straight-line acceleration, others in handling, still others in high mileage. Rarely do cars excell in all things. Karate styles are the asme way. Of course with cars there are plenty of after-market tuners that'll turn Honda Civics into Porsche-killers-this is where cross training comes in.

My two cents.

lol nice analogy

[makiwaraman]

however for the most part you will find less sport in Shorin-ryu.

When I went to look at the club I am at, they told me from the start that they do not do any sports karate and if thats your thing find another club. So not all shotokan clubs focus on sports karate.

regards maki

[Enviroman]

I've known some very decent Shotokan practicioners...while it does seem more sports-oriented than I might enjoy, there are certainly positive aspects to the style.

[Menjo]

Yea i like to train hard and try to less treat it as a sport, i just try to look at it as a good thing, even though i perfer to train more towards the non-sport.

[kivikala]

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.

[Skeptic 2004]

My observation of Shotokan is that it suffers from poor body mechanics. In an attempt to be powerful, the way I've seen Shotokan karateka move actually robs them of the very thing they seek. Their stances deadlock the transfer of weight and energy into what otherwise would be really strong techniques. It looks good, and I've seen Shotokan guys train HARD, but in the end they are their own worst enemies in terms of moving and execution, based purely on what I've seen.