throws and ground work in shotokan?

[alsey]

all real fighting styles contain techniques for use at all ranges - striking, grappling, throws/takedowns, groundwork - and karate is no exception.

I disagree. you will not find ground work in any pure japanese style that I know of. you won't find ground grappling in most chinese styles either, other than dog boxing. ground striking, but not ground grappling. And I'd wager that it's not in a lot of okinawan karate either, considering the chinese influence.

i suggest you do some more research on japanese styles. traditional jujitsu is full of groundwork. almost all (if not all) of judo and BJJ can be found in JJJ if you look for it.

there isn't much in karate, i've tried to explain why in the post above. the idea is that if you're any good at karate you won't need to go to the ground in most situations. but then, the principles of ground fighting are actually there in the kata. karate is massively different from jujitsu because of what its meant to be used for. jujitsu is a warrior art for dealing with other warriors, often on a battlefield. karate is in every sense a self defence system for use against the untrained.

i won't say anything about chinese styles because i know next to nothing about them.

kata are a catalog of techniques. the aforementioned kata are what is left of those styles. kung fu is notorious for this. a master would learn a form from someone and keep it in his system to keep the style alive. Look at all of the forms in longfist. many of them are forms from now extinct styles. Also, forms make it easy to catalog a style's techniques. Yes, there is more to it than that, but I wouldn't say the the form IS the style, more that the form is the essence of the style.

yeah, that's probably a better way of putting it.

once again, a kata is a catalog of the style. Why use multiple catalogs if I can get all I need into one? However, I disagree that kata teach you how to deal with any situation. show me groundwork in any of the heian katas...

heian godan springs to mind. look towards the end of the kata and try to imagine what is going on if the practitioner is on the ground instead of vertical. very difficult to describe in text as i hope you can imagine, i can only reference you to this book:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0953893219/sr=8-1/qid=1153779255/ref=sr_1_1/103-0057504-8379038?ie=UTF8

it has been invaluable in my own study of kata.

again, karate isn't meant for fighting other trained fighters. so you won't find something like how to get out of a choke while putting the other guy in your guard in a kata. you'll just find quick and simple methods of beating the untrained on the ground.

historically, it was a do anyway. just like judo. Any art created after the meiji / tokugawa eras are considered do and not jutsu. shotokan therefore is a do, regardless of what is taught in it.

yes, shotokan is a style of karate-do. but there is more to karate than karate-do.

[elbows_and_knees]

i suggest you do some more research on japanese styles. traditional jujitsu is full of groundwork. almost all (if not all) of judo and BJJ can be found in JJJ if you look for it.

I was actually referring to karate. but even in jjj, the focus is standup.

there isn't much in karate, i've tried to explain why in the post above. the idea is that if you're any good at karate you won't need to go to the ground in most situations.

and that is a really bad idea. There is a japanese saying - ichi go; ichi-e - one encounter, one chance. But, realistically, it doesn't work that way. if your one chance - in this case, the ability to end it with one strike - fails and you DO go to the ground, then what?

but then, the principles of ground fighting are actually there in the kata.

that really doesn't mean much though... I mean, In principle, I can use muay thai and formulate weapons usage. But realistically, I wouldn't be very good with a weapon if I did.

heian godan springs to mind. look towards the end of the kata and try to imagine what is going on if the practitioner is on the ground instead of vertical. very difficult to describe in text as i hope you can imagine, i can only reference you to this book:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0953893219/sr=8-1/qid=1153779255/ref=sr_1_1/103-0057504-8379038?ie=UTF8

it has been invaluable in my own study of kata.

that's interesting - I'll look into that book.

yes, shotokan is a style of karate-do. but there is more to karate than karate-do.

from the japanese? aren't the main japanese styles - wado, shito, etc. all karate-do? I know they may (like wado) have jujutsu influence, but it's still a do.

[elbows_and_knees]

tackling is common on the street between untrained fighters, but anyone any good at karate would have disabled an untrained opponent before they had the opportunity to tackle.

maybe. But that is an unsafe assumption. I know many trained MA who have gotten owned by untrained guys with either more fighting experience, more serious mindset, or both.

[bushido_man96]

I believe the difference between a do and a jutsu is how it was related to actual combat situations in a war. After the advent of the firearm, and the decline of close quarters combat in warfare, the need to study as much hand to hand combat began to fall away. This can even be seen in Western Martial Arts as well.

When the jutsu fell away, in order to somewhat preserve them, they started to become the dos we now know of.

As far as the "grappling existing in katas" arguement goes, it may be that there are those applications. The only problem is that unless you get the opportunity to practice those applications with a resisting partner, then one's ability to use them proficiently in a fight will low.

[alsey]

I was actually referring to karate. but even in jjj, the focus is standup.

that's because you don't want to be on the ground when there's hundreds of people swinging swords and halberds around. in JJJ the focus is to try and win the fight while still standing up to give you the best chance of survival, but if it does go to the ground then there is also a wealth of ground fighting methods.

there isn't much in karate, i've tried to explain why in the post above. the idea is that if you're any good at karate you won't need to go to the ground in most situations.

and that is a really bad idea. There is a japanese saying - ichi go; ichi-e - one encounter, one chance. But, realistically, it doesn't work that way. if your one chance - in this case, the ability to end it with one strike - fails and you DO go to the ground, then what?

then you use karate's ground fighting methods. the reason there isn't much of it is because you don't need much of it to defend yourself. karate won't teach you how to beat an experienced grappler, but it does contain the methods needed to win most ground fighting situations.

also i'm not talking about ending things with one strike. most karate techniques involve an entry, a clinch grapple of some sort, and then strikes or a throw, which then leaves the opponent either completely disabled or very vulnerable.

but then, the principles of ground fighting are actually there in the kata.

that really doesn't mean much though... I mean, In principle, I can use muay thai and formulate weapons usage. But realistically, I wouldn't be very good with a weapon if I did.

in principle you can develop any style into anything with enough thought, but i'm talking about actual ground fighting principles here: not stand up principles which can then be developed into ground fighting, although they are also in the kata.

yes, shotokan is a style of karate-do. but there is more to karate than karate-do.

from the japanese? aren't the main japanese styles - wado, shito, etc. all karate-do? I know they may (like wado) have jujutsu influence, but it's still a do.

ok let me clarify what i'm saying. the karate-do styles are mostly practiced as kick/punch-block systems today. however, these styles still practice the old kata which have mostly come from the okinawan karate (or ryukyu kempo or whatever you want to call it) which was a complete self defence system. so if you look in the kata, you'll see there is more to karate than the punch-block stuff that is commonly practiced in karate-do.

Edited July 25, 2006 by alsey

[alsey]

tackling is common on the street between untrained fighters, but anyone any good at karate would have disabled an untrained opponent before they had the opportunity to tackle.

maybe. But that is an unsafe assumption. I know many trained MA who have gotten owned by untrained guys with either more fighting experience, more serious mindset, or both.

so do i, and i think that's mainly because of the way a lot of martial arts are taught these days.

the kata teach you how to defeat an opponent before he has had chance to do something like tackle. if you are skilled in doing this then the chances are you won't get tackled. however, if you do, then karate does contain methods for fighting if you have been tackled to the ground. its just that the focus is on gaining the advantage and winning on your feet if you possibly can

[alsey]

As far as the "grappling existing in katas" arguement goes, it may be that there are those applications. The only problem is that unless you get the opportunity to practice those applications with a resisting partner, then one's ability to use them proficiently in a fight will low.

yeah, and its a serious problem. this is essentially why i stopped doing shotokan formally. i came to learn about the original nature of karate, attended a few seminars and stuff. then i asked the senior instructor at my dojo if we could practice some of it. to cut a long story short, the answer was no. also as a nidan i did a bit of instruction in classes, and it got to the point where i just couldn't do it anymore. i couldn't stand there teaching lame blocking techniques that could get people killed in a real fight.

unless you're very lucky and find a school that teaches combative karate, you'll probably have to take your training outside the dojo in an informal setting as i and another guy from my old dojo have done.

[bushido_man96]

As far as the "grappling existing in katas" arguement goes, it may be that there are those applications. The only problem is that unless you get the opportunity to practice those applications with a resisting partner, then one's ability to use them proficiently in a fight will low.

yeah, and its a serious problem. this is essentially why i stopped doing shotokan formally. i came to learn about the original nature of karate, attended a few seminars and stuff. then i asked the senior instructor at my dojo if we could practice some of it. to cut a long story short, the answer was no. also as a nidan i did a bit of instruction in classes, and it got to the point where i just couldn't do it anymore. i couldn't stand there teaching lame blocking techniques that could get people killed in a real fight.

unless you're very lucky and find a school that teaches combative karate, you'll probably have to take your training outside the dojo in an informal setting as i and another guy from my old dojo have done.

I don't understand why some instructors can be so single-minded; have a my way or the high way attitued towards teaching. It is frustrating, in my opinion.

[elbows_and_knees]

I believe the difference between a do and a jutsu is how it was related to actual combat situations in a war. After the advent of the firearm, and the decline of close quarters combat in warfare, the need to study as much hand to hand combat began to fall away. This can even be seen in Western Martial Arts as well.

When the jutsu fell away, in order to somewhat preserve them, they started to become the dos we now know of.

after the meiji / tokugawa (always forget which, that's why I put both) there was a time of peace. Samurai were not needed anymore. MA were taught mainly for fitness and for preservation of the art. That was the end of jutsu and the beginning of do. The wartime styles were considered koryu - classical martial arts. peacetime arts were more for enhancing your way of life, hence the term do.

[alsey]

after the meiji / tokugawa (always forget which, that's why I put both) there was a time of peace. .

things started to get peaceful after tokugawa, when meiji was made emperor.