The Uselessness of Kata

[NightOwl]

I am not sure about all that. Previously, if the "old masters" really wanted to test themselves, the only way was to walk around, challenging people, or hanging out in the bars or rough neighborhoods. The school of hard knocks can be a great learning university!

exactly, which I mentioned in my rant earlier. However to get a bit more on topic, did the masters in question fin their fights by intimidating their opponents with their kata so much that they curled into the fetal position and started crying? Or did they actually USE the tehniques rather than putting them all together in one long kata, only doing that later as a way to remember the moves without writing them down?

[bushido_man96]

I think that kata practice was a result of an increase in solo training, and not having a partner to work with. I could be off, though.

[NightOwl]

ah, maybe...MA history is sketchy at best. Anyone have an answer to the original purpose of kata?

[elbows_and_knees]

However, there are are take downs and grappling in kata. The key is to look outside the box. Just because a kata is taught that move X, Y, and Z is a punch, turn, and block doesn't mean that's the only application of the series of moves. I have pulled out numerous take-downs and locks out of what seemed like basic moves. Sometimes they work and sometime they don't. But I never know until I practice them of course.

There is throwing in them, I don't dispute that. But the kata only teaches part of the mechanics of the throw. It doesn't teach you how to off balance, which is the most detrimental part.

I absolutely agree with you here. Of all the bunkai I know and have practiced I have a select few that I tend to utilize on a consistant basis in training.

judo is like that as well. I know about 100 different throws and variations. Of them, I have about 8 that I use regularly (one for each direction) and three of those eight that are my bread and butter. But in order to teach, progess, etc. I have to learn all of the other throws, though I will likely never use them in shiai.

[elbows_and_knees]

Having studied some of the history of CMA, there have been times when MA DID in fact become for the most part 'all show' even in the past. In 1804, the Qing Emperor complained that the combat system taught to the army had , "(become) all flowery movements...only for show and performances, not for practical use." Then again, you also have instances like the MMA competition in 1260 where entrants had to waiver any liabilities for 'being beaten to death.' Also, in 1920's the nationalist goverment banned 'open challenges' where an inspiring teacher would establiush himself by issuing a fighting challenge in the town where he wanted to set up (or if he wanted to take over a school). Certainly during THESE times if you didn't know your stuff, you would face a WORLD of hurt. Thus, there were and WERE NOT old MAs who could handle themselves.Good fighters have never been part of the mainstream anyhow, there were never any 'good old days', but people are not superhuman today either.

perhaps. But the thing about these fights is that SOMEONE has to win. If you see to untrained drunks fighting in a bar, one must win, no? If drunk A beats drunk B, did he REALLY know his stuff, or did he just win that fight? Look at the fight I posted with gongyi. Those two masters looked clueless. But eventually someone would've won, if it were a streetfight. (this fight was sanctioned and was considered a draw.) As you agree, good fighters have never been part of the mainstream. Given that, then what is the liklihood that all of the masters were good fighters? Once again, I'm not saying that none of them were, but I don't think there were as many as we would like to think there were.

Personally if it came to toughness, i'd bet on ancient greek no-hold-barred wrestlers (I'm going blank on the name at the moment

pankration. for all practical purposes, it was wrestling and boxing.

[elbows_and_knees]

Ah yes, that's what I was looking for! Anyhow, the point being that the 'old guys' were not necessarily pushovers. There were plenty who were quite formidable, but niether were they all invincible demi-gods who could take on 100+ men, win UFC in 5 seconds, etc. (but they could make a mean pita ). Reality is somewhere between "The old masters could take on anyone...look at Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon!", and "A MMA granny could wipe the floor with anyone who came from before Gracie! After all, people were stupider and NEVER trained as hard as we do today!".

it's kind of ironic that you would bring them up as your idea of great fighters while in a discussion about the uselessness of kata. Neither wrestling nor boxing have kata. Drilling, conditioning and sparring.

[elbows_and_knees]

ah, maybe...MA history is sketchy at best. Anyone have an answer to the original purpose of kata?

the old chinese training methodology involved few forms or none. They, like I mention a lot, trained via drilling and conditioning. the forms that were used were trainined for a specific reason, a la qigong development in taiji, or to train a specific body mechanic intrinsic to the style. My karate teacher, who was japanese, only taught two kata - taikyoku shodan and sanchin. He knew all of them and helped me with them, as I was also training shotokan alsewhere, but he himself only taught two to his students. The first was because he thought it was great for teaching footowork and hip rotation, and the second for internal development. Back to the topic though, as time went on, people cross trained, adding new forms to what they already knew, some styles became extinct and people added those forms to their own in order to retain some knowledge of the extinct style, etc. What we ended up with are styles today that have 20 + forms. Perhaps the same is true with japanese kata.

[NightOwl]

Having studied some of the history of CMA, there have been times when MA DID in fact become for the most part 'all show' even in the past. In 1804, the Qing Emperor complained that the combat system taught to the army had , "(become) all flowery movements...only for show and performances, not for practical use." Then again, you also have instances like the MMA competition in 1260 where entrants had to waiver any liabilities for 'being beaten to death.' Also, in 1920's the nationalist goverment banned 'open challenges' where an inspiring teacher would establiush himself by issuing a fighting challenge in the town where he wanted to set up (or if he wanted to take over a school). Certainly during THESE times if you didn't know your stuff, you would face a WORLD of hurt. Thus, there were and WERE NOT old MAs who could handle themselves.Good fighters have never been part of the mainstream anyhow, there were never any 'good old days', but people are not superhuman today either.

perhaps. But the thing about these fights is that SOMEONE has to win. If you see to untrained drunks fighting in a bar, one must win, no? If drunk A beats drunk B, did he REALLY know his stuff, or did he just win that fight? Look at the fight I posted with gongyi. Those two masters looked clueless. But eventually someone would've won, if it were a streetfight. (this fight was sanctioned and was considered a draw.) As you agree, good fighters have never been part of the mainstream. Given that, then what is the liklihood that all of the masters were good fighters? Once again, I'm not saying that none of them were, but I don't think there were as many as we would like to think there were.

Personally if it came to toughness, i'd bet on ancient greek no-hold-barred wrestlers (I'm going blank on the name at the moment

pankration. for all practical purposes, it was wrestling and boxing.

That's the name. Who knew such brutality could come from the home of the Gyros?

As yes, if drunk A beats drunk B then you can attribute it to 'being the better of the worse', however if drunk A beats drunks CDEF afterwards, then a pattern for a knack of fighting emerges no? There were the equivelent of boxers and wrestlers back then as well, so it would not be hard to imagine that muscleheads (yes, they have always been around), street fighters, etc wouldn't attend such events as well. During the warring states period MAs were referred to as 'ji ji', and descirptions at the time describer practitioners as, "...people who bravely hit their enemies and put them to death". Although to be more balanced, it was also during this period that 'Jiao Di' play (showcase wrestling) flared up, and the 'artistic' rather than the martial began to get more emphasis.

Another case in the past was when MA (when staring a school) were sometimes known to rough up some local heavies/thugs in order to promote their art. Again though, like in the previous example given, MA's in the past have been too showy and not applicible as well. Thus the conclusion is this: The dichotomy of martial and art has and always will be around.

By the by....

When was the film in question made? CMA have been diluted alot by forms and the fog of time during the past century, and after the 1960's (if these guys are actually from China), MA's virtually stopped on the mainland until more modern times with the creation of 'Wushu.'

ah, maybe...MA history is sketchy at best. Anyone have an answer to the original purpose of kata?

the old chinese training methodology involved few forms or none. They, like I mention a lot, trained via drilling and conditioning. the forms that were used were trainined for a specific reason, a la qigong development in taiji, or to train a specific body mechanic intrinsic to the style. My karate teacher, who was japanese, only taught two kata - taikyoku shodan and sanchin. He knew all of them and helped me with them, as I was also training shotokan alsewhere, but he himself only taught two to his students. The first was because he thought it was great for teaching footowork and hip rotation, and the second for internal development. Back to the topic though, as time went on, people cross trained, adding new forms to what they already knew, some styles became extinct and people added those forms to their own in order to retain some knowledge of the extinct style, etc. What we ended up with are styles today that have 20 + forms. Perhaps the same is true with japanese kata.

I could easily see a similar scenerio play out in Japan. But with all the kata adding up, it has become a bit of a monster IMO. WingChun only had about 3 (that I knew of ....in the whole 2 1/2 months that I took it ). With some styles of Karate having 60+, I think that that is WAY too much time spent on memorization and not nearly enough on application (the exercise gained from kata could just as easily be gained from another source)

PS: Just watched the fight video and I must say it reminds me of highschool fights...VERY sloppy. Judging by the video quality I'm GUESSING that this was made during the Nationalist era...but I have no way of knowing for sure without more information...ha, I'm really curious now! Tai chi was the one guy's (is it a martial art? I thought that it was a meditative exercise?) and white crane the other's...

has a modern place's advertisment for this style. It features alot of the 'windmilling' that I noticed in the fight.

[username8517]

However, there are are take downs and grappling in kata. The key is to look outside the box. Just because a kata is taught that move X, Y, and Z is a punch, turn, and block doesn't mean that's the only application of the series of moves. I have pulled out numerous take-downs and locks out of what seemed like basic moves. Sometimes they work and sometime they don't. But I never know until I practice them of course.

There is throwing in them, I don't dispute that. But the kata only teaches part of the mechanics of the throw. It doesn't teach you how to off balance, which is the most detrimental part.

Yeah, I'll agree with that. Kata didn't neccessarily teach that as much as I've discovered by practicing and executive bunkai against a live opponent.

Good point.

[elbows_and_knees]

As yes, if drunk A beats drunk B then you can attribute it to 'being the better of the worse', however if drunk A beats drunks CDEF afterwards, then a pattern for a knack of fighting emerges no?

sure it does. But in the grand scheme of things, can he REALLY fight, or is he just better than other unskilled drunks. It merely makes him the best of the worst. Similarly, if you have a bunch of guys training, but none of them have ever had a fight, you have fighting that looks sloppy, like the vid I posted. the best of those guys would still be the best of the worst, even though they fought to the death. Since we only hear about these guys second hand, we really can't assume how well they fought.

There were the equivelent of boxers and wrestlers back then as well, so it would not be hard to imagine that muscleheads (yes, they have always been around), street fighters, etc wouldn't attend such events as well.

wouldn't attend what events? challenge matches? they weren't local events that everyone looked forward to, they just happened for various reasons.

By the by....

When was the film in question made? CMA have been diluted alot by forms and the fog of time during the past century, and after the 1960's (if these guys are actually from China), MA's virtually stopped on the mainland until more modern times with the creation of 'Wushu.'

that fight happened in macau in 1954.

I could easily see a similar scenerio play out in Japan. But with all the kata adding up, it has become a bit of a monster IMO. WingChun only had about 3 (that I knew of ....in the whole 2 1/2 months that I took it ).

including biu jee and the weapons forms, I think there are 6. you learned all three in 2.5 months??

PS: Just watched the fight video and I must say it reminds me of highschool fights...VERY sloppy. Judging by the video quality I'm GUESSING that this was made during the Nationalist era...but I have no way of knowing for sure without more information...ha, I'm really curious now! Tai chi was the one guy's (is it a martial art? I thought that it was a meditative exercise?) and white crane the other's...

has a modern place's advertisment for this style. It features alot of the 'windmilling' that I noticed in the fight.

Taiji is very much a fighting art. all of the "internal" styles have a fighting side, but taiji, yang in particular, is practiced by the majority of people for its health benefits. Gongyi, however, was trained in the fighting side - heck, he was the GRANDSON of the FOUNDER of wu style taiji, which along with chen style is known for it's fighting.

the windmilling is seen in several longfist type boxing styles. you can see it in northern longfist, choy lay fut, hop gar and various other styles.