The Uselessness of Kata

[cross]

That is a good article. I enjoy his honesty about his training.

Thats what i like about his articles also. Straight to the point. Tells it like it is.

Well, at least he tells it like it is for him. I like how he words his opinions, though. He doesn't beat around the bush.

Agreed.

[a_ninja]

Well the katas are not there for you to perform step by step but a guide line of what to do. it teaches you the correct way to move your footing. But i do agree that the whole kata is never used except for in movies. Ex: Just take the first elementry kata in shotokan karate(takeokoshodon) you move your foot out into a right front stance, if you knee is not bent then if someone kicks you there then it will possibly break your legs. A full kata i agree is usless in a fight but you should still train with them. its like on that tv show final fu. that one guy was using all this fancey moves and monkey style and drunken boxing(which is a great workout for balance and stamina) but in the end all it amounted to was a good show. He had less points and went home

[gojuchad]

hope you will not confuse true self defence techniques with kumite and competititions. true karate is hidden within kata and the moves are in fact very deadly and so are illegal in kumite and competitions. dig a little deeper and i think you will appreiciate your kata better. good luck.

[cross]

true karate is hidden within kata and the moves are in fact very deadly and so are illegal in kumite and competitions.

Any examples?

[lordtariel]

I wouldn't say deadly or illegal, but there are hidden moves in some katas. And yes, these really basic ones, but I'm sure there are others... I just haven't trained at bunkai that regularly. I apologize for the poor descriptions, it really lends it self better visually than verbally.

For example: the second move in Pinan Sandan is a down block and outside block at the same time with opposite arms. In place of the outside block you can substitute a backfist.

In Pinan Yodan, there is a point after the second elbow strike(move 8 I think) where you scoop and deflect a head strike, kick, then go into a cross-stance backfist... well in actuality you can trap the arm make his elbow bend the opposite direction, kick them to soften them up, and extended the cross stance out so can use the torque to throw them in place of the backfist.

While someone who ONLY practices kata probably won't stand a chance in a self-defense or sparring situation, I feel it has value in that it teaches technique, helps you understand how moves work, and is great for exercise and timing.

If people want to solely do kata, that's fine as well. Not everybody takes martial arts to learn to defend themselves. I think it's silly, but it's the truth. The problem comes in when they think they can defend themselves because they have a blackbelt from a school that does non-contact martial arts.

I don't want to offend anyone, but I guess what it comes down to is this: do you need kata to be a good fighter? Maybe not... but tell me then the difference between a fighter and a martial artist?

[cross]

For example: the second move in Pinan Sandan is a down block and outside block at the same time with opposite arms. In place of the outside block you can substitute a backfist.

I realise everyone is different, but if i want to learn to backfist, i would do a backfist, not a kata and then substitute a move that sortof looks the same. I wonder how much power would realisticly be possible performing the technique you describe?

In Pinan Yodan, there is a point after the second elbow strike(move 8 I think) where you scoop and deflect a head strike, kick, then go into a cross-stance backfist... well in actuality you can trap the arm make his elbow bend the opposite direction, kick them to soften them up, and extended the cross stance out so can use the torque to throw them in place of the backfist.

That sounds like it makes alot of sense. Have you ever tried to scoop and trap a punch with realistic speed and energy behind it? Balance is not something i would give up in a self defence situation, therefore the cross leg stance is a big no no for me.

I don't want to offend anyone, but I guess what it comes down to is this: do you need kata to be a good fighter? Maybe not... but tell me then the difference between a fighter and a martial artist?

Im not sure there is a clear cut accepted definition of each. I no longer consider myself a martial artist, and im not saying i consider myself a fighter either, but if you goal is self protection i would much rather be a fighter than a martial artist.

[sonofkanga]

Kata is a tool.No more and no less.

I don't subscribe to the too deadly thing.but they are what makes Oriental MA different.

They are as scribtures for anciet religions.

[Sohan]

I can't believe this topic has extended to 43 pages.

With respect,

Sohan

[bushido_man96]

I can't believe this topic has extended to 43 pages.

With respect,

Sohan

Its been going for a while now, hasn't it? So many opinions, and so much good discussion!

I do think that forms are tools, and they are good tools for learning technique, teaching flow, and developing technical skills.

However, many times in self-defense, simplicity is the key. Sometimes, forms deviate from simplicity; even the older, 'traditional' forms. The fact that self-defense maneuvers can be derived from the forms is great. I have never been fortunate to have any training like this, and wish I had.

Training drills can be effective as well. I am currently supplementing Combat Hapkido for my self-defense training. However, I have seen some of the Hae-Sul from my TKD forms, and I do want to start training in them. However, it is not something that is taught as commonly in TKD as it is in Karate styles.

[Muki]

I've been reading trough the posts steadily all week. It's a great discussion and some good and interesting points have been made.

If we look at the origins and reasons for why katas were developed in the first place, well, then katas are now indeed quite useless. We can instantly see, that nowadays there is no need to hide the "deadly" and once "illegal" moves in such an oldfashioned way. Why practice kata, when you could simply videotape the moves, defence techniques and then lock the tape in a Swiss vault? I also understand the point Cross is trying to make. Why practice kata, if you can practice the moves unmodified, the way they're meant to be performed in a real life situation?

I personally like them. Sometimes I simply dig in and search for new bunkai. I like to polish just one move or concentrate on a series of movements, until the feeling is right and I eventually don't need to think about the individual moves anymore. I like them, because it's all up to me to make it as hard or as easy as I want.

Kata practice (in my opinion) also improves abilities in other karate techniques, like being able to work in a rythm, which is great in sparring, kumite. Also to able to handle relaxation and contractions better, to improve movement skills, balance...

Of course you can take them as an ancient art - a now useless combat technique. But then again - as Oscar Wilde put it - all art is quite useless.

A point that I really liked was made here:

In Japan I never saw anyone doing any kata explanation at all. They were performance art routines that one practiced as a discipline - they had no relationship at all to the rest of karate practice except that they were thought to build character by forcing the person to work on the esoteric concept of perfecting some skill - which the Japanese think is an end unto itself, in my humble opinion.

I can't say that a good kata performer is necessarily also a good fighter. But I can say that he/she is a disciplined and persistent person, who's spent a years on perfecting his skills and and I value that.