Kata Thoughts

[Wa-No-Michi]

Thats a joke btw NightOwl, just in case you were thinkin!

[Wa-No-Michi]

I do see your point, Michi.

But those fighters in mma or judo or bjj are are very good at what they do, and despite the regulation placed on them by their competitive area would probibly fare pretty well in street conflict against an attacker. Even if a bjj'er only utilized the takedown aspect of his game to gain time to escape it would be well spent training time. An mma guy, realizing the need to adapt to his opponant will certainly have the tools to move, inflict damage, and stay mobile.

I'm not saying that any of these are or are designed to be pure in sd applications, I'm just saying that they do provide a good frame work. In part because they've adapted highly "live" training programs against resisting opponants.

Now, take that same fighter and spend some time doing those "non-sport" movments. Eye gouges and such. And give him some framework with which to support weapons defensed from. Now you've got a pretty competent ma-ist from a street presptive as well.

You can also look at sd systems built around similar "live" training principle, Krav and such to use a well known example. Again, sysems that don't utlize kata. They certainly havn't expanded or developed into sport application. Their biggest litmus test is how things work in a real enviorment.

Because of these things, I dont' think you can say that kata is the core of what makes karate (or martail arts) more combative. There are plenty of ways to train combativeness without relying on kata.

I'm not talking about breaking movments out of kata to use in isolation, sorry if I gave that impression, but utilizing movements of a combative nature in progressive training drills to make them accessable in high stress situatins. This includes their application (as best as humanly and gear allowed possible) against simulated attacks and during the course of sparring as well.

So, it's not just taking sruff out and using it. It's about identifying practical tools, no matter where they come from, and training them in a progressive set of drills that are as alive in nature as possible and incorporating them into an overall defensive stratagy for you to use. I don't think kata is necissary for this goal, that's all.

I agree, thats why most good karate schools have various levels of paired kata that allow the student to realise the purpose of the techniques found within the solo katas against an opponent.

But what these paired katas don't provide is the focus and correct movement that training in kata will instill.

I don't think I said that Kata was the core of what makes karate (or Martial arts) more combative (or I am sorry if I did, because it isn't correct). It could be argued however that training in Kata is core to making Karate what it is, two different things maybe.

But you and Nightowl are right, there are better ways to train today than kata and sorry about throwing my toys out of the pram earlier. I guess it was a little too much of the Christmas spirit.

What I do know though is that without kata, Wado for example would not work quite as it does. It would simply end up as another homogenised form of "carrotey" on the competition circuit, and lose its identity along the way. I would hate that to happen, as for me it would loose its MO which is unique.

Quite frankly, it does not concern me that I may not learning / teaching the most up to date and ultimate combative / self defense system(s) or techniques available. Wado is good for what it was designed for and kata is part of that design.

[tallgeese]

On the contrary, Michi, I think it's be interesting to see everyone's take and debate teh pros and cons.

[Kuma]

Since I've already shared my views on kata, I wanted to say my piece on the MMA info that was just posted.

Sport fighting is a fantastic way to learn how to apply much of what you learn. It teaches distance, timing, endurance, hitting and getting it, footwork, offense, defense, etc. It is invaluable. You don't necessarily need to compete, even sparring will get you the previous skills, but you do need to learn how to fight against a resisting opponent who is doing his best to get you back.

However, it's not the only thing you need for self protection. Some of them can teach you habits which, though they work wonderfully in the ring (i.e. weaving in boxing), they leave you quite vulnerable outside of it (i.e. weaving brings your head down, making you easier to either take down to the ground, knee strike, kick, etc.). When I was in the Marine Corps and we tested in MCMAP, you would sometimes grapple with an opponent who, as soon as you took the upper hand, all of a sudden produces a weapon that gives him the upper advantage. This taught us to save grappling as one of our last resorts, not the initial attack as many grappling-oriented fighters would think. There has been some point fighters who struck a blow in an altercation and actually turned around to celebrate the point, much like they did in tournaments. Once they realized what they did, by that time they had lost any advantage they originally had. Even in Kyokushin, my own style, the lack of head punching in jissen kumite can be considered a weakness.

You also need to recall that weapons are a huge part of our culture nowadays. Being a police officer (albeit still somewhat of a rookie), I've seen many of the disputes during my time involve a weapon of some kind. From a simple dinner fork to a sawed-off baseball bat, from a simple Swiss Army knife to an AR-15. I had to do training outside of what I was learning in MA classes to really address these issues.

So, in summary: I think realistic sparring and sports competitions are great for martial artists. We all should be doing it to some degree. However, never forget that sport fighting can teach you bad habits.

[bushido_man96]

I'm not talking about breaking movments out of kata to use in isolation, sorry if I gave that impression, but utilizing movements of a combative nature in progressive training drills to make them accessable in high stress situatins. This includes their application (as best as humanly and gear allowed possible) against simulated attacks and during the course of sparring as well.

So, it's not just taking sruff out and using it. It's about identifying practical tools, no matter where they come from, and training them in a progressive set of drills that are as alive in nature as possible and incorporating them into an overall defensive stratagy for you to use. I don't think kata is necissary for this goal, that's all.

I can see how, to the kata practitioner, that this can look like "reverse engineering." The kata practioner will train the kata first, and then look at moving into this kind of training. Whereas, like tallgeese has demonstrated, the non-kata practitioner will break down scenarios or situations, and look at the options from that standpoint.

I've heard people say that they could take on 'sport' fighter in a real fight because they can use deadly force but...so can the sport fighter! And the sport fighter can show that they can apply strikes, grabs, and attacks when someone doesn't want them to, as well as avoid attacks themselves, no matter what technique the attack may be.

I agree here, too. I just don't see how the arguement holds water. Even if the rule set is a bit more limited, higher contact levels prepares one for that level of contact that can be expected in a confrontation.

The Okinawans seemed to have a unique stance towards kata, only teaching one for long stretches of time( although the also fought bareknuckle at times too, here is a nice article on shotokan and karate: http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2006/01/29/funakoshi-man-vs-myth/ ).

I enjoyed that article, what I read of it. There are some nice points to consider in there; like how things can tend to get "romanticized." Also, there were some nice analogies of Karate and baseball, as well as sports in general.

[bushido_man96]

However, it's not the only thing you need for self protection. Some of them can teach you habits which, though they work wonderfully in the ring (i.e. weaving in boxing), they leave you quite vulnerable outside of it (i.e. weaving brings your head down, making you easier to either take down to the ground, knee strike, kick, etc.). When I was in the Marine Corps and we tested in MCMAP, you would sometimes grapple with an opponent who, as soon as you took the upper hand, all of a sudden produces a weapon that gives him the upper advantage. This taught us to save grappling as one of our last resorts, not the initial attack as many grappling-oriented fighters would think.

This shows the point that you'll do what you've trained, not what you think you'll do. Its important to evaluate things like this, because if no one ever presents a knife to a grappler in a training scenario, then they may just never consider it.

There has been some point fighters who struck a blow in an altercation and actually turned around to celebrate the point, much like they did in tournaments. Once they realized what they did, by that time they had lost any advantage they originally had.

Point fighting doesn't teach this; silly reactions of elation teach this. Even if one score's a point in a point fight, one can still be disciplined enough to keep his hands up, and his eyes on the opponent until someone calls break. Even keep fighting until they hear break. I don't think that is a bad habit of point fighting; its a dumb habit that someone picked up on their own.

[Kuma]

Exactly, bushido-man.

I apologize if it offended, I did not mean for it to. I meant to imply the celebrations you sometimes see during that kind of sparring. I noticed it fairly often during the Olympics this year watching the TKD fighters.

[bushido_man96]

Exactly, bushido-man.

I apologize if it offended, I did not mean for it to. I meant to imply the celebrations you sometimes see during that kind of sparring. I noticed it fairly often during the Olympics this year watching the TKD fighters.

No offense taken, Kuma. I just don't think that kind of reaction is something that coaches or teachers tell their students to do when they get a point.

I see it a lot in Olympic TKD, and I think it is silly. I spar with those rules myself, but would never drop my guard or turn around in the middle of a match. Its just a bad idea.

[NightOwl]

When I was in the Marine Corps and we tested in MCMAP, you would sometimes grapple with an opponent who, as soon as you took the upper hand, all of a sudden produces a weapon that gives him the upper advantage. This taught us to save grappling as one of our last resorts, not the initial attack as many grappling-oriented fighters would think.

You also need to recall that weapons are a huge part of our culture nowadays. Being a police officer (albeit still somewhat of a rookie), I've seen many of the disputes during my time involve a weapon of some kind. From a simple dinner fork to a sawed-off baseball bat, from a simple Swiss Army knife to an AR-15. I had to do training outside of what I was learning in MA classes to really address these issues.

Weapon work is a whole 'nother ball game. If someone has a weapon, trying to attack them unarmed is what you do if you know that they are going to use it and have no other choice (as you mentioned, ' a last resort' . However I don't think that diminishes any from unarmed combat sparring. Weapons are there for a reason- it is a HUGE advantage over being unarmed. That's why if someone pulls a knife, either you find a weapon of your own and/or get out if you can.

As you mentioned police training taught you outside of your MA classes, but that is to be expected. Military training =/= civilian training. You shouldn't be focusing on punches and kicks, but guns and simple controls (although the dog pile seems to be the best unarmed strategy against a perp ). In an unarmed combat situation, a well trained and skillful martial artist of roughly equal size probably could take on an off duty cop mono e mono. Heck, the last fight for the troops had a Navy SEAL, and he was demolished without being able to lift a finger.

However in a urban combat situation or on the battlefield, your unarmed abilities are greatly neutralized in favor of weapons and tactics. The Navy SEAL might not have the best H2H, but he can survive in the toughest conditions imaginable that would kill most.

The oldest Japanese martial art in existence, 'Katori' ryu ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenshin_Sh%C5%8Dden_Katori_Shint%C5%8D-ry%C5%AB ) while it does teach some jujutsu, teaches mostly weapon based techniques.

Also at its highest level, buried deep in its curriculum Katori ryu at one time (maybe still to a select few for tradition's sake) taught military field strategy, true 'Ninjutsu' ( stealth and reconnaissance tactics) and other things related directly to war. This system was created shortly after the warring states period of japan, so that makes sense.

As time went on, more and more jujutsu and dueling focused swordplay became emphasized in the later martial arts as Japan entered a time of peace and like today (in most of the West at least) you had to worry about tough guys starting a fight, muggings, and self defense as opposed to facing the heat of battle.

Jujutsu especially is tailored to unarmed combat or closing the gap to stop someone from using a weapon, and thus while it can be used for restraining someone (an area where I feel small joint manipulation plays an important role) or if you are lucky taking away a weapon, otherwise it isn't for armed fighting. Thus the military doesn't have very good unarmed hand to hand, but it doesn't need to. It needs to spend that time focused elsewhere.

Therefore I don't think that different training and needs takes anything away from contact sparring. The field of application is different

[Wa-No-Michi]

So, would it be safe to say that training in Kata is what makes karate karate as opposed to kickboxing?

Are there deeper mental processes and values attached to Kata?

Perhaps this isn't the best board to ask such a question, as I don't think there are many traditional karate-ka here anyway.

Maybe we should put it to a vote? and then we will all know once and for all whether we are wasting our time doing it...or not