Is today's Karate representative of the original concept?

[tallgeese]

If honoring the past is part of your goal in the ma's, then by all means, I agree 100% about preserving old kata.

I do also agree that we can come up with superior training methods in todays world. Not necissarily kata, but drilling methods, training tactics, ect. that can be much more intuitively applied "real world" more quickly.

The oldest forms are most certainly about fighitng, in a text book sort of sense, not necissarily a straight up mimic of combat. I agree that you are also correct in the fact that they are very complex. Due to this, you see lots of people who really have no idea what the movments actually are. In my experiance, these individuals are very rare. Thus, making learining the actual content very difficult and we are stuck with "interpertation".

As to newer forms, I find them all pretty artificial, hence very far removed from the original concept. Most of these have never been tested in the "battlefield".

To that point, we see alot of stuff getting used these days in fairly realistic or actual conflicts. MMA fighters train under unarmed conditions that are fairly realistic in terms of "aliveness" and contact. Lots of RBSD training goes into prepping cops and soldiers that routinly go into harms way. We still see testing in these crucibles and are learning some valuable lessons from them.

[granitemiller]

RBSD training is definitely realistic and a lot is learned from it. MMA training is for sport and while somewhat realistic, it is not "realistic" in terms of using on the battlefield (I would never go to the ground exposing myself), although we can and have learned from MMA as well. I guess in the end no training is bad!

[tallgeese]

Never want to and will never happen are two entirely different things. Still, I agree, I'd probibly not initiate ground activity, but I'll never say I'd never do it. Too many variables.

Still, it can and will happen. As you say, best to train rather than not. Look at lots of dashcam vids of cops getting hurt. Many happen because the officer is taken down by a rather lousy takedown. Then, is pummelled and/or his weapon taken. So, learning to work that aspect of a fight can and is paramount, and mma fighters tend to train it very efficiently for work in the street since striking is incorporated at the same time.

It's just and example, I was referring more to the constant movement in drilling and the contact mma clubs usually work under.

[Espina]

RBSD training is definitely realistic and a lot is learned from it. MMA training is for sport and while somewhat realistic, it is not "realistic" in terms of using on the battlefield (I would never go to the ground exposing myself), although we can and have learned from MMA as well. I guess in the end no training is bad!

I COMPLETELY agree with you granitemiller

[granitemiller]

MMA training is very worthwhile and the practical knowledge it gives is great. They also work out very hard.

[bushido_man96]

It is a mixture of both. The originator spent much more time examining and creating the moves then we realize. We live in a much too fast paced world, where everything is now now now. We also feel we are vastly superior to our past generations in all aspects.

My point is that someone in the 1600's, or 1800's, spent a great deal of time creating these kata, and they are very intricate and sophisticated, if you take the time to really study them (for example: Tekki is NOT about someone riding a horse or standing in a rice field - study the bunkai and see how devastating it really is!), you will see just how genius these old timers were. They fought for real, it was life or death back then, which is a point I think we miss. In addition, there are just so many ways you can take someone who grabs you, strike them and throw them to the ground. Why do we assume we know better?

Are we able to come up with something else, something better for this day and age? Absolutely. And we should be doing this! I am not stating that we are inept and can not come up with our own items for the here and now.

However, we need to honor the past and also really learn what our past masters meant to pass down to us by diligently studying bunkai. If you have ever created a form, and really put time and energy into it (and not just make up something on a whim), you will understand more about what I am trying to say. I think that TTC just made a quick comment on my post and really did not think about it much. I am saying that we need to really learn what was passed down, and the "original concepts" are encapsulated within the katas.

The question that I have is that do we really know that the forms came first? I don't think that they did. I think that perhaps some individuals came with some concepts of fighting, through actual fighting, and then these concepts eventually got written into what we see as the forms. So, I think that you can honor the past by not doing forms just as much as doing forms. In the end, it depends on which road you prefer to take to get to where you are going. I think some roads are shorter than others.

[granitemiller]

I see your point here. I think that the concepts of fighting came first, and the methodologies came second, which then became incorporated into kata.

It is a matter of preference, learning how to fight thru kata is a time proven method. Learning how to fight thru hands on training like MMA is another. Some roads are shorter, some are longer. I guess you need to decide where you want to go, and then choose the path to get there.

[Espina]

I'll have to respectfully disagree with you Bushidoman, because I think Katas are as important for a Martial Artist as kumite. They both are essential part of the art.

If you want to be a complete martial artist (from my point of view) you need to practice kumite, kata, push ups, abs, etc as much as anything else.

Of course you can always 'invent' your own style and pass over these things. A scalpel is a scalpel no matter in which hand it is. It could be use by a doctor to save someone's life in surgery or it could be used by a criminal to kill someone.

Same thing with martial arts. Anyone can throw a punch to another person. You don't need to be a karateka to do this (I think you and me and everyone here will agree with this). You just need your fist.

So, what's the difference between a person that practices the full spectrum of exercises and someone who doesn't? The person who is receiving the punch mentioned above will not note the difference (he most likely will be concentrated in staying alive rather than examining your technique hehehehe). I think the difference comes up with the road the martial artist took to get there.

I'm just saying that the more you train and the wider your training experiences are, the more complete you become when it comes to a fight.

[Espina]

I see your point here. I think that the concepts of fighting came first, and the methodologies came second, which then became incorporated into kata.

It is a matter of preference, learning how to fight thru kata is a time proven method. Learning how to fight thru hands on training like MMA is another. Some roads are shorter, some are longer. I guess you need to decide where you want to go, and then choose the path to get there.

That's what I was trying to say! Thanks granitemiller

[bushido_man96]

I see the point you are making, Espina, but it doesn't hold up when you come to MA styles that don't include forms as part of their training. Styles like Jeet Kune Do, Muay Thai, Boxing and Wrestling don't use forms in the sense that you and I are discussing them here. Neither do many of the Filipino styles, to my knowledge. There is no forms work in Western styles of swordsmanship, either. So, does that mean that the journey through these Martial paths is any cheaper than those experienced through a style that does use forms training? I don't think so.