Is today's Karate representative of the original concept?

[Espina]

You also have a really nice point too, bushidoman. I really like your opinion, and I agree with what you say about not all MA have katas incorporated.

What I'm thinking is this: if your style performs forms, you ought to do them, because that's the essence of your art, as much as probably kumite is.

If your art doesn't have an intrinsic 'kata system' then it's perfectly fine, but you still need to practice everything your style says you should practice.

And I think that's the main and most important thing: you have to practices whatever your style says you have to practice, otherwise it stops been the original art and becomes an adaptation of your own.

[bushido_man96]

Adaptations have their place too, I think. But, I'd say you are probably on a good track there. Sometimes, though, I think that a diversion in the way a style is done can be a good thing, but it doesn't have to be permament.

[Espina]

Yes, I think the same. 'Mutations' sometimes bring better things. Heck, that's how Nature goes.

But in someway, I think it's important to keep a 'pure' line intact, so you can always return to what was the original concept.

[bushido_man96]

The trouble is finding out exactly what the original concept truly was.

[Espina]

Yes, I think the only way to do that would be asking the one who invented it

[tallgeese]

I agreee with bushido man, training is important. But there are plenty of training modalities. Routine work on those is every bit as legitimate as work on kata.

It's the commitmit to training that distinguishes ma practitioners, not the specifics of what they do.

[bushido_man96]

I agreee with bushido man, training is important. But there are plenty of training modalities. Routine work on those is every bit as legitimate as work on kata.

It's the commitmit to training that distinguishes ma practitioners, not the specifics of what they do.

Well said, tallgeese. I agree.

[oneheart]

The kata is typically considered to hold the essence of karate not the kumite. But every school does things differently. Some schools rely only on free sparing while some go back to the one step stuff. I think one step sparring is way under appreciated. A really good Tai Chi teacher once told me "Don't confuse sparring with fighting. Its a martial contest. A fight is tick-tock. Remember that. Tick-tock. And usally ends with someone getting killed or maimed. Its a thing to be avoided."

But to say no martial artist should worry about how it was "back in the day" seems silly. Not everyone is doing this for the same reason, and I think we should remember that. I think a lot of people study karate for a hybrid of reasons. The historical aspect of it is very interesting to some people and that alone might be motivation to discover how karate has changed till today. Saying it doesn't matter sounds like lazy science. Its not that it doesn't matter, its just hard to figure out. And its true, some of these founders of kata really did have to fight for life, so we should take that into consideration when looking at their kata.

Elbows and knees don't get used much in sparring in some schools, very true. But it depends on how the school uses sparring. Many schools, including my own, have the philosophy that they don't want to disillusion their students to think that sparring is the same as fighting. Mine tends to use sparring to focus on specific aspects of combat and free sparing is generally said to teach endurance, timing, and space relations more than it helps to apply techniques. We will also use specific techniques for a set amount of time. For instance we might be trying to learn how to read an opponet without looking at his hands, or how to move so we are always just out of reach.

So it depends on the school of thought, but one school of thought is that elbows and knees existing in kihon and kata IS its place in Karate and its encouragement to be used in regualr combat, as these schools do not consider kumite a direct paralell to real combat.

[Espina]

I Like your post oneheart. I agree with you

[ShoriKid]

I'm going to go with, middle of the road, in a way that say, tallgeese would say "depends"

If your style or system uses kata, you should know why it teaches the ones it does. Even if you can't break out every move into an application, the general thing you learn from a kata should be known. Doesn't mean it always is, but it should be. If your style teaches push hands or pummeling drills, or shadow boxes, you should know why it does each of those things. I don't do pad work to smash my hands into small targets. I do it to work on combinations, targeting and the mechanics of how to apply a punch. I don't practice wrist locks because they look cool, or I think I can catch a punch and work one to end a fight instantly. I do them to understand how to manipulate a joint, to learn how to move a body with something other than brute force and how to seize on a small advantage to overcome a bad situation.

So, if you have a drill, be it kata or whatever, know why you do it, even if you haven't mastered it. Heck, even if you don't like it, at least be able to tell someone coming up in training why you do it so they can get some benefit from it. Wheather you agree with the underlieing concept or not, have a grasp of it's reason for existance. A good instrutor or coach should be able to impart the reason why you need to do what you do.

Now, knees, elbows and throws in karate, where are they? They are in the system, and they are alive and well in certain places. However, the safety concerns in their use have been one of the biggest reasons they weren't seen in a lot of schools. Mats cost money, and a lot of schools can't afford them starting out. And, once they can afford them, they have trained so long without them that the core ability just isn't there. Until recently striking pads for knees and elbows just weren't there. So, unless you were willing to risk a lot of pain and high percentage chances of injury, they weren't worth it. Even a controled elbow or knee to the head hurts and can cause a lot of bruising and cuts. Shoot, until recently most good sparring gloves that allowed for solid contact so enclosed the hand that gripping for most throws was impossible.

If you think that throwing has died out of karate, take a look at the AAU sparring rules for karate. Last time I looked at them, they allowed for sweeps and throws with a follow up technique. Granted, most competitions will end up not allowing them for, what I assume are insurance reasons(no mats, which are high dollar, no throws).