Classifying karate instruction

[Toptomcat]

There is an amazing panopoly of karate instruction out there. I've been trying to get a general picture of the way to best classify the various modern American karate systems, but the whole thing is so balkanized and varied that it's proving a difficult project. I've got the barest beginnings of a generalized framework, but nothing I'd like to expose to criticism yet: instead, I'd like to throw some of what I deem to be my more solid observations out here for comment, inviting criticism on any individual point- as well as fishing for similar observations from those who have been doing this far longer than I have.

-The knockdown systems all seem to have much more in common with each other than they do with anything else.

-While thoroughly hybridized with boxing and frequently not called 'karate', American kickboxing owes enough to karate in its historical roots and modern technique to demand classification as a karate in a general framework.

-Similarly, most of the Korean systems owe enough to karate technique and pedagogy to require placement somewhere in the framework.

-Systems that identify as Okinawan tend to have a greater emphasis on makawari work and other impact conditioning.

-Schools that do not spar at all tend to be either fraudulent or very specialized in purpose (i.e. geared more towards women's self-defense courses than karate as a hobby or lifestyle).

-Schools and systems that make a policy of training full-out with full-body armor- Redman suits and the like- tend to be geared towards a single group or small number of groups of security professionals, possibly due to the high initial investment involved. They tend to be thin enough on the ground not to form federations and set up sparring rules or tournaments that cover wide geographical areas, coming together on an ad hoc baisis or not at all.

As I have invited criticism and comment on a number of quite disparate obervations, please try to keep the original purpose of this thread firmly in mind to avoid one smaller issue overwhelming the whole. I'm trying to paint with a very broad brush, here: if you hold up a single person, a single school, or even a single style as counterexample to one of my general statements, but admit that it is true as a general rule, you miss the point. Also note that my primary goal is to classify how modern karate is taught in America, and am interested in history only insofar as it directly relates to that.

A few things in particular I'm interested in:

Are there geographical differences in the mix of schools? I know areas that have seen a lot of Asian immigration have a lot of schools, and there are some kinds of instruction that you can find practically anywhere in the suburbs- but are there any surprising and interesting hot spots, like the black karate scene in Harlem in the 60s and 70's?

Are there any large federations of unusual homogenity or heterogenity?

[isshinryu5toforever]

Ok to address your post. You are painting with a wide brush, maybe too wide. You're basically saying that aside from knockdown karate, most other styles, Korean and Japanese (this will include Okinawan for the time being) fit into largely the same category. While, I'm not going to say you're completely wrong, there are a lot of intricacies you're missing.

The Korean martial arts are largely an attempt at nationalism, but they do differ from their Japanese counterparts. Okinawan Karate is big on trying to figure things out via bunkai. The study of technique, what it is. When is a block a block? When is it a strike? When it is a throw? Etc. Taekwondo and Tang Soo Do usually focus on making your strikes so hard, specifically kicks, that they are strikes. Blocks are always blocks. There is also a big focus on kicking in Taekwondo, Tang Soo Do, and even Hapkido that doesn't exist in all Karate schools. That aside, Korean martial arts do owe a lot to Japanese martial arts (Yudo and Kumdo are Judo and Kendo, no doubt), but they have made the martial arts their own enough to merit separation. If you want an example of a country taking a sport and making it their own Trobriand cricket is probably the wildest. Look at videos of that, then look at videos of English cricket. Same game, different rules, different focus.

Now for the subject of Karate alone. When you look at Japanese karate, there are really two styles, Shotokan and Kyokushin. Kyokushin was the brainchild of Mas Oyama, who also went by Choi Baedal among Koreans. He was Korean, but he created a Japanese style of Karate. There were a lot of influences at work, and I don't feel like getting that deeply into politics. Just to say, he is the father of modern knockdown Karate. Shotokan is much more regimented, because it was introduced as a training tool for schools. Okinawan Karate borrowed the system of basics, upper and lower, and the way they're numbered, but the way Okinawan Karate is taught can vary greatly. I was taught essentially out of a back yard. That's the way it was done in the past. My sensei now has a real school, and I applaud him for that. It's less traditional, but money is an issue these days. Practitioners of Okinawan karate, as stated before, also tend to look more into what things are within kata, much more than the other styles. Many people get caught up in pressure points and nerve strikes, where they are, how to manipulate and use them. Some even fall in love with their own legend and claim they can perform no touch knockouts. I'll leave that one alone for now.

Anyways, the reason knockdown styles are all similar, is because almost all of them have the same root. When Sosai Oyama passed, his Karate federation fragmented. It went in hundreds of directions all at once, and this spawned Ashihara, Yamaki-Ryu, and a number of other variants.

As far as the way things shake out with geography, good luck with that. There are Taekwondo schools that aren't taekwondo schools, and there are those that call themselves Karate, because name recognition was bigger in the 80s. Example, there's a network of schools near my hometown that is essentially Shotokan Karate, but the schools are called Karate North Taekwondo. Try explaining that one to a Korean man. Or a Japanese one. Obviously, urban areas will have more variety, just like with anything else. Rural areas will have the more widespread martial arts, one of the many variants of Karate or Taekwondo. Maybe both.

On the subject of hotspots, I'd say Hawaii is probably one. They have Lua, Kajukenbo, and many other more mainline martial arts.

I realize I have said a lot without really saying much. Maybe someone much wiser than myself can assist you further. Can I at least inquire as to why you're taking such an academic approach to the martial arts?

[Wa-No-Michi]

...And whilst on the subject of Japanese Karate there is a course Wado-ryu, which gets most of it workings from traditional Japanese Jujutsu.

Arguably it is more Japanese than both Shotokan and Kyokushin.

[tallgeese]

Some of your observations are correct. Others I tend to agree with less. Still, it's a start for what you're trying to do.

I think the most correct statement that you make concerns groups using heavy sparring against armored attackers. I'd expand the definition to say that it's a small group that is more concerned with sd applications than anything else, including some schools of thought within trad karate circles. And that fact that organizations are ad hoc at best is, I'd say, right on the money once you get past the codified "systems" marketed to LE and civilian consumers. Not knocking on them, some are very solid and I've spoken before about how I'm a fan of some.

I think an easier way to divide instruction up is probably by methodology of training rather than any nationalistic or root of origin. So, maybe there is instruction that is largely "traditional" in nature, ie. kata and such. Then there is training that is drill and sparring based in nature. Maybe there is a separate category for sd focus in training. Perhaps a subcategory under trad for the near exclusive study of weapons.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the tack you're taking, but basing such divisions on methods of training might be easier and lead to a more intuitive grouping. For example, despite country of origin and philosophical differences; chin-na, tuite, and hapkido, might be closer to one another in form and training than say, chin-na and some of the animal styles.

Just food for thought. Good luck in your process.

[Wa-No-Michi]

Toptomcat,

What MA experience do you have?

WNM

[bushido_man96]

It sounds like you're looking to divide Karate into various teaching models. You could make as many or as few classifications as you like, depending on how specific you would want to be. I think you would want to make as few classifications as possible, and go with that. That in mind, you could look into something like this:

1. Sport-oriented styles. Your kickboxing would likely fall in here, and the knockdown style of Kyokushin may overlap here, as well.

2. Hard-styles. These could fall into the harder styles like Shotokan, that took the route of being a type of physical education/self-defense style. Your typical kata/kihon/kumite based systems may fall in line here.

3. Self-defense styles. These could be systems based soley on searching out the self-defense applications inherent in their styles, be it through forms or other ways of applying strategies and tactics.

4. Softer styles (?). You would have to check with Wa-No-Michi and some of the other Wado/Goju guys on this one, because I think that styles like Wado and Goju have a bit of a different set-up than the likes of Shotokan, Shito-Ryu, etc. But I could be wrong.

At any rate, this could give you a start on a break-down. Also note that schools may have a certain focus, with some overlap of the others contained. It won't be hard and fast, so some shades of grey may intervene.

[Toptomcat]

Toptomcat,

What MA experience do you have?

WNM

Constant study over about the last seven years, moving from karate school to school- for reasons of opportunity rather than listnessness, as schools closed down and I moved from place to place. The differences I noticed sparked my interest in this subject.