Not ALL Karate Is The Same!

[Lupin1]

What about ancient one-touch death grip styles? Can we concur that most of them are inaffective?

[sensei8]

What about ancient one-touch death grip styles? Can we concur that most of them are inaffective?

No. Not enough facts for me to base an unbiased opinion either for or against it. I would summize that I do doubt the effectiveness of these type of things, and that's about it.

[RW]

I believe karate in general has been dilluted.

Early karate practitioners sparred full time (if the word sparring actually applies to what they did). They punched a makiwara. And they would use throws, knees and elbows (there is a reazon karate's got hiza geri and empi uchi on kata and drills... and even that empi kata).

In order to popularize the martial art, I suppose, full contact sparring fell out of favor. So did hand attacks to the face (even in Kyokushin!). Kick are allowed only on the upper body in most styles and no elbows/knee strikes on sparring.

Is this really representative of how karate used to be?

Still, I don't see it as a negative thing. How many people want to show up to work/school with a black eye? Those who want to learn some self defense but don't want/can't have that go do karate (or taekwondo or other MA's) and not boxing or Muay Thai.

[Toptomcat]

The problem lies in those who train half-heartedly and believe they know how to defend themselves. There's such a thing as training that's so poor that it's worse than never having been trained at all, training that creates a false sense of security that can be actively counterproductive in keeping people safe- and there's a great deal of it out there.

[Soheir]

The problem lies in those who train half-heartedly and believe they know how to defend themselves. There's such a thing as training that's so poor that it's worse than never having been trained at all, training that creates a false sense of security that can be actively counterproductive in keeping people safe- and there's a great deal of it out there.

I agree, and I it's a lie that those people who train for a while, could actually defend themselves after they quit training totally. This is not something that you just learn and practice once, we must keep training, keep practicing.

[sensei8]

The problem lies in those who train half-heartedly and believe they know how to defend themselves. There's such a thing as training that's so poor that it's worse than never having been trained at all, training that creates a false sense of security that can be actively counterproductive in keeping people safe- and there's a great deal of it out there.

I agree, and I it's a lie that those people who train for a while, could actually defend themselves after they quit training totally. This is not something that you just learn and practice once, we must keep training, keep practicing.

Solid post!

Random question:

If one has been training/learning for quite some time, i.e. 20 or 30 or 40 plus years, and they 'quit training totally' for one reason or another: wouldn't muscle memory activate when attacked? Kind of like getting back onto the horse, in that, once you've done it before, all one has to do is get back onto the horse and everything starts to fall into place.

[Soheir]

Solid post!

Random question:

If one has been training/learning for quite some time, i.e. 20 or 30 or 40 plus years, and they 'quit training totally' for one reason or another: wouldn't muscle memory activate when attacked? Kind of like getting back onto the horse, in that, once you've done it before, all one has to do is get back onto the horse and everything starts to fall into place.

Well, that's why I said "for a while". Because I don't think 8 years is enough on this one. But I still think that you should not stop practicing after 40 years.

[sensei8]

Solid post!

Random question:

If one has been training/learning for quite some time, i.e. 20 or 30 or 40 plus years, and they 'quit training totally' for one reason or another: wouldn't muscle memory activate when attacked? Kind of like getting back onto the horse, in that, once you've done it before, all one has to do is get back onto the horse and everything starts to fall into place.

Well, that's why I said "for a while". Because I don't think 8 years is enough on this one. But I still think that you should not stop practicing after 40 years.

I concur with you!

[RW]

The problem lies in those who train half-heartedly and believe they know how to defend themselves. There's such a thing as training that's so poor that it's worse than never having been trained at all, training that creates a false sense of security that can be actively counterproductive in keeping people safe- and there's a great deal of it out there.

I agree, and I it's a lie that those people who train for a while, could actually defend themselves after they quit training totally. This is not something that you just learn and practice once, we must keep training, keep practicing.

Solid post!

Random question:

If one has been training/learning for quite some time, i.e. 20 or 30 or 40 plus years, and they 'quit training totally' for one reason or another: wouldn't muscle memory activate when attacked? Kind of like getting back onto the horse, in that, once you've done it before, all one has to do is get back onto the horse and everything starts to fall into place.

I did karate for a LONG time, then quit for a while, then began kickboxing (American style, not Muay Thai based).

The muscle memory is definitely still there. Your body is not the same, though. You tell your leg to move and it may or may not do it as fast as before, and your legs will get tired after a short while. Getting back in the game is much quicker than if you had never done karate in the first place...