I really hate forms

[Toptomcat]

Soken Hohan? The one whose karate was significantly influenced by a form of Okinawan village wrestling which by his own admission was sufficiently rough that broken limbs were a real possibility? That sounds like a form of practice sufficiently rough and freeform to be called 'sparring' to me.

[sensei8]

I agree with you sensei8 for the most part. However, I believe that kata should permeate most of the training in traditional karate. By this I mean that all kihon drills and all self defense as well as all kumite should come from the kata. To me these other drills and exercises are where you really start learning your forms. I detest free sparring the way that it's presented today. It wasn't originally like that. If you look at old JKA pics and videos if you can find them you'll see that their free sparring techniques came directly from their kihon and kata.

Why not judge training methods by the caliber of martial artists they produce, not their degree of adherence to old methods of the Japanese Karate Association?

I agree. I'm not defined by the three K's, therefore, I define the three K's. I still respect the three K's, because, for me, it's Karate, and I can't have Karate without the three K's, and vice versa. Yet, when I look at every martial art that's practiced throughout the world, every martial art has the three K's in every which way but loose. I'm pretty sure that every martial art has its basics, drills [kata], and sparring.

In my opinion sparring-heavy styles of karate have produced some impressive karateka...

I agree. Sparring is paramount! Kihon allows me to refine my techniques(s), and Kata allows me to refine my transitions, and Kumite allows me to refine where the rubber meets the road.

[username13768]

I'm talking about point sparring and the way that it is done for competition these days. It's a game of tag that means absolutely nothing. Not all, but a lot of schools are sparring like this and nothing else. I went to one school where they looked at me like an alien bug when I asked about 1, 2 and 3 step sparring in addition to free sparring.

I agree that kata is only one of the 3 k's necessary to good karate. However, sparring has to be made as realistic as possible and use the techniques and movement from the other 2 k's or the sparring becomes meaningless.

Certainly you can learn to fight and defend yourself without these things I'm talking about but is it true karate at that point? And I'm not talking about karate as a generic term as it's used today. I'm talking about a true Japanese/ Okinawan fighting art. Maybe I'm just getting confused by semantics here. Maybe we all are.

[username13768]

Oops ... To answer your question Toptomcat, I believe thatyou are actually referring Funakoshi Gichin and his description of Okinawan hand wrestling for "Karate Do Kyohan". This hand wrestling was never a part of any documented karate training. Given that most of the karate training of the period was undocumented. However, Funakoshi's Shuri Te (Shorin Ryu) lineage was mostly Chinese in origin with, I and some other well known historians believe, Indonesian influences as well since there was heavy trading going on around this period.

[sensei8]

I'm talking about point sparring and the way that it is done for competition these days. It's a game of tag that means absolutely nothing. Not all, but a lot of schools are sparring like this and nothing else. I went to one school where they looked at me like an alien bug when I asked about 1, 2 and 3 step sparring in addition to free sparring.

I agree that kata is only one of the 3 k's necessary to good karate. However, sparring has to be made as realistic as possible and use the techniques and movement from the other 2 k's or the sparring becomes meaningless.

Certainly you can learn to fight and defend yourself without these things I'm talking about but is it true karate at that point? And I'm not talking about karate as a generic term as it's used today. I'm talking about a true Japanese/ Okinawan fighting art. Maybe I'm just getting confused by semantics here. Maybe we all are.

In that, I agree with you wholeheartedly!

[Toptomcat]

No, I'm pretty sure I remember an interview with Soken Hohan in which he mentions something along those lines, I think by Ernest Estrada. You might be able to find it on Google.

As for sparring, I'm not a huge fan of stop-and-start point either. I think there are relevant lessons to be taken from lots of other kinds of kumite, though- Taekwondo-style continuous point, Kyokushin-style bareknuckle knockdown, three-steps, and American, Japanese, and Thai kickboxing, among others. None of them are an end to themselves, but each of them can sharpen martially relevant skills and each provides different ways to put what you've learned into practice.

Sticking exclusively to three-steps strikes me as a little too abstract. Kata are the map, combat is the territory, and if the only kumite you ever do is three-steps I think your students risk confusing the two.

[username13768]

No I teach jiyu kumite or free sparring too. However there better be techniques being used and not some flailing tournament junk. I have to stop now before I go on a rant about tournaments ... lol

[tonydee]

I agree with you sensei8 for the most part. However, I believe that kata should permeate most of the training in traditional karate. By this I mean that all kihon drills and all self defense as well as all kumite should come from the kata. To me these other drills and exercises are where you really start learning your forms. I detest free sparring the way that it's presented today. It wasn't originally like that. If you look at old JKA pics and videos if you can find them you'll see that their free sparring techniques came directly from their kihon and kata.

Why not judge training methods by the caliber of martial artists they produce, not their degree of adherence to old methods of the Japanese Karate Association? In my opinion sparring-heavy styles of karate have produced some impressive karateka...

I consider patterns an indispensable - though of course not the only - foundation of my training. Most martial arts movements require considerable skill to execute well, and patterns encourage serious practice of non-trivial combinations. The repetition in patterns gives people a chance to hone those skills over years. Practicing with partners is good, but less accessible, and more prone to variations or limitations in their actions that can sometimes limit the challenge and consequent progress from training with them. In a pattern, only perfection is good enough, and in that way not having another person as the benchmark helps keep you focused on improvement. The sheer simplicity of a pattern's environment of execution makes it possible to vary the mental and technical focus and seek out other dimensions to the practice (e.g. explosive speed of footwork, untelegraphed movement, body mechanics, mental awareness of surroundings, height in stances etc). I also believe it's important for people to seek a common technical basis in their art, and vary only after making a concerted and sustained effort to become proficient in the "traditional" movement. Too many movements are thrown away by relative novices following their own intuition of what's right for them or seems to work better in some limited partner-training or competition scenario, long before they're any serious insight into the technique.

Cheers,

Tony

[bushido_man96]

I agree with you sensei8 for the most part. However, I believe that kata should permeate most of the training in traditional karate. By this I mean that all kihon drills and all self defense as well as all kumite should come from the kata. To me these other drills and exercises are where you really start learning your forms. I detest free sparring the way that it's presented today. It wasn't originally like that. If you look at old JKA pics and videos if you can find them you'll see that their free sparring techniques came directly from their kihon and kata.

Why not judge training methods by the caliber of martial artists they produce, not their degree of adherence to old methods of the Japanese Karate Association? In my opinion sparring-heavy styles of karate have produced some impressive karateka...

I think this is the key here.

[algernon]

. . . all kihon drills and all self defense as well as all kumite should come from the kata . . .

I think similarly, but I prefer that the form is molded around the rest of style's training, rather than restricting the training to the form.

None of them are an end to themselves, but each of them can sharpen martially relevant skills and each provides different ways to put what you've learned into practice.

I agree completely. That very notion should be extended to every method of practice and drilling that we employ. The reason that we break down our training into parts (kata, bag work, free sparring, step sparring, etc.) is the fact that just beating each other senseless until someone gets pretty good at it is a lousy option. So, we have to use different tools to develop different areas, and balance them in a way that produces a good fighter.