Grappling in Karate

[jason ainley]

Check out Ian abernethys work .

Ian has written books and produced many dvds on this subject, Karates grappling methods and bunkai jitsu are two of them.

[Mike Flanagan]

The main thing I see here is that grappling seems to be associated with the cultural position of authority and community, while striking is more associated with division and weakness.

If you are the police, it is to your advantage to grapple with someone; you will tangle them up and have any number of tools to submit them without great harm into whatever situation is appropriate, the people around you will not interfere and will be glad for your presence. This is one reason why grappling is favored in MMA; there is no outward threats, no surprises, and nowhere to run.

If you are a fugitive or outlaw in your own land, you do not want to grapple. You want to deal with threats to your person decisively and rapidly, retaining your mobility and ability to act throughout in order to be able to flee to live another day. If a technique tangles you with your attacker, it is useless to you. You would be capturing yourself and delivering yourself to your attackers.

From what little I know of Karate, the original history of at least some forms of the art and many of its underpinnings of thought more resembled the latter state, not the former. This might partly explain why grappling has not previously had the attention in it as that it might have had otherwise.

Hi JusticeZero,

I have to say that I think you have this wrong to a degree. In the old Okinawan kingdom students of Karate would be more likely to be authority figures in society, not fugitives or outlaws. There was of course the king's bodyguard & security detail. But there were also lower ranks of shizoku (nobility) who acted as policemen. These all trained in Karate and would all have needed skills in control and restraint, as well as decisive boshing techniques.

Regardless of that, if you want effective self-defence skills you have to consider the nature of real violence, in which humans instinctively close to grappling range. Even matches between skilled strikers tend to deteriorate to this, if the rules of the match allow for it (and often even if the rules don't).

The nature of violence hasn't really changed much in 150 years so the Karate masters of the past recognised the need to deal with grappling and therefore have some grappling skills themselves. And so you'll find kata is replete with joint-locks and takedowns, in addition to the more obvious striking techniques.

[billyparker]

Mike Flanagan, well said Sir. To Te Jitsu, by: Gichin Funakoshi has a section on Nage Waza or Throwing technique. In this section Master Funakoshi actually says it would be an asset to have some Jujitsu incorporated into Karate.

We don't see much joint-locking (kansetsuwaza) or any type grappling for that matter in Karate today. But it's there if you wan't to find it. I believe the Okinawan specific school's tend to share more of those concepts than the Japanese mainland schools. But it's an important element of Karate, even if it's rare.

I myself am a policeman and I can appreciate many aspects of the Karate I practice, Shotokan. In fact my instructor used to teach policeman. It has applicability in specific circumstances. Good words Mr. Flanagan and excellent history you put down there. I completely agree.