Punching Methods - Why?

[Dobbersky]

May I also add that in the various "Sabaki" Competitions from Ashihara and Enshin and Daiko Juku Grabing IS allowed as part of the genre of "legal" techniques

[Dobbersky]

I would also like to add this from a friend on another forum, to this forum:

People punch that way precisely because they fail to ask, "why?" Traditional martial arts instruction does not encourage critical thinking. The idea is that the art was perfected at some point in the past, and the task today is to preserve the sacred tradition. People just assume that because those silly movements are in the art, they must have a practical purpose. They don't.

[bushido_man96]

I would also like to add this from a friend on another forum, to this forum:

People punch that way precisely because they fail to ask, "why?" Traditional martial arts instruction does not encourage critical thinking. The idea is that the art was perfected at some point in the past, and the task today is to preserve the sacred tradition. People just assume that because those silly movements are in the art, they must have a practical purpose. They don't.

I think some of that may be true, to an extent. There are some out there who do challenge and tinker with the way the moves are done, experimenting and working different things. However, I think many times the student/instructor relationship is expected to be one of listen and do, and questions as to why either don't come to the fore, or are not addressed at all if they do. Hopefully, this isn't the norm any more.

[ps1]

I tend to look for the simplest explanation.

They are different arts that developed in different times and different places in cultures that could not be more different.

So let's examine what a punch needs to be capable of doing.

1. Generate knockout power: both can do that

2. Be versatile enough to hit multiple targets: both can do that

3. Leave you in a position to follow up with another strong strike: both do that

So, in that regard, both striking styles are equally effective.

As far as the idea of bringing hands back to the face, that's more a defensive thing rather than offensive.

Boxers use their shoulders, hand position, head movement and footwork as a defensive strategy. They allow their shoulders and arms to absorb the blows.

Karateka prefer to use parrys and footwork to avoid getting hit; set up an angle and strike. In addition, modern day karateka do not tend to train with alot of aliveness and, therefore do not have to fully test all of their techniques.

That's a VERY basic analysis, I realize. But my opinion on why they are so different.

[Patrick]

Hello,

Thank you for visiting KarateForums.com.

We removed a post from this thread in error. It is quoted below. I apologize for the trouble.

Thanks,

Patrick

The only time we ever hip chamber a punch is during warm up, or, maybe, to start a kata. But for the most part while performing kata, and always while sparring, we assume more of a boxing stance. Occasionally a kata will run us through "cat stance" but aside from my sensei I've never seen anybody fight/spar from any position besides a balanced one foot forward stance. And my sensei was just trying to prove to me that cat stance has some functionality. Really it just proved that experience wins!

[sensei8]

Successful execution of any Karate technique, punch in this thread, requires that the entire technique, from ones head to their sole, must be in concert with one another; everything starting and ending at the same time. Shindokan teaches that any Karate technique shouldn't move akin to a domino effect; one after the other, but in harmony with conception, through crescendo, and climaxing, and in that, each piece of any Karate technique must have an exclamation to it. Otherwise, only a push is being performed instead of any said Karate technique(s).

This is Shindokan methodology as well as theorem.