Karate without Kata?

[tallgeese]

Valid I suppose.

But there might be quite a bit to it if a student is walking into a gym under the label of karate and is told he'll learn to fight or defend himself with a modality that was developed at the turn of the last century.

I guess that's the problem. It's in the presentation of what it's all for that bothers me more than anything as we move thru this debate. I can concede kata (and hence karate with kata), for certain purposes. I just don't think it's a good training method to learn to fight with (sojobo, you and I seem to be in agreement to a degree with this). It's the idea that it will teach you to succeed in combat that bothers me. Hence, my position that if you're doing karate for combative reasons it can easily be done without kata.

[sojobo]

Well, as I think I have said before, I tell people from the outset that what I teach (in my Wado dojo) is NOT self defense.

I have removed all references to SD from our web page.

It's still a Martial Art though... and a very very good one imo.

sojobo

[SAAMAG]

Quite the conversation so far.

Kara-te, by definition is simply empty handed fighting. It has developed over the years to consist of the basic three parts of kihon, kata, and kumite.

But how does one define "karate"? Is it the idea that the system contains these three components? Is it the specific way karate approaches combat from a strategic or technique standpoint? Is it the zen-like atmosphere and the culture that it's been born from? Can another form of Karate be bred from another country altogether?

The fact is that, every kick and punch that's found in Karate, can be found in other systems and vice versa. The human body can only move so many ways, and most stand-up striking styles utilize the same techniques in some degree. Does the existence of kata, bunkai, ito, tai sabaki, and the like denote the personality of karate, and therefore the essence of its identity?

If karate can exist devoid of kata and its affiliated antiquities, what remains that would make it karate versus some other style? Or is there such a thing as styles once you extrapolate the basic techniques?

[Dobbersky]

Quite the conversation so far.

Kara-te, by definition is simply empty handed fighting. It has developed over the years to consist of the basic three parts of kihon, kata, and kumite.

But how does one define "karate"? Is it the idea that the system contains these three components? Is it the specific way karate approaches combat from a strategic or technique standpoint? Is it the zen-like atmosphere and the culture that it's been born from? Can another form of Karate be bred from another country altogether?

The fact is that, every kick and punch that's found in Karate, can be found in other systems and vice versa. The human body can only move so many ways, and most stand-up striking styles utilize the same techniques in some degree. Does the existence of kata, bunkai, ito, tai sabaki, and the like denote the personality of karate, and therefore the essence of its identity?

If karate can exist devoid of kata and its affiliated antiquities, what remains that would make it karate versus some other style? Or is there such a thing as styles once you extrapolate the basic techniques?

FACT - Kata is practiced in other styles of martial arts too. There IS Jujitsu Kata, Judo Kata, Aikido Kata, Budo Kata Iaido Kata etc for Japanese styles.

In other Styles from other countries there are forms of 1 type or another. Kata/Hyungs/Poomsae or other names for them are practiced by Tai Chi, Kung Fu All Types, Silat, Filipino Martial Arts, etc.

The fact is anywhere where there is a series of combinations put together this is a Form or Kata!!!

For Example, if you have "Self Defence Drills" and you practice them 1 after the other at home or even at the Gym/Dojo/Dojang/Kwan/etc - YES YOU HAVE JUST PRACTICED A KATA!!!!

The thing is people see kata as complicated and hard or pointless as we don't use it for anything else. if this is the case then it is YOUR teacher's Fault!!!!

I use my kata and every part of it is used, Damn I even use techniques in the warm up for application!!!

Not having Kata is like sitting in the middle of the ocean in a rowing boat without any oars!!!

[tallgeese]

Part of the problem with the analogy (and it's an interesting one, Dobbersky) is that kata is predefined in its set of movements. There is no variation, ever. It's part of how kata is judged on being done well or not.

However, if you look at self defense drilling (your example) with a partner and focus mitts, you might throw the same jab, cross, lead hook combo each time. However, you and your partner will be moving, circling, ect. This is a dramatic difference that takes us to a movement patter far closer to an actual fight than a memorized pattern.

Even if we go to a solo example, someone doing the same combination on a heavy bag or torso dummy is still throwing the same tactic. However, they are moving, cutting angles, finding openings, ect. Again, this, and the contact of hitting something, is much more like a real fight due to the slightly more dynamic nature.

If we step back from mimicking a fight even more, due perhaps to equipment issues, we'd go to shadowboxing. This is probably the closest thing I could come up with out of my groups efforts that looks like, and might be compared to kata. However, there is still a difference. In shadowboxing, one is moving in a patter that IS NOT predefined. Even if they are working, still, the same jab, cross, lead hook combo. The lack of predefined movement is a major mindset shift from kata that goes to mimicking at least one, albeit, controlled aspect of unarmed combat.

This mindset difference is an important one, even if it is so basic it goes without saying. A fight isn't predetermined, and it moves. In fact, because of that fact it probably doesn't get said enough. Kata doesn't train this the way other forms of drilling does.

Still, I find the argument along this line interesting (someone who is more familiar with the Filipino system might have to comment from that standpoint) . Although for me we're talking about drills for a system, accessories to the boat to stay with your analogy. The strategy and principles of a system, to me, would be more analogous to the motor for the boat.

[davehale]

Sojobo,

I must strongly disagree with your statement that "people can make great sounding music without having to know how to play any musical instruments." I studied music theory and composition and before we ever wrote any music for specific instruments we spent a semester learning how to play it. Bit of a tagent, sorry but the musician in me was just screaming.

However, I completely agree with your feelings towards kata and karate. I do love that quote.

[bushido_man96]

I think that if you take Kata out of a martial art, you end up learning only what your instructor promotes and know. If you learn Kata, a reasonably intelligent person can actually learn more than what the instructor is willing or able to teach.

But all styles don't use kata as a training tool. Lacking kata isn't going to cause an inefficiency in learning.

Could you give me an example?

Sure. BJJ, Wrestling, Boxing, Muay Thai, Aikido, Combat Hapkido, Pankration, are some off the top of my head that don't train with kata. All are effective combat systems.

[sojobo]

Sure. BJJ, Wrestling, Boxing, Muay Thai, Aikido, Combat Hapkido, Pankration, are some off the top of my head that don't train with kata. All are effective combat systems.

Aikido has Kata - like "Koryu no Kata":

Remember not all Kata are solo Kata

Most traditional Japanese martial systems utilise the process of Kata.

Even Judo has Kata:

Infact kata in Japanese culture goes well beyond Martial Arts.

And the point is to evolve out of them....

sojobo

[Dobbersky]

I think that if you take Kata out of a martial art, you end up learning only what your instructor promotes and know. If you learn Kata, a reasonably intelligent person can actually learn more than what the instructor is willing or able to teach.

But all styles don't use kata as a training tool. Lacking kata isn't going to cause an inefficiency in learning.

Could you give me an example?

Sure. BJJ, Wrestling, Boxing, Muay Thai, Aikido, Combat Hapkido, Pankration, are some off the top of my head that don't train with kata. All are effective combat systems.

BJJ - this teaches combinations of techniques, THIS IS KATA

Wrestling - same as above

Boxing - each Gym has its own set of techniques and combinations practiced together makes up a Kata

Muay Thai - Again each Camp practices its own combinations and again when they practice them all together 1 after the other this is Kata, I know when I trained in Muay Thai myself My Arjan shouted 24, 10, 12, 15 & 4 etc

Aikido - Sojobo has answered.

Hapkido - These have Hyungs here's 1 of them

I've not come across a style yet that doesn't have a series of combinations/techniques put together to make it easier to practice!

As Sojobo said Kata Does NOT have to practiced alone, it can also be in pairs too

[sojobo]

As Sojobo said Kata Does NOT have to practiced alone, it can also be in pairs too

Ahh! - except Ohyo kumite is not Kata

It is practiced as such in many Wado groups these days but unlike Kihon Gumite - it is not "set" so as such is not kata.

... but I get your point.

Sojobo