Where did the Karate stances for punching originate from?

[Prototype]

In the Kata that is..It does not reflect how I or any assailant would attack with a punch. Ones body would never be positioned in that way, so why do we train in it?

The same when applied in bunkai.

Anybody knows?

[JackD]

This made me remember a video I once watched that seemed to make a lot of sense.

"Think of a stance as a transition not a position"

[JusticeZero]

Well, where did the stance for Western boxing originate? The way boxers position their bodies does not reflect how most anybody not exposed to European martial arts would throw a punch.

[Wastelander]

In the Kata that is..It does not reflect how I or any assailant would attack with a punch. Ones body would never be positioned in that way, so why do we train in it?

The same when applied in bunkai.

Anybody knows?

Kata does not teach kickboxing--if it did, it would look much more like you are thinking, I suspect. Instead, kata teaches something more akin to clinchwork. That is, it teaches close-range fighting techniques, many of which involve limb control, grabbing and striking, and takedowns of various sorts. Of course, the kata are cleaned up versions of these fighting methods, either to build proper structure or just to look nicer. As JackD mentions, the stances you see are much more transitional than they appear in the kata.

If you want to see the stances of kata in competitive fighting, look to the clinchwork of Muay Thai, the cagework of MMA, and the standing components of arts like judo and sumo. They don't stand idly by in a proper front stance, or horse stance, or cat stance, but they absolutely use them where appropriate for structure, control, and application of technique. You'll also notice a good number of the arm movements of kata, as well, just by the very nature of fighting at that range. Obviously, it isn't 100% crossover, because karate's approach is not identical to any one of those arts, but the similarities are clear, if you know what to look for.

[MatsuShinshii]

In the Kata that is..It does not reflect how I or any assailant would attack with a punch. Ones body would never be positioned in that way, so why do we train in it?

The same when applied in bunkai.

Anybody knows?

Kata does not teach kickboxing--if it did, it would look much more like you are thinking, I suspect. Instead, kata teaches something more akin to clinchwork. That is, it teaches close-range fighting techniques, many of which involve limb control, grabbing and striking, and takedowns of various sorts. Of course, the kata are cleaned up versions of these fighting methods, either to build proper structure or just to look nicer. As JackD mentions, the stances you see are much more transitional than they appear in the kata.

If you want to see the stances of kata in competitive fighting, look to the clinchwork of Muay Thai, the cagework of MMA, and the standing components of arts like judo and sumo. They don't stand idly by in a proper front stance, or horse stance, or cat stance, but they absolutely use them where appropriate for structure, control, and application of technique. You'll also notice a good number of the arm movements of kata, as well, just by the very nature of fighting at that range. Obviously, it isn't 100% crossover, because karate's approach is not identical to any one of those arts, but the similarities are clear, if you know what to look for.

Solid post Wastelander.

[Prototype]

Well, where did the stance for Western boxing originate? The way boxers position their bodies does not reflect how most anybody not exposed to European martial arts would throw a punch.

That's a separate thing since boxing is a sport in which no kicking is allowed. You can't fight in a boxing stance for Muay Thai or you will get put on your butt by low kicks. The point of Karate was for self defence, and I don't think the stances for punches make much sense.

[Wado Heretic]

The major problem in street or spontaneous violence is the collapse of distance between the aggressor and the victim. Punching in karate, as much as it's blocking techniques, evolved to deal with this collapse in distance. Hence the focus on penetrative power, and originating, during practice, from a place that does not make much sense from a competitive perspective, the hips or the chest, but which is a place the hand will naturally travel through if raising the hands to defend the self.

One must also consider the implications of hikite, or returning the hand with force; it makes little sense if one is keeping the hands up to defend the self. Rather, it is about controlling an attacker already within the mid-range, or the collapsed distance.

Also, the punching is largely to the body, or even when to the head comes up and into rather than straight to like a conventional boxing punch. This is because the body is a much larger target, and in the event of spontaneous violence is easier to hit than the smaller target of the head. Also though, if one does strike the head but forces it up, this can be used to effect a persons balance, and again better controls distance. This effects can be seen in the thrusting techniques of sumo for example; where the point of the striking is to control distance, and effect balance.

[LeighSimmsMA]

In the Kata that is..It does not reflect how I or any assailant would attack with a punch. Ones body would never be positioned in that way, so why do we train in it?

The same when applied in bunkai.

Anybody knows?

As you have rightly pointed out any assailant wouldn't attach with a punch in a formal stance and I have already made a thread about the issues with this kind of practice earlier this month (it can be found here: http://www.karateforums.com/my-thoughts-on-ippon-kumite-vt50270.html)

In terms of applying stances in bunkai and I can only speak for myself (obviously ), I think the use of stances in Karate as a whole is greatly misunderstood. I refer you to two quotes. First from from Gichin Funakoshi's nijukun (20 precepts): - "Kamae wa shoshinsha ni ato wa shizentai" (fixed positions are for beginners. Later, one moves naturally) and secondly from Genwa Nakasone on his understanding of the above precept: - "Karate has many stances; it also has none.

What I take from the above information is that beginners need to learn stances so they can understand how to move their bodyweight. For example a front stances moves the bodyweight forward, a back stance/cat stance moves the bodyweight back, a horse stance drops the bodyweight and keeps it centred. But once the student understand how to move their bodyweight, they should move onto apply the techniques within the kata in a dyanmic way where they move through stances and not into stances.

Let's take a basic stepping punch (the second motion in Pinan Nidan/Heian Shodan). Ignoring the pulling hand for sake of clarity (and that Wado Heretic has already mentioned), you first learn the kata by stepping into a front stance ("fixed positions are for beginners" "Karate has many stances")and executing the punch. Now in reality (and in two-person training) the punch should be done in motion, if it is the end of the drill then the defender should be moving out of danger and if there is to be any follow-up techniques the defender should be flowing straight into these to ensure any build-up of moment is not lost by becoming stationary. As you begin to transition between techniques you are using stances but for split-seconds ("later one moves naturally" "....also has none").

One purpose of stance is to put the bodyweight behind the punch so that the punch hurts the enemy. The purpose is not to perform a "good looking stance" whilst you punch someone! Sometimes, we get bogged down in detail of trying to perform correct form and forget that for application purposes we need to be using the stance and not just doing the stance.

Gichin Funakoshi's 18 precept "Kata wa tadashiku jissen wa betsu mono" (Kata is to be performed exactly, Kumite is another matter) seems to be a succinct way of saying what took me 4 paragraphs!.

Of course, there are other practical uses of stances, for example disrupting the enemys posture (think of the front leg of front stances driving into the side of the enemys knee) or to aid in keeping your centre of gravitiy low should the enemy have hold of you and is trying to move/throw you.

In summary, Funakoshi wrote that we should start by learning fixed positions and then move on to use them so they become natural movement rather than fixed. However, it seems that many dojo do not move past the initial stage.

Leigh

[sensei8]

Stances in Karate, whether they be in Kata or Kihon or Kumite, are tools, and tools alone, and in that, they'll change to fit the moment at hand. We're adapted creatures by fault!! If one way doesn't feel right, we'll change in order that it does.

Stances, no matter how taught or learned or what have you, are necessary if one's got to stand up and transition here to there, and so on and so forth. When we're drilling, our stances are so and thus, and we accept them for what they are. However, outside of that, stances are meant to be reevaluated from time to time by that practitioner alone. After all, no ones instructor moves you or fights for you or whatever...no...you have to do it all by yourself!!

I wholeheartedly concur with LeighSimmsMA post; makes a lot of quality points!

[LeighSimmsMA]

Stances in Karate, whether they be in Kata or Kihon or Kumite, are tools, and tools alone, and in that, they'll change to fit the moment at hand. We're adapted creatures by fault!! If one way doesn't feel right, we'll change in order that it does.

Stances, no matter how taught or learned or what have you, are necessary if one's got to stand up and transition here to there, and so on and so forth. When we're drilling, our stances are so and thus, and we accept them for what they are. However, outside of that, stances are meant to be reevaluated from time to time by that practitioner alone. After all, no ones instructor moves you or fights for you or whatever...no...you have to do it all by yourself!!

I wholeheartedly concur with LeighSimmsMA post; makes a lot of quality points!

Thanks for the support!

I think you have made an important but above but I am not sure if I understood you correctly . I think you are trying to say that use of stances should be internalised by the individual so they understand and become comfortable with how their own bodies move?