Where the average Karate school falls short!

[Luther unleashed]

I find that often many Karate styles and dojo’s Fall short in effectively teaching fighting. Too many tines I see students spend hours upon hours drilling self’s defense moves. I watch their opponent repeated and endlessly drive a slow moving punch forward, while the defender performs a set of techniques. It’s not a problem to start slow but what gets to me is even after years and black belt levels are earned, many practitioners who are defending against an attack me move very quickly, however the defender is never coming at a fast pace and is always very telegraphed to ensure a good outcome.

This in particular is why I am not actually a fan of things like one step sparring and self-defense. I personally believe that the biggest form of self defense happens in free sparring, most often karate I see spiring used as a sport version or additive to what they do. For me and my experience sparring was treated more like a fight. In karate it is common to see everybody moving the same exact way as they are taught to stand, and move, and strike identically. Of course with this happening it does not bring about a real mess of a fight because every single street opponent will move differently. When I teach spiring everybody may use the techniques they learn from class on their own, and although they are taught way to stand in the end they are aspiring stance is their own in the ways they move specifically are their own. Inspiring having an opponents coming at you is much more like a fight and nothing will feel closer to a fight in this. No matter how many self-defense moves we do there always seems to be a lack of true 100% resistance and consistently telegraphed slower movements where as inspiring it may be controlled because we don’t want to harm our opponent but in fact we aim to achieve very fast effective techniques that land.

I believe Karate’s weakness in many cases is the lack of treating sparring more like fighting, because as I stated, performing self-defense techniques with a partner is typically way to controlled.

Tell me what you guys think, I always welcome your opinions.

[LLLEARNER]

I would have to agree. Even though I am new to karate, I can already see a difference. I noticed that sparring allows me to try techniques in a better manner than just drilling. Not to knock drills, but they can become too slow for the effective feel of a fight. When I train hospital staff at work, I hate to see the watering down of the curriculum because people complain. I understand that the hospital is trying to minimize risk and having to accommodate physical differences, but the lack of authenticity in training will leave too many people too vulnerable in a conflict.

[DWx]

I find that often many Karate styles and dojo’s Fall short in effectively teaching fighting. Too many tines I see students spend hours upon hours drilling self’s defense moves. I watch their opponent repeated and endlessly drive a slow moving punch forward, while the defender performs a set of techniques. It’s not a problem to start slow but what gets to me is even after years and black belt levels are earned, many practitioners who are defending against an attack me move very quickly, however the defender is never coming at a fast pace and is always very telegraphed to ensure a good outcome.

This in particular is why I am not actually a fan of things like one step sparring and self-defense. I personally believe that the biggest form of self defense happens in free sparring, most often karate I see spiring used as a sport version or additive to what they do. For me and my experience sparring was treated more like a fight. In karate it is common to see everybody moving the same exact way as they are taught to stand, and move, and strike identically. Of course with this happening it does not bring about a real mess of a fight because every single street opponent will move differently. When I teach spiring everybody may use the techniques they learn from class on their own, and although they are taught way to stand in the end they are aspiring stance is their own in the ways they move specifically are their own. Inspiring having an opponents coming at you is much more like a fight and nothing will feel closer to a fight in this. No matter how many self-defense moves we do there always seems to be a lack of true 100% resistance and consistently telegraphed slower movements where as inspiring it may be controlled because we don’t want to harm our opponent but in fact we aim to achieve very fast effective techniques that land.

I believe Karate’s weakness in many cases is the lack of treating sparring more like fighting, because as I stated, performing self-defense techniques with a partner is typically way to controlled.

Tell me what you guys think, I always welcome your opinions.

I think there are positives and negatives to each approach. Step sparring is a useful format for developing tactics and practising responses but its no good as you say just learning to react to half speed punches. The one step format should be expanded upon to include other types of attacks and less regimented attacks (e.g. haymakers vs oi-zuki). Few blackbelts in our school, the next level of practice is for the attacker to attack with an undetermined technique and for the defender to react on the fly.

Free sparring provides that live format, but for self defence you'd also need to practice with non-traditional attacks. Not every would-be assailant grew up at the Cobra-kai.

[Wastelander]

Everything has its place, and "sparring" is a pretty varied category of training methods. I would agree that too many people train to deal with unrealistic attacks, or even if they work against realistic attacks, they may not move from compliant drilling to resistant drilling to free practice.

We have some formal drills in our organization that use the typical "step back, down block, step in, lunge punch" types of attacks to introduce some basic concepts and techniques, but we don't limit ourselves to that in our practice of those drills. Additionally, since we have a heavy emphasis on bunkai and kata application, we do a lot of training with that material using some simplified attacks for introduction purposes, and more realistic attacks as well. From compliant drilling, we move on to semi-resistant drilling, where the uke may block, or fight back out of the joint lock, or not fall down, etc., so that the technique was mostly successful, up until the very end.

This gives students an opportunity to learn how to counter such resistance, and how to continue if their technique fails. From there, we increase the resistance in two ways. Sometimes, we simply have the uke attack again in some way after doing what I previously described, so the student has to learn to deal with that type of failure. Other times, since we know the technique they are trying to do, we will do something to stop it earlier, or throw it off--moving differently, grabbing when there wasn't a grab before, throwing an awkward strike, or a flurry of them, etc. From these, you get a pretty good base of skills to work with.

This feeds into kakedameshi, kata randori, and "bully sparring" as I call it, as well as giving you the skills to cross over some of that material into more MMA-style sparring. These are sparring methods that allow you to work your techniques against resisting opponents in relative safety. Of course, everything I've described can only work in conjunction with supplemental training methods for developing the skills to actually use the techniques you learn in these types of sparring. I find that this varied approach addresses a lot of the shortcomings that come from more rigidly-structured methods.

[Prototype]

Wesley Snipes, a 5th degree black belt in Shotokan, readily admits that most Karatekas can't fight. The reason he says is because you learn forms and methodology but not real-life application. I think he has a very valid, though hardly original point.

[Alan Armstrong]

Hi Luther!

Experience in martial arts comes in all shapes and forms, from good examples to bad.

For you to notice the bad then you will hopefully recognize the good also; and apply it to your game/advantage.

The real danger is learning bad habits, which are difficult to unlearn.

Remember you are practicing in a (spoon fed) civilian dojo, whereas military MA is as close to realistic as possible.

Perhaps military MA training is for you, maybe this is something worth considering, in the near future.

[JR 137]

One step get a bad rep, and are definitely worth training IMO. It’s how one interprets and approaches them IMO. We have 10 “basic” and “intermediate” one-steps in our organization that are standardized and must be performed against a right punch and left punch during kyu ranks. Taken at face value, they’re ineffective; in the right context, they’re an effective teaching tool.

My CI reminds people of the following...

One fight will actually begin with a person stepping back with the stereotypical left low block and right hand chambered, then step straight forward with a straight punch. And they won’t stand there holding their punch out until you’ve finished your response. It’s not a “when you’re attacked, do this” thing. They’re meant to teach proper distance and footwork, where to block on the attacker, when and how to block, and teach proper targets with proper strikes. They’re another way to drill the basics and correct mistakes in using them. They’re not a coreographed response to common attacks.

Our basic ones are stand responses, and intermediates teach sweeping. I’ve seen a handful of the advanced ones (they’re taught at various dan ranks), and the ones I’ve seen end with joint locks and chokes.

As one progresses through the ranks and gets better at using them and controlling themself, the speed and resistance is increased appropriately. When I do them with a senior ranked partner and especially during testing, they’re certainly not punching slow nor throwing themselves on the ground to make me look good. They’re not fully resisting, but they’re appropriately making it difficult enough that if I’m a little off it won’t work. If I miss the block, I’m going to get hit (not blasted). If I block too early, as in when my CI says to go and I start immediately, they’ll stand there and ask “how’d you block a punch that’s not there yet? If I follow up the block too slowly, they’ll move and ask me what I’m waiting for. It’s not an attempt to embarrass me, it’s to keep me honest. And they won’t do these things to people who aren’t ready for it yet. That’s how they should be trained IMO.

[sensei8]

There's not a thing wrong with Karate!! The problem lies with the CI of said dojo!! Not all black belts can teach; and many have no business trying to do so!!

Methodologies and ideologies are handed down; what was solid once, has the potentiality of being weak in the hands of a CI that doesn't have the minimum of an idea what they're doing once on the floor.

Some black belts have effective solid techniques, but they couldn't teach their way out of a wet bag littered with holes, if their live depended on it.

Drilling is important, no matter how mundane and/or frustrating they can be. To learn how to walk, I first learned how to crawl. While I had just learned the basic fundamentals of crawling, I drilled and drilled and drilled the many aspects of crawling before I tackled something more complex...like...standing. I'll try to walk before I know how to because I want to learn the advanced stuff...like...walking because I want to, and I deserve it. I can learn standing after I attempt walking first...I know what's best.

The wake up of my enthusiasm is when I fall flat on my face, have that stunned and shocked locked on my face, just seconds before I start crying out loudly enough for mom and/or dad to hear my distress.

One steps are not the problem either...drilling isn't the problem either...whatever else isn't the problem either...the blame rests within the CI of the dojo. There's nothing wrong with Karate!!

Karate, like anything else has to be learned, and the learning process happens in steps...not leaps and bounds...but in steps, and if I may, baby steps, at that.

If the CI doesn't challenge students effectively, across the board, then students are going to fall off the wayside at an alarming rate. Don't think so! Then be that CI who doesn't challenge his/her students effectively, and see how fast the Student Body dwindles to nothingness.

Don't like drilling! Then quit Karate immediately. Btw, Kumite is vitally important, as is resistance training, and they both must be done often in order for growth in the student. Guess what? These two, to name a few, Kumite and resistant training are drills as well. They're just not labeled as such.

Imho!!

Edited October 22, 2017 by sensei8

[shortyafter]

Great posts by JR and sensei8. Thanks guys.

Growing up I was the kid that got picked last for dodgeball, and I didn't start getting genuinely active and then doing karate until my early 20's. For me it was important not just to learn how to fight, but rather how to use my body. I think karate, both technically and spiritually, is very effective at this. As others have stated, the drills teach me things like power, control, resistance, etc. For example, I do zumba twice a week and I like to include that as part of my karate training - it gets me into my body and loosens me up.

Then again I'm not JUST doing it in order to have a flexible and responsive physique. I am also doing it for self-defense / fighting purposes. I think, as sensei8 states, an effective CI will teach me to apply my new-found physicality in a way that greatly enhances my fighting and self-defense capabilities. It's all connected... as long as the dots are being drawn correctly.

[Wado Heretic]

You fight how you train, and you need to train for your intended fight. I would argue that is where many karate schools fail; trying to be a whole package, which does not in fact exist. If you intend to compete; your teaching regime must be geared towards the competitive format you intend to participate in. If your goal is self-defence, you must consider the self-defence needs you are catering to; do you need to focus on civilian self-defence, or combatives?

Many karate clubs/dojo, I have found, have that misunderstanding of cause and affect. Which goes back to Sensei8's sentiment that it is down to the Chief Instructor. It also goes back Wastelander's argument regarding the nature of drilling; some are unrealistic, but effective drilling a proven building block on developing fighting skills.

Being independent, and only part of the BKA for insurance purposes; I have a lot of flexibility in what I do. I tend to question students very early on regarding their ambitions and goals. If they are just along for the journey, or wish to study self-defence; then they are put on a training regime suited to self-defence. If they intend to compete; I coach them, and give them a regime suited to competing. Drilling is a huge part of both, as is sparring; but both have to be different. For example; no point making someone who wishes to compete do regular Mass Attack Randori, because that time would be better spent drilling wrestling or kick-boxing skills.

So, I would argue that it is the rigidity of grading syllabi that causes many problems, but also a failure to appreciate the end goal of training regimes. Many instructors teach karate, but without an eye to the end goal except karate for the sake of karate. As such, they are stuck in a cycle of rigidly teaching what they were taught. Never evolving, or being flexible, and arming students with the tools most appropriate for that student.