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.

I agree with you in that all too often schools will err on the side of caution and keep things slow so that no one gets hurt.

Fighting is unpredictable and I can see why you do not agree with the way some train.

Having said that I can only comment based on my training and experience and will allow others to comment for Karate as a whole. In the beginning phases we show the students how to defend against a set attack. Basically offender punches and the defender moves/deflects and counters. This is done at a slow speed so that the student can learn the technique/application and start to build muscle memory. However this is not a stagnant thing. This training should transition into training against a resistive opponent. Meaning that they no longer throw the strike slow or at the same height or angle. This then progresses into more of a free form of practice where as the opponent might throw any number of combinations until the student stops the attack by effecting a viable strike/throw/submission/etc. that ends the fight. This is done at full speed.

The concept is building upon their knowledge. They start learning a few techniques and applications and these are built upon. The training should go from compliant to resistive so that the student can assess it's effectiveness and suitability to them. This can only be done through pressure testing against a non-compliant opponent.

Each application and technique is done in this fashion and is built upon until the student has an endless amount of techniques and applications to draw upon.

The problem I have with sparring (Kumite) in most modern schools is everything the student is taught goes right out the window the minute they step on the floor. I also find issue with modern practice of kumite in that it is applied as a long distance method of fighting. This is not practical as 99.99% of fights are close quarters.

You should practice as you will fight in a real conflict. If you do not, muscle memory will revert the student back to the way they fight in class and this never ends well.

The training should be real in that how you practice will be how you will fight in a real confrontation.

Good points for sure. The thing about sparring is when I said I think it’s more effective, I meant if don’t the right way, and by right way I mean to be a lesson in fighting. As it stands the common school teaches a “sport” style of sparring, not because of how hard the contact is or isn’t, but more by the set techniques and way they learn which isn’t free like a fight.

An interesting point which relates is that I feel martial arts that fight their opponent t in the same style tend to get unrealistic outcomes. Meaning, learning to defend yourself against a guy that is stepping in with a reverse punch in a front stance is not practicing for real self defense in most cases. Of course an attacker could know martial arts, but make no mistake that most wont. They will attack you quickly in many cases and aggressively, not at all leaving their hand out for you. They will feint a great deal and feel things out, Sparring is the same way, if you spar a guy that fights like every other guy your not really learning to defend yourself in the common situation.

That’s why I said we trained using any techniques we learned and no set way of doing it. Being free is so overlooked and it is often met forcefully with traditional. In many cases tradition is beautiful, but it is the double edged sword of traditional Arts, as freedoms to think, and create is vital to the fighter.

[JR 137]

I like your previous post, Lex. However, I’m constantly reminded of this by my middle school students...

Everyone says “think outside the box.” Think freely and without constraints. Same as you’re saying - fight freely in a way without the constraints that plague many a dojo. Don’t “dojo fight,” but train to actually fight. Am I on the right track?

Now here’s the rub: I constantly remind my students that you have to know how to think inside the box before you can effectively think outside the box. You need to (relatively) master the basics before you start adding your own elements to it. The drilling is a way to master those basics. The drilling should keep all the textbook stuff intact - hands up, angles, footwork, etc. This engrains muscle memory.

If the drills you’ve been taught and the ones you taught your students aren’t working appropriately, change them. If the distance is off, change it. If the attack isn’t realistic, change it, then change the appropriate respective response.

What’s the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different outcome. If you’ve sufficiently trained it and analyzed it, and you’re not getting the results you think are appropriate, change it.

My previous teacher followed the organization’s curriculum. There were specific drills we did - left hand low block, forward leaning stance, step straight forward with a right straight punch. My former sensei taught those by the books. Once we were proficient with them, we did them out of a fighting stance. Once we were proficient with that, we moved around at a free-sparring speed. Once we were proficient, we’d use the same defense, only against a hook punch and had to adapt the initial block and footwork. Then we picked up the pace. All of that made them significantly more realistic. And functional.

Last thought...

I’ve been taught karate at the colored belt level is like turning the student into a robot. I.e. “do this this way, do that that way.” The student is basically a carbon copy. At the black belt level, the student is (or at least supposed to be) proficient enough in the basics to now start doing them in a way that’s tailored to him/her. Colored belts is “this is how it’s done.” Dan ranks is “make this work for you personally.” I like that approach. It goes to that think inside the box well enough to be able to think intelligently outside the box when the appropriate time comes. Maybe this is just who I’ve trained under rather than karate as a whole though. Black belts should be taught differently than colored belts.

There’s a great saying in photography:

First learn the rules of photography, and master them.

Then learn how and when to break them.

Definitely holds true in MA as well IMO.

Edited October 24, 2017 by JR 137

[bushido_man96]

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.

I agree with Danielle. I think that one-steps are a good starting point for low ranks, but they must be adapted as students increase in rank. They should go from being static to more interactive, and from beginning in ready positions and started with kihaps to being done as impromptu attacks that must be defended.

Performing sparring like fighting can lead to problems. One has to consider the contact levels, the target areas, and whether protective gear will be worn or not. I much prefer my sparring to have rules in place to prevent injuries and allow students to as much of it as possible in a training period.

[Luther unleashed]

I like your previous post, Lex. However, I’m constantly reminded of this by my middle school students...

Everyone says “think outside the box.” Think freely and without constraints. Same as you’re saying - fight freely in a way without the constraints that plague many a dojo. Don’t “dojo fight,” but train to actually fight. Am I on the right track?

Now here’s the rub: I constantly remind my students that you have to know how to think inside the box before you can effectively think outside the box. You need to (relatively) master the basics before you start adding your own elements to it. The drilling is a way to master those basics. The drilling should keep all the textbook stuff intact - hands up, angles, footwork, etc. This engrains muscle memory.

If the drills you’ve been taught and the ones you taught your students aren’t working appropriately, change them. If the distance is off, change it. If the attack isn’t realistic, change it, then change the appropriate respective response.

What’s the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different outcome. If you’ve sufficiently trained it and analyzed it, and you’re not getting the results you think are appropriate, change it.

My previous teacher followed the organization’s curriculum. There were specific drills we did - left hand low block, forward leaning stance, step straight forward with a right straight punch. My former sensei taught those by the books. Once we were proficient with them, we did them out of a fighting stance. Once we were proficient with that, we moved around at a free-sparring speed. Once we were proficient, we’d use the same defense, only against a hook punch and had to adapt the initial block and footwork. Then we picked up the pace. All of that made them significantly more realistic. And functional.

Last thought...

I’ve been taught karate at the colored belt level is like turning the student into a robot. I.e. “do this this way, do that that way.” The student is basically a carbon copy. At the black belt level, the student is (or at least supposed to be) proficient enough in the basics to now start doing them in a way that’s tailored to him/her. Colored belts is “this is how it’s done.” Dan ranks is “make this work for you personally.” I like that approach. It goes to that think inside the box well enough to be able to think intelligently outside the box when the appropriate time comes. Maybe this is just who I’ve trained under rather than karate as a whole though. Black belts should be taught differently than colored belts.

There’s a great saying in photography:

First learn the rules of photography, and master them.

Then learn how and when to break them.

Definitely holds true in MA as well IMO.

I hear what your saying. Martial arts should certainly be taught in stages. This topic has been difficult for me to convey exactly what I’m trying to say however to your point I definitely am not saying there’s no value in drills and I certainly believe that any type of self-defense should be slow at first, I always look at that stuff like training wheels for a fight. I don’t disagree. I like the drills you referred to at free sparring speed, that sounds fun!

[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 sparring 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.

I agree with Danielle. I think that one-steps are a good starting point for low ranks, but they must be adapted as students increase in rank. They should go from being static to more interactive, and from beginning in ready positions and started with kihaps to being done as impromptu attacks that must be defended.

Performing sparring like fighting can lead to problems. One has to consider the contact levels, the target areas, and whether protective gear will be worn or not. I much prefer my sparring to have rules in place to prevent injuries and allow students to as much of it as possible in a training period.

In general The main thing I was trying to say is that I do not see enough self-defense being handled at an appropriate speed. Even black belts are moving at a good speed when defending but if you really watch the person attacking it is slow in a manner that a full-fledged fight with adrenaline will not move. This is mybossues with what I referred to as the “average school” meaning mostly what I see.

As for sparring when I say treated less like some type of sport or specific art itself and more like completely free sparring, I do not mean the level of contact because that doesn’t mean a whole lot to me. I also do not mean changing the strike zone matters at all. I have never sustained a serious injury in sparring and we have always sparred in the manner I am referring to. What I am saying is there was no set stance, or the way I see most karate practitioners spar is they both bounce in the same exact manner on both feet at the same time. Their hands typically do almost the exact same things and their attacks no matter how nicely performed, are almost identical. I can certainly say the same thing for taekwondo.

What I am suggesting which is what I have always done and been a part of is that students develop their own stance, their own rhythm and movement, and their own techniques, not techniques that were specifically type just for sparring but anything they have learned from class as long as it is in a controlled manner to the proper strike so should be encouraged in my opinion.

In short I do not believe that something like one step self-defense or what have you is ineffective if it is practiced with a high level of aggression from the attacker, and I do not believe the cookie-cutter sparring is best using spiring’s potential to teach how to fight, I believe that everybody has their own natural way and that should be encouraged in my opinion inspiring, treating spiring like a fight does not mean you have to treat it with a high level o I do not believe the cookie cutter spiring is best using spiring’s potential to teach how to fight, I believe that everybody has their own natural way and that should be encouraged in my opinion inspiring, treating spiring like a fight does not mean you have to treat it with lack of regard for control or strike zone‘s, I just mean when I watch sparring it never really looks like a fight, because it looks as though each practitioner has been trained with a specific set of movements and weapons and it’s all they’re allowed to use, because that’s basically what it is in most cases. Watch guys like superfoot Bill Wallace, these guys get in there and fight and it looks more natural the way that two people would fight, not like the cookie cutter sparring I’m referring to.