Are breaking boards/bats purpose-made?

[singularity6]

Oh wow, that video was priceless!

[Spartacus Maximus]

Breaking boards or bats or anything else does have a real purpose for training and is not just for shows. Breaking the object is not the point because anyone can do with strength. The point is to test and evaluate correct technique and body mechanics. Power, speed and strength are only a small part of what is required to break an object.

[OneKickWonder]

Breaking boards or bats or anything else does have a real purpose for training and is not just for shows. Breaking the object is not the point because anyone can do with strength. The point is to test and evaluate correct technique and body mechanics. Power, speed and strength are only a small part of what is required to break an object.

I used to agree. Until one day we were told it's about delivering that power precisely on target. And I kind of thought yes, but it's not moving, and it's not trying it's very best to stop me.

[singularity6]

There is a psychology involved, here. Breaking a board isn't exactly the biggest feat of strength. It's more a mental feat, for most. People usually do not strike hard objects due to fear of injury. Going through a board with a new technique helps overcome that.

[OneKickWonder]

There is a psychology involved, here. Breaking a board isn't exactly the biggest feat of strength. It's more a mental feat, for most. People usually do not strike hard objects due to fear of injury. Going through a board with a new technique helps overcome that.

I used to believe that true, until I thought about it, and realised it's just yet more brainwashing.

Think about it's value in psychological terms. What are we teaching when we ask students to smash a stationary object that is being held still by often several of our friends? How does that help develop the self defence mindset?

Then think about other aspects of training that help develop self confidence. In sparring we have a moving, resisting opponent trying to hit us. At first it's scary. Over time it becomes less so, as you learn that you can move as well as anyone, judge distance, and land strikes against resistance.

Of course in sparring, unless it's full contact, we don't kick full force like we do in breaking, so we could say that breaking gives us that opportunity. But so does pad work.

You could say you need to know that in a self defence situation, you need to know that you can and will kick with enough force to disable an attacker temporarily. There's 2 problems with using board breaking to help with that. One is that a pre cut breaking board or an inch of soft pine tells us nothing of our power, and secondly, if you're full of adrenaline because you're under attack for real, you won't hold back.

So when we analyse the pros and cons, we find that at best, most of the time it looks good and makes a satisfying noise. At worst it teaches you to kick stationary restrained objects possibly bruising or breaking your foot just to win the approval of a panel that have only asked you to do it because that's the way it's always been done and they've never questioned it.

[sensei8]

There is a psychology involved, here. Breaking a board isn't exactly the biggest feat of strength. It's more a mental feat, for most. People usually do not strike hard objects due to fear of injury. Going through a board with a new technique helps overcome that.

I used to believe that true, until I thought about it, and realised it's just yet more brainwashing.

Think about it's value in psychological terms. What are we teaching when we ask students to smash a stationary object that is being held still by often several of our friends? How does that help develop the self defence mindset?

Then think about other aspects of training that help develop self confidence. In sparring we have a moving, resisting opponent trying to hit us. At first it's scary. Over time it becomes less so, as you learn that you can move as well as anyone, judge distance, and land strikes against resistance.

Of course in sparring, unless it's full contact, we don't kick full force like we do in breaking, so we could say that breaking gives us that opportunity. But so does pad work.

You could say you need to know that in a self defence situation, you need to know that you can and will kick with enough force to disable an attacker temporarily. There's 2 problems with using board breaking to help with that. One is that a pre cut breaking board or an inch of soft pine tells us nothing of our power, and secondly, if you're full of adrenaline because you're under attack for real, you won't hold back.

So when we analyse the pros and cons, we find that at best, most of the time it looks good and makes a satisfying noise. At worst it teaches you to kick stationary restrained objects possibly bruising or breaking your foot just to win the approval of a panel that have only asked you to do it because that's the way it's always been done and they've never questioned it.

I suppose that you're against Tameshiwara [Art of breaking] all together?!?

Are you against the usages of the Makiwara?!?

Either way, that's your given right, in which I wholeheartedly support!!

It's a practiced art that I've been involved in for quite along, long time. I never questioned it, not because I'm an idle-minded robot, but because in time, I understood its necessity and importance through much trial and errors, as well as research.

Sure, the successful trails do make a very satisfying sound, this I don't deny. But the more satisfying sound doesn't even emit from the material being broken. No. But from within having that solid technique(s).

"Boards don't hit back!!"...neither does the fallen opponent.

In the end, Tameshiwara is a tool. Just because a tool isn't used, for whatever the reason(s), that doesn't mean that said tool shouldn't be used, and/or believed in.

If a student doesn't want to, then don't do it, and don't be forced to do it. Tameshiwara ISN'T on any Shindokan curriculum, and the student won't be forced to do it on any Testing Cycle, because, once again, it's a tool.

Imho!!

[OneKickWonder]

I have nothing against physical conditioning. In fact I see it as essential. But we're in the 21st century. We know things now that we're not known 100+ years ago.

In any case, breaking isn't conditioning.

[DWx]

There is a psychology involved, here. Breaking a board isn't exactly the biggest feat of strength. It's more a mental feat, for most. People usually do not strike hard objects due to fear of injury. Going through a board with a new technique helps overcome that.

I used to believe that true, until I thought about it, and realised it's just yet more brainwashing.

Think about it's value in psychological terms. What are we teaching when we ask students to smash a stationary object that is being held still by often several of our friends? How does that help develop the self defence mindset?

Then think about other aspects of training that help develop self confidence. In sparring we have a moving, resisting opponent trying to hit us. At first it's scary. Over time it becomes less so, as you learn that you can move as well as anyone, judge distance, and land strikes against resistance.

Of course in sparring, unless it's full contact, we don't kick full force like we do in breaking, so we could say that breaking gives us that opportunity. But so does pad work.

You could say you need to know that in a self defence situation, you need to know that you can and will kick with enough force to disable an attacker temporarily. There's 2 problems with using board breaking to help with that. One is that a pre cut breaking board or an inch of soft pine tells us nothing of our power, and secondly, if you're full of adrenaline because you're under attack for real, you won't hold back.

So when we analyse the pros and cons, we find that at best, most of the time it looks good and makes a satisfying noise. At worst it teaches you to kick stationary restrained objects possibly bruising or breaking your foot just to win the approval of a panel that have only asked you to do it because that's the way it's always been done and they've never questioned it.

I see breaking and sparring as two parts of the whole. Breaking tests focus and raw power, if all the elements don't come together at the same moment you won't break. It's as simple as that. Even pad work can't give that feedback as a technique can feel powerful but can be less than perfect. Sparring tests timing and strategy which you won't get from breaking true, but equally you can't hit your training partners full force during sparring. Both are sides of the same coin.

[singularity6]

There is a psychology involved, here. Breaking a board isn't exactly the biggest feat of strength. It's more a mental feat, for most. People usually do not strike hard objects due to fear of injury. Going through a board with a new technique helps overcome that.

I used to believe that true, until I thought about it, and realised it's just yet more brainwashing.

Think about it's value in psychological terms. What are we teaching when we ask students to smash a stationary object that is being held still by often several of our friends? How does that help develop the self defence mindset?

Then think about other aspects of training that help develop self confidence. In sparring we have a moving, resisting opponent trying to hit us. At first it's scary. Over time it becomes less so, as you learn that you can move as well as anyone, judge distance, and land strikes against resistance.

Of course in sparring, unless it's full contact, we don't kick full force like we do in breaking, so we could say that breaking gives us that opportunity. But so does pad work.

You could say you need to know that in a self defence situation, you need to know that you can and will kick with enough force to disable an attacker temporarily. There's 2 problems with using board breaking to help with that. One is that a pre cut breaking board or an inch of soft pine tells us nothing of our power, and secondly, if you're full of adrenaline because you're under attack for real, you won't hold back.

So when we analyse the pros and cons, we find that at best, most of the time it looks good and makes a satisfying noise. At worst it teaches you to kick stationary restrained objects possibly bruising or breaking your foot just to win the approval of a panel that have only asked you to do it because that's the way it's always been done and they've never questioned it.

Hmmm. I'm not talking about self defense anywhere here.

Punching and kicking through one pine board is quite easy. How about 2? Eventually we go though 3 and 4 boards bound together. This takes great power, focus and technique. One also needs to prepare mentally, as our instincts tell us that "it hurts when we hit hard objects." Sure, you can bruise and break parts when hitting these things. This is why we work up to it, gradually increasing the challenges, honing our technique along the way.

Can these skills be taught in other ways? Absolutely! Bag work, focus mitts, kicking shields are all great, and should be used. Is it necessary to break boards and bricks? Perhaps not, but it is part of the martial arts culture, and seems to have ceremonial value. (One could also ask the question about martial arts uniforms, bowing in/out of class, etc... see Sensei8's post about pageantry in martial arts:

https://www.karateforums.com/the-pageantry-of-the-martial-arts-vt51102.html?highlight=pageantry )

[OneKickWonder]

Uniforms have a purpose. Quite apart from being functional to aid training, they also prevent ego getting in the way. Without uniform you'll have people with all the gear but no idea, and people who can't afford the best. Then you get differences and resentment.

Bowing in and out has purpose. It instills respect. If an instructor sees that someone can not follow basic etiquette, then he knows that that person can not be trusted to practice potentially lethal techniques with a fellow student. If you can't bow, how can you be expected to stop immediately and listen if the instructor spots a dangerous habit forming?

I'm not against breaking by the way. Some people enjoy doing it. More enjoy seeing it. That's great. But my point is that breaking adds no value to martial arts training in my opinion. As for it being in the culture, maybe it is. But I've not encountered references to it yet in any of martial arts history books I've read, nor in any grandmasters books, but I haven't by any means read everything.