Kata

[sensei8]

That's why I love what Soke pushed Dai-Soke to adhere to...

"Rank do not say you learn a new Kata...I SAY WHEN!! Not rank...not you...not nobody!!"

That can be hard to get behind because we seem to want what we want whenever we want it; the sooner and better.

[MatsuShinshii]

To be honest if we taught the art the way the founders did you wouldn't be taught Kata based on grade nor for that matter would you be taught every Kata.

Kata were taught to a student based on what suited that student. It was based on the individual and not the curriculum or syllabus.

Ever wander why some students were taught certain Kata and others were not? This leads to a lot of arguments about what Kata a founder really taught because some of their students had a different set of Kata than other students. So they argue that their Kata were the only Kata that founder taught because that was all that was taught to them. Times were different and because the training was focused around combat, the teacher would teach the student based on what suited them best and would capitalize on their strengths to make them more efficient and prepared for combat.

Now some students are taught Kata for the mere sake of learning Kata and not based on what will make them effective nor for the purposes of making them effective in terms of actual combat/fighting.

More Kata does not equal better martial artist unless your sole criteria is based on tournaments and winning trophies. Just my 2 cents.

[RW]

I've found that some schools of some styles have so many katas because they have a "1 kata per belt/grade test" philosophy.

Personally I think it's far more important to master a few katas (say, 5 katas from white to black belt) to the point you can do them without even thinking about the moves, you should know the kata by heart, basically muscle memory, with a deep understanding of the kata's body mechanics and applications.

Instead people rush to learn a new kata once they test for a new belt, and learn it in time for the new belt, the "old" kata getting put in the back burner

[JR 137]

To be honest if we taught the art the way the founders did you wouldn't be taught Kata based on grade nor for that matter would you be taught every Kata.

Kata were taught to a student based on what suited that student. It was based on the individual and not the curriculum or syllabus.

Ever wander why some students were taught certain Kata and others were not? This leads to a lot of arguments about what Kata a founder really taught because some of their students had a different set of Kata than other students. So they argue that their Kata were the only Kata that founder taught because that was all that was taught to them. Times were different and because the training was focused around combat, the teacher would teach the student based on what suited them best and would capitalize on their strengths to make them more efficient and prepared for combat.

Now some students are taught Kata for the mere sake of learning Kata and not based on what will make them effective nor for the purposes of making them effective in terms of actual combat/fighting.

More Kata does not equal better martial artist unless your sole criteria is based on tournaments and winning trophies. Just my 2 cents.

Not only did some teachers teach different kata to different students, but sometimes they taught the same kata differently to different students. Meitoku Yagi said Miyagi would tailor the kata to the students to address their strengths and weaknesses. Sanchin is a good example of this; he taught it with and without turns, and open and closed handed. I think it became more standardized in a sense later on in Miyagi’s teaching, but not everyone was taught it 100% the same way. Hence some Goju Ryu lineages do the turns and others don’t. I think they all currently do closed hands, but I’ve heard from several sources that this wasn’t always the case.

Sanchin wasn’t the only kata he tailored, and not every student learned every kata. Yagi could quite possibly be the only one to be taught every Goju Ryu kata by Miyagi personally.

[JR 137]

I've found that some schools of some styles have so many katas because they have a "1 kata per belt/grade test" philosophy.

Personally I think it's far more important to master a few katas (say, 5 katas from white to black belt) to the point you can do them without even thinking about the moves, you should know the kata by heart, basically muscle memory, with a deep understanding of the kata's body mechanics and applications.

Instead people rush to learn a new kata once they test for a new belt, and learn it in time for the new belt, the "old" kata getting put in the back burner

To play devil’s advocate...

Sometimes more is better. If I’m being taught a very limited number of kata, what if I don’t like said kata or it’s not the right one for me? There are kata in my syllabus that I do more or less for the sake of advancing, and there are kata I really like and can’t get enough of.

If I was required to solely do Pinan 3/sandan for for a year or two, I’d lose my mind. If Saiha was the only kata I did for 5 years straight, you wouldn’t hear a single complaint.

[MatsuShinshii]

To be honest if we taught the art the way the founders did you wouldn't be taught Kata based on grade nor for that matter would you be taught every Kata.

Kata were taught to a student based on what suited that student. It was based on the individual and not the curriculum or syllabus.

Ever wander why some students were taught certain Kata and others were not? This leads to a lot of arguments about what Kata a founder really taught because some of their students had a different set of Kata than other students. So they argue that their Kata were the only Kata that founder taught because that was all that was taught to them. Times were different and because the training was focused around combat, the teacher would teach the student based on what suited them best and would capitalize on their strengths to make them more efficient and prepared for combat.

Now some students are taught Kata for the mere sake of learning Kata and not based on what will make them effective nor for the purposes of making them effective in terms of actual combat/fighting.

More Kata does not equal better martial artist unless your sole criteria is based on tournaments and winning trophies. Just my 2 cents.

Not only did some teachers teach different kata to different students, but sometimes they taught the same kata differently to different students. Meitoku Yagi said Miyagi would tailor the kata to the students to address their strengths and weaknesses. Sanchin is a good example of this; he taught it with and without turns, and open and closed handed. I think it became more standardized in a sense later on in Miyagi’s teaching, but not everyone was taught it 100% the same way. Hence some Goju Ryu lineages do the turns and others don’t. I think they all currently do closed hands, but I’ve heard from several sources that this wasn’t always the case.

Sanchin wasn’t the only kata he tailored, and not every student learned every kata. Yagi could quite possibly be the only one to be taught every Goju Ryu kata by Miyagi personally.

This is very true. This could be stylistic changes from the teacher or structured directly to the student. I have seen sister arts perform a certain Kata many different ways. I have often wondered if this was due to the founder teaching it differently to each student, essentially tailoring it for each student, or if each student changed it based on their needs and thus passed it down.

However there is one other factor in that the Kata may be influenced, or should I say the instructor may be influenced, by the instructors experience via other arts as well that leads to changes.

[MatsuShinshii]

I've found that some schools of some styles have so many katas because they have a "1 kata per belt/grade test" philosophy.

Personally I think it's far more important to master a few katas (say, 5 katas from white to black belt) to the point you can do them without even thinking about the moves, you should know the kata by heart, basically muscle memory, with a deep understanding of the kata's body mechanics and applications.

Instead people rush to learn a new kata once they test for a new belt, and learn it in time for the new belt, the "old" kata getting put in the back burner

To play devil’s advocate...

Sometimes more is better. If I’m being taught a very limited number of kata, what if I don’t like said kata or it’s not the right one for me? There are kata in my syllabus that I do more or less for the sake of advancing, and there are kata I really like and can’t get enough of.

If I was required to solely do Pinan 3/sandan for for a year or two, I’d lose my mind. If Saiha was the only kata I did for 5 years straight, you wouldn’t hear a single complaint.

I agree in the sense of finding what works for you. I do not necessarily agree that more Kata are better.

Certain Kata fit the individual better than others. This is natural. However there are lessons that are taught within the Kata that on the surface may not be learned without depth of study. Some Kata seem boring because they do not have the flash but are invaluable in terms of teaching us offensive and defensive techniques.

As a kid I hated Naifuanchin (Naihanchi) but it became one of my favorites to study as I got older because I began learning the depth of techniques and applications. But I totally get what you are saying in terms of one fits, suites or interests you more than the other. There is one Kata within our syllabus that if I was told I could never study again, I would never miss it. So I understand what you are saying.

[JR 137]

To be honest if we taught the art the way the founders did you wouldn't be taught Kata based on grade nor for that matter would you be taught every Kata.

Kata were taught to a student based on what suited that student. It was based on the individual and not the curriculum or syllabus.

Ever wander why some students were taught certain Kata and others were not? This leads to a lot of arguments about what Kata a founder really taught because some of their students had a different set of Kata than other students. So they argue that their Kata were the only Kata that founder taught because that was all that was taught to them. Times were different and because the training was focused around combat, the teacher would teach the student based on what suited them best and would capitalize on their strengths to make them more efficient and prepared for combat.

Now some students are taught Kata for the mere sake of learning Kata and not based on what will make them effective nor for the purposes of making them effective in terms of actual combat/fighting.

More Kata does not equal better martial artist unless your sole criteria is based on tournaments and winning trophies. Just my 2 cents.

Not only did some teachers teach different kata to different students, but sometimes they taught the same kata differently to different students. Meitoku Yagi said Miyagi would tailor the kata to the students to address their strengths and weaknesses. Sanchin is a good example of this; he taught it with and without turns, and open and closed handed. I think it became more standardized in a sense later on in Miyagi’s teaching, but not everyone was taught it 100% the same way. Hence some Goju Ryu lineages do the turns and others don’t. I think they all currently do closed hands, but I’ve heard from several sources that this wasn’t always the case.

Sanchin wasn’t the only kata he tailored, and not every student learned every kata. Yagi could quite possibly be the only one to be taught every Goju Ryu kata by Miyagi personally.

This is very true. This could be stylistic changes from the teacher or structured directly to the student. I have seen sister arts perform a certain Kata many different ways. I have often wondered if this was due to the founder teaching it differently to each student, essentially tailoring it for each student, or if each student changed it based on their needs and thus passed it down.

However there is one other factor in that the Kata may be influenced, or should I say the instructor may be influenced, by the instructors experience via other arts as well that leads to changes.

Excellent points. I’d be willing to bet it could’ve been a bit of both, the original teacher tailoring things a bit, then the student tailoring a bit to his subsequent students.

Then there’s also the teacher perhaps changing things subtly to better fit their bunkai. Or they may think a move or two should be changed to something else because they don’t like the generally accepted bunkai. Perhaps substituting a move made better sense to the teacher and/or his students. Perhaps altering a move made the concept easier to understand by the students.

There are so many possibilities. To say it was one or another is probably being a bit too simplistic in thinking. I’d bet there were several reasons going on throughout the generations.

[MatsuShinshii]

To be honest if we taught the art the way the founders did you wouldn't be taught Kata based on grade nor for that matter would you be taught every Kata.

Kata were taught to a student based on what suited that student. It was based on the individual and not the curriculum or syllabus.

Ever wander why some students were taught certain Kata and others were not? This leads to a lot of arguments about what Kata a founder really taught because some of their students had a different set of Kata than other students. So they argue that their Kata were the only Kata that founder taught because that was all that was taught to them. Times were different and because the training was focused around combat, the teacher would teach the student based on what suited them best and would capitalize on their strengths to make them more efficient and prepared for combat.

Now some students are taught Kata for the mere sake of learning Kata and not based on what will make them effective nor for the purposes of making them effective in terms of actual combat/fighting.

More Kata does not equal better martial artist unless your sole criteria is based on tournaments and winning trophies. Just my 2 cents.

Not only did some teachers teach different kata to different students, but sometimes they taught the same kata differently to different students. Meitoku Yagi said Miyagi would tailor the kata to the students to address their strengths and weaknesses. Sanchin is a good example of this; he taught it with and without turns, and open and closed handed. I think it became more standardized in a sense later on in Miyagi’s teaching, but not everyone was taught it 100% the same way. Hence some Goju Ryu lineages do the turns and others don’t. I think they all currently do closed hands, but I’ve heard from several sources that this wasn’t always the case.

Sanchin wasn’t the only kata he tailored, and not every student learned every kata. Yagi could quite possibly be the only one to be taught every Goju Ryu kata by Miyagi personally.

This is very true. This could be stylistic changes from the teacher or structured directly to the student. I have seen sister arts perform a certain Kata many different ways. I have often wondered if this was due to the founder teaching it differently to each student, essentially tailoring it for each student, or if each student changed it based on their needs and thus passed it down.

However there is one other factor in that the Kata may be influenced, or should I say the instructor may be influenced, by the instructors experience via other arts as well that leads to changes.

Excellent points. I’d be willing to bet it could’ve been a bit of both, the original teacher tailoring things a bit, then the student tailoring a bit to his subsequent students.

Then there’s also the teacher perhaps changing things subtly to better fit their bunkai. Or they may think a move or two should be changed to something else because they don’t like the generally accepted bunkai. Perhaps substituting a move made better sense to the teacher and/or his students. Perhaps altering a move made the concept easier to understand by the students.

There are so many possibilities. To say it was one or another is probably being a bit too simplistic in thinking. I’d bet there were several reasons going on throughout the generations.

True. However I always cringe when I hear "changing a Kata to better suite the applications" or should I say accepted applications.

The point is that the founder did not put these movements into the Kata as fluff. All moves or sequence of moves have combat tested applications. Delving deeper into the Kata and figuring out, if you don't know or understand, the true application is going to foster greater results in teaching combative efficiency than changing it to something that fits in the instructors mind.

I would say this is the number one issue with Kata today. Because the instructor was not taught or forgot the application, they change the Kata to something that they know or understand or worse they make up something to fill the void in their understanding.

This does no justice to the instructors understanding of their art and worse it makes sure that the original concept is lost forever in their students understanding of the Kata.

The funny thing is... sometimes its the very thing you think it isn't. Better understanding of the elements of the art and in-depth study usually reveal the technique.

The problem now days is everyone is selling "Bunkai" and most haven't the foggiest notion of what the true applications are so they make it suite what they understand (punch, block, kick). This turns out to be ineffective, as this is not the true meaning, so instead of looking outside of the modern comfort zone they change it to make sense. Worst some adapt other arts, not even remotely associated with the art, to answer the question of meaning and you essentially begin to teach a different art.

Changing the original Kata, as the founder designed it, does happen and there is in most cases a viable reason for doing so. However as this happens, think generations of changes, the art itself is transformed into something entirely different than what the founders passed down. Some argue that the changes made the art more efficient and some argue that it's the natural progression and that change is good. What I know is the arts loose the original lessons and those lessons were there for a very good reason, because they worked. Good chance this is a main reason for some saying that the art is ineffective compared to some more modern arts. Just saying...

All things change and adapt over time. Good or bad? Well I guess you could ask the Japanized arts that are reduced to inventing "Bunkai" to fill the voids of understanding due to the changes made early on trying to make it Japanese rather than what the art was. Some changes are not good.

At least that's my 2 cents on the subject.