Legitimacy of a new style of karate...

[bushido_man96]

Sharing videos is possible; be sure to refer to the User Guidelines in regards to sharing videos. They are great for helping to illustrate points in discussions where words tend to be lacking.

[Miick 11]

In my town, a placed I used to train Kyokushin at has changed their name to something else. Same practice but just different name. Aside from that, Kyokushin has several offshoots such as Ashihara and Enshin Karate.

Now anyone can technically come up with their own style but I also understand that the person doing so must be a combination of a charismatic and powerful Karateka in order to bring their own brand to life.

In your opinion, what is the most dignified ways of coming up with a new style without disrespecting a current lineage?

For me, I dont need to start a new style . Our teacher ( who has now passed on ) , Kosei Nishihira taught and encouraged senior students to develop their own 'style' anyway ;

" You are very tall, you focus on these techniques ... you do that this way . " and change it for a shorter person, or for other reasons . Pretty much the same for him , from his teacher ; Hohan Soken . Thing is it was an old style family tradition, after Hohan Soken passed on there was no clear direct descendant ( a direct family member ) so no ' Head of Style ' , so to speak . ( Oh sure , it was claimed .... not wanting to get 'political' here . ) Some fellow students of Nishihira decided he was the one that best represented Soken's teaching, so they elected to follow him. But he was very humble , claimed nothing ( he said " Oh no ! I am only up to Mr. Soken's knee " ) he did inherit Soken's weapons though , and I have a private training film of him, after class casually talking and produced and old style wooden 'board' ( from storage, not on display ) that had his authority written out on it and signed by Soken .

At some stage ' Soken's group' ( as they where called by others ) came up with MSSR - Matsamura Sieto Shorin Ryu . Now , after Mr. Nishihira has passed on, there is no head . I dont know what has become of it in other countries ? Here in Oz , it is in process of forming an association with the few instructors as director and one as CEO - standard business model .

So within that frame work I have no need to 'start' a new style . My practice has developed into my own style within these teachings . Besides , I certainly dont want to start a club or a M.A. business (or any type of business ) .

Also this is slightly about Himokiri Karate but in all seriousness. My style has changed over the years. After years of boxing,karate,kung fu as well as judo/sambo and other MMA based martial arts. I have decided to focus on this type of modality:

1. First, make my boxing and karate ( with throws) my main focus

2. Second, focusing with a private grappling trainers sub defense

3. Have Kung Fu as a form of exercise and to cultivate strong foundation

Now my question for you guys is, should I give free lessons to have people try my style to see if there is value in learning it? Should I focus on fighting in MMA/combat karate?

My problem with fighting in combat sports is that if I win, it might just mean I am a competent fighter with conditioning. Doesn't make my teaching good per say. I also run hills and have a love/hate with cardio. But this is not something I can teach.

You could do a bit of both , and in your teaching, if you do become successful at 'MMA/combat' , when you teach you can inform people " I am successful at MMA/combat karate but that might be because one needs to also be a competent fighter with conditioning " .

IE. leave that 'just ' bit out .

[RW]

eeeehhhhhh. What is karate?

If I wake up one day, make up my own katas and don't teach any of the traditional katas (e.g. heians/pinans, naihanchi/tekkis, etc), is it even karate?

Some may point to lineage, but I am not sure that is the answer. So if a 5th degree black belt in shotokan and goju ryu made his own style, and he just so happens to be the grandson of Funakoshi or something like that, then it would be karate? What if a guy who has never done any karate in his life had made up the same system instead, literally 100% the same thing, then it would not be karate then?

This question is not really too theoretical. Why is kyokushin karate considered karate but not taekwondo or tang soo do (this topic is a can of worms, but watch this video and try thinking "this is not karate" :

)

to muddy the waters even more, isn't the reality of most US-based kempo/kenpo systems (american kenpo, american kempo, kempo 5.0, shaolin kempo, shaolin kenpo, ed parker kempo, kosho ryu kempo, etc) that karate guys took karate and sprinkled a little bit of other arts here and there and voila! You go yourself a new martial art, even though they even teach the pinan katas, slightly modified and renamed as pinion (e.g. 1 pinion, 2 pinion, here is an example:

)

To answer whether some guy opening "roaring tiger style karate dojo" at the local strip mall, as his own new style is legitimate or not I feel we need to answer what is karate, what is not karate, and whether you can be a karateka and not know any pinan/heian kata, or tekki/naihanchi and other kata like that.

[RW]

bonus question:

If I am a 5th degree black belt Goju Ryu black belt (hypothetical) and a 5th degree black belt in taekwondo or kenpo or kempo and I create my own style based on my own philosophy and my made up kata/forms/poomsae, would that style be karate? would it be tkd/kempo/kenpo? It'd be basically impossible to tell, right?

"oh look, screaming eagle dojo has Pinan Shodan, it must be karate..." the karate guy will say. But no, "it must be kenpo, since it has 1 pinion", the kenpo guy will say. "Nope! That's taekwondo, it has pyun-ahn 1", the TKD guy will say... and technically the 3 of them would be right.

[The Pred]

eeeehhhhhh. What is karate?

If I wake up one day, make up my own katas and don't teach any of the traditional katas (e.g. heians/pinans, naihanchi/tekkis, etc), is it even karate?

Some may point to lineage, but I am not sure that is the answer. So if a 5th degree black belt in shotokan and goju ryu made his own style, and he just so happens to be the grandson of Funakoshi or something like that, then it would be karate? What if a guy who has never done any karate in his life had made up the same system instead, literally 100% the same thing, then it would not be karate then?

This question is not really too theoretical. Why is kyokushin karate considered karate but not taekwondo or tang soo do (this topic is a can of worms, but watch this video and try thinking "this is not karate" :

)

to muddy the waters even more, isn't the reality of most US-based kempo/kenpo systems (american kenpo, american kempo, kempo 5.0, shaolin kempo, shaolin kenpo, ed parker kempo, kosho ryu kempo, etc) that karate guys took karate and sprinkled a little bit of other arts here and there and voila! You go yourself a new martial art, even though they even teach the pinan katas, slightly modified and renamed as pinion (e.g. 1 pinion, 2 pinion, here is an example:

)

To answer whether some guy opening "roaring tiger style karate dojo" at the local strip mall, as his own new style is legitimate or not I feel we need to answer what is karate, what is not karate, and whether you can be a karateka and not know any pinan/heian kata, or tekki/naihanchi and other kata like that.

Good question, on that kata part. If you think about it kata is essentially a preset combination drill which are based off of self-defense. Is it traditional because it came first, or did it become traditional overtime? Whose to say that katas you were to hypothetically make up wouldn't be considered traditional overtime?

[RW]

eeeehhhhhh. What is karate?

If I wake up one day, make up my own katas and don't teach any of the traditional katas (e.g. heians/pinans, naihanchi/tekkis, etc), is it even karate?

Some may point to lineage, but I am not sure that is the answer. So if a 5th degree black belt in shotokan and goju ryu made his own style, and he just so happens to be the grandson of Funakoshi or something like that, then it would be karate? What if a guy who has never done any karate in his life had made up the same system instead, literally 100% the same thing, then it would not be karate then?

This question is not really too theoretical. Why is kyokushin karate considered karate but not taekwondo or tang soo do (this topic is a can of worms, but watch this video and try thinking "this is not karate" :

)

to muddy the waters even more, isn't the reality of most US-based kempo/kenpo systems (american kenpo, american kempo, kempo 5.0, shaolin kempo, shaolin kenpo, ed parker kempo, kosho ryu kempo, etc) that karate guys took karate and sprinkled a little bit of other arts here and there and voila! You go yourself a new martial art, even though they even teach the pinan katas, slightly modified and renamed as pinion (e.g. 1 pinion, 2 pinion, here is an example:

)

To answer whether some guy opening "roaring tiger style karate dojo" at the local strip mall, as his own new style is legitimate or not I feel we need to answer what is karate, what is not karate, and whether you can be a karateka and not know any pinan/heian kata, or tekki/naihanchi and other kata like that.

Good question, on that kata part. If you think about it kata is essentially a preset combination drill which are based off of self-defense. Is it traditional because it came first, or did it become traditional overtime? Whose to say that katas you were to hypothetically make up wouldn't be considered traditional overtime?

I guess tracing the answer to this is like tracing the answer to bigger, but unrelated, questions.

Like, what is karate's ancestor? Ok, it's okinawa-te (shuri-te, etc). Good answer.

But what is okinawa te's ancestor? Well, certain kung fu styles that came from china (maybe white crane, incense shop boxing, etc).

What is that kung fu's ancestor? maybe the 18 hands of lohan?

what is its ancestor? well, some arts that came from India....

you get the idea, if we keep digging deeper and deeper we'd probably never end.

My 2 cents:

I think the kata were not traditional at first, when they were created in okinawa, for example, maybe anko itosu created the Pinan forms because the original traditional forms ( kusanku and chiang nan) were too long.

by the time funakoshi and others brought karate to japan, the traditional kata, such as the pinans were not considered traditional, but they were considered as the standard, the norm, if you will. With the years, these forms became considered traditional.

The kata some random guy hypothetically made up would absolutely become traditional if his martial art became popular and widespread and those kata were taught over the years, perhaps for generations. But would that be karate? It all loops back to "what is karate"?

my question has quite the practical component.... the case of random guys opening their own dojo or whatever teaching "karate" or "kempo" or simply "martial arts" (some places don't even bother saying which art sometimes!) and changing their kata so they are unique to their own school, a 1-dojo school or maybe a small chain of dojos in a specific city... is it misleading to tell people "I will teach you karate" (or whatever art) when they're actually learning a curriculum no other school in the country or planet will recognize?

[The Pred]

eeeehhhhhh. What is karate?

If I wake up one day, make up my own katas and don't teach any of the traditional katas (e.g. heians/pinans, naihanchi/tekkis, etc), is it even karate?

Some may point to lineage, but I am not sure that is the answer. So if a 5th degree black belt in shotokan and goju ryu made his own style, and he just so happens to be the grandson of Funakoshi or something like that, then it would be karate? What if a guy who has never done any karate in his life had made up the same system instead, literally 100% the same thing, then it would not be karate then?

This question is not really too theoretical. Why is kyokushin karate considered karate but not taekwondo or tang soo do (this topic is a can of worms, but watch this video and try thinking "this is not karate" :

)

to muddy the waters even more, isn't the reality of most US-based kempo/kenpo systems (american kenpo, american kempo, kempo 5.0, shaolin kempo, shaolin kenpo, ed parker kempo, kosho ryu kempo, etc) that karate guys took karate and sprinkled a little bit of other arts here and there and voila! You go yourself a new martial art, even though they even teach the pinan katas, slightly modified and renamed as pinion (e.g. 1 pinion, 2 pinion, here is an example:

)

To answer whether some guy opening "roaring tiger style karate dojo" at the local strip mall, as his own new style is legitimate or not I feel we need to answer what is karate, what is not karate, and whether you can be a karateka and not know any pinan/heian kata, or tekki/naihanchi and other kata like that.

Good question, on that kata part. If you think about it kata is essentially a preset combination drill which are based off of self-defense. Is it traditional because it came first, or did it become traditional overtime? Whose to say that katas you were to hypothetically make up wouldn't be considered traditional overtime?

I guess tracing the answer to this is like tracing the answer to bigger, but unrelated, questions.

Like, what is karate's ancestor? Ok, it's okinawa-te (shuri-te, etc). Good answer.

But what is okinawa te's ancestor? Well, certain kung fu styles that came from china (maybe white crane, incense shop boxing, etc).

What is that kung fu's ancestor? maybe the 18 hands of lohan?

what is its ancestor? well, some arts that came from India....

you get the idea, if we keep digging deeper and deeper we'd probably never end.

My 2 cents:

I think the kata were not traditional at first, when they were created in okinawa, for example, maybe anko itosu created the Pinan forms because the original traditional forms ( kusanku and chiang nan) were too long.

by the time funakoshi and others brought karate to japan, the traditional kata, such as the pinans were not considered traditional, but they were considered as the standard, the norm, if you will. With the years, these forms became considered traditional.

The kata some random guy hypothetically made up would absolutely become traditional if his martial art became popular and widespread and those kata were taught over the years, perhaps for generations. But would that be karate? It all loops back to "what is karate"?

my question has quite the practical component.... the case of random guys opening their own dojo or whatever teaching "karate" or "kempo" or simply "martial arts" (some places don't even bother saying which art sometimes!) and changing their kata so they are unique to their own school, a 1-dojo school or maybe a small chain of dojos in a specific city... is it misleading to tell people "I will teach you karate" (or whatever art) when they're actually learning a curriculum no other school in the country or planet will recognize?

No I don't think it's misleading at all, especially if karate is going to be a key component of what you teach.

[bushido_man96]

The "traditional" tag is, I think, a relatively recent descriptor attached to any MA style that originates in the far east. Another descriptor I've seen is "classical."

I think it basically came into being in order for the "traditionalists" to differentiate what they taught from things like Boxing, MMA, and even new eclectic styles that started to come into being, like Kajukenbo and other styles of Kenpo that were modified in the U.S. I also believe the main idea behind this "traditionalism" is the ability to trace the lineage back to a certain founder, and that this had to have happened before 1900 (for Karate, at least).

These are just thoughts on my end, not hard and fast rules. Just how I think these tags have been used for labeling the styles.

[sensei8]

Any legitimacy of any MA style depends not on what others may and/or may not say, as if their approval legitimizes any said MA, but on its effectiveness. However, for said MA to be effective, the practitioner MUST BE effective; more than not, because THAT practitioner is the vehicle/representative of that said MA. I mean, if the MA style and/or the practitioner isn't effective, then who cares one way or another.

Imho!!

[Wado Heretic]

The saying "As long as a piece of string" comes to mind with regards to trying to figure out where karate ends and general martial arts begin. Movements in Karate can also be found in Nánquán, Silat, Muay Boran, Tae Kwon Do, and American Kempo. In particular the basic percussive techniques and stances. However, we would not readily consider any of the above, and arts descended from them to be karate.

The one definition I have found, which I think is functional, if we we utilise the Wittgenstein paradigm of family relations is the following: Karate is a cultural artefact of the Okinawan People descending from RyuKyu Tode. If a system employs the forms (Kata) as developed on Okinawa, and derives its fighting methods from an interpretation of the kata through following the knowledge left by the innovators and preservers of Tode-Jutsu it can rightly be called Karate.

Under this definition, even if a founder of a system studied karate, but neglected to include the Okinawan cultural artefacts which are the concrete body of knowledge of Karate as the foundation of their system: it is not karate. It is their own invention, influenced by their karate knowledge, but it is no longer karate.

In this context: if you want the system to be legitimate as Karate, it needs to be built from the Okinawan cultural artefact through the kata. If you want the system to be legitimate as an effective martial art: you need to make sure you are adhering the to triangle of performance. You are providing a system which promotes the psychology, the physiology, and technical ability to be effective against an aggressor in either self-defence or the combat sport setting.