kata grappling techniques

[Beer-monster]

Yes but without a Japanese master in your pocket and so many MC Dojo's about, it is up to the student and his own common sence to decode the wealth of information in the kata.

[Kirves]

This is the only way of karate I know - I was beginning to think I was alone?

 

You're definitely NOT alone. But you are definitely in the minority. Happy training!

[Kirves]

Yes but without a Japanese master in your pocket and so many MC Dojo's about, it is up to the student and his own common sence to decode the wealth of information in the kata.

 

Yes there are so many reasons for the ignorance. It is "nobody's fault" per se. It began with the fact that some knowledge of karate was lost in Japan when WW2 and the martial art ban happened. On Okinawa this didn't happen, but it did in Japan. And then the Japanese developed karate into their own tastes (university phys. ed. goals, tournaments, zen budo). Now ad to this that we (in the west) mostly got the Japanese version of karate first. True, some soldiers learned karate on Okinawa, but when the big wave of martial arts hit us, it was Shotokan, Shito-ryu, Wado-ryu, Kyokushinkai, Japanese Goju-ryu and other Japanese styles that were the biggest styles. So we got their image of karate, instead of the Okinawan one. But we do have Okinawan Goju-ryu, Seito Matsumura Shorin-ryu, Seibukan Shorin-ryu and other styles that teach the Okinawan way too, but they are much smaller because they don't focus on the tournament fighting. So it is very understandable that people have a one-sided idea of how karate is practiced. And those who study Japanese styles, only can try to guess or find out what the kata mean. But they are good at kumite. Those who study pure Okinawan styles, always took bunkai for granted. And often thought that tournament sparring is a modern "perversation" of karate. Both are right and neither is wrong. They just aren't informed enough. By reading enough stuff by Bishop, McCarthy, and other karate reasearcher/authors people can broaden their knowledge, and they can start studying other styles too. Any Shotokan stylist for example, can go to a bunkai-seminar and learn what an Okinawan bunkai-expert has to say about his kata. It doesn't mean he has to drop his own style, not at all.

[Goju1]

Any Shotokan stylist for example, can go to a bunkai-seminar and learn what an Okinawan bunkai-expert has to say about his kata. It doesn't mean he has to drop his own style, not at all.

 

Yep - we had an intensive this weekend with one of the well known Okinawan Sensei's and all were welcome. It was interesting to see even the reasons for the specific warm-ups broken down and explained, let alone the kata and bunkai. Fascinating stuff (at least to me).

 

So, Kirves, you're saying the main difference in these posts is primarily whether the type of karate is Okinawan or Japanese?

[Kirves]

That is one of the main dividing reasons, but nothing is as black and white as that. Some Japanese styles did keep their Okinawan contacts, while others didn't. Some Okinawan styles decided to join the tournament bandwagon... Some Japanese styles decided to add jujutsu to their system to counteract the lost knowledge (wado ryu being a prime example of this train of thought). So there really is no guideline. Just look around and don't get stuck.

[cymry]

Go to iainabernethy.com

 

This guy kicks * with kata interpretations. Hes also published a few books - Karate's Grappling Methods, BunkaiJutsu (I own this it's great) and Throws for Strikers: The Forgotten Throws of Karate and Boxing.

[Jussi Häkkinen]

Cymry: Heh...well, I guess that such books are useful, if your own teachers do not teach (or know) about the grappling applications of kata.

 

However, I think that the coin has also an other side. Occasionally people go over when they try to see throws everywhere in kata. Yes, there are throwing, locking and other unpercussive techniques in kata. Still, they aren't a majority - and usually are very obvious (and usually have pretty obvious setups).

 

Some people claim - for example - that whole Naihanchi (Tekki) kata is a continuous joint locking and throwing drill. Although he can show this supposed drill with a partner, it isn't very probable or rational one - nor it has any support among the traditional styles and bunkai of karate. It isn't very useful either, if you think kata as a supposed phrasebook of fighting.

 

So, while learning throwing, joint locking and grappling is definitely worthwile and useful, you shouldn't be explaining every movement via them.

 

Now, I still must to ask: "What forgotten throws? Why have you forgotten them?"