# Shotokan for self defence.



## K-man

In an earlier thread a member who claims to be 'highly ranked' in Shotokan was rubbishing it as being pretty much useless for 'real' fighting. My view has been that Shotokan, like most Japanese karate, has moved away from its roots in to a more competition based style of karate but here is an opinion that I came across that gives an alternate opinion.



> You’re alone on a city street at night, the prey of an attacker determined to do you in. Without a hint of fear, he approaches you, demanding your money and threatening your life. Will you surrender and add your name to his list of victims? Or will you maintain control, fight back and turn the situation to your advantage?
> 
> Grapplers,Thai boxers and mixed-martial arts enthusiasts claim their techniques can help you escape such deadly confrontations — and they’re right. But they’re not your only options. Traditional arts such as _shotokan_ karate can help you repel an attacker just as effectively.
> 
> For Street Self-Defense There Is No Better Martial Art Than Shotokan Karate 8211 - Black Belt


We have had numerous discussions on the value of kata, or forms, and again,  our 'highly ranked' Shotokan practitioner is dismissive of any value of the kata. 

The author of this article has a different view ...



> Unfortunately, Rielly sees too many instructors teach self-defense but neglect the basics in favor of free sparring. “This is a mistake,” he warns. “The ability to free-spar or fight well is the result of training and should not be the primary means of training.”
> 
> Accordingly, *shotokan students learn most of their self-defense moves through forms* training. This approach doesn’t make sense to some people — especially beginners — but all shotokan forms are chock-full of self-defense applications.


Hmm! Those of you who have been around MT for some time might recall my comments on _advanced beginners_.


----------



## drop bear

Ok so we have one opinion for and one opinion against. And my opinion is i haven't seen any evidence that Shotokan or their training methods work in self defence.

so i suppose both opinions are equally valid at this point.


----------



## tshadowchaser

the only way to truly see if any system works as a good self defense is to be with someone who studies it when they need to use it.  One can hear of someone segueing "X" in a situation and hear it worked or did not but then that is only hearsay.
From what I have seen of old timers using Shotokan I have no doubt they would have been able to use it in the street.
I will not get into the forms is better or worse than whatever discussion at this time


----------



## Buka

System, style, school, blah, blah, blah (yes, I'm being a jerk) it's the practitioner more than anything else.

I don't know a lot about Shotokan. I don't know how it is overseas or how it is in other parts of the United States. All I can tell you is I fought some Shotokan guys in competition in the seventies and eighties, (maybe a couple dozen) both here in New England, some in New York and Florida.  I beat some and I lost to some. But every one of them hurt like the dickens. The way I always described them was "They like to punch a hole through your body so they can give the finger to the guy behind you."
Maybe it's different now, I really don't know.

I have no affiliation with Shotokan, no friends who train in that style. Just memories of ice packs and cracked ribs. Even the ones I beat.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

I have nothing against Shotokan and I am quite certain there are plenty of Shotokan practitioners who are very good at fighting and at self-defense. That said, the article was pretty weak sauce in the classic Black Belt Magazine style. Lots of assertions puffing a given style, attributed to whatever instructor is being profiled, without much in the way of evidence or critical thought. I could go through and kibitz line by line, but there's not much point. It's just the magazine's house style.


----------



## Mephisto

I don't know that self defense is the primary motivator behind the development and practice of shotokan. First I'd consider who made the art and why? Wasn't it gichin funakoshi? Was he a known fighter? Did he have a reputation as a fighter like many other old school teachers did? Somewhere along they way I've gotten the impression that he wanted to spread karate, but I could be wrong. Shotokan seems to be about personal development and strengthening ones self, not a bad thing but not specifically self defense either.

It seems like a lot of traditional arts were meant to defeat the untrained, and since martial arts were less popular and more secretive in days past its seems likely that most people had no formal training and perhaps any training would trump no skill. Now cultures are more diverse fighting and martial arts is more commonplace and perhaps different sizes and builds are more common? A self defense system should equip you to deal with bigger stronger or even skilled opponents. 

Kata, like we see in shotokan may have benefits but it is the longer rode to fighting ability and self defense. I'm not entirely sold on RBSD but self defense is the goal of these systems, they keep it relatively simple and largely leave out the classical and cultural details. Training time is valuable kata may have had its place in older times when people had less to do but now it seems like more of a cultural keepsake which when trained properly can also provide some self defense benefit.


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> I have nothing against Shotokan and I am quite certain there are plenty of Shotokan practitioners who are very good at fighting and at self-defense. That said, the article was pretty weak sauce in the classic Black Belt Magazine style. Lots of assertions puffing a given style, attributed to whatever instructor is being profiled, without much in the way of evidence or critical thought. I could go through and kibitz line by line, but there's not much point. It's just the magazine's house style.


I'm not putting in a plug for Shotokan. What I am pointing out is the fact that these guys are saying that the SD part of the system is in the bunkai, not in the sport side.


----------



## drop bear

tshadowchaser said:


> the only way to truly see if any system works as a good self defense is to be with someone who studies it when they need to use it.  One can hear of someone segueing "X" in a situation and hear it worked or did not but then that is only hearsay.
> From what I have seen of old timers using Shotokan I have no doubt they would have been able to use it in the street.
> I will not get into the forms is better or worse than whatever discussion at this time



yeah that was kind of what i was thinking. We are having a "Are martians blue or green" conversation here.


----------



## drop bear

Tony Dismukes said:


> I have nothing against Shotokan and I am quite certain there are plenty of Shotokan practitioners who are very good at fighting and at self-defense. That said, the article was pretty weak sauce in the classic Black Belt Magazine style. Lots of assertions puffing a given style, attributed to whatever instructor is being profiled, without much in the way of evidence or critical thought. I could go through and kibitz line by line, but there's not much point. It's just the magazine's house style.



I was having a think about this and kata cant be the end result. And is sounds like people think it is. So ok lets just say there is a ton of great self defence moves in kata. If you cant take that move and pull it off then kata becomes a pointless exercise. It would be like saying there are great self defence moves on youtube. But at some point you have to be less of a youtube expert and more of a make this move work for yourself expert.


----------



## drop bear

Mephisto said:


> I don't know that self defense is the primary motivator behind the development and practice of shotokan. First I'd consider who made the art and why? Wasn't it gichin funakoshi? Was he a known fighter? Did he have a reputation as a fighter like many other old school teachers did? Somewhere along they way I've gotten the impression that he wanted to spread karate, but I could be wrong. Shotokan seems to be about personal development and strengthening ones self, not a bad thing but not specifically self defense either.
> 
> It seems like a lot of traditional arts were meant to defeat the untrained, and since martial arts were less popular and more secretive in days past its seems likely that most people had no formal training and perhaps any training would trump no skill. Now cultures are more diverse fighting and martial arts is more commonplace and perhaps different sizes and builds are more common? A self defense system should equip you to deal with bigger stronger or even skilled opponents.
> 
> Kata, like we see in shotokan may have benefits but it is the longer rode to fighting ability and self defense. I'm not entirely sold on RBSD but self defense is the goal of these systems, they keep it relatively simple and largely leave out the classical and cultural details. Training time is valuable kata may have had its place in older times when people had less to do but now it seems like more of a cultural keepsake which when trained properly can also provide some self defense benefit.



Ok the best argument for kata has been from one of our karate guys. The idea is you train the moovements yo


----------



## drop bear

Bugger. Phone buttons again. Ok so you train the movements you would use in fighting under positional stress. So deeper stances exaggerated punches and kicks. So that when you fight your body is a bit conditioned to do what you want by training it to do a bit more than you need. Like resistance bands or underwater training.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> I'm not putting in a plug for Shotokan. What I am pointing out is the fact that these guys are saying that the SD part of the system is in the bunkai, not in the sport side.



Then you have a serious disconnect between the art and the sport. And you cant really do that and get benefit from both. One has to progress the other.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Bugger. Phone buttons again. Ok so you train the movements you would use in fighting under positional stress. So deeper stances exaggerated punches and kicks. So that when you fight your body is a bit conditioned to do what you want by training it to do a bit more than you need. Like resistance bands or underwater training.


So without any karate experience you are now an expert on karate stances and kata. Well, the only time we use a long stance is in a takedown. Because the kata is all grappling there are few if any kicks and there are no exaggerated punches. Best stick to your MMA. I'm out of here. This was meant to be a conversation with those who practise karate.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> So without any karate experience you are now an expert on karate stances and kata. Well, the only time we use a long stance is in a takedown. Because the kata is all grappling there are few if any kicks and there are no exaggerated punches. Best stick to your MMA. I'm out of here. This was meant to be a conversation with those who practise karate.



For self defence.

Can you talk me through the non exaggerated poses used here?


----------



## Transk53

I am just wondering after k-man posted. I too am not qualified to comment on the OP. Just wondering if with the Martial Arts these, and including the OP in this, days has had a fundamental shift in philosophy. Ie, keeping roots, but like a flower, is now in a new season. For the last decade or so, sports has been a social community drive that has become political through the obesity issue, at least in the UK anyway with the likes of Sky Sports Living for Sport Perhaps there has been a subtle shift that newbies like myself would not notice. SD is I guess is big business these days, why not sport to that too.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> For self defence.
> 
> Can you talk me through the non exaggerated poses used here?


Not being a Shotokan practitioner I have no idea of what it is about. As you are obviously more informed about kata than most of us perhaps you could give us your opinion.

But first a question. What has kihon kata got to do with what I posted? If you were really interested why did you not post some advanced bunkai demonstrating a real situation so we could actually discuss the value of the technique? You do understand kihon?

Here is some simple bunkai that gives a basic understanding of the techniques in the kata.




Now to my understanding, the Heian series of kata were instructional kata, not necessarily designed as a fighting system.  The bunkai shown here is not realistic in that it is choreographed but that doesn't take away from its primary purpose, giving a simple explanation of the kata, but again kihon.

So, are there realistic applications with the kata that you posted? Certainly.





And another, this time talking about the angles shown in the kata and you can see the long stances being used in the take downs.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> So without any karate experience you are now an expert on karate stances and kata. .



I don't think drop bear was claiming to be an expert in either. He was repeating an explanation from a karate practitioner and saying that he finds it a plausible justification for how kata are performed.

I've heard the same explanation before from some karate and kung fu exponents. (It's one of many, sometimes contradictory, explanations from different practitioners.) Since you're a karate practitioner, what's your opinion? Do you think there is any validity to it?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> Not being a Shotokan practitioner I have no idea of what it is about. As you are obviously more informed about kata than most of us perhaps you could give us your opinion.
> 
> But first a question. What has kihon kata got to do with what I posted? If you were really interested why did you not post some advanced bunkai demonstrating a real situation so we could actually discuss the value of the technique? You do understand kihon?
> 
> Here is some simple bunkai that gives a basic understanding of the techniques in the kata.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now to my understanding, the Heian series of kata were instructional kata, not necessarily designed as a fighting system.  The bunkai shown here is not realistic in that it is choreographed but that doesn't take away from its primary purpose, giving a simple explanation of the kata, but again kihon.
> 
> So, are there realistic applications with the kata that you posted? Certainly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And another, this time talking about the angles shown in the kata and you can see the long stances being used in the take downs.



I have a lot respect for Abernathy. I don't know whether the bunkai he shows are the ones intended by the creators of the forms, but If do think that he understands combative reality well enough that his explanations are at least plausible.

That first video, on the other hand ... whoever came up with that bunkai clearly did not understand combative reality. The first application demonstrated is particularly laughable.

I'm not a kata practitioner, but if I were I would want to know what the correct intended application was, because it affects the body dynamics. The muscle sequencing and alignment of force needed to effectively hit someone with a forearm smash, grab their  chin, and spin them to the ground is not the same as is needed for blocking a kick.  If I'm practicing for one but thinking I'm doing the other, I won't develop the skill to do either correctly. (That's not me claiming to be a kata expert - it's me claiming I know what it takes for me to learn physical skills.)


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> I don't think drop bear was claiming to be an expert in either. He was repeating an explanation from a karate practitioner and saying that he finds it a plausible justification for how kata are performed.
> 
> I've heard the same explanation before from some karate and kung fu exponents. (It's one of many, sometimes contradictory, explanations from different practitioners.) Since you're a karate practitioner, what's your opinion? Do you think there is any validity to it?


Tony these guys have been rubbishing kata and most karate since day one. I have posted explanation after explanation as to why things aren't always what they seem. Within all karate there is a huge misunderstanding of kata. It was in many ways designed that way so it could be practised without people knowing exactly what you were training. When someone takes time to explain something like has been done here and the information is ignored in this way, it is both insulting and annoying.  

So my opinion? Without the kata you do not have different styles of karate. The kata are the fighting systems that make each style unique. All the information you require to defend yourself is contained within the kata, so yes, Shotokan most definitely can be used for self defence. The problem is that most instructors have never been shown how to interpret the kata.



Tony Dismukes said:


> I have a lot respect for Abernathy. I don't know whether the bunkai he shows are the ones intended by the creators of the forms, but If do think that he understands combative reality well enough that his explanations are at least plausible.


I think the bunkai he demonstrates would almost certainly be different to that of the creator of the forms. That is not because of lack of understanding but more to do with the physical attributes of the person performing the kata. That was why in the early days the masters selected one or two kata to teach their students, not the plethora we see today. That combined with the fact that each of the moves portrayed have multiple applications. I don't believe there was ever a set bunkai passed down, in karate. The student was instructed in the basics, including the sequence of the kata (kihon) then told to go and explore the kata (advanced). You could say that kata is a mnemonic. It helps you remember the sequences.

I teach a lot of the same sequences to my Krav guys. They just don't learn the kata. They are entering, controlling and destroying their opponent the same as we do with the bunkai. Kata is simply a different method of teaching the same thing. 



Tony Dismukes said:


> That first video, on the other hand ... whoever came up with that bunkai clearly did not understand combative reality. The first application demonstrated is particularly laughable.


Not true. Again, this is kihon or a basic explanation. If you understand karate you would see it perhaps as a training tool or perhaps as a bunkai for competition. How do you explain the solar system to a four or five year old? I would be sure you would use simple terms and maybe even a fairytale. Certainly it would be a different explanation to that offered to university students. Kata is the same. It can be taught to children with a basic explanation. The deeper understanding comes with experience. 



Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm not a kata practitioner, but if I were I would want to know what the correct intended application was, because it affects the body dynamics. The muscle sequencing and alignment of force needed to effectively hit someone with a forearm smash, grab their  chin, and spin them to the ground is not the same as is needed for blocking a kick.  If I'm practicing for one but thinking I'm doing the other, I won't develop the skill to do either correctly. (That's not me claiming to be a kata expert - it's me claiming I know what it takes for me to learn physical skills.)


You are exactly right and that is the way I teach kata. I don't teach blocks at all, so none of my explanations refer to blocks. Kata is not for multiple opponents so I never teach that you are turning to face a new attack. All the movements are in relation to the position of your opponent so on turning we are looking at angles. Kata is all about grappling, so the kata is performed with that in mind.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> Tony these guys have been rubbishing kata and most karate since day one.



Perhaps, but the quote in question was not rubbishing kata. It was offering a justification for kata. Furthermore, it was a justification that originated from a karateka.



K-man said:


> I have posted explanation after explanation as to why things aren't always what they seem. Within all karate there is a huge misunderstanding of kata. It was in many ways designed that way so it could be practised without people knowing exactly what you were training. When someone takes time to explain something like has been done here and the information is ignored in this way, it is both insulting and annoying.



You have offered explanations for how kata works. Some other karateka (including drop bear's friend from his gym) have offered different explanations. Perhaps your explanation is the correct one. (Or perhaps there are more than one "correct" explanation, depending on the situation.) Is it necessarily insulting if drop bear doesn't automatically trust your explanation over the one his friend gave? Would it be insulting to his friend if he accepted yours instead?



K-man said:


> Not true. Again, this is kihon or a basic explanation. If you understand karate you would see it perhaps as a training tool or perhaps as a bunkai for competition. How do you explain the solar system to a four or five year old? I would be sure you would use simple terms and maybe even a fairytale. Certainly it would be a different explanation to that offered to university students. Kata is the same. It can be taught to children with a basic explanation. The deeper understanding comes with experience



I'll have to disagree on that one. I can understand offering beginners a simplified explanation that leaves out a lot of the advanced subtleties, complexities, and "what-ifs". I can't support offering beginners an explanation that is flat out wrong on multiple levels and demonstrates deep ignorance of combative reality.


----------



## seasoned

K-man said:


> I'm not putting in a plug for Shotokan. What I am pointing out is the fact that *these guys are saying that the SD part of the system is in the bunkai, not in the sport side.*


Bunkai meaning 2 person, kata meaning 1 person. Both = a whole. As this was pointed out earlier on in this post. 
Most styles are valid for SD. Everyone will defend their given art which is ok, it's all good for discussion. I feel the OP is valid and gives food for thought to create a well rounded sharing time.


----------



## Tez3

Iain's take on kata, I would point out that while he aims his applications towards all karate plus TKD and TSD he is a Wado Ryu man not Shotokan. They styles are similar enough but there are some differences in kata, when demonstrating kata he will do the Wado version.
What are the true applications of Kata Iain Abernethy


----------



## K-man

Tez3 said:


> Iain's take on kata, I would point out that while he aims his applications towards all karate plus TKD and TSD he is a Wado Ryu man not Shotokan. They styles are similar enough but there are some differences in kata, when demonstrating kata he will do the Wado version.
> What are the true applications of Kata Iain Abernethy


Thank you for posting this article. It says it all. Iain has also put out a little where he looked at Goju bunkai. The truth is, once you understand the principle you should be able to explore the kata for yourself.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Not being a Shotokan practitioner I have no idea of what it is about. As you are obviously more informed about kata than most of us perhaps you could give us your opinion.
> 
> But first a question. What has kihon kata got to do with what I posted? If you were really interested why did you not post some advanced bunkai demonstrating a real situation so we could actually discuss the value of the technique? You do understand kihon?
> 
> Here is some simple bunkai that gives a basic understanding of the techniques in the kata.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now to my understanding, the Heian series of kata were instructional kata, not necessarily designed as a fighting system.  The bunkai shown here is not realistic in that it is choreographed but that doesn't take away from its primary purpose, giving a simple explanation of the kata, but again kihon.
> 
> So, are there realistic applications with the kata that you posted? Certainly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And another, this time talking about the angles shown in the kata and you can see the long stances being used in the take downs.



Is bunkai kata though? I would have considered it an application of kata. Even sparring would be an application of kata. Kata achieves one result. Bunkai another,sparring another. So for self defence you work through a progression. 

That is why i did not present bunkai as an example.

And just like mma it is a progression. Line work,drills,resisted drills,sparring,fighting.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


>



ok this is kind of weird. A comment made here that "The kata is never wrong. My understanding of the kata is wrong"

Now unless kata has been thought up by god and not as i assume by some guy somewhere. This is going to not be the case.

Why would anybody subscribe to this belief?


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> Perhaps, but the quote in question was not rubbishing kata. It was offering a justification for kata. Furthermore, it was a justification that originated from a karateka.


Hmm! Well I think we are looking at this with different eyes. And, the 'karateka' wasn't a karateka. He is an ex Shotokan practitioner who dismissed Shotokan and kata as irrelevant.



Tony Dismukes said:


> You have offered explanations for how kata works. Some other karateka (including drop bear's friend from his gym) have offered different explanations. Perhaps your explanation is the correct one. (Or perhaps there are more than one "correct" explanation, depending on the situation.) Is it necessarily insulting if drop bear doesn't automatically trust your explanation over the one his friend gave? Would it be insulting to his friend if he accepted yours instead?



I have offered no explanation as to how kata works and Drop Bear has no karate experience apart from what he has 'seen'.



Tony Dismukes said:


> I'll have to disagree on that one. I can understand offering beginners a simplified explanation that leaves out a lot of the advanced subtleties, complexities, and "what-ifs". I can't support offering beginners an explanation that is flat out wrong on multiple levels and demonstrates deep ignorance of combative reality.


In that case I would invite you to examine the basic bunkai from YouTube and tell me if you would use it that way in a real fight. If the answer is 'no', then you are agreeing with me. If the answer is 'yes', .... well, we must live in different worlds.






This is kihon bunkai from my style so as to not denigrate Shotokan in any way. It is shown as a collection of techniques, not continuous, it relies on the attacker attacking and responding in a certain way (choreographed) and to me it is simply a basic explanation. If you reckon you could train like that and apply it to a pub brawl ... OK. It is not 'wrong' but it is also not a practical fighting application.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Is bunkai kata though? I would have considered it an application of kata. Even sparring would be an application of kata. Kata achieves one result. Bunkai another,sparring another. So for self defence you work through a progression.
> 
> That is why i did not present bunkai as an example.
> 
> And just like mma it is a progression. Line work,drills,resisted drills,sparring,fighting.


Without bunkai kata is nothing but a collection of moves. In other martial arts, bunkai can be partnered work so the application is passed along as it was intended. That isn't the case with karate. You may as well just toss kata out if you are not going to use it as it was intended.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> ok this is kind of weird. A comment made here that "The kata is never wrong. My understanding of the kata is wrong"
> 
> Now unless kata has been thought up by god and not as i assume by some guy somewhere. This is going to not be the case.
> 
> Why would anybody subscribe to this belief?


The kata is the kata, in many cases tried and tested over a hundred or more years. The kata shows you what to do but you must be able to make it work for you. Some kata I don't find all that good for me. Others work really well, but it takes years to research these things. You could spend a lifetime on just one kata.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> The kata is the kata, in many cases tried and tested over a hundred or more years. The kata shows you what to do but you must be able to make it work for you. Some kata I don't find all that good for me. Others work really well, but it takes years to research these things. You could spend a lifetime on just one kata.



well strangely that depends on how long the idea that the kata is not wrong has been going for. 

because obviously there is no reason to test something that isn't wrong.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Without bunkai kata is nothing but a collection of moves. In other martial arts, bunkai can be partnered work so the application is passed along as it was intended. That isn't the case with karate. You may as well just toss kata out if you are not going to use it as it was intended.



Bunkai as an application of kata. Without resisted training bunkai is just a dead drill.

It is a progression. And without that progression you basically get that first video you posted.

None of these elements stand alone.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> Hmm! Well I think we are looking at this with different eyes. And, the 'karateka' wasn't a karateka. He is an ex Shotokan practitioner who dismissed Shotokan and kata as irrelevant.



If I'm interpreting drop bear's comment correctly, the anonymous karateka whose explanation he  was repeating is not a member here and has not (so far as I know) dissed Shotokan or kata. Drop bear trains with karateka at his gym and when he says "one of our karate guys" I assume he means one of his gym mates. (drop bear, please correct me if I am wrong.)



K-man said:


> I have offered no explanation as to how kata works



??? Weren't you just complaining that your explanations were being ignored and that it was insulting? I think I must be misunderstanding you somehow.



K-man said:


> In that case I would invite you to examine the basic bunkai from YouTube and tell me if you would use it that way in a real fight. If the answer is 'no', then you are agreeing with me. If the answer is 'yes', .... well, we must live in different worlds.



Hmm. It's all rather stylized. Many of the techniques could work, more or less, although they would look a bit different against a less stylized attack. Others seem rather impractical, regardless of the style of attack. None of it seems as realistic as what Abernathy was showing in your second and third video.  None are as _bad_ as the first sequence in the first video you posted.

Either way, how does it mean I am agreeing with you regarding the original point? As I said before, I _do_ agree that it can be useful to give beginners simplified explanations and exercises as part of the learning process. I _don't_ agree that it is useful to give them fantasy explanations and exercises that will only serve to mislead them and build bad habits.

Getting back to your analogy of explaining the solar system to a five year old: I might say that the Earth orbits around the Sun. I would probably wait until the kid was older to explain that actually the Earth and Sun both orbit around a shared center of gravity which (due to the Sun's greater mass and size) is actually located within the sun's radius. I would _not_ tell the kid that the Sun is Apollo riding his golden chariot and that he could wait until nightfall to sneak into the stable and steal the magical horses if he wanted to ride through the sky.


----------



## K-man

C


Tony Dismukes said:


> If I'm interpreting drop bear's comment correctly, the anonymous karateka whose explanation he  was repeating is not a member here and has not (so far as I know) dissed Shotokan or kata. Drop bear trains with karateka at his gym and when he says "one of our karate guys" I assume he means one of his gym mates. (drop bear, please correct me if I am wrong.)
> 
> 
> 
> ??? Weren't you just complaining that your explanations were being ignored and that it was insulting? I think I must be misunderstanding you somehow.
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm. It's all rather stylized. Many of the techniques could work, more or less, although they would look a bit different against a less stylized attack. Others seem rather impractical, regardless of the style of attack. None of it seems as realistic as what Abernathy was showing in your second and third video.  None are as _bad_ as the first sequence in the first video you posted.
> 
> Either way, how does it mean I am agreeing with you regarding the original point? As I said before, I _do_ agree that it can be useful to give beginners simplified explanations and exercises as part of the learning process. I _don't_ agree that it is useful to give them fantasy explanations and exercises that will only serve to mislead them and build bad habits.
> 
> Getting back to your analogy of explaining the solar system to a five year old: I might say that the Earth orbits around the Sun. I would probably wait until the kid was older to explain that actually the Earth and Sun both orbit around a shared center of gravity which (due to the Sun's greater mass and size) is actually located within the sun's radius. I would _not_ tell the kid that the Sun is Apollo riding his golden chariot and that he could wait until nightfall to sneak into the stable and steal the magical horses if he wanted to ride through the sky.


Cool.  I've put my position. The karateka I was referring to was Hanzou not some 'someone I know'.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Bunkai as an application of kata. Without resisted training bunkai is just a dead drill.
> 
> It is a progression. And without that progression you basically get that first video you posted.
> 
> None of these elements stand alone.


Bunkai is not a drill and it is resisted. I have explained that to you many times in the past so I will not bother discussing it further. You stick to what you believe and I will continue teaching what I teach.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> C
> 
> The karateka I was referring to was Hanzou not some 'someone I know'.



I assumed that was who you meant. However, unless I'm totally misunderstanding drop bear, that's not the person who gave him the explanation for kata that he was repeating.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> In an earlier thread a member who claims to be 'highly ranked' in Shotokan was rubbishing it as being pretty much useless for 'real' fighting. My view has been that Shotokan, like most Japanese karate, has moved away from its roots in to a more competition based style of karate but here is an opinion that I came across that gives an alternate opinion.



Where did I say Shotokan was useless for "real" fighting? WTH are you even talking about?



> We have had numerous discussions on the value of kata, or forms, and again,  our 'highly ranked' Shotokan practitioner is dismissive of any value of the kata.



I'm dismissive of it because I feel that training time can be better utilized elsewhere. Your videos showcasing nonsensical bunkai only confirms that opinion. No one is going to come at you in a deep front stance, performing a reverse punch. People fight in narrow stances in order to remain mobile, which is why double leg takedowns are so effective.

Personally, 30 minutes of hard, full contact sparring against a variety of opponents would be a better use of training time than 30 minutes doing pre-arranged patterns from the 1920s.

However, that's just my opinion.



> The author of this article has a different view ...



Considering that his Shotokan dojo has to compete against MMA and Bjj schools for students, that doesn't surprise me. His snide shot at the MMA community didn't go unnoticed.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Where did I say Shotokan was useless for "real" fighting? WTH are you even talking about?


In your early posts you wrote of how your Shotokan training was a total waste of time. I'm not going to go trawling to find it. If your now saying your karate training was worthwhile then good for you.



Hanzou said:


> I'm dismissive of it because I feel that training time can be better utilized elsewhere. Your videos showcasing nonsensical bunkai only confirms that opinion. No one is going to come at you in a deep front stance, performing a reverse punch. People fight in narrow stances in order to remain mobile, which is why double leg takedowns are so effective.


You can have whatever opinion you like but perhaps you should read the post before making the comment you did. I am not suggesting the nonsensical bunkai is in any way effective, and for what it's worth I don't teach any punch from a deep stance. The deep stance had other uses.



Hanzou said:


> Personally, 30 minutes of hard, full contact sparring against a variety of opponents would be a better use of training time than 30 minutes doing pre-arranged patterns from the 1920s.
> 
> However, that's just my opinion.


It depends what you are talking about. Are you talking about doing 30 minutes of kata or 30 minutes of unscripted resisted bunkai. If it is the former, I will agree. If it is the latter I would rather have the bunkai, but then as the bunkai is not prearranged I presume you are going back to the kihon yet again to back your position.



Hanzou said:


> Considering that his Shotokan dojo has to compete against MMA and Bjj schools for students, that doesn't surprise me. His snide shot at the MMA community didn't go unnoticed.


This is a snide shot, really? What? Claiming your martial art is as effective on the street as MMA is a snide shot. 


> Grapplers, Thai boxers and mixed-martial arts enthusiasts claim their techniques can help you escape such deadly confrontations — and they’re right. But they’re not your only options. Traditional arts such as _shotokan_ karate can help you repel an attacker just as effectively.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> In your early posts you wrote of how your Shotokan training was a total waste of time. I'm not going to go trawling to find it. If your now saying your karate training was worthwhile then good for you.



Yes, a total waste of MY time. I can't speak for anyone else, including the people I trained with. If I could convert the 8 years I spent with Karate and change it to 8 years of MT or Boxing, I'd do so in a heartbeat.



> You can have whatever opinion you like but perhaps you should read the post before making the comment you did. I am not suggesting the nonsensical bunkai is in any way effective, and for what it's worth I don't teach any punch from a deep stance. The deep stance had other uses.



I'm just going on the videos you posted. I simply don't find Bunkai to be realistic training at all. It's like practicing idealistic scenarios that aren't going to happen when the chips come crashing down. Its just so unnatural and rehearsed that it stands out to me like a sore thumb. What makes it worse is that I have YET to see a Karateka fight this way. Even amazing ones like Loyoto Machida doesn't fight the way they're fighting in Bunkai training.



> It depends what you are talking about. Are you talking about doing 30 minutes of kata or 30 minutes of unscripted resisted bunkai. If it is the former, I will agree. If it is the latter I would rather have the bunkai, but then as the bunkai is not prearranged I presume you are going back to the kihon yet again to back your position.



I'm talking about this;










Those karatekas learned more in 30 seconds of getting their clocks cleaned, than in 30 minutes of doing Kata or Bunkai.



> This is a snide shot, really? What? Claiming your martial art is as effective on the street as MMA is a snide shot.



Yes. Context is everything.


----------



## drop bear

Tony Dismukes said:


> If I'm interpreting drop bear's comment correctly, the anonymous karateka whose explanation he was repeating is not a member here and has not (so far as I know) dissed Shotokan or kata. Drop bear trains with karateka at his gym and when he says "one of our karate guys" I assume he means one of his gym mates. (drop bear, please correct me if I am wrong.)



Yeah that is on the money.


----------



## drop bear

Tony Dismukes said:


> Either way, how does it mean I am agreeing with you regarding the original point? As I said before, I _do_ agree that it can be useful to give beginners simplified explanations and exercises as part of the learning process. I _don't_ agree that it is useful to give them fantasy explanations and exercises that will only serve to mislead them and build bad habits



Yeah that is almost a thread in itself. For beginners there is almost a different level of truth than an advanced guy gets. As a quick example there is no right hooks in boxing. Which is what a beginner gets. But there is right hooks if you have certain positions.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Bunkai is not a drill and it is resisted. I have explained that to you many times in the past so I will not bother discussing it further. You stick to what you believe and I will continue teaching what I teach.



It looks like a drill. How is it not a drill


----------



## Mephisto

Can anyone explain why Funakoshi founded Shotokan? I think I know why it was created but I think its worth looking at. I think the origins and purpose behind an art have a lot to do with its effectiveness for a given purpose. If we use an art that was designed for fitness and dissemination for self defense we are not using it for its primary intended purpose.


----------



## Grenadier

Hanzou said:


> I'm dismissive of it because I feel that training time can be better utilized elsewhere. Your videos showcasing nonsensical bunkai only confirms that opinion. No one is going to come at you in a deep front stance, performing a reverse punch. People fight in narrow stances in order to remain mobile, which is why double leg takedowns are so effective.



I am very surprised that you made this kind of an assertion, especially considering that you claimed a nidan ranking from an authentic JKA dojo.   At the Shodan level, just about any adult holding that ranking has a better understanding of how using deep stances are meant to strengthen the muscles of the lower body, and to teach the practitioner how to utilize the lower body as the main power source to drive the upper body's techniques.  

When the body (and mechanics) are properly conditioned over time, when it comes time to throw a punch from a narrower stance, that punch will be significantly more powerful than one thrown by someone who hasn't practiced those mechanics, and conditioned the body.   

It's basically the same reason why those who lift weights go through the full motions when lifting.  Think of it this way...   

Who is going to benefit from the bench press more?  The person who starts with the weights at the chest level and lifts it to full extension of the arms, or the person who starts with his arms extended already, and only lifts the weights about 12 inches instead?  Even though the latter may look more "practical" in the real world, it won't help the person nearly as much compared to the former when it comes to increasing overall strength.   

Will the former allow a 150 pound beanpole to be stronger than a 250 pound individual built like a brick outhouse?  Of course not, but neither would the latter.  He would, though, certainly have better muscle development using the former, than the latter.  It's all about developing his own self so that he comes closer to his potential, instead of comparing him to the next guy.   



> Personally, 30 minutes of hard, full contact sparring against a variety of opponents would be a better use of training time than 30 minutes doing pre-arranged patterns from the 1920s.



And how long could you continue to practice in such a way?  You can't stay young forever.  Joints become less flexible, bones become more brittle, and well-developed muscles deteriorate over time as we get older.  

I would encourage you to look at your old notes from your days of Shotokan training.  For that matter, you may want to have a chat with your old sensei about this subject.   

Many of the JKA seniors have written articles about how the "old methods" of training continue to thrive in today's society, since they can be practiced for many a decade, and the practitioner will not see any dropoff in his technique when relying on good bodily mechanics and fundamental technique, instead of sheer brawn and athleticism.  

If you get a chance, I'd also recommend some of the books written by Enoeda Sensei, who was quite well-known for his amazing punching power, even as he grew old.  They can provide a very nice insight into the methods.


----------



## Tez3

Mephisto said:


> Can anyone explain why Funakoshi founded Shotokan? I think I know why it was created but I think its worth looking at. I think the origins and purpose behind an art have a lot to do with its effectiveness for a given purpose. If we use an art that was designed for fitness and dissemination for self defense we are not using it for its primary intended purpose.




I'm not Shotokan, my style is Wado Ryu but I found this from a Shotokan site, it may explain his thoughts, I think most writing about Funakoshi are the same as this though.
Gichin Funakoshi - Founder of Shotokan Karate


----------



## drop bear

Grenadier said:


> I am very surprised that you made this kind of an assertion, especially considering that you claimed a nidan ranking from an authentic JKA dojo.   At the Shodan level, just about any adult holding that ranking has a better understanding of how using deep stances are meant to strengthen the muscles of the lower body, and to teach the practitioner how to utilize the lower body as the main power source to drive the upper body's techniques.
> 
> When the body (and mechanics) are properly conditioned over time, when it comes time to throw a punch from a narrower stance, that punch will be significantly more powerful than one thrown by someone who hasn't practiced those mechanics, and conditioned the body.
> 
> It's basically the same reason why those who lift weights go through the full motions when lifting.  Think of it this way...
> 
> Who is going to benefit from the bench press more?  The person who starts with the weights at the chest level and lifts it to full extension of the arms, or the person who starts with his arms extended already, and only lifts the weights about 12 inches instead?  Even though the latter may look more "practical" in the real world, it won't help the person nearly as much compared to the former when it comes to increasing overall strength.
> 
> Will the former allow a 150 pound beanpole to be stronger than a 250 pound individual built like a brick outhouse?  Of course not, but neither would the latter.  He would, though, certainly have better muscle development using the former, than the latter.  It's all about developing his own self so that he comes closer to his potential, instead of comparing him to the next guy.
> 
> 
> 
> And how long could you continue to practice in such a way?  You can't stay young forever.  Joints become less flexible, bones become more brittle, and well-developed muscles deteriorate over time as we get older.
> 
> I would encourage you to look at your old notes from your days of Shotokan training.  For that matter, you may want to have a chat with your old sensei about this subject.
> 
> Many of the JKA seniors have written articles about how the "old methods" of training continue to thrive in today's society, since they can be practiced for many a decade, and the practitioner will not see any dropoff in his technique when relying on good bodily mechanics and fundamental technique, instead of sheer brawn and athleticism.
> 
> If you get a chance, I'd also recommend some of the books written by Enoeda Sensei, who was quite well-known for his amazing punching power, even as he grew old.  They can provide a very nice insight into the methods.




Ha...

That's  what i said.


----------



## Grenadier

Mephisto said:


> Can anyone explain why Funakoshi founded Shotokan? I think I know why it was created but I think its worth looking at. I think the origins and purpose behind an art have a lot to do with its effectiveness for a given purpose. If we use an art that was designed for fitness and dissemination for self defense we are not using it for its primary intended purpose.



Funakoshi Sensei was simply a fellow who wanted to teach Karate his way, and spread it to the masses.  It wasn't until much later, that his own students named  the system "Shotokan" after his pen name of "Shoto."  

His teachings of Karate were significantly in line with what his Sensei, Itosu Anko, believed, and certainly helped promote the teaching of Karate to the masses, not just a select few.   Itosu Sensei's belief was that the practitioner alone, was the one who decided what to do with his martial arts knowledge, and I would feel comfortable guessing that Funakoshi Sensei held a similar belief.  For example, if someone wanted to use it to better his health, then that was his choice to make.


----------



## Hanzou

Grenadier said:


> I am very surprised that you made this kind of an assertion, especially considering that you claimed a nidan ranking from an authentic JKA dojo.   At the Shodan level, just about any adult holding that ranking has a better understanding of how using deep stances are meant to strengthen the muscles of the lower body, and to teach the practitioner how to utilize the lower body as the main power source to drive the upper body's techniques.



I understand perfectly why they do it. I was pointing out that in the "bunkai" they were using deep stances and shotokan techniques. 



> And how long could you continue to practice in such a way? You can't stay young forever. Joints become less flexible, bones become more brittle, and well-developed muscles deteriorate over time as we get older.



MT and Boxing guys practice like that for years.



> I would encourage you to look at your old notes from your days of Shotokan training.  For that matter, you may want to have a chat with your old sensei about this subject.



I appreciate the suggestion, but I have little interest in revisiting Shotokan or karate in general.


----------



## Danny T

Mephisto said:


> Can anyone explain why Funakoshi founded Shotokan? I think I know why it was created but I think its worth looking at. I think the origins and purpose behind an art have a lot to do with its effectiveness for a given purpose. If we use an art that was designed for fitness and dissemination for self defense we are not using it for its primary intended purpose.


Funakoshi did not found Shotokan Karate. Shotokan was the name his students gave to his training hall. What he did found was Shotokai. Shotokai was the association of all those who trained Karate-do in the Shotokan (the training hall). Funakoshi called what he taught Karate-do Kyohan.
In 1949 Isao Obata, one of his students, developed what would be the largest karate organization in the world, the Japanese Karate Association (Kyokai) and started doing competitions. Upon Funakoshi's death the Kyokai separated from the Shotokai organization and it was this Koyokai style that became known as Shotokan and grew through the promoted competitions (something frowned on and forbidden by Funakoshi). 
Funakoshi 'did not' found Shotokan as a style of karate-do.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> MT and Boxing guys practice like that for years.




I grew up in Boxing gyms. Visit one and work with boxers and kickboxers now. I've never heard of or seen anyone in their 60s-70, sparring hard full contact for 30 minutes. The Gentlemen of that age from various styles I have sparred, can only go for a round or two at the most like that and they feel it later on. 

The guys that are training at that age arent doing a lot of full contact sparring anymore


----------



## Mephisto

Danny T said:


> Funakoshi did not found Shotokan Karate. Shotokan was the name his students gave to his training hall. What he did found was Shotokai. Shotokai was the association of all those who trained Karate-do in the Shotokan (the training hall). Funakoshi called what he taught Karate-do Kyohan.
> In 1949 Isao Obata, one of his students, developed what would be the largest karate organization in the world, the Japanese Karate Association (Kyokai) and started doing competitions. Upon Funakoshi's death the Kyokai separated from the Shotokai organization and it was this Koyokai style that became known as Shotokan and grew through the promoted competitions (something frowned on and forbidden by Funakoshi).
> Funakoshi 'did not' found Shotokan as a style of karate-do.


Weather you want to say Funakoshi founded the art or weather the art simply followed in his tradition. What was the purpose behind the art? Why did he frown on competition? If his focus was anything other than self defense wouldn't that also mean that Shotokan isn't meant to be for or about self defense primarily? Some self defense skill may be a benefit of the training but if self defense isn't the intended primary purpose than perhaps if some has self defense as their primary goal they should seek out another art. 


Drose427 said:


> I grew up in Boxing gyms. Visit one and work with boxers and kickboxers now. I've never heard of or seen anyone in their 60s-70, sparring hard full contact for 30 minutes. The Gentlemen of that age from various styles I have sparred, can only go for a round or two at the most like that and they feel it later on.
> 
> The guys that are training at that age arent doing a lot of full contact sparring anymore


I have, I don't know how many rounds they go but I've heard of old timers stepping up from time to time to spar, and I've heard some have done very well too. The difference in boxing is that most acknowledge that age and time in a system don't equate to unstoppable skill. Old timers are respected but not worshipped as an unstoppable fighter. In many non competitiove systems students feel they can't even come close to the skill of their aging masters and wouldn't dare challenge them. There is no lying in boxing and competitive arts because the ring and competition presents the truth, and surprise the old timers aren't the most efficient fighters and competitors, but they certainly are valued and respected. Here's a video of one such respectable old timer, the young guy underestimated him and payed for it. A few rounds might show a different outcome but here, the old guy shows he's not to be underestimated.


----------



## Danny T

Mephisto said:


> Weather you want to say Funakoshi founded the art or weather the art simply followed in his tradition. What was the purpose behind the art? Why did he frown on competition? If his focus was anything other than self defense wouldn't that also mean that Shotokan isn't meant to be for or about self defense primarily? Some self defense skill may be a benefit of the training but if self defense isn't the intended primary purpose than perhaps if some has self defense as their primary goal they should seek out another art.


It isn't whether I want to say Funakoshi founded the art or whether the art followed in his tradition.
It is he didn't found it was a student who broke off from what Funakoshi was teaching. Not only did they incorporate sparring and competition they changed the manner they did kata. Funakoshi's Karate-do was all about self-defense and personal development. Not competition. 

At Funakoshi's death in 1957, his students split into several factions: on one side was the Nihon Karate Kyokai -the Japan Karate Association and on another side was the Shotokai Association. 

The Shotokai Association is the group of students who continued to train in the Shotokan training hall and it has a defined practice method now known as Shotokai Karate. (Funakoshi call karate; Karate-do. All karate was to him Karate.) Shotokai continued to train in the manner Funakoshi taught Karate-do. Crisp flowing kata and a self-defense mindset whereas the JKA - Shotokan group uses hard, quick, sharp movements and positions in its katas and trains for Kata and sparring competitions yet maintaining some self-defense aspects.What is known as Shotokan Karate today is not the same Karate-do Funakoshi taught.


----------



## Hanzou

Mephisto said:


>



LoL! That vid is awesome. That kid got exactly what was coming to him.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Mephisto said:


> I have, I don't know how many rounds they go but I've heard of old timers stepping up from time to time to spar, and I've heard some have done very well too.



Plenty of senior citizen boxers and kickboxers can still fight and spar very well. The claim was that they don't regularly incorporate 30 minute sessions of hard sparring into their training because it takes too much of a toll on a body that doesn't heal so fast anymore. I'd say that's pretty accurate.


----------



## Danny T

At 60 I still train and practice 6 days a week. I spar lightly several rounds and go hard for a couple every week. I also am very discriminating as to who I spar with and how we spar because of the toll, injuries, and healing time. I've also got to instruct several sessions a week as well as holding pads coaching several fighters for numerous rounds everyday.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> I appreciate the suggestion, but I have little interest in revisiting Shotokan or karate in general.


Clearly that is not true.  Otherwise you would not keep coming onto threads like this one.  You would actually let it go and be done.


----------



## Hanzou

Flying Crane said:


> Clearly that is not true.  Otherwise you would not keep coming onto threads like this one.  You would actually let it go and be done.



This thread was directed at me by the OP, that's why I'm here.

Thanks for your participation.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> This thread was directed at me by the OP, that's why I'm here.
> 
> Thanks for your participation.


It's not just this thread.  It's the one that lead to this thread, and all the others.  Thanks for your participation.


----------



## tshadowchaser

gentlemen please refrain from trading jabs at each other.


----------



## Buka

We are all such passionate artists. See how that sounds different without the word "martial" included?

And yet....we all continue to go to class, day in, day out. We all get home and moan because this hurts, that hurts, this got tweaked, that got hit, wrenched, crushed or twisted.

Damn, we're all fricken' nuts.


----------



## Hanzou

Flying Crane said:


> It's not just this thread.  It's the one that lead to this thread, and all the others.  Thanks for your participation.



And those threads are how many months old by now?

Again, I wouldn't be in this thread if someone hadn't decided to direct it towards me.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> And those threads are how many months old by now?
> 
> Again, I wouldn't be in this thread if someone hadn't decided to direct it towards me.


Don't believe that for a moment.


----------



## Mephisto

Flying Crane said:


> Don't believe that for a moment.


Who cares, it's a public forum. Anyone is free to comment on any thread as long as it abides by forum policy.


----------



## Flying Crane

Mephisto said:


> Who cares, it's a public forum. Anyone is free to comment on any thread as long as it abides by forum policy.


Yup, that's what I'm doing.


----------



## Mephisto

Flying Crane said:


> Yup, that's what I'm doing.


Yea but you're crying about Hanzou posting in this thread.


----------



## Flying Crane

Mephisto said:


> Yea but you're crying about Hanzou posting in this thread.


You said anyone is free to comment on any thread.  That's what I've done. 

Are you now crying about me posting in this thread?


----------



## jks9199

All right, folks...

Bring it back on topic.  That's the use of Shotokan karate for self defense.  Not BJJ.  Not who should participate.  One of the rules here at MT is to stay on topic...

To refresh your memory, here is the OP:


> In an earlier thread a member who claims to be 'highly ranked' in Shotokan was rubbishing it as being pretty much useless for 'real' fighting. My view has been that Shotokan, like most Japanese karate, has moved away from its roots in to a more competition based style of karate but here is an opinion that I came across that gives an alternate opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’re alone on a city street at night, the prey of an attacker determined to do you in. Without a hint of fear, he approaches you, demanding your money and threatening your life. Will you surrender and add your name to his list of victims? Or will you maintain control, fight back and turn the situation to your advantage?
> 
> Grapplers,Thai boxers and mixed-martial arts enthusiasts claim their techniques can help you escape such deadly confrontations — and they’re right. But they’re not your only options. Traditional arts such as _shotokan_ karate can help you repel an attacker just as effectively.
> 
> For Street Self-Defense There Is No Better Martial Art Than Shotokan Karate 8211 - Black Belt
> 
> 
> 
> We have had numerous discussions on the value of kata, or forms, and again,  our 'highly ranked' Shotokan practitioner is dismissive of any value of the kata.
> 
> The author of this article has a different view ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, Rielly sees too many instructors teach self-defense but neglect the basics in favor of free sparring. “This is a mistake,” he warns. “The ability to free-spar or fight well is the result of training and should not be the primary means of training.”
> 
> Accordingly, *shotokan students learn most of their self-defense moves through forms* training. This approach doesn’t make sense to some people — especially beginners — but all shotokan forms are chock-full of self-defense applications.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hmm! Those of you who have been around MT for some time might recall my comments on _advanced beginners_.
Click to expand...


----------



## Brummie

Although I haven't a clue about shotokan as a style, I do find that nowadays people are constantly questioning the effectiveness of traditional martial arts in a self defence situation.

The way I try to think of it is, should I get attacked or involved in a fight, and the other person is trained in martial arts or fighting, which is probably highly unlikely, then it would be the best disciplined who would come out on top most probably.

However, I do think its unlikely that an attacker or common thug starting a brawl will be trained, or have a reasonable amount of training, therefore, all the hard work, effort and skill that we have learned would give us an advantage to help protect ourselves.

After all, I'd like to think most of us would avoid violence at all costs. And only when no other option is available would we utilise our training.


----------



## Paul_D

Brummie said:


> Although I haven't a clue about shotokan as a style, I do find that nowadays people are constantly questioning the effectiveness of traditional martial arts in a self defence situation.



I think this is mostly becasue they mistake fighting, MA and SD for the same thing, not realising that not only are they vastly different, but in some cases the skills learnt to be successful in one field can be the exact opposite of the skills required to be successful in the other.


----------



## Mephisto

Brummie said:


> Although I haven't a clue about shotokan as a style, I do find that nowadays people are constantly questioning the effectiveness of traditional martial arts in a self defence situation.
> 
> The way I try to think of it is, should I get attacked or involved in a fight, and the other person is trained in martial arts or fighting, which is probably highly unlikely, then it would be the best disciplined who would come out on top most probably.
> 
> However, I do think its unlikely that an attacker or common thug starting a brawl will be trained, or have a reasonable amount of training, therefore, all the hard work, effort and skill that we have learned would give us an advantage to help protect ourselves.
> 
> After all, I'd like to think most of us would avoid violence at all costs. And only when no other option is available would we utilise our training.


A thug may be untrained but they may be very familiar with aggression and violence. This is where some TMA fail, they do not prepare the student for an aggressive attack. Compliant training will not prepare you for controlling an aggressive person. Fighting may be different from self defense but it is a crucial component to preparing for self defense. If are accustomed to an aggressive opponent you'll have one more tool for the streets.


----------



## Brummie

Yes having the tool set to deal with an aggressive person, or knowing the correct answer to someone who suddenly launches an attack is important, so pressure testing in any martial arts is a good idea.

However, trusting that when adrenaline kicks in you can remain composed is the real unknown until it happens.

Still, I'd rather learn it, drill and train it, trust in my ability,but hope to never have to use it. Than not know it to stat with.


----------



## Paul_D

Mephisto said:


> A thug may be untrained but they may be very familiar with aggression and violence. This is where some TMA fail, they do not prepare the student for an aggressive attack.


It's also were some MMA fail to deal with an aggressive attack.  Look at the recent incident with Cody Gibson in a bar.  Yes he is very used to dealing with violence in the cage, but he clearly had no idea how to deal with an drunken thug in a bar as he made basic SD errors as SD doesn't  form part of his MMA training.  That doesn't mean TMA is any better at dealing with the realities of civilian violence, becasue it isn't but MMA isn't free of the criticism than you are only putting in TMA.

Gibson isn't the only one of course, there are other examples (just are there are just as many examples where MMA has helped with SD).

MMA & TMA are great at what they do, but neither of them are designed to deal with he realities of civilian violence.  Saying that one is better or worse at preparing you for SD than the other is like arguing whether apples or oranges are better at being banana's.



Mephisto said:


> Fighting may be different from self defense but it is a crucial component to preparing for self defense. If are accustomed to an aggressive opponent you'll have one more tool for the streets.


Really?  Old people don't get attacked by people that want to "fight" them, women don't get attacked by men that want to "fight" them.  Fighting is only crucial to SD if fighting is the most likely form of violence you will face (i.e if you are male aged 18-30). The Suzy Lamplaugh Trust teach self defence but don't teach a single physical technique.  Iain Abernethy says Self Defence is 95% Awareness and Avoidance 4% Verbal De-Esclation and 1% Physical Techniques. Geoff Thompson's book Dead or Alive: The Ultimate Self Protein Handbook focuses more on Avoidance than it does physical techniques, as does The Little Black Book of Violence.

Men, particularity young men, tend to focus on fighting as it is the most likely form of violence they will face.  But for the rest of us it is extremely unlikely.  Other area's of violence are much more likely and so fighting is far from crucial for most people as for most people fights are not the form of violence they are most likely to face.


----------



## Mephisto

Paul_D said:


> It's also were some MMA fail to deal with an aggressive attack.  Look at the recent incident with Cody Gibson in a bar.  Yes he is very used to dealing with violence in the cage, but he clearly had no idea how to deal with an drunken thug in a bar as he made basic SD errors as SD doesn't  form part of his MMA training.  That doesn't mean TMA is any better at dealing with the realities of civilian violence, becasue it isn't but MMA isn't free of the criticism than you are only putting in TMA.
> 
> Gibson isn't the only one of course, there are other examples (just are there are just as many examples where MMA has helped with SD).
> 
> MMA & TMA are great at what they do, but neither of them are designed to deal with he realities of civilian violence.  Saying that one is better or worse at preparing you for SD than the other is like arguing whether apples or oranges are better at being banana's.
> 
> 
> Really?  Old people don't get attacked by people that want to "fight" them, women don't get attacked by men that want to "fight" them.  Fighting is only crucial to SD if fighting is the most likely form of violence you will face (i.e if you are male aged 18-30). The Suzy Lamplaugh Trust teach self defence but don't teach a single physical technique.  Iain Abernethy says Self Defence is 95% Awareness and Avoidance 4% Verbal De-Esclation and 1% Physical Techniques. Geoff Thompson's book Dead or Alive: The Ultimate Self Protein Handbook focuses more on Avoidance than it does physical techniques, as does The Little Black Book of Violence.
> 
> Men, particularity young men, tend to focus on fighting as it is the most likely form of violence they will face.  But for the rest of us it is extremely unlikely.  Other area's of violence are much more likely and so fighting is far from crucial for most people as for most people fights are not the form of violence they are most likely to face.


I disagree that mma doesn't prepare you to handle aggressive opponents. It's what the ring is all about. That being said mma doesn't provide situational awareness training and there are other aspects of real life training it lacks and I don't deny that. What mma does do is prepare you to handle yourself in all ranges of empty hand combat. The frequent transition from one range to the next during training is great for real life fighting.
A lot of self defense focuses on developing street smarts. I agree that deescalation and awareness are key factors to a good self defense strategy. but these are non martial components of self defense. Mma trains the martial components well. I'm not saying mma is better than all TMA. But I will say mma is better for the martial components of self defense than TMA that doesn't spar or train with a resisting opponent.


----------



## Paul_D

Mephisto said:


> That being said mma doesn't provide situational awareness training and there are other aspects of real life training it lacks and I don't deny that.t


That's a better way of explaining it


----------



## Mephisto

Paul_D said:


> That's a better way of explaining it


You can be th best mma fighter but if you're dumb enough to bump chests and argue and do the "monkey dance" that so often precludes a fight you just might not see a sucker punch coming. Street smarts are crucial to solid self defense.


----------



## drop bear

Paul_D said:


> MMA & TMA are great at what they do, but neither of them are designed to deal with he realities of civilian violence. Saying that one is better or worse at preparing you for SD than the other is like arguing whether apples or oranges are better at being banana's.



It depends what system can be modified to fit into different games. So at the bare bones your physical techniques have to work.

The major issue with mmaers looking at some of the self defence stuff is that it really doesn't work. And generally we know it because we have tried it.

You really need both.


----------



## drop bear

Mephisto said:


> I disagree that mma doesn't prepare you to handle aggressive opponents. It's what the ring is all about. That being said mma doesn't provide situational awareness training and there are other aspects of real life training it lacks and I don't deny that. What mma does do is prepare you to handle yourself in all ranges of empty hand combat. The frequent transition from one range to the next during training is great for real life fighting.
> A lot of self defense focuses on developing street smarts. I agree that deescalation and awareness are key factors to a good self defense strategy. but these are non martial components of self defense. Mma trains the martial components well. I'm not saying mma is better than all TMA. But I will say mma is better for the martial components of self defense than TMA that doesn't spar or train with a resisting opponent.



I actually do deescalation and awareness. And a lot of what i see in training I have issues with.


----------



## Tez3

Mephisto said:


> I disagree that mma doesn't prepare you to handle aggressive opponents. It's what the ring is all about



Aggressive opponents yes, the person you have trained to fight, who is standing opposite you but if the ref for some unknown reason decided to batter you or a judge or just a random person jumping into the ring attacked you'd be as surprised as hell and taken unawares _more so because you are concentrating on your opponent_. Just as you would if you were concentrating on your mobile phone taking a call or texting as you were walking down the street and got attacked. I'd suggest that training a full contact style would enable you to be less shocked if you were punched and more likely to be able to respond but really as has been said awareness is the best sort defence you can get and as Iain Abernethy says never discount running away, it's a very valid SD technique.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Paul_D said:


> The Ultimate Self Protein Handbook


What is a 'self protein'?


----------



## ShotoNoob

Hanzou said:


> I'm talking about this;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those karatekas learned more in 30 seconds of getting their clocks cleaned, than in 30 minutes of doing Kata or Bunkai.
> 
> Yes. Context is everything.


|
Please point out the traditional karateka in either of these videos.  I can't find them.  You see Hanzou, CONTEXT IS, IN FACT, EVERYTHING.


----------



## Hanzou

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Please point out the traditional karateka in either of these videos.  I can't find them.  You see Hanzou, CONTEXT IS, IN FACT, EVERYTHING.



First you need to define "traditional karateka" and provide examples. Then you need to point out where in this thread anyone was talking about "traditional karatekas".


----------



## Hanzou

Brummie said:


> Although I haven't a clue about shotokan as a style, I do find that nowadays people are constantly questioning the effectiveness of traditional martial arts in a self defence situation.
> 
> The way I try to think of it is, should I get attacked or involved in a fight, and the other person is trained in martial arts or fighting, which is probably highly unlikely, then it would be the best disciplined who would come out on top most probably.
> 
> However, I do think its unlikely that an attacker or common thug starting a brawl will be trained, or have a reasonable amount of training, therefore, all the hard work, effort and skill that we have learned would give us an advantage to help protect ourselves.
> 
> After all, I'd like to think most of us would avoid violence at all costs. And only when no other option is available would we utilise our training.



Here's a recent stabbing attack in a subway;






In that situation, my MMA/Bjj training would be far more beneficial and effective than my TMA/Karate training. Hence why people question the latter's effectiveness in a  self defense situation.


----------



## Danny T

Hanzou said:


> Here's a recent stabbing attack in a subway;
> 
> In that situation, my MMA/Bjj training would be far more beneficial and effective than my TMA/Karate training. Hence why people question the latter's effectiveness in a  self defense situation.


This is the reason you get so much flak Hanzou. 
You say, people question the effectiveness of Karate training in a self defense situation because your training was lacking.
The video shows two in a grappling situation. Yes at this point a good ground fighting skill would be a good skill to have. What happen prior to getting to this point? What skill set would have been better? How about an ability to defuse the situation? What was the argument about? What happen for the situation to get to the point of the two subjects struggling on the ground? Were there other skills that could have been utilized prior to it becoming a struggle on the ground? Could the skill sets developed from a karate training background have been effective prior to flopping on the ground?


----------



## Hanzou

Danny T said:


> This is the reason you get so much flak Hanzou.



Flak for what? Pointing out that Karate is lacking when it comes to ground fighting, and that lack can be detrimental or deadly in a self defense situation?



> You say, people question the effectiveness of Karate training in a self defense situation because your training was lacking.
> The video shows two in a grappling situation. Yes at this point a good ground fighting skill would be a good skill to have. What happen prior to getting to this point? What skill set would have been better? How about an ability to defuse the situation? What was the argument about? What happen for the situation to get to the point of the two subjects struggling on the ground? Were there other skills that could have been utilized prior to it becoming a struggle on the ground? Could the skill sets developed from a karate training background have been effective prior to flopping on the ground?



Perhaps, but the difference is that MMA has an answer for all the steps in that scenario. Karate's answer stops as soon as the fight hits the pavement.


----------



## Paul_D

RTKDCMB said:


> What is a 'self protein'?


Self protection.

Bloody spell checker!  Why does modern technology make it feel like a battle of wills trying to get something to type what you want to say, rather than what it thinks you might mean ;-)


----------



## Steve

drop bear said:


> Ok so we have one opinion for and one opinion against. And my opinion is i haven't seen any evidence that Shotokan or their training methods work in self defence.
> 
> so i suppose both opinions are equally valid at this point.


who has actually trained in shotokan?   Maybe that's an okay place to start.   


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Hanzou

Steve said:


> who has actually trained in shotokan?   Maybe that's an okay place to start.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD



I did, for the better part of a decade.

Of course many here don't like my opinion about it.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Flak for what? Pointing out that Karate is lacking when it comes to ground fighting, and that lack can be detrimental or deadly in a self defense situation?
> 
> Perhaps, but the difference is that MMA has an answer for all the steps in that scenario. Karate's answer stops as soon as the fight hits the pavement.


What rubbish! Our training tonight was almost entirely on the ground although primarily focused on getting up from the ground. Where you get this notion that karate is purely a stand up martial art just shows how much *your* karate training was lacking, not that karate is lacking.


----------



## Steve

K-man said:


> What rubbish! Our training tonight was almost entirely on the ground although primarily focused on getting up from the ground. Where you get this notion that karate is purely a stand up martial art just shows how much *your* karate training was lacking, not that karate is lacking.


You're,training in karate now?  I thought you were aikido and Krav Maga.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> What rubbish! Our training tonight was almost entirely on the ground although primarily focused on getting up from the ground. Where you get this notion that karate is purely a stand up martial art just shows how much *your* karate training was lacking, not that karate is lacking.



Don't you actively cross-train with Bjj, Aikido, and Krav Maga stylists?

In that case you'd be quite correct. My sensei didn't train with Bjj, Aikido, and Krav Maga people. He thought Shotokan had all the answers for everything.


----------



## Paul_D

Hanzou said:


> Karate's answer stops as soon as the fight hits the pavement.


There is groundwork in kata, if you understand kata correctly.  Most instructors don't however, hence most don't teach the throws, joints locks, takedowns, chokes, groundwork etc etc within kata.  

The have a strictly "everything is a block, kick or punch" approach to kata bunkai.  But that is the fault of your instructors, not karate.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Flak for what?



For being too simplistic in your thinking (you looked and all you saw was two people rolling around on the ground, whilst Danny T was able to see the bigger picture) and jumping to conclusions without ample justification.



Hanzou said:


> Pointing out that Karate is lacking when it comes to ground fighting, and that lack can be detrimental or deadly in a self defense situation?



If Karate is lacking in groundwork BJJ is lacking in standup, which can be detrimental or deadly in a self defense situation, erroneous statements can go both ways. 



Hanzou said:


> Perhaps, but the difference is that MMA has an answer for all the steps in that scenario. Karate's answer stops as soon as the fight hits the pavement.



Many TMA's have answers to all of those steps. Unless it is taught with a self defence mindset MMA's answer doesn't even begin until the fighting stage.


----------



## Mephisto

Paul_D said:


> There is groundwork in kata, if you understand kata correctly.  Most instructors don't however, hence most don't teach the throws, joints locks, takedowns, chokes, groundwork etc etc within kata.
> 
> The have a strictly "everything is a block, kick or punch" approach to kata bunkai.  But that is the fault of your instructors, not karate.


I really question the "karate has grappling" argument. Perhaps it has some stand up joint locks, but ground fighting? I'll admit I'm skeptical because I've never seen it. I've seen numerous karate demos, videos clips, and been to a few schools. Never seen any grappling. To me it seems like the claim is a modern attempt to make karate more practical and marketable. Was anyone doing karate grappling in the 1970s and 1980s? It's like in FMA where guys say all FMA trains all ranges, and other arts think they need to add in skill sets to remain relevant rather than sticking with what they're good at and meant for.


RTKDCMB said:


> For being too simplistic in your thinking (you looked and all you saw was two people rolling around on the ground, whilst Danny T was able to see the bigger picture) and jumping to conclusions without ample justification.
> 
> 
> 
> If Karate is lacking in groundwork BJJ is lacking in standup, which can be detrimental or deadly in a self defense situation, erroneous statements can go both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> Many TMA's have answers to all of those steps. Unless it is taught with a self defence mindset MMA's answer doesn't even begin until the fighting stage.


The fight in the video involved ground grappling so it's a fair assessment for him to say bjj would have helped. It's also fair to say karate may have helped prior to the ground fight, it's also fair to say if the guy had a gun or 5 friends he would be better off too.
bjj has a fair bit of standup, more so than karate has groundwork. Of course bjj stand up is grappling, with some self defense combatives thrown into the gjj curriculum.
As for TMA has answers to all steps preceding the ground fight scenario? I don't think traditional arts taught how to diffuse a fight, these arts come from different times and cultures where our modern approach to situational awReness and diffusion would not necessarily apply. I'd argue that any street smarts training in a TMA is a modern addition and this not traditional. Also many arts can be classified as TMA so you can't really say all or most TMA would prepare you for the events leading up to a fight.


----------



## Danny T

Hanzou said:


> Flak for what? Pointing out that Karate is lacking when it comes to ground fighting, and that lack can be detrimental or deadly in a self defense situation?


No, it is the constant pointing out that *your* karate is lacking so all karate is lacking.



Hanzou said:


> Perhaps, but the difference is that MMA has an answer for all the steps in that scenario. Karate's answer stops as soon as the fight hits the pavement.


And again here, your point is that ALL karate lacks ground skills. It is about how different individuals and schools actually train. 

Also I could very easily do as you often do and make the statement that BJJ styles don't do self defense or any type of de-escalation training even in the face of knowing others who have done so in their training because I have never done any self-defense or de-escalation training in the BJJ training I have received.


----------



## Tez3

Mephisto said:


> I really question the "karate has grappling" argument.



My style of karate has ground fighting, something that doesn't surprise people who know who the founder of Wado Ryu was.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> I actually do deescalation and awareness. And a lot of what i see in training I have issues with.


This is great.  Do you do this as part of our outside your bjj training?  Is it with your bjj trainers but outside of the core curriculum or completely separate "SD" training?

Again, while I have found this pre-cursor and situational awareness training more present in the traditional karate styles rather than the muay thai or mma clubs or clubs focusing solely on sport I have trained at and visited, I would acknowledge that this situational SD training is not so much a part of the traditional karate style curriculum I have trained in but more so in the approach taken by the particular sensei's I have trained with.  There are plenty of traditional schools that do not focus on precursor/situational/environmental training.  However, that said, I think on the whole the reason that this may be found more often in traditional schools is that they have the ability to have a broader scope of focus, rather than sports schools where (i) the primary drive is for practitioners to be the best they can be in that sport and to do well in tournaments and / or (ii) there is simply no interest in the SD element.


----------



## Paul_D

Mephisto said:


> I really question the "karate has grappling" argument. Perhaps it has some stand up joint locks, but ground fighting? I'll admit I'm skeptical because I've never seen it.


Morio Hiagonna tells us the tale of a meeting in the 1930s where Jigoro Kano (founder of Judo) and Chojun Miyagi (founder of Goju-Ryu karate) discussed grappling and groundwork in karate:

“When they spoke later Kano Sensei asked, "Are there ne-waza (ground fighting techniques) in karate?" Miyagi explained that there are, along with nage waza (throwing techniques), shime waza (choking techniques) and gyaku waza (joint locking techniques). He then demonstrated some examples explaining the continual importance of harmonizing and focusing the breath. Kano was surprised to find that karate was much more than just punching and kicking techniques, but that it encompassed the depth of a complete martial art." – The History of Karate, Okinawan Goju-Ryu, Morio Hiagonna


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Perhaps, but the difference is that MMA has an answer for all the steps in that scenario. Karate's answer stops as soon as the fight hits the pavement.


The thing is, does MMA provide you with an answer for avoiding that situation in the first place?
Seems to be the key question that needs to be answered here.


----------



## Mephisto

I think it's fairly common for Gracie jujitsu to include some combatives and self defense training. Is it common to all bjj? probably not. But I'd say it's common among gjj, so with that in mind is say gjj is a good place to go train bjj with a self defense mindset.

 The same goes for karate guys that emphasize realism and grappling. Some exemplary schools may train realistically and bring in a rbsd element, but on the whole I don't think this is the case. I'm sure you can find one school that trains hard or trains realistically within a system. But if 99% of a system does not train realistically is that system worth recommending for self defense for the minority of schools that may be training realistically?


----------



## Mephisto

Paul_D said:


> Morio Hiagonna tells us the tale of a meeting in the 1930s where Jigoro Kano (founder of Judo) and Chojun Miyagi (founder of Goju-Ryu karate) discussed grappling and groundwork in karate:
> 
> “When they spoke later Kano Sensei asked, "Are there ne-waza (ground fighting techniques) in karate?" Miyagi explained that there are, along with nage waza (throwing techniques), shime waza (choking techniques) and gyaku waza (joint locking techniques). He then demonstrated some examples explaining the continual importance of harmonizing and focusing the breath. Kano was surprised to find that karate was much more than just punching and kicking techniques, but that it encompassed the depth of a complete martial art." – The History of Karate, Okinawan Goju-Ryu, Morio Hiagonna


That's a good starting point. But was Hiagonna sensei just saying that to sound relevant? If he was able to show some of throwing, joint locking, and choking, was it standing or on the ground? Was it one of few often overlooked techniques in goju? If it's so common, can you link some video? I'm learning here and just asking questions, hopefully I'm coming off as to smarmy


----------



## Zero

Mephisto said:


> As for TMA has answers to all steps preceding the ground fight scenario? *I don't think traditional arts taught how to diffuse a fight, these arts come from different times and cultures* where our modern approach to situational awReness and diffusion would not necessarily apply. I'd argue that *any street smarts training in a TMA is a modern addition* and this not traditional. Also many arts can be classified as TMA so you can't really say all or most TMA would prepare you for the events leading up to a fight.



This is interesting...I would acknowledge that the modern approach to SD/situational awareness may well be different and of course suited to the "modern" environment or societal "norms". But why would not traditional arts going back many years, even many centuries, not contain or at least have ancillary training or discussion on diffusion and avoidance?  Particularly if one was living in an era where the criminal/punitive sanction for killing another may be lesser or non-existent compared to today and in a society where the open wearing of weapons may have been common place and acceptable. 
...In those circumstances I would have thought it just as, if not more, important than now days to be aware of one's environment and how to nicely talk down that big Manchu carrying the guando over his shoulder and hassling you out for your deep fried bean curd in the back alley of Guizhou??

Would love some input from TMA guys on this...


----------



## Hanzou

Paul_D said:


> There is groundwork in kata, if you understand kata correctly.



Could you provide some evidence of this, or is this simply more examples of modern Karatekas making up move sets from pre-existing kata movements?


----------



## Paul_D

Mephisto said:


> That's a good starting point. But was Hiagonna sensei just saying that to sound relevant? If he was able to show some of throwing, joint locking, and choking, was it standing or on the ground? Was it one of few often overlooked techniques in goju? If it's so common, can you link some video? I'm learning here and just asking questions, hopefully I'm coming off as to smarmy


No, your not mate, don't worry 

Here Iain Abernethy explains that the "jump" in Pinan Godan (which is often interpreted as someone jumping a katana ) is in fact a way of preventing your opponent from spinning out of the joint lock that is being applied.

Pinan Godan Heian Godan Throw video Iain Abernethy

There are other examples (just as there are other alternate explanations for these same moves).  But we know from the writings of the old masters that ground fighting was originally in there somewhere.  Unfortunately it has been lost to a large degree now karate focuses mainly on block/kick/punch, so it becomes difficulty process of practically minded people like Iain, and others, trying to "reverse engineer" the information back out of the kata.


----------



## Zero

Mephisto said:


> That's a good starting point. But was Hiagonna sensei just saying that to sound relevant? If he was able to show some of throwing, joint locking, and choking, was it standing or on the ground? Was it one of few often overlooked techniques in goju? If it's so common, can you link some video? I'm learning here and just asking questions, hopefully I'm coming off as to smarmy


Yeah, I am not saying I am leaning either way on this one but as always, it's hard to tell from a book and potentially hearsay on the behalf of Hiagonna (to the extent he was simply relating what he was told by Kano) if Kano was simply being polite on this matter.  Was Hiagonna actually present when Miyagi was giving examples to Kano?


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Could you provide some evidence of this?



Yes, the evidence is in abundance Hanzou, please simply refer to any kata.  It is there for those who know what they are looking for and for those that have been trained accordingly.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> The thing is, does MMA provide you with an answer for avoiding that situation in the first place?
> Seems to be the key question that needs to be answered here.



I don't see why it wouldn't.


----------



## Paul_D

A bit more info that may help:-

Karate Grappling Did It Really Exist Iain Abernethy

Karate s Grappling Methods Amazon.co.uk Iain Stuart Abernethy Peter Skillen 9780953893201 Books


----------



## Hanzou

Paul_D said:


> No, your not mate, don't worry
> 
> Here Iain Abernethy explains that the "jump" in Pinan Godan (which is often interpreted as someone jumping a katana ) is in fact a way of preventing your opponent from spinning out of the joint lock that is being applied.
> 
> Pinan Godan Heian Godan Throw video Iain Abernethy
> 
> There are other examples (just as there are other alternate explanations for these same moves).  But we know from the writings of the old masters that ground fighting was originally in there somewhere.  Unfortunately it has been lost to a large degree now karate focuses mainly on block/kick/punch, so it becomes difficulty process of practically minded people like Iain, and others, trying to "reverse engineer" the information back out of the kata.



Isn't that the same Abernethy who said that Karate grappling was "crude" and not even close to the grappling you see in Judo/Bjj/Wrestling?



Zero said:


> Yes, the evidence is in abundance Hanzou, please simply refer to any kata.  It is there for those who know what they are looking for and for those that have been trained accordingly.



Really? Evidence of ground fighting in every single kata? Somehow I seriously doubt that.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Brummie said:


> The way I try to think of it is, should I get attacked or involved in a fight, and the other person is trained in martial arts or fighting, which is probably highly unlikely, then it would be the best disciplined who would come out on top most probably.





Paul_D said:


> I think this is mostly becasue they mistake fighting, MA and SD for the same thing, not realising that not only are they vastly different, but in some cases the skills learnt to be successful in one field can be the exact opposite of the skills required to be successful in the other.





Paul_D said:


> Really? Old people don't get attacked by people that want to "fight" them, women don't get attacked by men that want to "fight" them. Fighting is only crucial to SD if fighting is the most likely form of violence you will face (i.e if you are male aged 18-30).





Paul_D said:


> Men, particularity young men, tend to focus on fighting as it is the most likely form of violence they will face. But for the rest of us it is extremely unlikely. Other area's of violence are much more likely and so fighting is far from crucial for most people as for most people fights are not the form of violence they are most likely to face.





Mephisto said:


> I agree that deescalation and awareness are key factors to a good self defense strategy. but these are non martial components of self defense.





Danny T said:


> The video shows two in a grappling situation. Yes at this point a good ground fighting skill would be a good skill to have. What happen prior to getting to this point? What skill set would have been better? How about an ability to defuse the situation? What was the argument about? What happen for the situation to get to the point of the two subjects struggling on the ground? Were there other skills that could have been utilized prior to it becoming a struggle on the ground? Could the skill sets developed from a karate training background have been effective prior to flopping on the ground?





Zero said:


> This is interesting...I would acknowledge that the modern approach to SD/situational awareness may well be different and of course suited to the "modern" environment or societal "norms". But why would not traditional arts going back many years, even many centuries, not contain or at least have ancillary training or discussion on diffusion and avoidance?



Okay, I think I need to address a dirty little secret of the relation between martial arts training and real world violence.

Most martial arts training is in some way or form related to developing ability in fighting. The context for that fighting may vary (archaic sword duels, modern ring fighting, "street" violence, theatrical fighting, etc) and there may be additional claimed objectives (fitness, "discipline", etc), but to some degree we all think we are learning how to fight.

The secret is this - *once you get away from the "social" violence whereby individuals (mostly young men) try to establish their dominance or release excess testosterone in one-on-one clashes, the outcome of most violence is not settled by individual fighting skill*. In most violence, the winner is the side which successfully deploys surprise, intimidation, superior positioning, superior numbers, and superior weaponry. Regardless of whether you are a mugger selecting a victim, police officers  arresting a suspect, or an infantry platoon assaulting an enemy fortification, you aren't looking for a fair fight. In fact, you don't want there to be a fight at all. You want the outcome to be determined before the encounter begins.

It's technically possible to prevail by means of superior fighting skill and spirit if you are outnumbered, out-armed, and caught by surprise, but it's not a high-percentage proposition, no matter how good you are. If you manage to survive and get away in that situation, then you are doing well.

What this means for self-defense is that 95% of the job is in a) steering clear of the temptations to engage in avoidable social violence and b) having the awareness to make sure that surprise, intimidation, superior positioning, superior numbers, and superior weaponry are not used against you (and are preferably on your side). It doesn't hurt to have some actual fighting ability for when everything else goes wrong, but that shouldn't be your primary concern.


----------



## Danny T

Tony Dismukes said:


> What this means for self-defense is that 95% of the job is in a) steering clear of the temptations to engage in avoidable social violence and b) having the awareness to make sure that surprise, intimidation, superior positioning, superior numbers, and superior weaponry are not used against you (and are preferably on your side). It doesn't hurt to have some actual fighting ability for when everything else goes wrong, but that shouldn't be your primary concern.


Yeap!!! 
Thanks Tony.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> I don't see why it wouldn't.



Well...for one in MMA your goal, in the simplest terms, is to go up and hit the guy.

For SD Awareness and de-escalation you've already failed at that point



Hanzou said:


> Isn't that the same Abernethy who said that Karate grappling was "crude" and not even close to the grappling you see in Judo/Bjj/Wrestling?
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Evidence of ground fighting in every single kata? Somehow I seriously doubt that.



If you would have had a good instructor, you wouldn't.

Nobodies claiming its as in depth as BJJ or Judo, but it is there.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Well...for one in MMA your goal, in the simplest terms, is to go up and hit the guy.
> 
> For SD Awareness and de-escalation you've already failed at that point



You do know that there are people who practice MMA for self defense right?



> If you would have had a good instructor, you wouldn't.
> 
> Nobodies claiming its as in depth as BJJ or Judo, but it is there.



If there's such an abundance of good instructors teaching this, we should see more evidence of it outside of "go look in the Kata and decipher the movements". We should be seeing Karatekas performing ground fighting on some level somewhere. Perhaps even competing against more established grappling styles.

That's not what we see though.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> I don't see why it wouldn't.


Come on, have you in your mma classes, or in any mma you have witnessed, focused on situational awareness on the street, de-escalation of confrontations, scoping of environment to assess exit ways etc?  Are you saying you have or are you saying you simply don't see why it wouldn't, in that you don't really know?


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> You do know that there are people who practice MMA for self defense right?


Yes but as said by Drose, do you have situational awareness and de-escalation training in mma training? Please answer


----------



## Zero

Tony Dismukes said:


> Okay, I think I need to address a dirty little secret of the relation between martial arts training and real world violence.
> 
> Most martial arts training is in some way or form related to developing ability in fighting. The context for that fighting may vary (archaic sword duels, modern ring fighting, "street" violence, theatrical fighting, etc) and there may be additional claimed objectives (fitness, "discipline", etc), but to some degree we all think we are learning how to fight.
> 
> The secret is this - *once you get away from the "social" violence whereby individuals (mostly young men) try to establish their dominance or release excess testosterone in one-on-one clashes, the outcome of most violence is not settled by individual fighting skill*. In most violence, the winner is the side which successfully deploys surprise, intimidation, superior positioning, superior numbers, and superior weaponry. Regardless of whether you are a mugger selecting a victim, police officers  arresting a suspect, or an infantry platoon assaulting an enemy fortification, you aren't looking for a fair fight. In fact, you don't want there to be a fight at all. You want the outcome to be determined before the encounter begins.
> 
> It's technically possible to prevail by means of superior fighting skill and spirit if you are outnumbered, out-armed, and caught by surprise, but it's not a high-percentage proposition, no matter how good you are. If you manage to survive and get away in that situation, then you are doing well.
> 
> What this means for self-defense is that 95% of the job is in a) steering clear of the temptations to engage in avoidable social violence and b) having the awareness to make sure that surprise, intimidation, superior positioning, superior numbers, and superior weaponry are not used against you (and are preferably on your side). It doesn't hurt to have some actual fighting ability for when everything else goes wrong, but that shouldn't be your primary concern.



Yes, that was my point.  Why would a skilled fighter of yester-year not be interested in situational awareness, environmental assessment etc, so he can avoid being jumped by the local back-alley bandaits to the best of his abilities and go on to live a long and fruitful life plying his martial arts wares to the rich kids of the local governor?


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> Come on, have you in your mma classes, or in any mma you have witnessed, focused on situational awareness on the street, de-escalation of confrontations, scoping of environment to assess exit ways etc?  Are you saying you have or are you saying you simply don't see why it wouldn't, in that you don't really know?



\Urban Warriors Academy MMA Gym London Krav Maga London The importance of Situational Awareness - Urban Warriors Academy - MMA Gym London Krav Maga London

Classes - Costa Mesa BJJ - Costa Mesa MMAJiu Jitsu Orange County BJJ Orange County Costa Mesa BJJ


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> You do know that there are people who practice MMA for self defense right?
> 
> 
> 
> If there's such an abundance of good instructors teaching this, we should see more evidence of it outside of "go look in the Kata and decipher the movements". We should be seeing Karatekas performing ground fighting on some level somewhere. Perhaps even competing against more established grappling styles.
> 
> That's not what we see though.




All 6 of the MMA/Boxing gyms in my area claim to teach self defense, but outside of SD focused BJJ none of the guys I've worked with from any other general MMA training for the cage. They had no grasp of awareness and de-escalation, none of the "make a note of everyone you see in a room and have a way to kill them" style awareness thinking.

The gyms that do this are a minority.

A lot of Karateka do more groundfighting in their SD, I personally do Armbars and  chokes with my takedowns. As does many of the instructors in my area, both in our association and a neighboring style.

Why would they go to a competition with accomplished grapplers with the little groundwork and grappling Karate does give? Are Judoka gonna start coming to Point Karate tournaments now too?


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Really? Evidence of ground fighting in every single kata? Somehow I seriously doubt that.


Yeah, you got me there Hanzou, I put in the smiley so you could tell I was yanking your chain!!...that said, I am told it is in some of it. I am a goju ryu guy, I love to fight and love karate but only have a rudimental ability and understanding of kata at best so am the last to talk in depth on it!


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> \Urban Warriors Academy MMA Gym London Krav Maga London The importance of Situational Awareness - Urban Warriors Academy - MMA Gym London Krav Maga London


OK, so that was an article on the website, which is nice to see. But I couldn't see anything on curriculum on the website and/or if SD and these concepts are trained in at the actual club.  So question the value of that to support your claim. Again, do you focus on this at your club, or have you actually witnessed this at other mma clubs?   Next please.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> All 6 of the MMA/Boxing gyms in my area claim to teach self defense, but outside of SD focused BJJ none of the guys I've worked with from any other general MMA training for the cage. They had no grasp of awareness and de-escalation, none of the "make a note of everyone you see in a room and have a way to kill them" style awareness thinking.
> 
> The gyms that do this are a minority.
> 
> A lot of Karateka do more groundfighting in their SD, I personally do Armbars and  chokes with my takedowns. As does many of the instructors in my area, both in our association and a neighboring style.
> 
> Why would they go to a competition with accomplished grapplers with the little groundwork and grappling Karate does give? Are Judoka gonna start coming to Point Karate tournaments now too?



I'm not the one claiming that Judokas are strikers here. 

If your claim is that there is a competent level of grappling and ground fighting in karate, then karate should be competitive with the other grappling styles out there. If it isn't, then that means that it isn't widely taught, or refined on any reasonable level, and really shouldn't be brought up when we discuss the importance of grappling/ground fighting in a SD situation.

Again, this all goes back to my earlier argument that Karate attempts to be all things to all people.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> \Urban Warriors Academy MMA Gym London Krav Maga London The importance of Situational Awareness - Urban Warriors Academy - MMA Gym London Krav Maga London
> 
> Classes - Costa Mesa BJJ - Costa Mesa MMAJiu Jitsu Orange County BJJ Orange County Costa Mesa BJJ


I'd be willing to bet that the bulk of the situational awareness training comes from the Krav Maga instructors: 

Urban Warriors Academy MMA Gym London Krav Maga London Our Coaches Mixed Martial Arts London


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> I'm not the one claiming that Judokas are strikers here.
> 
> If your claim is that there is a competent level of grappling and ground fighting in karate, then karate should be competitive with the other grappling styles out there. If it isn't, then that means that it isn't widely taught, or refined on any reasonable level, and really shouldn't be brought up when we discuss the importance of grappling/ground fighting in a SD situation.
> 
> Again, this all goes back to my earlier argument that Karate attempts to be all things to all people.



Nor have we claimed that Karateka are astounding grapplers. Basic level of grappling will never fly in a competitive environment.

You're the only one claiming Karate Grappling to be on the same level as Judo or BJJ. Wrestling isnt as refined or complex as Judo or BJJ, should it not be discussed for SD either?


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> OK, so that was an article on the website, which is nice to see. But I couldn't see anything on curriculum on the website and/or if SD and these concepts are trained in at the actual club.  So question the value of that to support your claim. Again, do you focus on this at your club, or have you actually witnessed this at other mma clubs?   Next please.



Did you see the second link? My point is yes there are MMA gyms out there that practice situational awareness.

As to my school, we're Gjj, and we do have a self defense class, and a class for women where situational awareness is taught.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> I'd be willing to bet that the bulk of the situational awareness training comes from the Krav Maga instructors:
> 
> Urban Warriors Academy MMA Gym London Krav Maga London Our Coaches Mixed Martial Arts London



Check the second link. All Bjj buddy. However, it shouldn't be surprising that a Mixed Martial Arts gym would teach a mixture of martial arts.



Drose427 said:


> Nor have we claimed that Karateka are astounding grapplers. Basic level of grappling will never fly in a competitive environment.
> 
> You're the only one claiming Karate Grappling to be on the same level as Judo or BJJ. Wrestling isnt as refined or complex as Judo or BJJ, should it not be discussed for SD either?



What are we considering basic level here? White belt level Judo or Bjj? High school Freshman level Wrestling? Exactly how basic are we talking here? Anything lower than that is "learning from book" level grappling.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Did you see the second link? My point is yes there are MMA gyms out there that practice situational awareness.
> 
> As to my school, we're Gjj, and we do have a self defense class, and a class for women where situational awareness is taught.



but its not the majority. If you say TMA is bad for RBSD because good schools are a minority, how can you praise MMA for SD when SD focused MMA schools are also a minority?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hanzou said:


> If your claim is that there is a competent level of grappling and ground fighting in karate, then karate should be competitive with the other grappling styles out there. If it isn't, then that means that it isn't widely taught, or refined on any reasonable level, and really shouldn't be brought up when we discuss the importance of grappling/ground fighting in a SD situation.


Not necessarily. From what I've seen, the grappling in most karate is aimed at dealing with an untrained civilian assailant and is intended to work in conjunction with the striking aspects of karate. No one is claiming that it is sufficient for out-grappling a grappling specialist.

Think of it as comparable to the classic Gracie self-defense curriculum covering defenses against standing headlocks, throat grabs, haymaker punches, etc. That curriculum is valid for its intended purpose, but someone who only trained in those techniques would still get destroyed in the white belt division of a grappling tournament.

(BTW - I've seen plenty of evidence for grappling in karate, but not so much for actual newaza. That, I'm skeptical of.)


----------



## Hanzou

Tony Dismukes said:


> Not necessarily. From what I've seen, the grappling in most karate is aimed at dealing with an untrained civilian assailant and is intended to work in conjunction with the striking aspects of karate. No one is claiming that it is sufficient for out-grappling a grappling specialist.
> 
> Think of it as comparable to the classic Gracie self-defense curriculum covering defenses against standing headlocks, throat grabs, haymaker punches, etc. That curriculum is valid for its intended purpose, but someone who only trained in those techniques would still get destroyed in the white belt division of a grappling tournament.
> 
> (BTW - I've seen plenty of evidence for grappling in karate, but not so much for actual newaza. That, I'm skeptical of.)



Yeah, I'm talking about ground fighting. It started from this quote from Paul D;



Paul_D said:


> *There is groundwork in kata, if you understand kata correctly.  Most instructors don't however, hence most don't teach the throws, joints locks, takedowns, chokes, groundwork etc etc within kata.  *



I'm well aware of the hip throws, and foot sweeps in karate. I'm talking about the above where the claim is that there's ground work/newaza in kata. Considering that every kata I learned was on my feet, I highly doubt this claim.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> but its not the majority. If you say TMA is bad for RBSD because good schools are a minority, how can you praise MMA for SD when SD focused MMA schools are also a minority?



Really? Just about every MMA gym or Bjj school I've come across offers a self defense program of some kind. Even gyms based around promoting fighters. Self defense and women's protection classes is big business.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Really? Just about every MMA gym or Bjj school I've come across offers a self defense program of some kind. Even gyms based around promoting fighters. Self defense and women's protection classes is big business.



Usually its nothing more than the usual MMA curriculum that theyre saying "apply for SD." Thats a far cry from De-escalation, awareness, Fighting out of common SD situations, learning how to defend yourself from a seated position. Learning disarms, how to go about multiple opponents, or RBSD in general, proper mindset, etc.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Check the second link.



Actually I didn't Check it, I was just referring to the first link. You were asked if MMA teaches situational awareness and the information in your first link suggested that the situational awareness came, not from the MMA instructors, but from the Krav Maga instructors, which is an art I believe you have also had reservations about.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Usually its nothing more than the usual MMA curriculum that theyre saying "apply for SD." Thats a far cry from De-escalation, awareness, Fighting out of common SD situations, learning how to defend yourself from a seated position. Learning disarms, how to go about multiple opponents, or RBSD in general, proper mindset, etc.



Shotokan and other Karate styles are RSBD systems now?

That's quite a goal post move....


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Did you see the second link? My point is yes there are MMA gyms out there that practice situational awareness.
> 
> As to my school, we're Gjj, and we do have a self defense class, and a class for women where situational awareness is taught.



Jeepers(!!) Hanzou, give yourself a fighting chance!  I checked the second link, I could not find any mention of situational awareness etc and all which is required so you can avoid a confrontation in the first place.  What I did find was absolutely from the perspective of a sport fighting guy coming at SD.  Please read following from the bjj website:

Quote: "Reality based combative & Self Defense class *teaches you how to engage a wide variety of armed opponents and survive life threatening situations*. This class will give the average man or woman, soldier, law enforcement officer, or security guard the *tools needed to disarm and combat an assailant*." Unquote.

There is nothing in here regarding avoiding becoming a victim in the first place, it is all from the mind set of "you're in the violent situation, now _take it to 'em_!! Kiya!" Use these great skills to survive a life threatening encounter!!

There is nothing mentioned on how to avoid this in the first place and just as importantly, nothing on how to diffuse the situation if you find yourself facing a violent altercation.

Sorry, but again, does your mma school train in this, have you witnessed it in other mma schools?  ...not sure what to do with your mention that you have a self defense class for women that focuses on situational awareness.  Clearly for you men with your sport fighting skills, who needs to bother about avoiding a fight in the first place?!!  Take it to 'em, kiya!! hehe!  Ok, on that one I am having a laugh (but I'm also crying at the same time!)


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Shotokan and other Karate styles are RSBD systems now?
> 
> That's quite a goal post move....



Your joking just proves my point..


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Actually I didn't Check it, I was just referring to the first link.



Well go ahead and click it. That way you won't have any perceived notions of hypocrisy on my part.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> Jeepers(!!) Hanzou, give yourself a fighting chance!  I checked the second link, I could not find any mention of situational awareness etc and all which is required so you can avoid a confrontation in the first place.  What I did find was absolutely from the perspective of a sport fighting guy coming at SD.  Please read following from the bjj website:
> 
> Quote: "Reality based combative & Self Defense class *teaches you how to engage a wide variety of armed opponents and survive life threatening situations*. This class will give the average man or woman, soldier, law enforcement officer, or security guard the *tools needed to disarm and combat an assailant*." Unquote.
> 
> There is nothing in here regarding avoiding becoming a victim in the first place, it is all from the mind set of "you're in the violent situation, now _take it to 'em_!! Kiya!" Use these great skills to survive a life threatening encounter!!
> 
> 
> There is nothing mentioned on how to avoid this in the first place and just as importantly, nothing on how to diffuse the situation if you find yourself facing a violent altercation.
> 
> Sorry, but again, does your mma school train in this, have you witnessed it in other mma schools?  ...not sure what to do with your mention that you have a self defense class for women that focuses on situational awareness.  Clearly for you men with your sport fighting skills, who needs to bother about avoiding a fight in the first place?!!  Take it to 'em, kiya!! hehe!  Ok, on that one I am having a laugh (but I'm also crying at the same time!)




I'm curious as to why that's considered "sport fighting guy" language for self defense when this TKD school which is non-competitive says the exact same thing;

*



			Self Defence
		
Click to expand...

*


> The definition of Rhee Tae Kwon Do involves dynamic techniques of unarmed combat for self-defensive purposes, combining the skilled application of powerful punches, kicks, blocks, dodges and interceptions.
> 
> *The Rhee Taekwondo practitioner uses well trained hands, arms and feet to effect the rapid immobilisation of any attacker.*




Rhee Tae Kwon Do - Perth Western Australia

I do believe earlier on that page they label themselves as a "superior" form of self defense because they're not a sport. I'm also pretty sure this school doesn't practice sparring either.

So just curious; Is it only outlandish when sport MA or MMA makes such self-defense claims?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> I'm curious as to why that's considered "sport fighting guy" language for self defense when this TKD school which is non-competitive says the exact same thing;
> 
> 
> 
> Rhee Tae Kwon Do - Perth Western Australia
> 
> I do believe earlier on that page they label themselves as a "superior" form of self defense because they're not a sport. I'm also pretty sure this school doesn't practice sparring either.
> 
> So just curious; Is it only outlandish when sport MA or MMA makes such self-defense claims?



Of course not, but that was never the argument.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Of course not, but that was never the argument.



What is the argument? That MMA and other sport styles don't offer self defense? We both know that's nonsense.

The other argument is that there's groundfighting hidden within Karate kata. We both know that's nonsense as well.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> What is the argument? That MMA and other sport styles don't offer self defense? We both know that's nonsense.
> 
> The other argument is that there's groundfighting hidden within Karate kata. We both know that's nonsense as well.





Zero said:


> Jeepers(!!) Hanzou, give yourself a fighting chance!  I checked the second link, I could not find any mention of situational awareness etc and all which is required so you can avoid a confrontation in the first place.  What I did find was absolutely from the perspective of a sport fighting guy coming at SD.  Please read following from the bjj website:
> 
> Quote: "Reality based combative & Self Defense class *teaches you how to engage a wide variety of armed opponents and survive life threatening situations*. This class will give the average man or woman, soldier, law enforcement officer, or security guard the *tools needed to disarm and combat an assailant*." Unquote.
> 
> There is nothing in here regarding avoiding becoming a victim in the first place, it is all from the mind set of "you're in the violent situation, now _take it to 'em_!! Kiya!" Use these great skills to survive a life threatening encounter!!
> 
> There is nothing mentioned on how to avoid this in the first place and just as importantly, nothing on how to diffuse the situation if you find yourself facing a violent altercation.
> 
> Sorry, but again, does your mma school train in this, have you witnessed it in other mma schools?  ...not sure what to do with your mention that you have a self defense class for women that focuses on situational awareness.  Clearly for you men with your sport fighting skills, who needs to bother about avoiding a fight in the first place?!!  Take it to 'em, kiya!! hehe!  Ok, on that one I am having a laugh (but I'm also crying at the same time!)




Hanzou, You've showed nothing to prove that your standard MMA gyms teach any SD beyond the normal MMA curriculum, aside from your Krav Maga instructor. I'll ask again, if MMA gyms teaching SD, awareness, and de-escalation are a minority, how is that any different or better to you than your opinion that quality TMA schools are a minority?


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Hanzou, You've showed nothing to prove that your standard MMA gyms teach any SD beyond the normal MMA curriculum, aside from your Krav Maga instructor. I'll ask again, if MMA gyms teaching SD, awareness, and de-escalation are a minority, how is that any different or better to you than your opinion that quality TMA schools are a minority?



Wait... where did I say that quality TMA schools are a minority?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Wait... where did I say that quality TMA schools are a minority?



Seriously? You should read your own posts...you sure talk down on TMA's a lot for someone who thinks highly of them


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Seriously? You should read your own posts...you sure talk down on TMA's a lot for someone who thinks highly of them



I do believe that the only thing I said was that Karate lacked ground fighting. Thus if a situation forced you to fight from that range (like that stabbing in the subway), karate would offer no answer for you.

MMA, Judo, Bjj, and a few other styles would.


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> For self defence.
> 
> Can you talk me through the non exaggerated poses used here?


|
I love it when these kata videos are posted.  The kata haters find everything they see as wrong; the kata fanatics uoh & goo over the very fine demonstration this sensei is putting on.  Great stirring the pot piece.  The sensei thinks kata is serious business.  Who is he and did anybody think of contacting  him?
|
On the lighter side, there's reverse punch in there.  Machida likes those in MMA.  He's knocked several MMA opponent's around with that.  Just trying to pick out a practicality among all the other objectives sought in the kata.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Hanzou, You've showed nothing to prove that your standard MMA gyms teach any SD beyond the normal MMA curriculum, aside from your Krav Maga instructor. I'll ask again, if MMA gyms teaching SD, awareness, and de-escalation are a minority, how is that any different or better to you than your opinion that quality TMA schools are a minority?



If you are getting de-escalation and situational awareness from a. Martial arts school. You are almost always going to the wrong place.

sorry. Lets put it this way. Martial arts qualification is not a reference for good de-escalation.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I
> 
> Rhee Tae Kwon Do - Perth Western Australia
> 
> I do believe earlier on that page they label themselves as a "superior" form of self defense because they're not a sport.



Why is it so hard to believe that if you specialize in self defense rather than adding it as an afterthought you might be better at it. You do know that the purpose of a website is to advertise your art right?



Hanzou said:


> II'm also pretty sure this school doesn't practice sparring either.



And once again you jump to erroneous conclusions based on a lack of knowledge and preconceived notions:

From the region of the website: (where i started out):






From a different region:


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, I'm talking about ground fighting. It started from this quote from Paul D;
> 
> 
> 
> I'm well aware of the hip throws, and foot sweeps in karate. I'm talking about the above where the claim is that there's ground work/newaza in kata. Considering that every kata I learned was on my feet, I highly doubt this claim.


There are no karate kata for fighting on the ground that I have heard of. You might be able to use some of the combinations on the ground but that's about it, very limited. However there is still a reasonable amount of ground work in general Goju training.


----------



## S33KR

Hello, I'm new here. I was skimming through the conversation. Primarily the first and current pages. 

I have no experience with Shotokan at all. But my instructor told me a story about a Shotokan guy who visited the school he was studying at at the time. (This was probably 30 or more years ago.) He said the guy participated in a friendly sparring match with the other students and absolutely dominated everyone. 

He said the guy was just so fast that he was all over you before you had time to process it. He said that even though the guy was using the same techniques over and over (front kick, straight and reverse punch) he was so fast at getting off the line and so precise with his attacks, that it didn't matter. 

So my point I guess, is judging from this story (and the credibility of my instructor) that yeah, Shotokan definitely has self defense applications.

 I feel like the primary weapon that any martial art employs is intent. If you train Shotokan or any other martial with the intention of getting out of the situation as quickly as possible through what ever means necessary, it will probably serve you well in a self defense scenario. But its unfair to say that any martial art will be effective in 100% of the situations. Maybe the guys has a knife, or gun. Or a friend with a gun, or a car and he's going to run you over. You never know.

And on another note, when does self defense stop being self defense and it starts being fighting or a life/death sparring match. If the guy has had some experience formally or from his buddies on the street and he squares up with you it will change the mechanics of self defense techniques. I say this to validate MMA's usefulness.

Just my two cents though.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Why is it so hard to believe that if you specialize in self defense rather than adding it as an afterthought you might be better at it. You do know that the purpose of a website is to advertise your art right?



because self defence is not a definable thing with any sort of proven pathway to reach it.

It would be like specifically training for happiness.


----------



## Paul_D

drop bear said:


> because self defence is not a definable thing with any sort of proven pathway to reach it.
> 
> It would be like specifically training for happiness.


I don't think that's true at all.  Goeff Thompsons Dead or Alive: The Ultimate Self Protection Handbook is full of the SD skills.  My wife thinks Martial Arts is a "load of bollocks" but she has used the skills in it that book to kill situations dead at the "interview" stage.  I myself have used them on a number of occasions to stop incidents progressing to the "fight" stage.

You can train The Fence, and pre-emptive striking form The Fence, Threat & Awareness Evaluation (Coopers colour codes), Verbal De-Escalation, you can run training drills where you simulate arguments in bars and then afterwards discuss what happened that went well and what happened that went badly (i.e. you hit pre-emptively, but could you have walked away? or yo walked away and he jumped you should yo have hit pre-emptively etc etc)  You can run drill where you go to a cash machine and a mugger comes p to you with a knife, and again dissect and analysis afterwards yo can practice keeping a loved one safe/getting them to safety, you can teach your students the relevant laws in their area and test them on them so they know in a criss what then can act and what they can /cant do (so that they are not worried about waiting until it's too late before they attack for fear of legal troubles).  You can familiarise your students with the rituals of violence so that they know what to look out for, you can run drill with 2 or 3 or more attackers so you can practice positioning yourself so you don't get surrounded, practising taking out the first one or two guys and then verbally intimidating the third/rest into leaving, you can teach the skills to get back up off the ground as quickly as possible if you end up there (rather than staying there looking for locks etc).  The Suzy Lamplaugh Trust has some fabulous information on keeping yourself safe at home, at work, travelling on trains/buses, out in public, on nights out, etc   

The list goes on and on, but I'm boring myself now too   Point is, there are plenty of practical definable SD skills which can be practised and can produce results.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> I'm curious as to why that's considered "sport fighting guy" language for self defense when this TKD school which is non-competitive says the exact same thing;
> 
> 
> 
> Rhee Tae Kwon Do - Perth Western Australia
> 
> I do believe earlier on that page they label themselves as a "superior" form of self defense because they're not a sport. I'm also pretty sure this school doesn't practice sparring either.
> 
> So just curious; Is it only outlandish when sport MA or MMA makes such self-defense claims?



OK, Hanzou, clearly you just do not want to answer a very specific question put to you - do those schools focus on the "soft skills" of SD, being situational awareness, de-escalation, etc?  You continually evade this.  In fact, to be clear, the specific question put to you and which you have continued to evade was not to provide various links to websites but to advise me (I) whether your school trains in such or (II) if you had personally seen/experienced other mma schools doing so?

I do not understand why you continue to dance around this?  But that's your free choice to do so.

None of the website links you have provided have shown evidence of focusing on the important pre-cursor "soft side" of SD and even if they did, that would not amount to much as I am after what you have experienced or seen first hand.  What you experience in a school and what you are offered is not always reflective of the website blog...

Dros and myself keep asking you a very simply and precise question which you have yet to even respond to or answer.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> because self defence is not a definable thing with any sort of proven pathway to reach it.
> 
> It would be like specifically training for happiness.


Sorry Drop bear, I just can't agree with that.  For the reasons stated by Paul-D and more so.

SD is something you can absolutely train, drill and prepare for, both on the tool kits of physical responses, the mental state and approach when faced with and in a situation and the mental state in avoiding or minimising your chances of experiencing an SD situation in the first place.  There are several pathways, including taking appropriate SD classes or specific and appropriate training in addition to your regular MA curriculum, attending seminars on the mental aspects and also there is much literature to digest on this subject as well.  much of SD is simply adapting your and your loved ones' approach to life and behaviour when out and about and (to a lesser (but also important) degree) when in the home. 

As a small example,  my old sensei who is a LEO told me that more fatalities in home burglaries and break-ins are inflicted by improvised weapons picked up in the house than by guns etc carried by the perps, ie more people are killed in their home by their own kitchen knife left in the drying rack than by a weapon taken to the scene.  My sensei advised me to always put away all knives, sharp bladed items, etc in the kitchen and about the house every night before going to bed and when having visitors and trades people in the house.  I passed this on to the girl who is now my wife.  I do not keep my sharp blades, cross bows, katana etc on display these days. This is one simple example.

When you say "proven" pathways, that is a somewhat harder proposition and threshold.  But I think it is clear that people that have drilled and kept up appropriate training, then they have successfully come through a violent situation.  There are examples, listed in books such as The Gift of Fear where people have followed the training and/or ingested the written guidance, and avoided what would have been a very hairy situation.  I think there is enough empirical evidence and examples that show there are various "proven" pathways so that SD can be approach specifically rather than only in an ad hoc, haphazard manner which you may be suggesting.

(I say "appropriate" as while, like MA schools in general, there are some very good SD teachers and syllabuses, there are also some very laughable and down-right dangerous (to the students, that is) SD teachers and classes.


----------



## drop bear

Paul_D said:


> I don't think that's true at all.  Goeff Thompsons Dead or Alive: The Ultimate Self Protection Handbook is full of the SD skills.  My wife thinks Martial Arts is a "load of bollocks" but she has used the skills in it that book to kill situations dead at the "interview" stage.  I myself have used them on a number of occasions to stop incidents progressing to the "fight" stage.
> 
> You can train The Fence, and pre-emptive striking form The Fence, Threat & Awareness Evaluation (Coopers colour codes), Verbal De-Escalation, you can run training drills where you simulate arguments in bars and then afterwards discuss what happened that went well and what happened that went badly (i.e. you hit pre-emptively, but could you have walked away? or yo walked away and he jumped you should yo have hit pre-emptively etc etc)  You can run drill where you go to a cash machine and a mugger comes p to you with a knife, and again dissect and analysis afterwards yo can practice keeping a loved one safe/getting them to safety, you can teach your students the relevant laws in their area and test them on them so they know in a criss what then can act and what they can /cant do (so that they are not worried about waiting until it's too late before they attack for fear of legal troubles).  You can familiarise your students with the rituals of violence so that they know what to look out for, you can run drill with 2 or 3 or more attackers so you can practice positioning yourself so you don't get surrounded, practising taking out the first one or two guys and then verbally intimidating the third/rest into leaving, you can teach the skills to get back up off the ground as quickly as possible if you end up there (rather than staying there looking for locks etc).  The Suzy Lamplaugh Trust has some fabulous information on keeping yourself safe at home, at work, travelling on trains/buses, out in public, on nights out, etc
> 
> The list goes on and on, but I'm boring myself now too   Point is, there are plenty of practical definable SD skills which can be practised and can produce results.



none of that is self defence. Self defence is what I define it to be.

But seriously there is a difference on training a specific skill set. Like not to be surrounded. And this vague idea of training self defence.

As far as anecdotes i punched a guy once in self defence to great success and i had a friend who punched a guy as well. But what have I proven In regards to training methods and their relation to self defence?

If saying i did this successfully or that is really good. Then all training has been shown to be able to be practiced and produce results.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Sorry Drop bear, I just can't agree with that.  For the reasons stated by Paul-D and more so.
> 
> SD is something you can absolutely train, drill and prepare for, both on the tool kits of physical responses, the mental state and approach when faced with and in a situation and the mental state in avoiding or minimising your chances of experiencing an SD situation in the first place.  There are several pathways, including taking appropriate SD classes or specific and appropriate training in addition to your regular MA curriculum, attending seminars on the mental aspects and also there is much literature to digest on this subject as well.  much of SD is simply adapting your and your loved ones' approach to life and behaviour when out and about and (to a lesser (but also important) degree) when in the home.
> 
> As a small example,  my old sensei who is a LEO told me that more fatalities in home burglaries and break-ins are inflicted by improvised weapons picked up in the house than by guns etc carried by the perps, ie more people are killed in their home by their own kitchen knife left in the drying rack than by a weapon taken to the scene.  My sensei advised me to always put away all knives, sharp bladed items, etc in the kitchen and about the house every night before going to bed and when having visitors and trades people in the house.  I passed this on to the girl who is now my wife.  I do not keep my sharp blades, cross bows, katana etc on display these days. This is one simple example.
> 
> When you say "proven" pathways, that is a somewhat harder proposition and threshold.  But I think it is clear that people that have drilled and kept up appropriate training, then they have successfully come through a violent situation.  There are examples, listed in books such as The Gift of Fear where people have followed the training and/or ingested the written guidance, and avoided what would have been a very hairy situation.  I think there is enough empirical evidence and examples that show there are various "proven" pathways so that SD can be approach specifically rather than only in an ad hoc, haphazard manner which you may be suggesting.
> 
> (I say "appropriate" as while, like MA schools in general, there are some very good SD teachers and syllabuses, there are also some very laughable and down-right dangerous (to the students, that is) SD teachers and classes.



That guy from the mma bashing thread. Developed his system through self defence success.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> If you are getting de-escalation and situational awareness from a. Martial arts school. You are almost always going to the wrong place.
> 
> sorry. Lets put it this way. Martial arts qualification is not a reference for good de-escalation.



Maybe on the whole I would say you are correct, but again, this depends totally on who you are training with and who your sensei is and what their background and interests are.  I would say real world experience which has lead to additional concerted thought and application of these principles makes one hell of a good reference for de-escalation and situational awareness skills.

I have obtained my best and most real world applicable SD training (and which I have put into practice in real situations), both physical and mental, from my goju ryu club.  From the head fight coach/sensei that is also a LEO and from the senior jujitsu guy that also trains at our club and that just happens to run his own successful SD school (I say "successful" in that he seems to get a decent amount of students, mainly from security guard outfits, and makes a living out of this).  I must say in all honesty though that the teachings of most use and which I have found most "accessible" have come from the sensei who is a LEO who puts a lot of thought into this kind of thing and has used this for years on the beat and in defusing potentially very bad situations between inmates and in the holding pens, rather than the jujitsu guy with the SD school....


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Maybe on the whole I would say you are correct, but again, this depends totally on who you are training with and who your sensei is and what their background and interests are.  I would say real world experience which has lead to additional concerted thought and application of these principles makes one hell of a good reference for de-escalation and situational awareness skills.
> 
> I have obtained my best and most real world applicable SD training (and which I have put into practice in real situations), both physical and mental, from my goju ryu club.  From the head fight coach/sensei that is also a LEO and from the senior jujitsu guy that also trains at our club and that just happens to run his own successful SD school.  I must say in all honesty though that the teachings of most use have come from the sensei who is a LEO who puts a lot of thought into this kind of thing and has used this for years on the beat and in defusing potentially very bad situations between inmates and in the holding pens, rather than the jujitsu guy with the SD school....








Ok this guy has same proof that validates his system. Now I am not dying your system doesn't work. But objectively I cant see how your argument is better than his as to why.


----------



## drop bear

Ok. I have thought up a simple way of explaining my issue here.

If I train specifically to run I will be faster than someone who trains football.

To support this I have beaten people in running races.


----------



## K-man

Steve said:


> You're,training in karate now?  I thought you were aikido and Krav Maga.


As we have established earlier, you don't read my posts and you haven't bothered checking my profile. Goju is my primary art. I started with Japanese Goju and if I hadn't discovered Okinawan Goju I would probably believe karate was much like Hanzou describes. I started my Goju school about 9 or 10 years ago so you might say I have accumulated a small understanding of karate over the past 30 plus years.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Why is it so hard to believe that if you specialize in self defense rather than adding it as an afterthought you might be better at it. You do know that the purpose of a website is to advertise your art right?



That TKD school specializes in self-defense? According to their website they specialize in several things, not just self defense.



> And once again you jump to erroneous conclusions based on a lack of knowledge and preconceived notions:



I never said I was certain about that aspect. Just FYI.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> There are no karate kata for fighting on the ground that I have heard of. You might be able to use some of the combinations on the ground but that's about it, very limited. However there is still a reasonable amount of ground work in general Goju training.



Well thank you for clearing that up. I figured there was no ground fighting hidden in the kata of karate.

As for Goju, could you provide some examples of ground work within the system? I'm very interested in seeing some examples of karate ground fighting.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> OK, Hanzou, clearly you just do not want to answer a very specific question put to you - do those schools focus on the "soft skills" of SD, being situational awareness, de-escalation, etc?  You continually evade this.  In fact, to be clear, the specific question put to you and which you have continued to evade was not to provide various links to websites but to advise me (I) whether your school trains in such or (II) if you had personally seen/experienced other mma schools doing so?
> 
> I do not understand why you continue to dance around this?  But that's your free choice to do so.
> 
> None of the website links you have provided have shown evidence of focusing on the important pre-cursor "soft side" of SD and even if they did, that would not amount to much as I am after what you have experienced or seen first hand.  What you experience in a school and what you are offered is not always reflective of the website blog...
> 
> Dros and myself keep asking you a very simply and precise question which you have yet to even respond to or answer.



The original question was if those MMA schools offer situational awareness. That was after you asked if MMA or Bjj training could teach you how to avoid a fight altogether. Now you're asking me if MMA/Bjj offers the soft side of SD, which is quite different than what you asked before.

This line of questioning is fairly irrelevant. If a MA school/gym says they offer self defense, that should really be the end of the discussion. Both of those examples I offered state that they do teach self defense. My Gjj school offers self defense courses, and thanks to the combatives wave that swept through the Gracie systems recently, all Gjj schools now offer self defense training.

Now, if you feel that those self defense offerings are sub par, that's your opinion. There's been plenty of examples where people who practice sport MA have done perfectly fine in self defense situations. That really wasn't the point that started all of this. The point was that my current training gives me an answer if the fight hits the ground as it did in that subway stabbing situation. My former Shotokan training (and frankly many traditional MAs) did not.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Well thank you for clearing that up. I figured there was no ground fighting hidden in the kata of karate.
> 
> As for Goju, could you provide some examples of ground work within the system? I'm very interested in seeing some examples of karate ground fighting.


Not really and I'm certainly not going looking all over Youtube. Basically for me it is the same as I teach in Krav so pretty much anything you see in Krav ground work will cover it. There is nothing about working to achieve submission. Years ago we we training more like you see in MMA today, because we were in a competition based system. Now our ground work is more designed to protect you if you are on the ground and how to escape the grappler if you are taken to the ground.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

drop bear said:


> because self defence is not a definable thing



Sure it is. The problem is that different people are using different definitions without spelling them out, which confuses the discussion. We'd probably have more light and less heat in these discussions if everybody spelled out exactly which definition they were using at the current moment.



drop bear said:


> ...with any sort of proven pathway to reach it.



Eh, depends on how stringent you're going to be about the meaning of "proven." There's no practical or ethical way to do rigorous scientific studies on the matter. However, once we've agreed on which definition of self-defense we are discussing, we can assemble reasonable evidence for or against certain approaches to certain aspects of that goal.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Not really and I'm certainly not going looking all over Youtube. Basically for me it is the same as I teach in Krav so pretty much anything you see in Krav ground work will cover it. There is nothing about working to achieve submission. Years ago we we training more like you see in MMA today, because we were in a competition based system. Now our ground work is more designed to protect you if you are on the ground and how to escape the grappler if you are taken to the ground.



Not working to achieve a submission? Are you guys not learning chokes or locks in order to disable a threat? Then what are you working to achieve?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> Basically for me it is the same as I teach in Krav so pretty much anything you see in Krav ground work will cover it.



So mostly stuff like protecting yourself from getting kicked in the head and getting back to your feet? Do you include escapes from pins? If so, do you think those go back to the founding of Goju Ryu or are they more recent additions?


----------



## Steve

K-man said:


> As we have established earlier, you don't read my posts and you haven't bothered checking my profile. Goju is my primary art. I started with Japanese Goju and if I hadn't discovered Okinawan Goju I would probably believe karate was much like Hanzou describes. I started my Goju school about 9 or 10 years ago so you might say I have accumulated a small understanding of karate over the past 30 plus years.


Seems like that's been building up for a while.   I hope you feel better now.  

Do you think the extensive cross training you done has helped improve your karate?  what about the extensive training youallege to have done with bjj black belts?   Seems like those are very positive and helpful thing.  sadly, I don't thin that's the norm.   We're efery karateka to train as you do, surelyshotokan schools like Hanzou attended wouldn't be the majority, as someone acknowledged earlier in the thread.


----------



## Mephisto

drop bear said:


> none of that is self defence. Self defence is what I define it to be.
> 
> But seriously there is a difference on training a specific skill set. Like not to be surrounded. And this vague idea of training self defence.
> 
> As far as anecdotes i punched a guy once in self defence to great success and i had a friend who punched a guy as well. But what have I proven In regards to training methods and their relation to self defence?
> 
> If saying i did this successfully or that is really good. Then all training has been shown to be able to be practiced and produce results.


I too punched a guy in self defense with great success in a few occasions, didn't even need to follow up with a groin kick, eye gouge, or knee implosion.


Zero said:


> Maybe on the whole I would say you are correct, but again, this depends totally on who you are training with and who your sensei is and what their background and interests are.  I would say real world experience which has lead to additional concerted thought and application of these principles makes one hell of a good reference for de-escalation and situational awareness skills.
> 
> I have obtained my best and most real world applicable SD training (and which I have put into practice in real situations), both physical and mental, from my goju ryu club.  From the head fight coach/sensei that is also a LEO and from the senior jujitsu guy that also trains at our club and that just happens to run his own successful SD school (I say "successful" in that he seems to get a decent amount of students, mainly from security guard outfits, and makes a living out of this).  I must say in all honesty though that the teachings of most use and which I have found most "accessible" have come from the sensei who is a LEO who puts a lot of thought into this kind of thing and has used this for years on the beat and in defusing potentially very bad situations between inmates and in the holding pens, rather than the jujitsu guy with the SD school....


Not every goju instructor is an Leo. I do not believe that situational awareness are part of the traditional goju curriculum. Perhaps it's like gjj where self defense is a prominent part of many school's curriculum but I doubt it traces back to Japan or Okinawa.


----------



## Mephisto

Self defense has two components, the soft techniques as discussed here and the martial components. Soft technique largely boils down to street smarts and common sense and an Leo would be a great resource for such training. However, soft techniques are different from martial techniques and quality in one doesn't guarantee quality in the other. Soft techniques can be learned from a lecture format, video, or book, Much more so than martial techniques can be learned. You can give the best soft technique lecture but if you Segway to the martial component and do crappy and ineffective self defense techniques you're still not delivering a quality product.


----------



## Hanzou

Hanzou said:


> Not working to achieve a submission? Are you guys not learning chokes or locks in order to disable a threat? Then what are you working to achieve?



Nevermind, I found this little gem of an article;

Krav Maga and Ground Fighting - Krav Maga Institute



> Some of the best techniques to break a person’s arm while fighting on the ground are the armbar lock from Judo and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, and the Kimura from BJJ. One of the better ways to control your opponent on the ground is the Kuzure Kesa Gatame from Judo. So why won’t a Krav Maga practitioner find these moves in the Krav Maga system if they work so well? What kind of ground game does Krav Maga have?
> 
> I will start by saying that even though I have traveled many places throughout the world, I have yet to see streets made out of inch-and-a-half mats.
> 
> I say with sincerity that the two fighting systems I mentioned above are amazing fighting styles. But we have to remember that street fighting is very different from competitive fighting, with unknown threats, unknown obstacles, and no ability to stop the fight at will. As a well known fighter/celebrity in the BJJ world once told me: “In the street, I will definitely take my opponent down—but I would not go down to the ground.”



This article illustrates the main issue I have with many similar systems like this. In the goal to become as self defense oriented as possible, and to separate yourself from those "sport guys", you lose part of what makes these tactics so effective in the first place. For example, some of the most effective chokes/locks/breaks come from the Guard position, which is a position where you're fighting from your back. For this article, it would appear that Krav Maga avoids that position entirely all for the single minded goal of getting back to your feet as quickly as possible.

A good goal to be sure. However, the Guard position was developed for those times where getting back to your feet wasn't feasible. Avoiding it entirely, as well as arm locks, Kimuras, and other "submissions"  in order to separate sport from self defense is pretty silly IMO.

But to each their own I suppose.....


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Not working to achieve a submission? Are you guys not learning chokes or locks in order to disable a threat? Then what are you working to achieve?


Certainly I teach chokes and locks but not so much on the ground. Getting the back or even side control I might be tempted to go for a choke but in the main I don't want to be on the ground. I want to be up and away, not rolling around on the floor. Rolling in a competition, fine. Rolling in a street fight, not on. I was watching a video of a couple of the Gracies discussing self defence and I couldn't help but think of you when they said in a street fight they wouldn't want to be on the ground.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> That TKD school specializes in self-defense? According to their website they specialize in several things, not just self defense.



The primary goal of the school is to teach our martial art for self defense, there are some students do it for various other reasons but the school is focused on teaching self defense. But I have only been there for 27 years, I'm sure you know better than I do.



Hanzou said:


> I never said I was certain about that aspect. Just FYI.



But you were "pretty sure", and totally wrong.


----------



## Zero

Mephisto said:


> .
> 
> Not every goju instructor is an Leo. I do not believe that situational awareness are part of the traditional goju curriculum. Perhaps it's like gjj where self defense is a prominent part of many school's curriculum but I doubt it traces back to Japan or Okinawa.



Agreed, and I had stated as much myself earlier. In my post right now you have quoted I said on the whole I agreed but that that needs to be qualified as it very much depends on who you are training with.  In addition, not every LEO will be the best, or even appropriate, person to go to for SD tips or advice in any event...


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hanzou said:


> However, the Guard position was developed for those times where getting back to your feet wasn't feasible.



As far as I've been able to determine the actual history, the guard was developed for use in challenge matches for those times when you are taken down and can't get the top position, as opposed to use in self-defense situations where you are unable to get to your feet. I think there is validity in the later use, but many jiujiteiros get too comfortable hanging out in the guard when they should be trying to get up in a real fight or self-defense situation. I've been trying to break that habit in myself and in my students.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> The original question was if those MMA schools offer situational awareness. That was after you asked if MMA or Bjj training could teach you how to avoid a fight altogether. Now you're asking me if MMA/Bjj offers the soft side of SD, which is quite different than what you asked before.
> 
> This line of questioning is fairly irrelevant. If a MA school/gym says they offer self defense, that should really be the end of the discussion. Both of those examples I offered state that they do teach self defense. My Gjj school offers self defense courses, and thanks to the combatives wave that swept through the Gracie systems recently, all Gjj schools now offer self defense training.
> 
> Now, if you feel that those self defense offerings are sub par, that's your opinion. There's been plenty of examples where people who practice sport MA have done perfectly fine in self defense situations. That really wasn't the point that started all of this. The point was that my current training gives me an answer if the fight hits the ground as it did in that subway stabbing situation. My former Shotokan training (and frankly many traditional MAs) did not.



Sorry Hanzou, you still seem to keep missing the point here. First, my line of questioning has not changed. Situational awareness is tantamount, indeed it very much is, teaching you to avoid a fight altogether.  In the context of my posts it is very clear that this is what I am putting into the category of "soft" SD applications - in that you are not having to engage physically with another.  My question to you has never changed or waivered.  You simply have not responded on point.

Again, you go on to reference "combative waives" and that your school does SD, from your posts to date, all that can be taken from that is that your SD involves the actual combat element, being the physical side.

You have still yet to respond on point. Which is fine - all I was after was whether your school, or other mma schools you have been to and actually witnessed, practice situational awareness and the "soft side" of SD.  So far no answer on that.

As an aside, I have never said the self defence offerings you are referencing are sub par.  They are not part of my question to you.  All you have done is avoid my question and now attempted to misrepresent me with statements I have not made in this thread.

I am glad your current training gives you answers if the fight hits the ground, that is good, I was merely wanting you to answer or perhaps more so, t question yourself whether your current training gives you the training to avoid the fight in the first place. Unless you like potentially exposing yourself to litigation and punitive action and have no issue being engaged in life threatening situations, surely it is a better thing to be equipped so to avoid this in the first place, to the extent possible?


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> Ok this guy has same proof that validates his system. Now I am not dying your system doesn't work. But objectively I cant see how your argument is better than his as to why.



Drop bear, no offense to those guys, but I am not going to even start that Vid, from the stances of at least 4 of the 5 chaps in shot, it looks like a lame duck from the get-go!!    That may be completely unfair but that's my take from the school of hard knocks.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Certainly I teach chokes and locks but not so much on the ground. Getting the back or even side control I might be tempted to go for a choke but in the main I don't want to be on the ground. I want to be up and away, not rolling around on the floor. Rolling in a competition, fine. Rolling in a street fight, not on. I was watching a video of a couple of the Gracies discussing self defence and I couldn't help but think of you when they said in a street fight they wouldn't want to be on the ground.



I always find it interesting that you view comfort level on the ground as being synonymous with desirability to be on the ground. 

I don't think anyone wants to be on the ground. The purpose of learning to fight from that range is that if you end up there, you can control the tempo and achieve a dominant position. Further, the better you become at it, the less "rolling" you'll actually be doing against inexperienced opponents. It should also be said that some of the most effective locks and chokes come from the ground position, where more of your weight can be applied to a specific body part.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> The primary goal of the school is to teach our martial art for self defense, there are some students do it for various other reasons but the school is focused on teaching self defense. But I have only been there for 27 years, I'm sure you know better than I do.



We're moving away from the point; The point is that it isn't just sport MAs that make crazy SD claims to draw people through the doors, its the non-sport schools as well.


----------



## Hanzou

Tony Dismukes said:


> As far as I've been able to determine the actual history, the guard was developed for use in challenge matches for those times when you are taken down and can't get the top position, as opposed to use in self-defense situations where you are unable to get to your feet



Isn't that essentially the same thing? In either case, the Guard is there to give you a dominant position from your back in times when (for whatever reason) you can't take the top position, or get to your feet. If I'm in a challenge match and can't sweep for mount, or take their back, then I can fight from Guard. If I'm in a self defense situation and I can't sweep for mount, or take their back, then again I can fight from Guard.

My point is that ignoring that position entirely (or the finishes it offers) simply because you don't want to be like those "sport Jujitsu guys", is pretty silly and potentially dangerous.



> I think there is validity in the later use, but many jiujiteiros get too comfortable hanging out in the guard when they should be trying to get up in a real fight or self-defense situation. I've been trying to break that habit in myself and in my students.



I was "fortunate" in that I was never comfortable in Guard during my early years, so I always felt that Guard was the weakest part of my game. To this day, I'm not comfortable in it (and it interestingly made me pretty good at sweeps), but I definitely see what you're talking about. Some guys (and gals) just love putting you in their Guard. Interestingly, getting MORE comfortable in Guard has been a personal goal of mine since I got my purple belt.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> We're moving away from the point; The point is that it isn't just sport MAs that make crazy SD claims to draw people through the doors, its the non-sport schools as well.


And my school isn't one of them.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> And my school isn't one of them.



I would say that claiming that your training can "rapidly immobilize *any* attacker" is a pretty crazy claim to make.

Maybe that's not what YOUR school claims, but that's what that school I linked to claims.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> I am glad your current training gives you answers if the fight hits the ground, that is good, I was merely wanting you to answer or perhaps more so, t question yourself whether your current training gives you the training to avoid the fight in the first place. Unless you like potentially exposing yourself to litigation and punitive action and have no issue being engaged in life threatening situations, surely it is a better thing to be equipped so to avoid this in the first place, to the extent possible?



I have no doubt that my training in Bjj has taught me to avoid confrontations, as much as knowing how to handle myself if things go south. 

As for litigation and punitive action, being able to disable someone without actually hurting them has its merits.


----------



## Paul_D

drop bear said:


> And this vague idea of training self defence.


Its not vague to me, I know exactly what my training in relation to SD is and consists of and its goals.
[QUOTE="drop bear, post: 1691338, member: 32080"As far as anecdotes i punched a guy once in self defence to great success and i had a friend who punched a guy as well. But what have I proven In regards to training methods and their relation to self defence?][/QUOTE]
No one punched anyone, I don't know where you are getting this from? 
The skills in Dead or Alive: The Ultimate Self Protection Handbook were used to _stop_ incidents escalating to the punch throwing stage.  I've explained the skills, told you were to get them from, told you I know they work, but that's not enough becasue it's "anecdotal".  Other than video  myself next time I'm not sure what more I can do mate? I guess we'll agree to disagree 

But the books only $8.45 on Amazon ;-)


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I would say that claiming that your training can "rapidly immobilize *any* attacker" is a pretty crazy claim to make.



Really? the word 'any' is what you are basing 'wild claims' on. Ironic when you consider many MMA fighters claim to be the best fighters in the world. Have they fought everybody in the world? Now if the website stated that a student would be invincible if they studied there then you would have a case to say they are wild claims. And for the record most of the fights our students, blackbelts and instructors have gotten into have ended very quickly.



Hanzou said:


> Maybe that's not what YOUR school claims, but that's what that school I linked to claims.



That IS my school, in my city, just not my region anymore. Oh and by the way, your comment about being pretty sure the school does not practice sparring, that demonstration video I showed you was on the page you linked.

Care to put up a link to the website of YOUR school so we can compare?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hanzou said:


> Isn't that essentially the same thing? In either case, the Guard is there to give you a dominant position from your back in times when (for whatever reason) you can't take the top position, or get to your feet. If I'm in a challenge match and can't sweep for mount, or take their back, then I can fight from Guard. If I'm in a self defense situation and I can't sweep for mount, or take their back, then again I can fight from Guard.


Not quite.

In a challenge match, I'm committed to engaging with my opponent. If I can't get the top position, then settling for guard and working for a sweep or submission is a viable option. (Especially if it's a grappling-only match as many of the matches in the formative years of BJJ were.)

In a self-defense situation, I would prefer to disengage from my attacker(s). Having someone in my guard is significantly less bad than being mounted, but it's still potentially a very bad situation. Disengaging and getting to my feet should be a higher priority than either sweeping or submitting in most (not all) cases. Fortunately, the guard does offer some good routes to safely disengage and get up  if you are tangled with an opponent on the ground.


----------



## Hanzou

Tony Dismukes said:


> Not quite.
> 
> In a challenge match, I'm committed to engaging with my opponent. If I can't get the top position, then settling for guard and working for a sweep or submission is a viable option. (Especially if it's a grappling-only match as many of the matches in the formative years of BJJ were.)
> 
> In a self-defense situation, I would prefer to disengage from my attacker(s). Having someone in my guard is significantly less bad than being mounted, but it's still potentially a very bad situation. Disengaging and getting to my feet should be a higher priority than either sweeping or submitting in most (not all) cases. Fortunately, the guard does offer some good routes to safely disengage and get up  if you are tangled with an opponent on the ground.



So are you saying that  there are *no* self-defense situations where eliminating a threat either via a choke or break would be preferable/viable options to attempting to escape?


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Really? the word 'any' is what you are basing 'wild claims' on.



Actually no, it would be the entire line. Saying that your training would allow you to "rapidly immobilize any attacker" is a pretty wild claim.

Just saying....


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hanzou said:


> So are you saying that  there are *no* self-defense situations where eliminating a threat either via a choke or break would be preferable/viable options to attempting to escape?


Nope. You'll notice I said "most (*not all*)".

Some situations where going for the choke or break first might be preferable:

You are 100% certain there are no 3rd parties nearby or likely to show up to stomp your head in.
Your opponent is doing a good enough job holding you down that you can choke him out faster than you can disengage.
Your opponent gives you an immediate opening so that you can take an extra second to snap his arm and still manage to disengage quickly before any additional attackers arrive.
The tactical situation is such that getting to your feet will not give you a route to escape until your attacker is incapacitated - and you lack the ability to handle him standing.

As I said, use of the guard has self-defense validity as long as you understand the tactical needs of the situation and train to respond appropriately to those needs. If we don't understand the difference between working to win a fight and working to survive a self-defense situation, then we can run into trouble,


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Actually no, it would be the entire line. Saying that your training would allow you to "rapidly immobilize any attacker" is a pretty wild claim.



So if it said that my training would allow me to "rapidly immobilize *an* attacker" that would still be a wild claim in your opinion? And that is just your opinion, which is not coming from any position of knowledge.


----------



## Mephisto

RTKDCMB said:


> So if it said that my training would allow me to "rapidly immobilize *an* attacker" that would still be a wild claim in your opinion? And that is just your opinion, which is not coming from any position of knowledge.


It's a wild claim, but it is typical of school advertisements. I've seen many schools claim to offer the best instruction, another wild claim. You also mentioned that mma fighters claim to be the best in the world. I wouldn't mind seeing some quotes specifically, but I'm sure it's been said. The difference is the fighter is an individual preparing physchologically for a match, the school is selling a product. Advertising can often be filled with half truths but is be curious to the truth to any of the statement in question. 

I wouldn't mind seeing a video from honzou's school though. The tkd school in question demoed typical tkd fair, plenty of flash, some compliant possibly self defense, and a brief moment of typical tkd soarring complete with typical tkd high kicks (which are generally frowned upon from a sd pov).


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> I have no doubt that my training in Bjj has taught me to avoid confrontations, as much as knowing how to handle myself if things go south.
> 
> As for litigation and punitive action, being able to disable someone without actually hurting them has its merits.


Then good for you my friend and long may you continue to avoid any such situations.  Personally, I have very little in my repertoire that enables me to disable an assailant without "hurting" them, be it my jujitsu joint locks, which sure as hell hurt when put on to the degree required to restrain or disable a resisting and aggressive assailant or my judo throws and submissions...I don't think you can say choking someone until they pass out is not hurting them.  I certainly do not want to be in a position where I am having to maintain a lock or hold (either standing or on the ground - and particularly NOT on the ground) until the coppers turn up!    I have actually kept a shop lifter immobilised with a shoulder lock until the shopping mall security guards turned up but I would not have done that on the street at night where his potential mates where also on the scene...


----------



## RTKDCMB

Mephisto said:


> I wouldn't mind seeing a video from honzou's school though. The tkd school in question demoed typical tkd fair, plenty of flash, some compliant possibly self defense, and a brief moment of typical tkd soarring complete with typical tkd high kicks (which are generally frowned upon from a sd pov).


We typically frown upon them for self defense too.We don't have a lot of flash, you will not find very many tornado kicks or any 720 kicks or backflips.


----------



## Zero

Mephisto said:


> It's a wild claim, but it is typical of school advertisements. I've seen many schools claim to offer the best instruction, another wild claim. You also mentioned that mma fighters claim to be the best in the world. I wouldn't mind seeing some quotes specifically, but I'm sure it's been said. *The difference is the fighter is an individual preparing physchologically for a match, the school is selling a product. Advertising can often be filled with half truths but is be curious to the truth to any of the statement in question.*


Sorry Mephisto the Magnificent but sometimes, actually, oftentimes these days, it is the prize fighter that is also selling a product (with more dollars on the line than the school); the fighter and the forum they represent, UFC for example, IS the product and it is very much in the world of advertising, marketing and sales in which such claims and pre-fight, after fight promo material is made...the $ is king, all hail the $!


----------



## Zero

RTKDCMB said:


> We typically frown upon them for self defense too.We don't have a lot of flash, you will not find very many tornado kicks or any 720 kicks or backflips.


But nothing looks better for sheer coolness value and aesthetics than escaping doing backflip/flick flaks at speed down the alleyway, you get that up on YouTube and you da man, Da Man!!!


----------



## Mephisto

Zero said:


> Sorry Mephisto the Magnificent but sometimes, actually, oftentimes these days, it is the prize fighter that is also selling a product (with more dollars on the line than the school); the fighter and the forum they represent, UFC for example, IS the product and it is very much in the world of advertising, marketing and sales in which such claims and pre-fight, after fight promo material is made...the $ is king, all hail the $!


What does that have to do with a mma fighters claiming to be the best in the world? There are many more mma venues than the ufc that lack the same level of merchandizing as the ufc. Fighters have been claiming to be the best for eons, in all events. Basketball players and competitive athletes of all kinds do it. And they are probably happy to oblige anyone who claims to be better to prove it.


----------



## Zero

Mephisto said:


> What does that have to do with a mma fighters claiming to be the best in the world? There are many more mma venues than the ufc that lack the same level of merchandizing as the ufc. Fighters have been claiming to be the best for eons, in all events. Basketball players and competitive athletes of all kinds do it. And they are probably happy to oblige anyone who claims to be better to prove it.


In answer to your question, your very words being: "*the difference is the fighter is an individual preparing psychologically for a match, the school is selling a product."  *I was making the point that in competitive, prize fighting, there is often not this degree of difference that you are stating. Yes the fighter is mentally preparing for a match but the fighter is also selling themselves, the particular fight and the overall forum, the example I used being UFC.  My answer therefore has everything to do with the statement of yours that I again highlight above.  Or are you saying a response is permitted to only certain of your statements, claims or questions and not others? 

Further, in making such statements "I am the greatest in the world", "I am going to take him out in the first round", this can very much be hype build up for a pay-per-view fight.  So I see my observation as absolutely on point.


----------



## Hanzou

Tony Dismukes said:


> As I said, use of the guard has self-defense validity as long as you understand the tactical needs of the situation and train to respond appropriately to those needs. If we don't understand the difference between working to win a fight and working to survive a self-defense situation, then we can run into trouble,



But under what circumstances would someone be confused to the point where they would be utilizing suicidal tactics in a street fight? I mean, my instructor never TOLD me to not take someone's back if someone with a baseball bat is standing behind me. I just sort of know better because its common sense. I was never trained to do knee on belly or modified mount instead of full-on-mount if I have another threat to deal with, I just do it. This is true even among sport guys whose entire application of technique revolved around sporting rules and limitations.


Again, my point is that ignoring the Guard position and its benefits in order to advocate a position that your MA isn't a sport is a pretty silly thing to do. I think we both agree that it is a very useful tool that can be utilized to great effect in a SD situation. I'm not really understanding your disagreement here.


----------



## Hanzou

Mephisto said:


> I wouldn't mind seeing a video from honzou's school though. The tkd school in question demoed typical tkd fair, plenty of flash, some compliant possibly self defense, and a brief moment of typical tkd soarring complete with typical tkd high kicks (which are generally frowned upon from a sd pov).



Relson Gracie Jiu-Jitsu Academy - YouTube

That should be all of them.


----------



## Mephisto

Zero said:


> In answer to your question, your very words being: "*the difference is the fighter is an individual preparing psychologically for a match, the school is selling a product."  *I was making the point that in competitive, prize fighting, there is often not this degree of difference that you are stating. Yes the fighter is mentally preparing for a match but the fighter is also selling themselves, the particular fight and the overall forum, the example I used being UFC.  My answer therefore has everything to do with the statement of yours that I again highlight above.  Or are you saying a response is permitted to only certain of your statements, claims or questions and not others?
> 
> Further, in making such statements "I am the greatest in the world", "I am going to take him out in the first round", this can very much be hype build up for a pay-per-view fight.  So I see my observation as absolutely on point.


Really? the claim by a fighter that he's the best is bragging, that's it. There's no secret conspiracy to make money via bragging for the fight promotion. Sure it makes things more interesting but I don't think there's a bragging to monetary gain relationship that you're implying. Not to mention if these are championship bouts the fighter's claim to be the best may be somewhat accurate if he's competing at the top level in his sport. 

On the other hand a school claiming to teach students to "rapidly immobilize any attacker" is very different. Do you think there is truth to the statement? It should be no surprise that schools make unfounded claims to sound more appealing. Recently I saw a school that claimed to have world class instructors, no credentials or names were given, and chances are the instructirs haven't trained any world class athletes. But it sounds good to unknowledgeable potential students.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> Then good for you my friend and long may you continue to avoid any such situations.  Personally, I have very little in my repertoire that enables me to disable an assailant without "hurting" them, be it my jujitsu joint locks, which sure as hell hurt when put on to the degree required to restrain or disable a resisting and aggressive assailant or my judo throws and submissions...I don't think you can say choking someone until they pass out is not hurting them.  I certainly do not want to be in a position where I am having to maintain a lock or hold (either standing or on the ground - and particularly NOT on the ground) until the coppers turn up!    I have actually kept a shop lifter immobilised with a shoulder lock until the shopping mall security guards turned up but I would not have done that on the street at night where his potential mates where also on the scene...



Choking someone out is relatively painless compared to bashing their face in until they pass out, or breaking their bones. It doesn't take much to choke someone unconscious. It takes far more effort to choke someone to death.

Further, if done properly, such maneuvers should accomplish their goal relatively quickly. I've personally choked someone out (and have been choked out) in a matter of seconds. I've also witnessed people getting bones broken completely by accident. The reaction can occur quickly, and oftentimes when the first tinge of pain hits it's already too late.

I suppose that's what makes me avoid fighting; I know what I'm capable of doing to people, and its something that I want to avoid at all costs.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Choking someone out is relatively painless compared to bashing their face in until they pass out, or breaking their bones. It doesn't take much to choke someone unconscious. It takes far more effort to choke someone to death.
> 
> Further, if done properly, such maneuvers should accomplish their goal relatively quickly. I've personally choked someone out (and have been choked out) in a matter of seconds. I've also witnessed people getting bones broken completely by accident. The reaction can occur quickly, and oftentimes when the first tinge of pain hits it's already too late.
> 
> I suppose that's what makes me avoid fighting; I know what I'm capable of doing to people, and its something that I want to avoid at all costs.


I agree with all of that other than that it takes far more effort to choke someone to death.  I have choked out opponents and been choked out myself through not tapping.  If you have your choke on right and either the blade of your forearm or hand engaged, then it only takes a little more time to bring about death or to put your opponent/assailant in a position where they can not self-recover/ self-resuscitate and therefore succumb to death or brain damage relatively quickly.  Ok, I have not thank god choked anyone to death (!!!) but I have been told by trainers, have read about it and it makes perfect physiological and medical sense that if you keep the pressure on just a bit longer then it is bye bye for good good.  Happy if those in the know can tell me otherwise...


----------



## Zero

Mephisto said:


> Really? the claim by a fighter that he's the best is bragging, that's it. There's no secret conspiracy to make money via bragging for the fight promotion. Sure it makes things more interesting but I don't think there's a bragging to monetary gain relationship that you're implying. Not to mention if these are championship bouts the fighter's claim to be the best may be somewhat accurate if he's competing at the top level in his sport.
> 
> On the other hand a school claiming to teach students to "rapidly immobilize any attacker" is very different. Do you think there is truth to the statement? It should be no surprise that schools make unfounded claims to sound more appealing. Recently I saw a school that claimed to have world class instructors, no credentials or names were given, and chances are the instructors haven't trained any world class athletes. But it sounds good to unknowledgeable potential students.


I am saying that the "bragging" as you put it, trash talk, pre-fight hype can well be all part of the show and that it can very much add to ticket sales and therefore does come into the monetary equation (sure often it isn't but often it is part of that picture).

If you want to disagree with that then that's cool, we can disagree on that.

I don't want to be drawn into the comments on school website claims. 

But I would agree with you, if that is what you are saying, that there is a lot of schlock, nonsense, down right false claims and even false and misleading advertising and statements going on in the martial arts world and some clubs are doing that absolutely for the reason of getting people through the dojo doors to part with the hard earned cash...  I wonder if this is regulated to any degree, or should be...or if that is what we of the larger MA community want??  I mean some of the claims you see, if they were made in other sectors, such as the drug industry (uh, that has its own issues!!) or food industry, people would be opening themselves up to legal proceedings and damages claims.

...I wonder if anyone has tried and successfully sued a martial arts school for claiming they would be "trained by the best" or learn "DEVASTATING, CRIPPLING MOVES" and after handing over their money for months on end none of this has resulted.  A hard defence to overcome would be the standard response that, "hey, that student never applied themselves in class or never paid attention and of course we meant they had to train after school also"??


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Hanzou said:


> But under what circumstances would someone be confused to the point where they would be utilizing suicidal tactics in a street fight? I mean, my instructor never TOLD me to not take someone's back if someone with a baseball bat is standing behind me. I just sort of know better because its common sense.



Being confused to the point of using highly inappropriate tactics in a street fight is pretty common. "Common sense" on the other hand, is not.

Under pressure of an emergency situation (such as a street fight), people's ability to reason out a sensible solution takes a sharp nosedive. Tunnel vision is common. There's a strong tendency to fall back onto whatever patterns are well established and easily available to your brain.

That's why...

If all your guard training is focused on sweep or submit, you are highly likely to fixate on that if you end up in the guard in a fight.

If you regularly do guard training focused on sweep, submit, *or stand*, then you are much more likely to have the stand/disengage reaction come out when necessary in a fight.

If you regularly do sparring/drilling where your *primary focus* is getting up from the bottom and disengaging, then you are even more likely to have that option mentally available to you when you need it.

My point is that too many of us in BJJ spend too much of our guard time focusing on just the sweep and submit options.



Hanzou said:


> Again, my point is that ignoring the Guard position and its benefits in order to advocate a position that your MA isn't a sport is a pretty silly thing to do. I think we both agree that it is a very useful tool that can be utilized to great effect in a SD situation. I'm not really understanding your disagreement here.



We're certainly agreed that the guard has its place in the self-defense toolbox. On the other hand, almost none of us really spend a lot of time training every potentially useful tool. Everyone has different priorities.  I'm sure the FMA folks could ask why we spend so much time focusing on unarmed techniques and neglect tools like a knife, which is much more of a force multiplier.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> I agree with all of that other than that it takes far more effort to choke someone to death.  I have choked out opponents and been choked out myself through not tapping.  If you have your choke on right and either the blade of your forearm or hand engaged, then it only takes a little more time to bring about death or to put your opponent/assailant in a position where they can not self-recover/ self-resuscitate and therefore succumb to death or brain damage relatively quickly.  Ok, I have not thank god choked anyone to death (!!!) but I have been told by trainers, have read about it and it makes perfect physiological and medical sense that if you keep the pressure on just a bit longer then it is bye bye for good good.  Happy if those in the know can tell me otherwise...



What's your definition of "a little more time"? There's no way you kill someone with a choke in a matter of seconds. Pass out? Definitely.


----------



## Mephisto

Tony Dismukes said:


> Being confused to the point of using highly inappropriate tactics in a street fight is pretty common. "Common sense" on the other hand, is not.
> 
> Under pressure of an emergency situation (such as a street fight), people's ability to reason out a sensible solution takes a sharp nosedive. Tunnel vision is common. There's a strong tendency to fall back onto whatever patterns are well established and easily available to your brain.
> 
> That's why...
> 
> If all your guard training is focused on sweep or submit, you are highly likely to fixate on that if you end up in the guard in a fight.
> 
> If you regularly do guard training focused on sweep, submit, *or stand*, then you are much more likely to have the stand/disengage reaction come out when necessary in a fight.
> 
> If you regularly do sparring/drilling where your *primary focus* is getting up from the bottom and disengaging, then you are even more likely to have that option mentally available to you when you need it.
> 
> My point is that too many of us in BJJ spend too much of our guard time focusing on just the sweep and submit options.
> 
> 
> 
> We're certainly agreed that the guard has its place in the self-defense toolbox. On the other hand, almost none of us really spend a lot of time training every potentially useful tool. Everyone has different priorities.  I'm sure the FMA folks could ask why we spend so much time focusing on unarmed techniques and neglect tools like a knife, which is much more of a force multiplier.


I'd like to think I'm more down to earth than some of the FMA guys I'm friends with and talk to. Knife defense is highly speculative, and anyone with a knife is a "master" if you're unarmed. Unlike bjj, striking or unarmed arts where generally the higher ranks greatly outclass the lower ranks, I think the gap is much smaller when dealing with a high risk situation like knife vs unarmed. Knife training is beneficial but unless you're an unsavory character chances are most knife guys in the States just don't have the experience to  claim to be an expert. Most people have been in a fight, even if it was as a youth but much fewer have faced a blade. Statistically I think it's not as important of a skill as many FMA guys would have you believe, but it doesn't hurt. The same goes for the guys that train with the "stick represents a blade" mentality. At least in the states I think stick as an impact weapon has much more applicability. How many people do you guys know that have faced a ~2 ft blade? What about another impact weapon improvised or not? You might be lucky enough to find an improvised stick in an attack and might be unlucky enough to face one. But your chances of facing a ~2 ft blade are very slim.


----------



## Hanzou

Tony Dismukes said:


> We're certainly agreed that the guard has its place in the self-defense toolbox. On the other hand, almost none of us really spend a lot of time training every potentially useful tool. Everyone has different priorities.  I'm sure the FMA folks could ask why we spend so much time focusing on unarmed techniques and neglect tools like a knife, which is much more of a force multiplier.



Probably because gutting someone like a fish is a quick way to wind up in the slammer.

However, I do agree with the rest of your post, even if I haven't personally experienced it myself.


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Drop bear, no offense to those guys, but I am not going to even start that Vid, from the stances of at least 4 of the 5 chaps in shot, it looks like a lame duck from the get-go!!    That may be completely unfair but that's my take from the school of hard knocks.



and fair enough too. But it is developed through his success in SD.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> So are you saying that  there are *no* self-defense situations where eliminating a threat either via a choke or break would be preferable/viable options to attempting to escape?



We run the get up sweep submit Idea.


----------



## drop bear

Mephisto said:


> I too punched a guy in self defense with great success in a few occasions, didn't even need to follow up with a groin kick, eye gouge, or knee implosion.
> 
> Not every goju instructor is an Leo. I do not believe that situational awareness are part of the traditional goju curriculum. Perhaps it's like gjj where self defense is a prominent part of many school's curriculum but I doubt it traces back to Japan or Okinawa.



yeah one does not necessarily link to the other. Like my running metaphor.

And need to be assessed separately.


----------



## drop bear

Tony Dismukes said:


> Eh, depends on how stringent you're going to be about the meaning of "proven." There's no practical or ethical way to do rigorous scientific studies on the matter. However, once we've agreed on which definition of self-defense we are discussing, we can assemble reasonable evidence for or against certain approaches to certain aspects of that goal.



there seems to be a lot of misinformation on the subject. And we don't tend to rigorously examine it.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

drop bear said:


> We run the get up sweep submit Idea.


I think MMA gyms tend to be better about that than pure BJJ clubs.


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> So mostly stuff like protecting yourself from getting kicked in the head and getting back to your feet? Do you include escapes from pins? If so, do you think those go back to the founding of Goju Ryu or are they more recent additions?


Certainly protecting the head is a priority. An example would be a single leg takedown from the ground where I see MMA guys training to grab the ankle with both hands. I teach it with one hand grabbing the ankle so you still have one arm up to protect the head. On the ground against multiple attackers again I stress keeping the head protected and to keep moving.

Escaping from pins and locks is an interesting point. Generally it is not taught in Aikido until about 3rd dan. I teach it from the early stages as knowing how to escape means you learn better how to apply the hold.

As to whether these elements were in the original Goju ... I believe almost certainly. Although Higaonna didn't name Goju he started Naha-te, its forebear. This was the combination of the Kung fu that Kanryo Higaonna became a master of in China and the local wrestling type fighting that had developed in Okinawa, Tegumi. Chojun Miyagi was his student and obviously learned those things from Higaonna. Miyagi also studied Judo in his early years, something he obviously encouraged his students to study also. Jinan Shinzato, Miyagi's top pre-war student, and Eiichi Miyazato, Miyagi's successor, were both highly trained Judoka. Miyazato's student Masaji Taira, ex Jundokan and now teaching around the world, is also a highly trained Judoka and is teaching this hands on style of karate. 

You might say these guys trained judo to fill in the gaps but I would suggest it was more to better understand what was already there. I started Aikido for that same reason.

Then you look at the Bubishi. It has many illustrations of grappling. Even more telling is the section on vital points and pressure points. Obviously some are for striking but others are activated by pressing or rubbing, something you need to be actively engaged to perform.

Of course that raises the question, "if it was there originally, why don't you see it now?" I think that is because of the mass training style that was adopted to teach karate to the masses. Hundreds of students lined up and moving in unison. Easy to teach kicks and strikes but difficult to teach complex grappling techniques. That is characteristic of Japanese Karate but not so much in the Okinawan style.


----------



## ShotoNoob

S33KR said:


> Hello, I'm new here. I was skimming through the conversation. Primarily the first and current pages.
> 
> I have no experience with Shotokan at all. But my instructor told me a story about a Shotokan guy who visited the school he was studying at at the time. (This was probably 30 or more years ago.) He said the guy participated in a friendly sparring match with the other students and absolutely dominated everyone.
> 
> He said the guy was just so fast that he was all over you before you had time to process it. He said that even though the guy was using the same techniques over and over (front kick, straight and reverse punch) he was so fast at getting off the line and so precise with his attacks, that it didn't matter.
> 
> So my point I guess, is judging from this story (and the credibility of my instructor) that yeah, Shotokan definitely has self defense applications.
> 
> I feel like the primary weapon that any martial art employs is intent. If you train Shotokan or any other martial with the intention of getting out of the situation as quickly as possible through what ever means necessary, it will probably serve you well in a self defense scenario. But its unfair to say that any martial art will be effective in 100% of the situations. Maybe the guys has a knife, or gun. Or a friend with a gun, or a car and he's going to run you over. You never know.
> NIce Post.  I've intensity level on which one has trained. Your post demonstrates that someone training Shotokan karate at a higher level of intensity could exhibit this kind of self defense effectiveness.  There's many a you tube vid demonstrating Shotokan kumite competitors on this level.


I've commented before on the levels of intensity with which one trains traditional karate.  Higher intensity training should work towards producing the results in your story....  There's many a YT vid of Shotokan kumite competitors demonstrating what you are describing....
|
You qualification of "intent" figures exactly into this equation and dovetails with the "State of Mind" thread the concepts advocated there.
|
Again, nice post.....


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Certainly protecting the head is a priority. An example would be a single leg takedown from the ground where I see MMA guys training to grab the ankle with both hands. I teach it with one hand grabbing the ankle so you still have one arm up to protect the head. On the ground against multiple attackers again I stress keeping the head protected and to keep moving.
> 
> Escaping from pins and locks is an interesting point. Generally it is not taught in Aikido until about 3rd dan. I teach it from the early stages as knowing how to escape means you learn better how to apply the hold.
> 
> As to whether these elements were in the original Goju ... I believe almost certainly. Although Higaonna didn't name Goju he started Naha-te, its forebear. This was the combination of the Kung fu that Kanryo Higaonna became a master of in China and the local wrestling type fighting that had developed in Okinawa, Tegumi. Chojun Miyagi was his student and obviously learned those things from Higaonna. Miyagi also studied Judo in his early years, something he obviously encouraged his students to study also. Jinan Shinzato, Miyagi's top pre-war student, and Eiichi Miyazato, Miyagi's successor, were both highly trained Judoka. Miyazato's student Masaji Taira, ex Jundokan and now teaching around the world, is also a highly trained Judoka and is teaching this hands on style of karate.
> 
> You might say these guys trained judo to fill in the gaps but I would suggest it was more to better understand what was already there. I started Aikido for that same reason.
> 
> Then you look at the Bubishi. It has many illustrations of grappling. Even more telling is the section on vital points and pressure points. Obviously some are for striking but others are activated by pressing or rubbing, something you need to be actively engaged to perform.
> 
> Of course that raises the question, "if it was there originally, why don't you see it now?" I think that is because of the mass training style that was adopted to teach karate to the masses. Hundreds of students lined up and moving in unison. Easy to teach kicks and strikes but difficult to teach complex grappling techniques. That is characteristic of Japanese Karate but not so much in the Okinawan style.



It would be helpful if we could see some video examples of this Karate grappling in action, and see how it compares to modern grappling forms.

Interestingly, Abernathy has opined that what little Karate grappling there is, it's crude in comparison to what's found in the grappling arts. So I don't see why it's worth discussing when it comes to self defense.


----------



## drop bear

Tony Dismukes said:


> I think MMA gyms tend to be better about that than pure BJJ clubs.



There are not many submissions from inside guard  but plenty of hammer fists.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Mephisto said:


> The tkd school in question demoed typical tkd fair, plenty of flash, some compliant possibly self defense, and a brief moment of typical tkd soarring complete with typical tkd high kicks (which are generally frowned upon from a sd pov).



I should point out that the demonstration on the website is not typical of our usual style of demonstration. This one was for the Chinese festival in Northbridge. It was a bit more flashy than usual, there were only black belts, they had a demo team (usually those taking part in demonstrations are just the students and instructors/black belts that were available at the time). This one was practiced extensively beforehand (usually we just meet an hour before the demonstration, sort out what we are going to do and have a quick practice session). There are typically only one or two tile breaks and the most spectacular breaking technique is just a flying side kick, jumping front kick or jump spinning heel kick. We usually try to keep it simple so that potential students will not think that they would not be able to do it.


----------



## Tames D

K-man said:


> So without any karate experience you are now an expert on karate stances and kata. Well, the only time we use a long stance is in a takedown. Because the kata is all grappling there are few if any kicks and there are no exaggerated punches. Best stick to your MMA. *I'm out of here.* This was meant to be a conversation with those who practise karate.


You really should stop saying this.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> It would be helpful if we could see some video examples of this Karate grappling in action, and see how it compares to modern grappling forms.
> 
> Interestingly, Abernathy has opined that what little Karate grappling there is, it's crude in comparison to what's found in the grappling arts. So I don't see why it's worth discussing when it comes to self defense.



Krav Maga's punching is less refined than a normal boxing class, is it not worth mentioning for SD?


----------



## Zero

Tames D said:


> You really should stop saying this.


----------



## Zero

Tames D said:


> You really should stop saying this.


What? K-Man's left the building again?  He'll be back...


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> What's your definition of "a little more time"? There's no way you kill someone with a choke in a matter of seconds. Pass out? Definitely.


You said "effort".  There is a world of difference between "more effort" and "more time".

But in answer to your question, I do not know, I would need someone on here with a medical background or actual experience in this to tell us, if you are asking how long a choke needs to be on for death to be the more than likely result.

Of course on a neck crank such as tate hishige or even more so gyaku hishige, that's a different matter, that can be literally done in seconds but as you have said, this does require exertion, particularly if you are up against someone your own size/weight or larger.  It's interesting as with these moves you can apply them either as strangulations with the blade/edge of forearm or as they are referred to as dislocations, ie being death moves/breaks, when you instead apply torque or a backwards bending crank.


----------



## Zero

Mephisto said:


> I'd like to think I'm more down to earth than some of the FMA guys I'm friends with and talk to. Knife defense is highly speculative, and anyone with a knife is a "master" if you're unarmed. Unlike bjj, striking or unarmed arts where generally the higher ranks greatly outclass the lower ranks, I think the gap is much smaller when dealing with a high risk situation like knife vs unarmed. Knife training is beneficial but unless you're an unsavory character chances are most knife guys in the States just don't have the experience to  claim to be an expert. Most people have been in a fight, even if it was as a youth but much fewer have faced a blade. Statistically I think it's not as important of a skill as many FMA guys would have you believe, but it doesn't hurt. The same goes for the guys that train with the "stick represents a blade" mentality. At least in the states I think stick as an impact weapon has much more applicability. How many people do you guys know that have faced a ~2 ft blade? What about another impact weapon improvised or not? You might be lucky enough to find an improvised stick in an attack and might be unlucky enough to face one. But your chances of facing a ~2 ft blade are very slim.



Valid points but do the statistics in the States of finding yourself facing a mugger or assailant holding a gun therefore make the applicability of training in bjj or striking arts for self defence much less than we MAs would hope?  What is the likelihood of being faced with a gun, rather than an unarmed mugger or assailant, in the States?  Is it not as much as media sometimes portrays?


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> and fair enough too. But it is developed through his success in SD.


haha!  Cripes, I just found a bit of down time and actually watched that "highlight clip", thanks for the numerous laughs!!


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Krav Maga's punching is less refined than a normal boxing class, is it not worth mentioning for SD?



I'd put Krav's punching on par with Karate and other TMA's  punching. So I would say that its definitely worth mentioning. I can learn to punch at a Krav school.

In comparison, Ian Abernathy states plainly that if you want to learn grappling, learn a  grappling style.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> You said "effort".  There is a world of difference between "more effort" and "more time".



Oh how I do love semantics....



> But in answer to your question, I do not know, I would need someone on here with a medical background or actual experience in this to tell us, if you are asking how long a choke needs to be on for death to be the more than likely result.



Well I do know, because I've choked out plenty of people, but to date haven't come close to killing anyone. In a SD situation, choking someone out is a quick and relatively painless method of ending a confrontation.


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Oh how I do love semantics....
> 
> 
> 
> Well I do know, because I've choked out plenty of people, but to date haven't come close to killing anyone. In a SD situation, choking someone out is a quick and relatively painless method of ending a confrontation.


Funny but I don't see anything semantic there and see a gulf of difference between time and effort...but I admit my cross to bear is that I am a lawyer, gulp, and have a legally trained mind so it is very hard for me to avoid semantics as you say.  I have managed to disengage that in my personal life as it used to cause no end of tortuous hardships with my wife and arguments at dinner parties!  : )  maybe I should try to do the same here.  Uuh, not that I see you as anything like my "Online MT Wife" Hanzou!! haha!


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Oh how I do love semantics....
> 
> 
> 
> Well I do know, because I've choked out plenty of people, but to date haven't come close to killing anyone. In a SD situation, choking someone out is a quick and relatively painless method of ending a confrontation.



So how much longer do you have to apply the pressure for it to go from a KO to RIP? A minute, or is it much less?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> I'd put Krav's punching on par with Karate and other TMA's  punching. So I would say that its definitely worth mentioning. I can learn to punch at a Krav school.
> 
> In comparison, Ian Abernathy states plainly that if you want to learn grappling, learn a  grappling style.



As have we. The assertion never was that Karates grappling was comparable to a jiujitieros or judokas, only that it exists in a mild basic form. Anyone with training will tell you basics and fundamentals are more than enough against someone with no training, which your average person wont have so its definitely worth mentioning. The whole debated started to correct the misconception that there is _no_ ground game or grappling, which isn't quite true. Nobody has held the opinion or made the assertion that its as refined as a grappling style


----------



## Danny T

drop bear said:


> We run the get up sweep submit Idea.





Hanzou said:


> It would be helpful if we could see some video examples of this Karate grappling in action, and see how it compares to modern grappling forms.
> 
> Interestingly, Abernathy has opined that what little Karate grappling there is, it's crude in comparison to what's found in the grappling arts. So I don't see why it's worth discussing when it comes to self defense.



The point is that grappling is in karate. Have not said it is the same or to the level as BJJ. 
BJJ and other systems where grappling in the predominate aspect should be at a higher level. 
From what I have been exposed to the grappling in karate was to utilized vs a non trained or a lowly train attacker (and yes that karate grappling is not to the same level within a highly trained BJJ person). Same could be stated of BJJ striking vs a boxer utilizing punching only.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> So how much longer do you have to apply the pressure for it to go from a KO to RIP? A minute, or is it much less?



I've heard estimates of everything from 30 seconds to a few minutes depending on the person being choked. The point is, the person getting choked should begin to lose consciousness a lot sooner than that.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Zero said:


> So how much longer do you have to apply the pressure for it to go from a KO to RIP? A minute, or is it much less?



That is not really predictable. A blood choke will result in death sooner than an air choke, but it'll still probably take a few minutes.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> As have we. The assertion never was that Karates grappling was comparable to a jiujitieros or judokas, only that it exists in a mild basic form. Anyone with training will tell you basics and fundamentals are more than enough against someone with no training, which your average person wont have so its definitely worth mentioning. The whole debated started to correct the misconception that there is _no_ ground game or grappling, which isn't quite true. Nobody has held the opinion or made the assertion that its as refined as a grappling style



While Krav hand techs may not be comparable to boxing, they're comparable to the hand techs of other MAs. According to Abernathy, Karate grappling is below every form of grappling out there. So you're not making an accurate comparison here.

We have yet to see any Karate ground game whatsoever. All we're getting are stories of Okinawans playing grappling games with each other. Where's some examples of traditional karate ground fighting? Surely if it's being taught in Okinawan Karate we should see evidence of it somewhere.


----------



## Mephisto

Hanzou said:


> I've heard estimates of everything from 30 seconds to a few minutes depending on the person being choked. The point is, the person getting choked should begin to lose consciousness a lot sooner than that.


I've heard debate as to weather a choke causes incousciousness due to the manual restriction of oxygen and blood flow or if it's a response due to the drop in blood pressure from the restriction. Either way I think causing death or severe damage is a function of how long you deprive the brain of oxygen due to the restriction of blood flow. It probably varies from person to person but Id guess you'd have to hold it for couple of minutes but you also have factors like the health and build of the person you're choking and the position they're in. 

On a side note a bjj buddy once suggested that if we were camping and he broke an arm he'd just have me choke him out and reset the bone. Not sure how smart that idea is though.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Zero said:


> So how much longer do you have to apply the pressure for it to go from a KO to RIP? A minute, or is it much less?


 For a healthy individual, it will typically take several minutes (I've read 3-5 minutes) for brain damage to occur from a properly applied blood choke.

_*However*_ - individuals with an unusually hypersensitive carotid sinus could be triggered into cardiac irregularity. Also, individuals in poor vascular health might suffer damage much more quickly or have other complications. I would imagine there might also be some kinds of pre-existing conditions which could be set off by the choke.

Air chokes can inflict permanent damage much more quickly, by crushing the trachea. I don't recommend those for self-defense purposes.


----------



## Mephisto

Hanzou said:


> While Krav hand techs may not be comparable to boxing, they're comparable to the hand techs of other MAs. According to Abernathy, Karate grappling is below every form of grappling out there. So you're not making an accurate comparison here.
> 
> We have yet to see any Karate ground game whatsoever. All we're getting are stories of Okinawans playing grappling games with each other. Where's some examples of traditional karate ground fighting? Surely if it's being taught in Okinawan Karate we should see evidence of it somewhere.


I'd agree, if it's (grappling) inherent to certain flavors of karate and is part of the system we should be able to find some video of it somewhere if it's as common as seems to be claimed here. I haven't seen much karate stand up grappling let alone ground work. Even rudimentary grappling is good if you train it with the honesty and realization that its not you're forte but more of an answer to a possibility.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Mephisto said:


> I've heard debate as to weather a choke causes incousciousness due to the manual restriction of oxygen and blood flow or if it's a response due to the drop in blood pressure from the restriction. Either way I think causing death or severe damage is a function of how long you deprive the brain of oxygen due to the restriction of blood flow. It probably varies from person to person but Id guess you'd have to hold it for couple of minutes but you also have factors like the health and build of the person you're choking and the position they're in.
> 
> On a side note a bjj buddy once suggested that if we were camping and he broke an arm he'd just have me choke him out and reset the bone. Not sure how smart that idea is though.



Blood chokes require compression of the artery, which stops (or significantly decreases) the flow of blood to the brain. Since the veins are MUCH easier to compress, as well as being closer to the surface, they will also be compressed. 
If both are completely compressed, there will be no flow into or out of the brain, and the oxygen in the (non-moving) blood will be quickly depleted, leading to unconsciousness. Pressure within the vessels won't change significantly.
If the artery is partially compressed, there will be some blood flow in, but none out. Depleting the available oxygen will take slightly longer (depending on the degree of arterial occlusion). The pressure in the vessels will rise somewhat.


----------



## Drose427

Mephisto said:


> I'd agree, if it's (grappling) inherent to certain flavors of karate and is part of the system we should be able to find some video of it somewhere if it's as common as seems to be claimed here. I haven't seen much karate stand up grappling let alone ground work. Even rudimentary grappling is good if you train it with the honesty and realization that its not you're forte but more of an answer to a possibility.





Hanzou said:


> While Krav hand techs may not be comparable to boxing, they're comparable to the hand techs of other MAs. According to Abernathy, Karate grappling is below every form of grappling out there. So you're not making an accurate comparison here.
> 
> We have yet to see any Karate ground game whatsoever. All we're getting are stories of Okinawans playing grappling games with each other. Where's some examples of traditional karate ground fighting? Surely if it's being taught in Okinawan Karate we should see evidence of it somewhere.



The issue with this is TMAs arent like Boxing or MMA, where even local events tend to be televised on local access channels. You can't even find videos of every form or SD drill in any TMA, forget just finding videos of everything Karate has to offer. If you go to youtube and google you're going to find Flashy Demos and Sparring, not much more. Thats what brings in students, or what parents wanna keep record of their child doing, so thats whats getting recorded. 

Paul D and K-man both gave examples of uses and the type of grappling taught. Everyones been very clear that it isnt free rolling in the sense of BJJ or Judo, if you're still looking for that you havent been paying attention.

youtube popped up this example, if i had more time Id give more:






I believe Paul D gave another example earlier.


----------



## Mephisto

Dirty Dog said:


> Blood chokes require compression of the artery, which stops (or significantly decreases) the flow of blood to the brain. Since the veins are MUCH easier to compress, as well as being closer to the surface, they will also be compressed.
> If both are completely compressed, there will be no flow into or out of the brain, and the oxygen in the (non-moving) blood will be quickly depleted, leading to unconsciousness. Pressure within the vessels won't change significantly.
> If the artery is partially compressed, there will be some blood flow in, but none out. Depleting the available oxygen will take slightly longer (depending on the degree of arterial occlusion). The pressure in the vessels will rise somewhat.


I don't know if that's really the case. I've discussed the topic at length with individuals who have done some homework and their are at least three plausible theories, and arguably a couple more contenders:
"Carotid chokes work because of 

A. No blood gets to the brain thereby cutting of oxygen to the brain and causing a KO.
B. The vagas nerve is stimulated, dropping BP and oxygen to the brain, thereby causing a KO
C. The flow of blood out of the brain is restricted causing a pressure difference that causes a KO."
One of the strongest arguments is the vasocagal nervous response which is a nervous system reaction due to altered blood pressure. That's why unconsciousness is so quick from a choke. But you're theory is plausible too, my point is like many things, it's debatable.


----------



## Mephisto

Drose427 said:


> The issue with this is TMAs arent like Boxing or MMA, where even local events tend to be televised on local access channels. You can't even find videos of every form or SD drill in any TMA, forget just finding videos of everything Karate has to offer. If you go to youtube and google you're going to find Flashy Demos and Sparring, not much more. Thats what brings in students, or what parents wanna keep record of their child doing, so thats whats getting recorded.
> 
> Paul D and K-man both gave examples of uses and the type of grappling taught. Everyones been very clear that it isnt free rolling in the sense of BJJ or Judo, if you're still looking for that you havent been paying attention.
> 
> youtube popped up this example, if i had more time Id give more:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe Paul D gave another example earlier.


Well it looks like you were able to find some video, so maybe we weren't to far off in asking for video. I like the video it definitely shows some karate ground application, I'm just curious if this is the only guy running the kata this way. If no one else or the majority of people within his system don't acknowledge that this is a ground kata, than it doesn't matter what it's original purpose was if it has been lost.


----------



## Drose427

Mephisto said:


> Well it looks like you were able to find some video, so maybe we weren't to far off in asking for video. I like the video it definitely shows some karate ground application, I'm just curious if this is the only guy running the kata this way. If no one else or the majority of people within his system don't acknowledge that this is a ground kata, than it doesn't matter what it's original purpose was if it has been lost.



Point is, video on the web is a poor example. The most marketable, or popular, will always have more people uploading their videos. People upload what viewers want to see the majority of the time.

Clearly he isnt the only one, when myself, K-man, and Paul D have mentioned specific training, others have agreed with applications here. The statistical odds of all 3 of us attending "special badass, not typical" schools as MMA guys like to put it considering the lineage and geographical differences are pretty crazy. Yet, all of go to schools were there a ground fighting applications in our various forms. The implication that they arent there at all is just false.


----------



## Tez3

Drose427 said:


> Clearly he isnt the only one, when myself, K-man, and Paul D have mentioned specific training, others have agreed with applications here. The statistical odds of all 3 of us attending "special badass, not typical" schools as MMA guys like to put it considering the lineage and geographical differences are pretty crazy



I train like this as well, I also know several places that train like this, it's not unusual at all as you've said.
 I just can't be bothered arguing all the same points over and over when being told endlessly that we don't train 'ground fighting' in karate.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Mephisto said:


> I don't know if that's really the case. I've discussed the topic at length with individuals who have done some homework and their are at least three plausible theories, and arguably a couple more contenders:



I did a fair bit of homework myself, enroute to earning a Masters in physiology...



Mephisto said:


> "Carotid chokes work because of
> 
> A. No blood gets to the brain thereby cutting of oxygen to the brain and causing a KO.



That is correct.



Mephisto said:


> B. The vagas nerve is stimulated, dropping BP and oxygen to the brain, thereby causing a KO



That is done with a strike, not a choke.



Mephisto said:


> C. The flow of blood out of the brain is restricted causing a pressure difference that causes a KO."



Compressing the veins takes very little pressure. But at that level of pressure, your opponent would be able to move freely. If you're applying enough pressure to prevent your opponent from moving, you'll be compressing the artery.



Mephisto said:


> One of the strongest arguments is the vasocagal nervous response which is a nervous system reaction due to altered blood pressure. That's why unconsciousness is so quick from a choke. But you're theory is plausible too, my point is like many things, it's debatable.



This is incorrect. The vasovagal response *causes* a decrease in blood pressure (and heart rate). Not the other way around.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> The issue with this is TMAs arent like Boxing or MMA, where even local events tend to be televised on local access channels. You can't even find videos of every form or SD drill in any TMA, forget just finding videos of everything Karate has to offer. If you go to youtube and google you're going to find Flashy Demos and Sparring, not much more. Thats what brings in students, or what parents wanna keep record of their child doing, so thats whats getting recorded.
> 
> Paul D and K-man both gave examples of uses and the type of grappling taught. Everyones been very clear that it isnt free rolling in the sense of BJJ or Judo, if you're still looking for that you havent been paying attention.
> 
> youtube popped up this example, if i had more time Id give more:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe Paul D gave another example earlier.




What nonsense. How can pull any of that from Tekki Shodan?






There's zero resemblance between the two. 

It's almost as if someone learned a little grappling and assigned it to a random kata. 

This is simply yet another example of people trying to make Karate applicable for all things instead of simply accepting that it has holes.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> What nonsense. How can pull any of that from Tekki Shodan?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's zero resemblance between the two.
> 
> It's almost as if someone learned a little grappling and assigned it to a random kata.



The first few moves are nearly identical in both videos...differences being yours enunciates a crescent kick and long arm extension. The legs coming together to trap and push, the cross block and"post party" bit from my video, are the same movements from yours just from the ground.

Saying theres "zero resemblance" is like saying theres zero resemblance from a standing rear naked, and one done from your back.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> The first few moves are nearly identical in both videos...differences being yours enunciates a crescent kick and long arm extension. The legs coming together to trap and push, the cross block and"post party" bit from my video, are the same movements from yours just from the ground.
> 
> Saying theres "zero resemblance" is like saying theres zero resemblance from a standing rear naked, and one done from your back.



Would the fact that Sensei Ando also practices Bjj have anything to do with him suddenly "discovering" Karate ground fighting?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Would the fact that Sensei Ando also practices Bjj have anything to do with him suddenly "discovering" Karate ground fighting?



He didnt "discover" it, that moves always been there.. Other schools have taught _that move that way. _Attributing it to him would be like saying the Gracies invented the Armbar. Not to mention the examples Paul D and K-Man gave from other forms if you'd like other examples. At this point, you're simply in denial because your Shotokan was lacking so you assume all else does as well.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> While Krav hand techs may not be comparable to boxing, they're comparable to the hand techs of other MAs. According to Abernathy, Karate grappling is below every form of grappling out there. So you're not making an accurate comparison here.


I would suggest Krav hand techniques are every bit comparable to boxing. They were taken from boxing and they are trained as a boxer would train. Further they are used without bandaging the hands and using gloves so the alignment of the arm and wrist is critical. What I teach in punching for both Krav and karate is far more technical than I was taught in my boxing.

And, FWIW, I think you are misquoting Iain Abernethy.



Hanzou said:


> We have yet to see any Karate ground game whatsoever. All we're getting are stories of Okinawans playing grappling games with each other. Where's some examples of traditional karate ground fighting? Surely if it's being taught in Okinawan Karate we should see evidence of it somewhere.


No, it is only you who hasn't seen it. I've been training it since I started karate over 30 years ago. Historical evidence is readily available for its origins and there is ample evidence even on youtube of people practising different aspects of it. As you have always been telling us, fights often go to the ground so if Tegumi is the original Okinawan wrestling and it didn't go to the ground maybe we should all learn it for its 'anti-grappling' effectiveness.



Hanzou said:


> What nonsense. How can pull any of that from Tekki Shodan?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's zero resemblance between the two.
> 
> It's almost as if someone learned a little grappling and assigned it to a random kata.
> 
> This is simply yet another example of people trying to make Karate applicable for all things instead of simply accepting that it has holes.


No. Now others have accused me of not changing my opinion. Well, I just did. You are right in saying that this is an example of people making karate, or more specifically kata, applicable.

There is no, and I believe there probably never was, specific bunkai for any particular karate kata, Pinans excepted. The secret of the bunkai was to make the sequence of the kata work in a particular situation. Now every kata has techniques that can be taken individually. That could be called Oyo bunkai but to me it is only bunkai when you can take a sequence of techniques and provide a workable explanation. What the video shows is just that. You are on the ground, you perform the first technique to escape. If it fails, you go to the very next technique. If that fails you go to the next technique and so on.

Instead of rubbishing this video I would be commending it. The guy has done a great job in interpreting the kata in a way it can be used on the ground against a relatively untrained person.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Would the fact that Sensei Ando also practices Bjj have anything to do with him suddenly "discovering" Karate ground fighting?


Would the fact that I practise Aikido have anything to do with me suddenly "discovering" Karate locks and holds?

No, I recognised that there were locks and holds in the kata and started Aikido to learn more about them and how to apply them. The fact that my original instructor didn't understand them or teach them is the problem we have been discussing all along and that is that much of the original systems have been lost as karate went down the competition path.

If I was forty years younger I would certainly be looking at BJJ more closely but I've seen too many friends with joint reconstructions to even consider it now.

Hanzou, perhaps you could open your eyes to the possibility that there really is more in karate that you were shown in your karate training.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> He didnt "discover" it, that moves always been there.. Other schools have taught _that move that way. _Attributing it to him would be like saying the Gracies invented the Armbar. Not to mention the examples Paul D and K-Man gave from other forms if you'd like other examples. At this point, you're simply in denial because your Shotokan was lacking so you assume all else does as well.



I must have missed that, because I don't remember Kman and Paul D providing any examples of Karate ground fighting. However the example *you* provided is a guy who has trained in grappling applying his grappling knowledge to a Karate kata. He wasn't taught this by his Karate teacher. He even says it in that video that he was practicing Bjj and he suddenly had the bright idea that the movements resembled Tekki Shodan.

I'm sure with a little bit of imagination I could make all of Karate's katas resemble ground work. However, that knowledge doesn't come from my background in Karate, that knowledge comes from my background in Bjj.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Would the fact that I practise Aikido have anything to do with me suddenly "discovering" Karate locks and holds?



No, because there's photographs of even Funakoshi performing locks and holds.

That's quite a bit different than arguing that there's an entire system of grappling hidden within Karate's katas.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> I must have missed that, because I don't remember Kman and Paul D providing any examples of Karate ground fighting. However the example *you* provided is a guy who has trained in grappling applying his grappling knowledge to a Karate kata. He wasn't taught this by his Karate teacher. He even says it in that video that he was practicing Bjj and he suddenly had the bright idea that the movements resembled Tekki Shodan.
> 
> I'm sure with a little bit of imagination I could make all of Karate's katas resemble ground work. However, that knowledge doesn't come from my background in Karate, that knowledge comes from my background in Bjj.


That is the secret of bunkai. Now if you really could do that my respect for you and your ability would be enormous. The fact that you would be using your BJJ skills to interpret kata is irrelevant. Unfortunately your understanding of kata and how it works in as a fighting system is so poor, I can't see it happening any time soon.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> I must have missed that, because I don't remember Kman and Paul D providing any examples of Karate ground fighting. However the example *you* provided is a guy who has trained in grappling applying his grappling knowledge to a Karate kata. He wasn't taught this by his Karate teacher. He even says it in that video that he was practicing Bjj and he suddenly had the bright idea that the movements resembled Tekki Shodan.
> 
> I'm sure with a little bit of imagination I could make all of Karate's katas resemble ground work. However, that knowledge doesn't come from my background in Karate, that knowledge comes from my background in Bjj.



It doesnt come from _your_ Karate training. But many other TMA folks here have said and some have even given examples where ground applications are. We have no Grappling background in our system, but when a movement translates to ground fighting its taught that way. K-mans was the same, he said he picked up Aikido to further this knowledge.

Sensai Ando being on his back and seeing a familiar movement has nothing to with his BJJ training. Even if it was his first day of BJJ,  that move would have been familiar to him from the kata. He wouldnt need to be applying any sort of grappling technique or using a wrestling thought process. Unless squeezing the legs together and bringing your hands to your face like in the Real world application of that move is a BJJ technique. A technique feels familiar. If a boxer throws a hook from guard is that because of BJJ training/experience too?



Hanzou said:


> No, because there's photographs of even Funakoshi performing locks and holds.
> 
> That's quite a bit different than arguing that there's an entire system of grappling hidden within Karate's katas.



Nobody here has claimed there's "an entire grappling system," your black/white thinking has led _you_ to make this assertion.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> I'm sure with a little bit of imagination I could make all of Karate's katas resemble ground work. However, that knowledge doesn't come from my background in Karate, that knowledge comes from my background in Bjj.



And for YOU that would be true.  But not for everyone else out there.

You keep falling back into what has been pointed out to you over and over: that your experiences with karate do not necessarily match the experiences that others have had.  

You clearly feel that your karate experience was lacking and failed to live up to what you were looking for in your training.  That could have been for any of a number of reasons, including:
Poor instruction
A sensei who lacked knowledge to teach properly
Your own lack of ability/aptitude for the method
Your own lack of commitment to the training process
The methodology itself was simply a poor match for you and was not something you should have been doing

Given that I'm not in a position to judge you or your sensei, I'll just assume it was the last reason.  So you find something else that is a better match for you, that makes sense to you as a training methodology, that lives up to your personal expectations and goals, and you do that.  Nobody will fault you for that.  I've done it myself, several times.

But when you insist that YOUR experiences are representative of everyone else's, that the training you received is identical to what others have received, and you use that position to paint everything in broad strokes as a reflection of your personal experiences, then you are taking a position of ignorance.

People here are doing you a favor: they have been patient and generous enough to try and give you an education and not simply write you off as ignorant and unable to be educated.  Are you proving them wrong?  It's your choice. Accept an education, or choose to be deliberately ignorant.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> That is the secret of bunkai. Now if you really could do that my respect for you and your ability would be enormous. The fact that you would be using your BJJ skills to interpret kata is irrelevant. Unfortunately your understanding of kata and how it works in as a fighting system is so poor, I can't see it happening any time soon.



So the secret of Bunkai is to learn a completely different MA and then apply that MA to karate katas in a less desirable and effective manner?

Then you're supposed to pretend that the "bunkai" you created (thanks to the moves you learned from a completely different MA) was in karate the entire time?

You'd seriously respect me more for doing that?


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> It doesnt come from _your_ Karate training. But many other TMA folks here have said and some have even given examples where ground applications are. We have no Grappling background in our system, but when a movement translates to ground fighting its taught that way. K-mans was the same, he said he picked up Aikido to further this knowledge.



So you honestly believe that Ando was taught that ground work solely from his Karate training when he himself said (in the very video you posted) that he figured all of this out while practicing Bjj?




> Sensai Ando being on his back and seeing a familiar movement has nothing to with his BJJ training. Even if it was his first day of BJJ,  that move would have been familiar to him from the kata. He wouldnt need to be applying any sort of grappling technique or using a wrestling thought process. Unless squeezing the legs together and bringing your hands to your face like in the Real world application of that move is a BJJ technique. A technique feels familiar. If a boxer throws a hook from guard is that because of BJJ training/experience too?



Using your hips to break posture, grasping the head to further break posture, open guard positioning, moving to your side to slip out of someone's mount, hooking and trapping the legs in order to sweep, etc. all comes from grappling. In fact, it's fundamental Bjj. The idea that he pulled those nuances from the first 4 movements of a Kata is utterly ridiculous. If Karatekas are truly learning all of that from just 4 movements in the opening of Tekki Shodan ( because frankly his ground work looked very good), then we should be seeing karatekas competing at the top levels of grappling.



> Nobody here has claimed there's "an entire grappling system," your black/white thinking has led _you_ to make this assertion.



Well considering that your argument is that Sensei Ando learned all of that from just 4 kata techniques within one kata, there would have to be right?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> So the secret of Bunkai is to learn a completely different MA and then apply that MA to karate katas in a less desirable and effective manner?
> 
> Then you're supposed to pretend that the "bunkai" you created (thanks to the moves you learned from a completely different MA) was in karate the entire time?
> 
> You'd seriously respect me more for doing that?



I think what he's saying is that he'd respect you for recognizing the possibility that the lack lies in you, not in the arts you hold in such contempt.


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> I think what he's saying is that he'd respect you for recognizing the possibility that the lack lies in you, not in the arts you hold in such contempt.



How can the lack lie in me when its impossible to learn grappling and ground fighting in your standard Karate dojo?

Additionally, I hold no contempt for Karate. I simply know what it is, and what it isn't.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> So you honestly believe that Ando was taught that from his Karate teacher when he himself said in the very video you posted that he figured all of this out while practicing Bjj?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Using your hips to break posture, grasping the head to further break posture, open guard positioning, moving to your side to slip out of someone's mount, hooking and trapping the legs in order to sweep, etc. all comes from grappling. In fact, it's fundamental Bjj. The idea that he pulled those nuances from the first 4 movements of a Kata is utterly ridiculous. If Karatekas are truly learning all of that from 4 movements ( because frankly his ground work looked very good), then we should be seeing karatekas competing at the top levels of grappling.
> 
> 
> 
> Well considering that your argument is that Sensei Ando learned all of that from just 4 kata techniques within one kata, there would have to be right?



The movement he demonstrated on his partner were _exactly_ the same as the first moves of the form. You may have a way of doing it in BJJ, but what he demonstrated was right out of that kata, unadulterated, unchanged. I never said where he learned it, but that _exact movement_  is from the kata, is taught in Karate as a means of getting back up exactly as he demonstrated, in schools all over. He said he noticed the familiar movement during BJJ practice, he didnt learn it there. Again, same concept as a boxer using a hook from his back. Its a familiar movement all the same. He even demonstrated and described the movements when teaching form standing in the video as he did from the back. Nothing distinction it as BJJ, especially when the EXACT MOVEMENT is in the video you posted of Tekki Shodan.

Even with zero BJJ training, if he had been working on groundwork he would have recognized that position from Tekki Shodan and would still apply and teach it that way. 

Saying he only say that because of his BJJ is giving incorrect credit.

And no, there wouldnt have to be. Thats a pretty simple movement on anyone outside of a BJJ school where you learn how to prevent it.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> The movement he demonstrated on his partner were _exactly_ the same as the first moves of the form.



Really?


















The *exact same* you say?



> You may have a way of doing it in BJJ, but what he demonstrated was right out of that kata, unadulterated, unchanged. I never said where he learned it, but that _exact movement_  is from the kata, is taught in Karate as a means of getting back up exactly as he demonstrated, in schools all over. He said he noticed the familiar movement during BJJ practice, he didnt learn it there. Again, same concept as a boxer using a hook from his back. Its a familiar movement all the same. He even demonstrated and described the movements when teaching form standing in the video as he did from the back. Nothing distinction it as BJJ, especially when the EXACT MOVEMENT is in the video you posted of Tekki Shodan.
> 
> Even with zero BJJ training, if he had been working on groundwork he would have recognized that position from Tekki Shodan and would still apply and teach it that way.



Then it shouldn't be too difficult to find a Karate instructor capable of doing that with zero Bjj training right?


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> How can the lack lie in me when its impossible to learn grappling and ground fighting in your standard Karate dojo?
> 
> Additionally, I hold no contempt for Karate. I simply know what it is, and what it isn't.


Go back and re-read my earlier post, #248.  That should clear up your confusion.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Really?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL][/img]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL][/img]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL][/img]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL][/img]
> 
> The *exact same* you say?
> 
> 
> 
> Then it shouldn't be too difficult to find a Karate instructor capable of doing that with zero Bjj training right?



Your links are broken, but the moves in the form in both our videos are the nearly identical. I pointed out the differences to you earlier, now you're simply arguing semantics to avoid the facts several of us have given you about familiarity and applications of forms.

Now that the links work, im gonna note you cropped the top clip short so the move Sensei Ando is actually applying isn't even being shown..

Second, it isnt too hard. Clearly, many of us here _from different associations and parts of the world_, have instructors capable and have pointed that out.



Hanzou said:


> Additionally, I hold no contempt for Karate. I simply know what it is, and what it isn't.



Except very clearly, you do not. You know what _your_ training was. Where the rest of us can recognize when a movement from a kata can be applied in groundfighting and groundwork and how thats been taught to us, you've have taken every opportunity to say nothing more than, "No, we never did that at my old school so clearly it isnt there! BJJ is still better for grappling!" When many different people from different schools here have explained that its common in Dojos everywhere and effectiveness against a grappler was never the question.

You are the only person who has said anything about these groundwork and grappling applications being on any comparable level to any grappling style. The rest of us have explained them as they were explained to us, in Karate/TSD/TKD as simple applications for groundwork. Not understanding that simple concept of forms and how they relate to applications, you can hardly say you know what karate is. You know the poor experience you had.

When students from unrelated TMAS and Schools all over the world, are telling you there are groundwork applications in forms, that we have _all been taught these things_ and you're denying it simply because of your singular experience at a poor school, its simply misinformed and ignorant.


----------



## Mephisto

are we saying that the demonstrated Kata is commonly known to be a ground kata? This is commonly accepted among those doing the kata in question? Are we still talking about shotokan here or is this kata from another form of karate? 

I'm sure I could find some footwork common to what I know in the filipino martial arts in say salsa dancing or the tango or some other dance. But that doesn't mean weapons footwork was concealed in the dance all along. Or who knows maybe long ago one of those dances came from a fencing art? But if that knowledge was lost generations ago and there's no proof, what's the point? 

I'm not sure if shotokan grappling is more common than I realized and has been there all along and all competent shotokan practitioners know this, or if my dancing scenario is what's going on and the grappling is a reconstruction of what may have been. as we've seen done with midevil sword arts and pankration which now exist as recreations of what may have been.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> *How can the lack lie in me *when its impossible to learn grappling and ground fighting in your standard Karate dojo?



I've highlighted the problem.


----------



## Drose427

Mephisto said:


> are we saying that the demonstrated Kata is commonly known to be a ground kata? This is commonly accepted among those doing the kata in question? Are we still talking about shotokan here or is this kata from another form of karate?
> 
> I'm sure I could find some footwork common to what I know in the filipino martial arts in say salsa dancing or the tango or some other dance. But that doesn't mean weapons footwork was concealed in the dance all along. Or who knows maybe long ago one of those dances came from a fencing art? But if that knowledge was lost generations ago and there's no proof, what's the point?
> 
> I'm not sure if shotokan grappling is more common than I realized and has been there all along and all competent shotokan practitioners know this, or if my dancing scenario is what's going on and the grappling is a reconstruction of what may have been. as we've seen done with midevil sword arts and pankration which now exist as recreations of what may have been.



We're saying the same thing we've been the whole time. Kata has some ground applications, not just shotokan but across TMA's, many people here have concurred. It's always been taught that way at my school, other posters here have said their experiences were similar in that when part of a kata can be applied to groundwork, it is. Someone posted a link to a book where early founders were discussing grappling in Karate. Im sure some schools are just analyzing and may be "reconstructing" as you put it, but for many of us it was part of day one of our training, of our instructors, and of their instructors.

By the number of folks here who have said there are groundwork applications in their forms, I wouldn't call it rare.


----------



## Mephisto

Drose427 said:


> We're saying the same thing we've been the whole time. Kata has some ground applications, not just shotokan but across TMA's, many people here have concurred. It's always been taught that way at my school, other posters here have said their experiences were similar in that when part of a kata can be applied to groundwork, it is. Someone posted a link to a book where early founders were discussing grappling in Karate. Im sure some schools are just analyzing and may be "reconstructing" as you put it, but for many of us it was part of day one of our training, of our instructors, and of their instructors.
> 
> By the number of folks here who have said there are groundwork applications in their forms, I wouldn't call it rare.


Cool, if you say so. I trained TSD in a limited capacity and learned a few forms but nothing ever touched on ground fighting but I'm not gonna say that reflects what everybody else does or knows.


----------



## Flying Crane

Mephisto said:


> Cool, if you say so. I trained TSD in a limited capacity and learned a few forms but nothing ever touched on ground fighting but I'm not gonna say that reflects what everybody else does or knows.


And that is a perfectly reasonable position to take.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Your links are broken, but the moves in the form in both our videos are the nearly identical. I pointed out the differences to you earlier, now you're simply arguing semantics to avoid the facts several of us have given you about familiarity and applications of forms.
> 
> Now that the links work, im gonna note you cropped the top clip short so the move Sensei Ando is actually applying isn't even being shown..



Actually, what I posted would be the beginning of Tekki Shodan. I heard what Ando said, and was a bit curious as to where he got that opening movement from.

Here's the opening of the kata from that earlier clip I posted;




Sensei Osaka JKA Shotokan; Opening of Tekki Shodan;












> Second, it isnt too hard. Clearly, many of us here _from different associations and parts of the world_, have instructors capable and have pointed that out.



Yet amazingly out of all of those instructors, the *only* one you post has extensive training in Bjj......


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Actually, what I posted would be the beginning of Tekki Shodan. I heard what Ando said, and was a bit curious as to where he got that opening movement from.
> 
> Here's the opening of the kata from that earlier clip I posted;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sensei Osaka JKA Shotokan; Opening of Tekki Shodan;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet amazingly out of all of those instructors, the *only* one you post has extensive training in Bjj......



The beginning of that clip is _exactly_ the movement Ando is doing from his back..

If you need it broken down:

The knees tightening and hands crossing and coming up then down, which is a common variation....exactly like ando did. You clip he simply doesnt bring his hands as high

Considering he walks you through the form both standing and from guard the _same way as when he was standing_, its pretty clear he got it from that form.....and yes, because the rest of us dont record everything we teach we must not teach it!

Also, he "dabbled" in BJJ according to his website, and used a move he learned _from a karate kata_...but he was on his back so i guess your point is its only karate if he's standing?


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> The beginning of that clip is _exactly_ the movement Ando is doing from his back..
> 
> If you need it broken down:
> 
> The knees tightening and hands crossing and coming up then down, which is a common variation....exactly like ando did. You clip he simply doesnt bring his hands as high



Ando brought his opponents head to his chest and lifting his hips in order to break posture. That's quite a stretch to say he got that from the opening of Tekki Shodan. At what point does the karateka reach foward and brings his hands back towards his upper chest area? How the hell is bending the knees the same as lifting your hips?

Simple, it's not the same movement. However, that's fundamental Guard control in Bjj.



> Considering he walks you through the form both standing and from guard the _same way as when he was standing_, its pretty clear he got it from that form.....and yes, because the rest of us dont record everything we teach we must not teach it!



You can view what he's doing from the clips I posted. It's pretty obvious that he's not taking much of anything from Tekki Shodan. That kata is many things, but it's definitely not a blueprint for grappling.



> Also, he "dabbled" in BJJ according to his website, and used a move he learned _from a karate kata_...but he was on his back so i guess your point is its only karate if he's standing?



Really? According to his blog he's been doing Bjj for a few years now, and he took up Bjj because he said that he felt his ground game was lacking;

Lessons Learned from a Dojo Light Bulb - Sensei Ando Mierzwa


But again, I could be wrong about all of this. All you would need is a karateka doing ground fighting who has zero bjj experience.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Ando brought his opponents head to his chest and raised his hips in order to break posture. That's quite a stretch to say he got that from the opening of Tekki Shodan. At what point does the karateka reach foward and brings his hands back towards his upper chest area? How the hell is bending the knees the same as raising your hips?
> 
> Simple, it's not the same movement. However, that's fundamental Guard control in Bjj.
> 
> 
> 
> You can view what he's doing from the clips I posted. It's pretty obvious that he's not taking much of anything from Tekki Shodan. That kata is many things, but it's definitely not a blueprint for grappling.
> 
> 
> 
> Really? According to his blog he's been doing Bjj for a few years now, and he took up Bjj because he said that he felt his ground game was lacking;
> 
> Lessons Learned from a Dojo Light Bulb - Sensei Ando Mierzwa



Many of us here from all over the world have given examples of ground fighting in our Karate. You're in total denial because it coincides with your poor experience with Karate

You clearly didnt do Shodan, else you'd know many schools teach the you reach up than come down. Some go above the head, others out. Some dont at all.The ones that do, do it in nearly the exact the same way he performs and teaches it in his video, he explains exactly what your attempting to call out from a standing position.....Hell, in the second clip of his video you cropped, the raising of his leg to slip past is the same movement as the Karetekas crescent kick and stomp.

Ando also never raises his hips from the ground, he pinches his knees together. Which according to his video, is how he performs the form standing.

Literally everything you've attempted to call out Ando either explains when doing the form normally, or has to do with your limited experience with the form i.e. not knowing hands coming up like a head grab is a common variant of the form.

Basically, you're claiming to have an understand of knowledge you dont know and when given many different explanations and proof from many different folks here to correct you, all you've done is given misdirection, argued semantics, and hid behind a wall of "We didnt do it at my school and since you dont record classes it doesnt exist and has nothing on BJJ" Even when you took 2 videos next to each other doing virtually the same movement, you refuse to see whats before you.

Frankly, if after so many different folks coming with different explanations, evidence, and anecdotes you still have wool over your eyes from your personal poor experience and you refuse to be anything but stubborn and ignorant, I have no intention of doing this any further.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Frankly, if after so many different folks coming with different explanations, evidence, and anecdotes you still have wool over your eyes from your personal poor experience and you refuse to be anything but stubborn and ignorant, I have no intention of doing this any further.



The only "evidence" you've provided is a karate guy who has done Bjj performing fundamental Bjj grappling techniques, and other posters saying that "it exists". Again, if this were truly as wide spread as you say it is, we'd be seeing it from far more sources that Ando Mierzwa. It takes pretty solid grappling training to perform what he did in that video, and you don't get that by making up grappling tactics from a kata in a completely different fighting range. 

Interestingly, out of all of the contemporary and historical Japanese sources of Shotokan out there, not a single one showcases Tekki Shodan, or any Shotokan Kata utilizing grappling applications from the ground.

I wonder why that is, considering that you and others here believe that it's always been there. I can find hundreds if not thousands of books and vids on Tekki Shodan. Why? Because its truly always been there.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> The only "evidence" you've provided is a karate guy who has done Bjj performing fundamental Bjj grappling techniques, and other posters saying that "it exists". Again, if this were truly as wide spread as you say it is, we'd be seeing it from far more sources that Ando Mierzwa. It takes pretty solid grappling training to perform what he did in that video, and you don't get that by making up grappling tactics from a kata in a completely different fighting range.
> 
> Interestingly, out of all of the contemporary and historical Japanese sources of Shotokan out there, not a single one showcases Tekki Shodan, or any Shotokan Kata utilizing grappling applications from the ground.
> 
> I wonder why that is, considering that you and others here believe that it's always been there. I can find hundreds if not thousands of books and vids on Tekki Shodan. Why? Because its truly always been there.



As I believe Paul D said earlier, Tegumi has been a part of Karate since the beginning and it's always been exactly as we've explained, what we were taught, and teach.

These articles go over exactly that more:
Tegumi - Karate s Forgotten Range

There s no Grappling in Karate .Is there Moyers Karate

Karate and Okinawan Sumo

Tegumi - Old Style Karate s Two-Person Exercises

McCarthy (i believe was his name) took more from his experience with it and went into a different direction.

Paul D also mentioned a book where it was discussed.

As I said, we've given you more than anecdotes. You're simply ignoring them.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> The only "evidence" you've provided is a karate guy who has done Bjj performing fundamental Bjj grappling techniques, and other posters saying that "it exists". Again, if this were truly as wide spread as you say it is, we'd be seeing it from far more sources that Ando Mierzwa. It takes pretty solid grappling training to perform what he did in that video, and you don't get that by making up grappling tactics from a kata in a completely different fighting range.
> 
> Interestingly, out of all of the contemporary and historical Japanese sources of Shotokan out there, not a single one showcases Tekki Shodan, or any Shotokan Kata utilizing grappling applications from the ground.
> 
> I wonder why that is, considering that you and others here believe that it's always been there. I can find hundreds if not thousands of books and vids on Tekki Shodan. Why? Because its truly always been there.



Speaking of Tegumi, Look what the youtube fairy popped up:

























Goshin Wales - YouTube


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> As I believe Paul D said earlier, Tegumi has been a part of Karate since the beginning and it's always been exactly as we've explained, what we were taught, and teach.
> 
> These articles go over exactly that more:
> Tegumi - Karate s Forgotten Range
> 
> There s no Grappling in Karate .Is there Moyers Karate
> 
> Karate and Okinawan Sumo
> 
> Tegumi - Old Style Karate s Two-Person Exercises
> 
> McCarthy (i believe was his name) took more from his experience with it and went into a different direction.
> 
> Paul D also mentioned a book where it was discussed.
> 
> As I said, we've given you more than anecdotes. You're simply ignoring them.



Yeah, more tales from the old days. Can we get some modern examples please? Like actual modern Karate students doing this stuff. After all, your claim is that all of the good Karate teachers are teaching this stuff.

Also this from your second link;








Isn't ground fighting.


----------



## Danny T

While I cannot say I learned what is shown in the video as part of kata we did do as some of the training I did within the ground fighting I received in the shotokan training I was exposed to.
My training must not have been from a standard shotokan dojo.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, more tales from the old days. Can we get some modern examples please? Like actual modern Karate students doing this stuff. After all, your claim is that all of the good Karate teachers are teaching this stuff.
> 
> Also this from your second link;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't ground fighting.



Well considering I posted 2 other examples of ground fighting....One of which is Abernathy using bunkai from kata,a gain your nitpicking to avoid the subject of being proven wrong..


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Well considering I posted 2 other examples of ground fighting....One of which is Abernathy using bunkai from kata,a gain your nitpicking to avoid the subject of being proven wrong..



The upa escape is now considered Bunkai from kata? 






Where's the laugh emoticon when you need it?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> The upa escape is now considered Bunkai from kata?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where's the laugh emoticon when you need it?



A grappling style that came from a _Japanese_ martial art uses something also found in a _Japanese Art that precedes it_? They must have stole it from Brazil! 

Both Karate and BJJ took from Tegumi, judo, and Jujutsu. Claiming that move for BJJ is like a Boxer saying other art stole the straight punch.

Ura Bunkai. An entire method of Bunkai were one move from a kata can be applied to a different situation. We've explained this and given examples.

In my system we have a form called Pinan Odan. In the beginning, its a simple punch block into a quick hidden fist and chamber on the other side. From guard, this becomes either a punch/block on a typical attacker, the hidden fist chamber becomes a gi choke. When you twist and switch sides, it becomes a choke. This can also be a choke from a standing position, but thats a little more difficult as they arent in your guard. This is a throw as well. 

Applying movements from kata to groundfighting isnt some rare secret, you're just in complete denial. 

The "well we'd see videos!" excuse doesnt cut it when most of us can't even find videos of our _own kata. _


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> So the secret of Bunkai is to learn a completely different MA and then apply that MA to karate katas in a less desirable and effective manner?
> 
> Then you're supposed to pretend that the "bunkai" you created (thanks to the moves you learned from a completely different MA) was in karate the entire time?
> 
> You'd seriously respect me more for doing that?


As usual you are twisting it to suit your own ends. You quoted Ando Mierzwa to demonstrate that he had trained BJJ. In fact the blog was titled "Lessons learned from a dojo light bulb". Now if you read the blog you might have recognised that you shared something in common with Ando.



> *YIKES!* All those years of martial arts training and here I was getting my butt kicked by a burned out light bulb.
> 
> That weird bulb brought out the worst in me. Specifically, it raised three horrible feelings…
> 
> *Ignorance, incompetence, and insecurity.*
> 
> Heavy stuff. But that’s not the worst part. The worst part is that I refused to _admit_ to any of those feelings. I just kept making excuses and ignoring the problem.
> 
> _I was keeping myself in the dark.
> 
> Lessons Learned from a Dojo Light Bulb - Sensei Ando Mierzwa_


How true is that?

But that's a side issue. The secret is not to learn another martial art to apply it to a karate kata, but learning another martial art may help you understand your own system better. Now we have already established that your Shotokan training was way less than optimal. If the instructors are training you for karate style competition I wouldn't be expecting a lot of ground work or grappling.

The kata posted is Tekki Shodan, we know it as Naihanchi Shodan. It is not a traditional Goju kata but it was obviously recognised by someone higher up in Goju as a kata worth learning. The first real karate bunkai I saw was George Dillman demonstrating Naihanchi bunkai. It was all stand up grappling and the only groundwork was takedowns. In recent years I have virtually given it away to concentrate on the Goju kata and bunkai. Now I will revisit Naihanchi with different eyes.

Hanzou, bunkai is what it means to you, not what it meant to some Chinese guy two hundred years ago. A lot of my bunkai I have worked by reverse engineering. It doesn't matter how you arrive at your understanding. The important thing is that the sequence of techniques works for you. If that includes BJJ, Judo, Aikido or Capoiera techniques, fantastic, go for it. Karate can evolve just as BJJ is evolving. There are dozens of techniques in kata that people will tell you are 'blocks'. It was pointed out to me many years ago that there can't be blocks in the kata or it becomes choreography. That made me question whether indeed there were any blocks in karate, period. Any particular movement may have multiple applications. There is nothing to say they can't be used on the ground.

I remember being told years ago that kata could be used on the ground but I never really explored that option. Now that Ando has shown the possibility of use of bunkai on the ground I'll start to explore it a bit more.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> A grappling style that came from a _Japanese_ martial art uses something also found in a _Japanese Art that precedes it_? They must have stole it from Brazil!



Keep in mind that Bjj actually predates Funakoshi founding Shotokan in Japan. Further, Bjj's lineage comes from Maeda, and as far as I know, Maeda never practiced any form of Karate. Bjj itself is a combination of judo/juijitsu, catch wrestling, and street fighting.

Did Abernathy "steal" the Upa escape form the Brazilians? "Stealing" is a harsh term. More likely, as Bjj proved the effectiveness of ground fighting, other arts began to borrow from it to fill in the gaps. Heck, Judo was neglecting newaza for decades until the UFC and Bjj showed how important newaza was to fighting.



> Both Karate and BJJ took from Tegumi, judo, and Jujutsu. Claiming that move for BJJ is like a Boxer saying other art stole the straight punch.



Bjj didn't take anything from Tegumi, and frankly, I seriously doubt Karate took much from it either. All of this just smells of Karatekas taking modern grappling, and claiming that it was actually in their art the entire time.

I have a great deal of respect for Abernethy, but saying that the Upa escape is some hidden kata bunkai technique is pretty laughable behavior. I know for a fact that he trains with Bjj guys, so clearly that's where he picked it up. There's no shame in simply admitting where you really got the technique from.

Of course everyone needs to make a living right?



> Applying movements from kata to groundfighting isnt some rare secret, you're just in complete denial.
> 
> The "well we'd see videos!" excuse doesnt cut it when most of us can't even find videos of our _own kata. _



I wonder why that is....


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Keep in mind that Bjj actually predates Funakoshi founding Shotokan in Japan. Further, Bjj's lineage comes from Maeda, and as far as I know, Maeda never practiced any form of Karate. Bjj itself is a combination of judo/juijitsu, catch wrestling, and street fighting.
> 
> Did Abernathy "steal" the Upa escape form the Brazilians? "Stealing" is a harsh term. More likely, as Bjj proved the effectiveness of ground fighting, other arts began to borrow from it to fill in the gaps. Heck, Judo was neglecting newaza for decades until the UFC and Bjj showed how important newaza was to fighting.
> 
> .



Yes, BJJ did. But the grappling in Shotokan, comes from Judo/Jujustu/and Tegumi. If you read the articles I posted, you'd see where funakoshi was talking about how Tegumi played a role in his Okinawan Karate training years before founding Shotokan. So no, it isnt a modern invention. BJJ shares a lineage with the systems that Karate takes its grappling from. Seeing similar concepts isnt surprising.



Hanzou said:


> I wonder why that is....



Because we dont feel the need to record every second of our training? You dont see 100 videos online of a doctor learning an appendectomy, does that mean Doctors dont learn it?

Better yet, you don't see videos of a Pathologist performing physicals. So I can assume they cant right?


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Bjj didn't take anything from Tegumi, and frankly, *I seriously doubt Karate took much from it either.* All of this just smells of Karatekas taking modern grappling, and claiming that it was actually in their art the entire time.


Seriously? You are now questioning the well documented history of karate?



Hanzou said:


> I have a great deal of respect for Abernethy, but saying that the Upa escape is some hidden kata bunkai technique is pretty laughable behavior. I know for a fact that he trains with Bjj guys, so clearly that's where he picked it up. There's no shame in simply admitting where you really got the technique from.
> 
> Of course everyone needs to make a living right?


Mmm! Interesting this newfound respect for Iain Abernethy (even with the snide comment to finish). Eighteen months ago when I posted some of his video to demonstrate the application of kata you dismissed his work as not realistic. 


Hanzou said:


> I wonder why that is....


Simply because not everything is on YouTube.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou:  serious question, what do you believe is contained in kata? Do you understand the difference between a technique and a principle?  Do you see kata as an exercise in the practice of technique, or the practice of principles, or both, or neither, or something else?

Second serious question: do you recognize that many similar or identical techniques are found in common with many different systems of martial art?

By way of example, in my own time in training I've noticed capoeira has techniques in common with judo and with Kenpo.  White crane has techniques in common with Kenpo and wing Chun and capoeira.  Kenpo has techniques in common with Dan zan Ryu and judo.

My point being, curriculum does not exist in a vacuum.  No curriculum of any system is truly unique to itself.  Is that a point you would agree with?


----------



## Mephisto

Flying Crane said:


> Hanzou:  serious question, what do you believe is contained in kata? Do you understand the difference between a technique and a principle?  Do you see kata as an exercise in the practice of technique, or the practice of principles, or both, or neither, or something else?
> 
> Second serious question: do you recognize that many similar or identical techniques are found in common with many different systems of martial art?
> 
> By way of example, in my own time in training I've noticed capoeira has techniques in common with judo and with Kenpo.  White crane has techniques in common with Kenpo and wing Chun and capoeira.  Kenpo has techniques in common with Dan zan Ryu and judo.
> 
> My point being, curriculum does not exist in a vacuum.  No curriculum of any system is truly unique to itself.  Is that a point you would agree with?


I'd agree that many arts share movements, one art may use a movement for a completely different purpose than another art. For example in my Filipino system we have several stick disarms, We only use those movements as stick disarms. But I've trained in other arts and other stick arts and I've seen how some will use the same stick disarm motion for multiple techniques. Now when I teach the stick disarms I'll show the empty hand version. A vine disarm becomes a shoulder lock, a north south disarm becomes an elbow lock. I could tell my students that the empty hand disarm applications have always been there and it's a stretch but if the motions have been their then perhaps the empty hand moves have been there in a sense. But the truth is it took outside knowledge for me to learn this new application for disarms in my system and without outside knowledge I'd never have a thought of it. I could show this to my peers and some might even agree with my new knowledge and some might even act as though they've known it all along. Some might imply that the empty hand applications for disarms have always been in my system and just under that I didn't learn it due to inferior training. But the truth is I'm just recycling a movement a repurposing it based on my knowledge from another system. I don't think its wrong to do this but I think it's important to be honest about how I arrived at the technique. I suppose shotokan is different than my example because apparently everyone in shotokan grapples with the exception of sport focused schools.


----------



## drop bear

Flying Crane said:


> Hanzou:  serious question, what do you believe is contained in kata? Do you understand the difference between a technique and a principle?  Do you see kata as an exercise in the practice of technique, or the practice of principles, or both, or neither, or something else?
> 
> Second serious question: do you recognize that many similar or identical techniques are found in common with many different systems of martial art?
> 
> By way of example, in my own time in training I've noticed capoeira has techniques in common with judo and with Kenpo.  White crane has techniques in common with Kenpo and wing Chun and capoeira.  Kenpo has techniques in common with Dan zan Ryu and judo.
> 
> My point being, curriculum does not exist in a vacuum.  No curriculum of any system is truly unique to itself.  Is that a point you would agree with?



I think the argument is that it becomes increasingly hard to believe that the guy who invented kata had somehow managed to cover every single issue into one perfect response. Nobody else has ever managed this with anything.

That kata is being treated as dogma. And that people are rationalising to try to grind real life into a shape that they can agree with.

And for me anyway. Training with a dogmatic belief in kata wont work in the long term because say for example with ground work. There will be elements that are not covered by kata or outright defy kata that will be effective and essential to getting the basic fundamentals of your technique right.

So you don't do the hip escape because it looks similar to the nasi goreng kata. You do it because it is the best method you can employ to get that fat sweaty bugger off you.

Same as if you went and did judo. But refused to change from karate. You screw yourself up.


----------



## Hanzou

Flying Crane said:


> Hanzou:  serious question, what do you believe is contained in kata? Do you understand the difference between a technique and a principle?  Do you see kata as an exercise in the practice of technique, or the practice of principles, or both, or neither, or something else?
> 
> Second serious question: do you recognize that many similar or identical techniques are found in common with many different systems of martial art?
> 
> By way of example, in my own time in training I've noticed capoeira has techniques in common with judo and with Kenpo.  White crane has techniques in common with Kenpo and wing Chun and capoeira.  Kenpo has techniques in common with Dan zan Ryu and judo.
> 
> My point being, curriculum does not exist in a vacuum.  No curriculum of any system is truly unique to itself.  Is that a point you would agree with?



Absolutely, but there's a difference between what you're describing and what we're discussing. In this case we have a karateka performing basic Bjj, and stating that it's some hidden grappling in a fairly advanced shotokan kata. 

Did I mention that this guy also studied Bjj?

So what's the more likely scenario? That this guy is performing standard Bjj fundamentals, or that he discovered some hidden grappling sequence hidden within a kata that isn't even designed for ground fighting in the first place?

Well, I can find several Bjj vids showing precisely the techniques he was doing. The only Tekki Shodan bunkai based on ground fighting is his own.

The same applies to Abernethy; Is he performing a super secret hidden kata bunkai, or a basic Bjj mount escape?

Here's the deal; If Karatekas can learn this top secret karate grappling bunkai from a month of Bjj training, why waste time trying to decipher advanced kata in the first place? 

Just sign up for Bjj classes. Just like Sensei Ando did.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> Absolutely, but there's a difference between what you're describing and what we're discussing. In this case we have a karateka performing basic Bjj, and stating that it's some hidden grappling in a fairly advanced shotokan kata.
> 
> Did I mention that this guy also studied Bjj?
> 
> So what's the more likely scenario? That this guy is performing standard Bjj fundamentals, or that he discovered some hidden grappling sequence hidden within a kata that isn't even designed for ground fighting in the first place?
> 
> Well, I can find several Bjj vids showing precisely the techniques he was doing. The only Tekki Shodan bunkai based on ground fighting is his own.
> 
> The same applies to Abernethy; Is he performing a super secret hidden kata bunkai, or a basic Bjj mount escape?
> 
> Here's the deal; If Karatekas can learn this top secret karate grappling bunkai from a month of Bjj training, why waste time trying to decipher advanced kata in the first place?
> 
> Just sign up for Bjj classes. Just like Sensei Ando did.


Im still waiting for you to actually answer my questions.  None of the responses have done so.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Absolutely, but there's a difference between what you're describing and what we're discussing. In this case we have a karateka performing basic Bjj, and stating that it's some hidden grappling in a fairly advanced shotokan kata.
> 
> Did I mention that this guy also studied Bjj?
> 
> So what's the more likely scenario? That this guy is performing standard Bjj fundamentals, or that he discovered some hidden grappling sequence hidden within a kata that isn't even designed for ground fighting in the first place?
> 
> Well, I can find several Bjj vids showing precisely the techniques he was doing. The only Tekki Shodan bunkai based on ground fighting is his own.
> 
> The same applies to Abernethy; Is he performing a super secret hidden kata bunkai, or a basic Bjj mount escape?
> 
> Here's the deal; If Karatekas can learn this top secret karate grappling bunkai from a month of Bjj training, why waste time trying to decipher advanced kata in the first place?
> 
> Just sign up for Bjj classes. Just like Sensei Ando did.



What about the example I gave? My grappling experience is limited to HS wrestling and walked you through a simple Gi choke from one of our forms. Paul D gave an abernathy example from another form. 

Again, your video argument is moot. If you can't even find basic Karate  form videos, how you can expect to see application videos?

it isnt some "super secret bunkai" theyre pretty basic movements. Any gold belt should be able to pick out moves from a kata any adapt them anyways, it doesnt take much to do it for the ground. If your single school couldnt do this, but all of ours have you have to wonder what the majority training really is. Quite frankly, if you dont know how to adapt a move from a kata, you have no business doing kata. You're not training, you're dancing. At that point you clearly havent been paying attention.

For many people its not as simple as "signing up for BJJ." For a variety of reasons. Our cheapest BJJ school in the area is 450 a month. Our cheapest across 5 towns, is more expensive than any 2 of the other martial art schools in the area _combined._ I've never seen a BJJ school priced less than 100 a month. for 450 in my area, you can get Judo/Aikido, TSD, and Fire Arms Training. Rather do a sport/competition focus? You can still afford one of the other Boxing/MMA gyms but they dont teach traditional BJJ(wrestlings their base although Im sure they have some familiarity with BJJ), _and_ another Martial Art. 

Idk about you, but unless BJJ is some ultimate Action Movie greatest in the world, self defense system, I'm not paying an erroneous amount of money each month for dues when I can get far more training and experience elsewhere. Add that on to the fact that many people dont wanna groundfight. Theyd rather focus their training elsewhere, especially if else includes some type of groundfighting or ground defense or they already have a wrestling background. Which is more than enough to handle the untrained.  Or maybe they cant afford BJJ in addition to the art they enjoy.

This is just the money argument. Theres also time and scheduling conflicts, injuries that affects ones ability to grab anything in the first place.


----------



## Flying Crane

I guess I need to ask another question to hanzou:  do you believe that karate has a specific body of techniques, and anything outside of that specific body of techniques is not karate?

So... Everything a karate guy does will be found within a kata somewhere, and kata is the "rule book" of what a karateka is allowed to do, in combat or in defending himself?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> How can the lack lie in me when its impossible to learn grappling and ground fighting in your standard Karate dojo?


Not being able to recognize your own flaws is a flaw in itself.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> What about the example I gave? My grappling experience is limited to HS wrestling and walked you through a simple Gi choke from one of our forms. Paul D gave an abernathy example from another form.



That does nothing for me. I would need to see some footage to be able to judge completely. Like that Abernathy vid you posted. Thanks to that, I was immediately able to tell what he was doing, and it was a very basic Bjj mount escape.



> Again, your video argument is moot. If you can't even find basic Karate  form videos, how you can expect to see application videos?



I don't get your meaning here. Are you saying that the vids I posted weren't legit kata videos? One of those vids used to be on the JKA website as an example of how to perform the kata properly.



> it isnt some "super secret bunkai" theyre pretty basic movements. Any gold belt should be able to pick out moves from a kata any adapt them anyways, it doesnt take much to do it for the ground. If your single school couldnt do this, but all of ours have you have to wonder what the majority training really is. Quite frankly, if you dont know how to adapt a move from a kata, you have no business doing kata. You're not training, you're dancing. At that point you clearly havent been paying attention.



Uh, Tekki Shodan is a fairly advanced kata. Most Shotokan schools don't teach it until Purple/Brown belt levels. Again, the stuff Ando was doing was fundamental Bjj stuff, and if your argument is to be believed, he took Tekki Shodan, placed it on the ground, and modified it to the point where it somehow looked exactly like fundamental Bjj.

Also I simply don't believe that the majority are being taught any of this. If they were, we'd have more than one example (who just happened to take Bjj), and we'd have more than just the first 4 movements of Tekki Shodan, and it wouldn't look almost exactly like  Bjj.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Seriously? You are now questioning the well documented history of karate?



Its so well documented that most articles about this are less than 20 years old. Popping up right about the same time karate dojos started losing significant ground to MMA. It's a smart tactic, since people are concerned about grappling, or how to stop grapplers. It's pretty convenient to rediscover your long lost grappling art hidden in your katas from 100 years ago.



> Mmm! Interesting this newfound respect for Iain Abernethy (even with the snide comment to finish). Eighteen months ago when I posted some of his video to demonstrate the application of kata you dismissed his work as not realistic.



Oh, I still view his work the same way. I just respect the man for making a living doing what he loves to do. And heck, since everyone else is riding the grappling wave, so can he.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> That does nothing for me. I would need to see some footage to be able to judge completely. Like that Abernathy vid you posted. Thanks to that, I was immediately able to tell what he was doing, and it was a very basic Bjj mount escape.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't get your meaning here. Are you saying that the vids I posted weren't legit kata videos? One of those vids used to be on the JKA website as an example of how to perform the kata properly.
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, Tekki Shodan is a fairly advanced kata. Most Shotokan schools don't teach it until Purple/Brown belt levels. Again, the stuff Ando was doing was fundamental Bjj stuff, and if your argument is to be believed, he took Tekki Shodan, placed it on the ground, and modified it to the point where it somehow looked exactly like fundamental Bjj.
> 
> Also I simply don't believe that the majority are being taught any of this. If they were, we'd have more than one example (who just happened to take Bjj), and we'd have more than just the first 4 movements of Tekki Shodan, and it wouldn't look almost exactly like  Bjj.


We've given you multiple examples, from 3 or 4 different forms. Tekki shodan is an advanced form yeah, but it's not the only one. Picking a part of a form for SD and applying it is the same at all levels, it's basic stuff. Again when 5 strangers can give you examples, you should really think about how "rare" something can be.  You still haven't explained how lack of video means it doesn't exist. The only video of my entire associations forms that im aware of online are exerpts in demos, brief show in tournament recordings, and one of Bassai my instructor did to compare how we do it compared to others here. This is across 6 branch schools and a main school. I suppose we don't do contact drills or bag work because they aren't in the videos?  

 Again, Are pathologists not able to do physicals because there isn't videos of this?

You do realize that's just one associations forms right? And even then you can't find videos of every for in their association. My meaning was pretty clear.

Not everyone has the time or interest in making YouTube videos.  Using YouTube as a guide...I mean it just sounds bad itself..


----------



## Hanzou

Flying Crane said:


> I guess I need to ask another question to hanzou:  do you believe that karate has a specific body of techniques, and anything outside of that specific body of techniques is not karate?



Pretty much.

For example, Floyd Mayweather doesn't do Karate. Rickson Gracie didn't do karate.

Karate is a fairly distinct set of martial arts. You recognize it almost immediately when you see it. At least I can, since I spent quite a few years in it. 

I know that Elbow escapes, trap and rolls, and the Guard definitely isn't Karate.



> So... Everything a karate guy does will be found within a kata somewhere, and kata is the "rule book" of what a karateka is allowed to do, in combat or in defending himself?



Everyone performs their personal fighting style when they're in combat or defending themselves. Again, the argument here is that the creators hid away entirely different martial arts systems within the katas. Sorry, I just don't buy it.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Its so well documented that most articles about this are less than 20 years old. Popping up right about the same time karate dojos started losing significant ground to MMA. It's a smart tactic, since people are concerned about grappling, or how to stop grapplers. It's pretty convenient to rediscover your long lost grappling art hidden in your katas from 100 years ago.



Except it isnt.. in the book exert Paul d quoted from Funakoshis book they're discussing how Funakoshis is explaining how tegumi from his youth training in Okinawa karate helped him create Shotokan. The book was My Way of Life I believe, which came out in the 70s, long before the time of Karate "started losing significant ground". At this point, I'm assuming you're not even reading the information we'recommend giving you


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Pretty much.
> 
> For example, Floyd Mayweather doesn't do Karate. Rickson Gracie didn't do karate.
> 
> Karate is a fairly distinct set of martial arts. You recognize it almost immediately when you see it. At least I can, since I spent quite a few years in it.
> 
> I know that Elbow escapes, trap and rolls, and the Guard definitely isn't Karate.
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone performs their personal fighting style when they're in combat or defending themselves. Again, the argument here is that the creators hid away entirely different martial arts systems within the katas. Sorry, I just don't buy it.


 
No, the argument was never that there was an "entire system hidden away". You are quite literally the only one carrying that torch.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> Pretty much.
> 
> For example, Floyd Mayweather doesn't do Karate. Rickson Gracie didn't do karate.
> 
> Karate is a fairly distinct set of martial arts. You recognize it almost immediately when you see it. At least I can, since I spent quite a few years in it.
> 
> I know that Elbow escapes, trap and rolls, and the Guard definitely isn't Karate.
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone performs their personal fighting style when they're in combat or defending themselves. Again, the argument here is that the creators hid away entirely different martial arts systems within the katas. Sorry, I just don't buy it.


I'm not selling anything.  I'm trying to gauge what you do and do not understand. 

Care to answer my earlier questions?


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> But that's a side issue. The secret is not to learn another martial art to apply it to a karate kata, but learning another martial art may help you understand your own system better. Now we have already established that your Shotokan training was way less than optimal. If the instructors are training you for karate style competition I wouldn't be expecting a lot of ground work or grappling.
> 
> The kata posted is Tekki Shodan, we know it as Naihanchi Shodan. It is not a traditional Goju kata but it was obviously recognised by someone higher up in Goju as a kata worth learning. The first real karate bunkai I saw was George Dillman demonstrating Naihanchi bunkai. It was all stand up grappling and the only groundwork was takedowns. In recent years I have virtually given it away to concentrate on the Goju kata and bunkai. Now I will revisit Naihanchi with different eyes.
> 
> Hanzou, bunkai is what it means to you, not what it meant to some Chinese guy two hundred years ago. A lot of my bunkai I have worked by reverse engineering. It doesn't matter how you arrive at your understanding. The important thing is that the sequence of techniques works for you. If that includes BJJ, Judo, Aikido or Capoiera techniques, fantastic, go for it. Karate can evolve just as BJJ is evolving. There are dozens of techniques in kata that people will tell you are 'blocks'. It was pointed out to me many years ago that there can't be blocks in the kata or it becomes choreography. That made me question whether indeed there were any blocks in karate, period. Any particular movement may have multiple applications. There is nothing to say they can't be used on the ground.
> 
> I remember being told years ago that kata could be used on the ground but I never really explored that option. Now that Ando has shown the possibility of use of bunkai on the ground I'll start to explore it a bit more.



Martial Arts evolve via pressure testing techniques, discarding flawed techniques, and embracing more effective ones. They also evolve by admitting their shortcomings and seeking methods to fill those shortcomings.

 Martial Arts do not evolve by actively taking techniques from other systems and pretending that they've been within that system the entire time.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Martial Arts evolve via pressure testing techniques, discarding flawed techniques, and embracing more effective ones. They also evolve by admitting their shortcomings and seeking methods to fill those shortcomings.
> 
> Martial Arts do not evolve by actively taking techniques from other systems and pretending that they've been within that system the entire time.


 
We'vw given you articles and books of funakoshi discussing grappling, it's applications in shotokan  and how it pertains to tegumi and groundWork, some _ 20 years before the rise of MMA and BJJ._ Hard to claim "it's a modern invention we'really adding i" when master were discussing ground applications some 40 years prior.

We've also given you other examples than andos. Me and Paul D gave examples from 2 Pinan forms. 

You're simply ignoring the information we're giving you and nitpicking what fits your opinion.


----------



## Tez3

Drose427 said:


> We'vw given you articles and books of funakoshi discussing grappling, it's applications in shotokan  and how it pertains to tegumi and groundWork, some _ 20 years before the rise of MMA and BJJ._ Hard to claim "it's a modern invention we'really adding i" when master were discussing ground applications some 40 years prior.
> 
> We've also given you other examples than andos. Me and Paul D gave examples from 2 Pinan forms.
> 
> *You're simply ignoring the information we're giving you and nitpicking what fits your opinion*.



This has been the case all along, in countless other threads now the same information has been given and still it's ignored because some are so invested in having only their style of martial arts being the 'correct' one, the one that works that there is no room to accept what others are saying. It could become beyond frustrating that time and time again the value of karate is devalued and misunderstood simply because one person had an unsatisfactory experience in one particular style, with one particular instructor and one particular school. That doesn't make it true that every karateka all around the world is doing the same thing, when experienced karateka tell you how they are training, when they tell you what is in there classes and teaching why would you disbelieve them?
Drose427, your replies have consistently been patient and informative, I really believe you can do no more, it was a valiant effort and I for one appreciate it but like me it's probably time to give up as nothing is going to persuade some that we do what we say we do.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> We'vw given you articles and books of funakoshi discussing grappling, it's applications in shotokan  and how it pertains to tegumi and groundWork, some _ 20 years before the rise of MMA and BJJ._ Hard to claim "it's a modern invention we'really adding i" when master were discussing ground applications some 40 years prior.
> 
> We've also given you other examples than andos. Me and Paul D gave examples from 2 Pinan forms.
> 
> You're simply ignoring the information we're giving you and nitpicking what fits your opinion.



Funakoshi reminiscing about wrestling in his youth isn't the same as an active system of ground fighting existing and being practiced within Shotokan. It also isn't the same as the recent explosion of grappling popping up in traditional MA systems that previously had very little in the way of grappling. Again, I have no problem acknowledging standing locks and holds within Karate, it's the ground fighting like in that Sensei Ando video that I don't believe.

It's like Wing Chun anti-grappling. Instead of simply admitting that anti-grappling was created as a response to the rise of Bjj and MMA, exponents concocted some nutty story about how it was invented by the founder of the system itself. The Karate situation is a bit more pervasive, because you have karate exponents simply incorporating modern grappling and saying that its Tegumi, or kata Bunkai. You did it earlier, stating that Ando's and Abernethy's pretty clear display of Bjj technique was in fact Karate bunkai.

It's a good marketing ploy. Wish I had thought of it.


----------



## Mephisto

Drose427 said:


> What about the example I gave? My grappling experience is limited to HS wrestling and walked you through a simple Gi choke from one of our forms. Paul D gave an abernathy example from another form.
> 
> Again, your video argument is moot. If you can't even find basic Karate  form videos, how you can expect to see application videos?
> 
> it isnt some "super secret bunkai" theyre pretty basic movements. Any gold belt should be able to pick out moves from a kata any adapt them anyways, it doesnt take much to do it for the ground. If your single school couldnt do this, but all of ours have you have to wonder what the majority training really is. Quite frankly, if you dont know how to adapt a move from a kata, you have no business doing kata. You're not training, you're dancing. At that point you clearly havent been paying attention.
> 
> For many people its not as simple as "signing up for BJJ." For a variety of reasons. Our cheapest BJJ school in the area is 450 a month. Our cheapest across 5 towns, is more expensive than any 2 of the other martial art schools in the area _combined._ I've never seen a BJJ school priced less than 100 a month. for 450 in my area, you can get Judo/Aikido, TSD, and Fire Arms Training. Rather do a sport/competition focus? You can still afford one of the other Boxing/MMA gyms but they dont teach traditional BJJ(wrestlings their base although Im sure they have some familiarity with BJJ), _and_ another Martial Art.
> 
> Idk about you, but unless BJJ is some ultimate Action Movie greatest in the world, self defense system, I'm not paying an erroneous amount of money each month for dues when I can get far more training and experience elsewhere. Add that on to the fact that many people dont wanna groundfight. Theyd rather focus their training elsewhere, especially if else includes some type of groundfighting or ground defense or they already have a wrestling background. Which is more than enough to handle the untrained.  Or maybe they cant afford BJJ in addition to the art they enjoy.
> 
> This is just the money argument. Theres also time and scheduling conflicts, injuries that affects ones ability to grab anything in the first place.


$450 a month? Do they train world class athletes? That seems ridiculous. Did you say &450 is for bjj and a variety of other arts? Surely you can train just bjj for less. Seems like for that price they'd havevdifferent levels of membership.


Flying Crane said:


> I guess I need to ask another question to hanzou:  do you believe that karate has a specific body of techniques, and anything outside of that specific body of techniques is not karate?
> 
> So... Everything a karate guy does will be found within a kata somewhere, and kata is the "rule book" of what a karateka is allowed to do, in combat or in defending himself?


I dont think anyone would say that there's a system limits what you can do in an actual fight but if a bjj guy were to throw a high kick I'd say that he's not doing bjj. Some bjj guys do throw low leg checking kicks but it is part of the bjj syllabus? Has kicking been part of bjj all along?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Funakoshi reminiscing about wrestling in his youth isn't the same as an active system of ground fighting existing and being practiced within Shotokan. It also isn't the same as the recent explosion of grappling popping up in traditional MA systems that previously had very little in the way of grappling. Again, I have no problem acknowledging standing locks and holds within Karate, it's the ground fighting like in that Sensei Ando video that I don't believe.
> 
> It's like Wing Chun anti-grappling. Instead of simply admitting that anti-grappling was created as a response to the rise of Bjj and MMA, exponents concocted some nutty story about how it was invented by the founder of the system itself. The Karate situation is a bit more pervasive, because you have karate exponents simply incorporating modern grappling and saying that its Tegumi, or kata Bunkai. You did it earlier, stating that Ando's and Abernethy's pretty clear display of Bjj technique was in fact Karate bunkai.
> 
> It's a good marketing ploy. Which I had thought of it.


If you actually read the excerpts, funakoshi goes in to talking about specific techniques..and how he trained them as a part of his karate Training and taught them until modernization and commercialization..as have several of us here, you keep ignoring the examples we give you.

Again, nobody other than you has claimed there's an active ground system. 

You seem to have an issue distinctive between continously free-rolling, and applying moves from kata, which shows you don't really understand bunkai. Which is the fault of your instructor.

You still havent answered many of flying cranes questions, or explained how a lack of youtube prescense means something doesnt exist, or chimed in to my explanation that "simply taking BJJ" isnt possible or even the best cjoice for everyone. We've given you exact examples from multiple forms, books, articles with more historical texts long before BJJ even came into the picture (nullifying the "modern invention to keep up with BJJ" argument )You keep ignoring evidence that doesn't fit your opinion. I'm done repeating myself and the other guys hear.



Mephisto said:


> $450 a month? Do they train world class athletes? That seems ridiculous. Did you say &450 is for bjj and a variety of other arts? Surely you can train just bjj for less. Seems like for that price they'd havevdifferent levels of membership.
> 
> I dont think anyone would say that there's a system limits what you can do in an actual fight but if a bjj guy were to throw a high kick I'd say that he's not doing bjj. Some bjj guys do throw low leg checking kicks but it is part of the bjj syllabus? Has kicking been part of bjj all along?


 
the 450 one has Boxing too The MMA gym claiming Helios Gracie lineage (I haven't checked they're full lineage) is 250 or adult BJJ alone. Self defense and no-gi are an additional 50. The full MMA package I'd close to 5, but the striking is limited to American kickboxing. which quite frankly, is subpar. Their  BJJ  from what i hear is good in the competitive aspect, but the price is outrageous. Are all BJJ schools that bad? Of course not, i briught up my local gyms to give an example of how "simply takeing BJJ" isnt always an option. 

Generally speaking though, BJJ is expensive, one of the most expensive arts. It's popular and commercialized and folks know they can milk their students regardless of the quality of their training. Their are boxers who are subpar because of poor instruction but never bother to see how their instructors line up with other gyms. They just think it's all on them. That's the flaw in the "sports have a public funnel argument". if it made every gym good, there'd be no sub part guys.

The issue is the ground and standing applications of kata as locks and hold come from Judo and Jujustu, as did BJJ. Nobody here is claiming or has claimed "well this gi choke is solely karate!" That's like a BJJ guy saying they invented the armbar. Every grapple, lock, and choke application we use and teach from our kata, is usually taught in Judo or Japanese Jutusu and drilled in Randori. Nobody other than Hanzou believes or has been arguing that Funakoshi invented an entire grappling system. We've all said that whats there is basic and meant for the untrained and isnt randori Or free rolling. Any competive grappler is in a different league. Tegumi was nothing more than Okinawa wrestling Funakoshi trained in, brought to karate, then taught with his karate until full modernization. In his book he talks about specific techs karate should still be drilling. All he did, was take grappling elements and put them in forms. Many just like a BJJ rear naked, they can be done standing or from the ground.

There are strikes in Japanese Jujustu, contrary to popular belief. When a Japanese Jujustu guy with zero cross training throws a punch or kick,  is he now using a different martial art?


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> If you actually read the excerpts, funakoshi goes in to talking about specific techniques..and how he trained them as a part of his karate Training and taught them until modernization and commercialization..as have several of us here, you keep ignoring the examples we give you.
> 
> Again, nobody other than you has claimed there's an active ground system.



If there's no active ground system, then what is the point of your argument? No active ground system means that its not being taught or developed within the system itself.

My point was that if I get taken to the ground in a fight, my karate training has no answers for that situation. A lack of an active ground system in Karate confirms that belief.



> You seem to have an issue distinctive between continously free-rolling, and applying moves from kata, which shows you don't really understand bunkai. Which is the fault of your instructor.



I understand bunkai perfectly. However my understanding of it is far more cynical and negative than your understanding of it.



> You still havent answered many of flying cranes questions, or explained how a lack of youtube prescense means something doesnt exist, or chimed in to my explanation that "simply taking BJJ" isnt possible or even the best cjoice for everyone. We've given you exact examples from multiple forms, books, articles with more historical texts long before BJJ even came into the picture (nullifying the "modern invention to keep up with BJJ" argument )You keep ignoring evidence that doesn't fit your opinion. I'm done repeating myself and the other guys hear.



I answered FC's questions that pertain to this discussion. It isn't just a lack of youtube presence, there's also a lack of presence within all media. I didn't chime into your explanation about taking Bjj because I didn't see the relevance. And besides, you can always take Judo as an alternative.

Hopefully that helps.

As for your "exact" examples, you do know that there's a difference between Nagewaza and Newaza right? Again, I have no problem acknowledging throws, standing locks, and standing holds in karate, its the ground fighting aspect that I doubt.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> If there's no active ground system, then what is the point of your argument? No active ground system means that its not being taught or developed within the system itself.
> 
> *my* karate training has no answers for that situation. A lack of an active ground system in Karate confirms that belief.
> 
> I understand bunkai perfectly. However my understanding of it is far more cynical and negative than your understanding of it.
> 
> Hopefully that helps.
> 
> As for your "exact" examples, you do know that there's a difference between Nagewaza and Newaza right? Again, I have no problem acknowledging throws, standing locks, and standing holds in karate, its the ground fighting aspect that I doubt.



Yours didnt. The rest of us have no issue with being able to apply the locks, torques, and chokes form standing kata to doing them on our backs.

Are we free-rolling as in a competitive environment? No.

Are we practicing newaza from standing chokes and locks in our forms as bunkai? Yeah, its not difficult at all. typically, you have to change very little if anything.

 Thats like saying you can only do a rear naked from a standing position.

Can I still set an Armbar from a takedown by throwing the leg over like like we do as a crescent in Samdan and teach as an application of that form? Yes, is the same movement and I have full control of the arm/wrist.

Gi choke from Odan.

Bunkai vs. Kumite. 

Nobody is claiming everyones live wrestling. But saying there is _zero_ ground game or applications is false. Especially considering your reasoing is because _yours_ didnt.

No there isnt a lack in "all media." We've shown videos of full rolling in goju schools, linked articles discussing teachings and events from long before BJJ, and books written by Grandmasters or from interviews and talks with Grandmaster from long before BJJ's time. Saying theres a "lack of presence within all media" just shows you havent actually looked at any of the sources.

Funakoshi practiced and taught full on Okinawan Wrestling (newaza) in his okinawan days. He believed we still should and as a result of that reasoning, many of us still do. This is all in his books, its far more than "reminiscing about his boyhood days." 

instead of covering your ears and going "nananananannanan", look into the actual information we've given you.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> Pretty much.
> 
> For example, Floyd Mayweather doesn't do Karate. Rickson Gracie didn't do karate.
> 
> Karate is a fairly distinct set of martial arts. You recognize it almost immediately when you see it. At least I can, since I spent quite a few years in it.
> 
> I know that Elbow escapes, trap and rolls, and the Guard definitely isn't Karate.
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone performs their personal fighting style when they're in combat or defending themselves. Again, the argument here is that the creators hid away entirely different martial arts systems within the katas. Sorry, I just don't buy it.


Still waiting for answers to the earlier questions.

But this answer here is quite telling.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I understand bunkai perfectly


Now that's a wild claim.


----------



## Mephisto

Drose427 said:


> Yours didnt. The rest of us have no issue with being able to apply the locks, torques, and chokes form standing kata to doing them on our backs.
> 
> Are we free-rolling as in a competitive environment? No.
> 
> Are we practicing newaza from standing chokes and locks in our forms as bunkai? Yeah, its not difficult at all. typically, you have to change very little if anything.
> 
> Thats like saying you can only do a rear naked from a standing position.
> 
> Can I still set an Armbar from a takedown by throwing the leg over like like we do as a crescent in Samdan and teach as an application of that form? Yes, is the same movement and I have full control of the arm/wrist.
> 
> Gi choke from Odan.
> 
> Bunkai vs. Kumite.
> 
> Nobody is claiming everyones live wrestling. But saying there is _zero_ ground game or applications is false. Especially considering your reasoing is because _yours_ didnt.
> 
> No there isnt a lack in "all media." We've shown videos of full rolling in goju schools, linked articles discussing teachings and events from long before BJJ, and books written by Grandmasters or from interviews and talks with Grandmaster from long before BJJ's time. Saying theres a "lack of presence within all media" just shows you havent actually looked at any of the sources.
> 
> Funakoshi practiced and taught full on Okinawan Wrestling (newaza) in his okinawan days. He believed we still should and as a result of that reasoning, many of us still do. This is all in his books, its far more than "reminiscing about his boyhood days."
> 
> instead of covering your ears and going "nananananannanan", look into the actual information we've given you.


I'd agree that a lock or choke can be done standing or on the ground but a upa, hip escape, guard pass, are exclusively ground moves. you might be able to find a way to apply a hip escape while standing. A bjj guy might cross train in karate or another art and find a similiar movement, but could he claim bjj taught the move all along but it is currently out of fashion?


----------



## Flying Crane

Mephisto said:


> I dont think anyone would say that there's a system limits what you can do in an actual fight but if a bjj guy were to throw a high kick I'd say that he's not doing bjj. Some bjj guys do throw low leg checking kicks but it is part of the bjj syllabus? Has kicking been part of bjj all along?


if kicking is part of BJJ training at all, then the choice to throw the kick high is a personal choice, and it's still BJJ.  Who has the authority to dictate that it's Not BJJ based on an arbitrary height "limit" that is subject to individual and personal preference?  I'd say nobody does.  If the individual chooses to develop his kick to deliver it high, the same kick he learned in his BJJ school, then it's still BJJ.  

I appreciate your taking the time to respond.  My point is, curriculum shouldn't limit what one can use.  Curriculum makes suggestions of things that should be useful, but curriculum should also be a tool that expresses deeper principles and helps one understand and develop those principles.  Once that is accomplished, then curriculum becomes infinite because you understand how to apply the principles in anything and everything you do, even if not part of the formalized curriculum, even if the movement isn't even a "proper" technique.

If you don't have a grasp on this concept, then you are simply a technique collector.  That can still be effective and functional, but lacks depth of understanding and indicates a beginners mentality.  Hanzou's posts paint a picture of someone who lacks depth in his understanding of the training process.  His posts indicate that he is a technique collector, but fails to understand the principles underneath, and how the point of training is ultimately to understand these principles and not be limited by technique or by a "curriculum".  Hanzou may be reasonably effective with his skills, but he lacks depth.  He has a beginners mentality and a beginners understanding.


----------



## Drose427

Mephisto said:


> I'd agree that a lock or choke can be done standing or on the ground but a upa, hip escape, guard pass, are exclusively ground moves. you might be able to find a way to apply a hip escape while standing. A bjj guy might cross train in karate or another art and find a similiar movement, but could he claim bjj taught the move all along but it is currently out of fashion?



The upa video was only one explanation. given by abernathy.

The Ando tekki shodan video was another where the movement he used to escape was the same movement in the opening of the form as taught in his association. This movement long precedes BJJ and he didnt teach the BJJ way of doing it. He taught it from the ground exactly the same way as he did standing.

When Karate/tegumi/JJJ taught that specific movement for many, many years before BJJ existed, its hard to claim that movement as BJJ. Theyre in Karate because of the Wrestling and JJJ influence in Karate, and are still common in Okinawan schools.

Are there things in BJJ that BJJ improved for groundgame? Of course

Many of us here have given other examples. In my last post I gave examples from forms we've been doing long before BJJ. Hard to say we're attempting to mimic BJJ as a modern invention.  I also posted a video of a Gujo school that does full okinawan submission wrestling. Funakoshi has talked about how Okinawan Wrestling was a big part of his Okinawan Karate training and how it applies to kata and bunkai. A style that already had influence from the Predecessors of BJJ.

Nobody here is saying we _invented _any of this. We took it from Wrestling, JJJ, and Judo just like BJJ did. We simply stole the basics, and stole them first.

Again, nobody here is or has ever claimed it to be comparable to a grappling focused style.

The only one claiming Karates Grappling is out of fashion was Hanzou, the rest of us are actively drilling our ground locks, chokes, and escapes as our associations have for many many years.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Drose427 said:


> youtube popped up this example, if i had more time Id give more:





Drose427 said:


> The first few moves are nearly identical in both videos...differences being yours enunciates a crescent kick and long arm extension. The legs coming together to trap and push, the cross block and"post party" bit from my video, are the same movements from yours just from the ground.





K-man said:


> There is no, and I believe there probably never was, specific bunkai for any particular karate kata, Pinans excepted. The secret of the bunkai was to make the sequence of the kata work in a particular situation. Now every kata has techniques that can be taken individually. That could be called Oyo bunkai but to me it is only bunkai when you can take a sequence of techniques and provide a workable explanation. What the video shows is just that. You are on the ground, you perform the first technique to escape. If it fails, you go to the very next technique. If that fails you go to the next technique and so on.
> 
> Instead of rubbishing this video I would be commending it. The guy has done a great job in interpreting the kata in a way it can be used on the ground against a relatively untrained person.





Drose427 said:


> The movement he demonstrated on his partner were _exactly_ the same as the first moves of the form. You may have a way of doing it in BJJ, but what he demonstrated was right out of that kata, unadulterated, unchanged. I never said where he learned it, but that _exact movement_ is from the kata, is taught in Karate as a means of getting back up exactly as he demonstrated, in schools all over.





K-man said:


> Hanzou, bunkai is what it means to you, not what it meant to some Chinese guy two hundred years ago. A lot of my bunkai I have worked by reverse engineering. It doesn't matter how you arrive at your understanding. The important thing is that the sequence of techniques works for you. If that includes BJJ, Judo, Aikido or Capoiera techniques, fantastic, go for it. Karate can evolve just as BJJ is evolving. There are dozens of techniques in kata that people will tell you are 'blocks'. It was pointed out to me many years ago that there can't be blocks in the kata or it becomes choreography. That made me question whether indeed there were any blocks in karate, period. Any particular movement may have multiple applications. There is nothing to say they can't be used on the ground.



No disrespect intended towards those who train solo kata, but here we get into why it would not work for me. In my experience, in order to develop usable skill in a technique, I have to practice it as closely as possible to actual application. Foot placement, body alignment, sequence of muscle activation, and lots of other details make a big, big difference.

The problem I see with many of these bunkai demonstrations (including the video from Mr. Ando) is that the purported applications do not match the actual movements of the kata to any useful degree for developing usable skill. There may be a superficial resemblance such that you could argue the kata symbolically represents applications a, b, and c in steps 1, 2, and 3. Maybe that was even the intention of the kata's creator - I wasn't there when the kata was created, so I can't say. I _can_ say that performing a standing cross step does _not_ use the same muscle sequencing, alignment, or body dynamics as the heel drag variation of the knee-elbow escape from mount. There are many, many differences in the details of those two movements - and those differences are vital to making the technique actually work.

I give Mr. Ando credit for his ingenuity in mapping a correspondence between the kata and the ground techniques in question - but it's at best a symbolic codding between the kata and the application. I could practice the kata 10,000 times while visualizing the bunkai he suggests and I wouldn't get any better at the techniques. The movements are just too different.

I'm not a stranger to the idea that certain core movement patterns can apply to a wide variety of different applications. I both train and teach that way. I'm saying that in this case, the underlying movement pattern is fundamentally different. Maybe other people can learn useful skills from performing a kata where each movement acts as a coded representation of a bunch of different techniques that actually use different body dynamics and details of movement, but I can't.

(BTW - this is one thing I like about Abernathy. From what I've seen, his bunkai are such that you could perform the kata in a recognizable way and still be approximating the body dynamics of the proposed application.)



Drose427 said:


> Our cheapest BJJ school in the area is 450 a month.


Yeesh! For that kind of money I want Kyra Gracie to be giving me a back rub after every workout. My gym charges $100/month for unlimited classes 7 days per week, including BJJ, boxing, Muay Thai, and MMA.



Mephisto said:


> I dont think anyone would say that there's a system limits what you can do in an actual fight but if a bjj guy were to throw a high kick I'd say that he's not doing bjj. Some bjj guys do throw low leg checking kicks but it is part of the bjj syllabus? Has kicking been part of bjj all along?



Believe it or not - yes! Kicking has been part of the BJJ curriculum from the very beginning. These days you mostly see it in the more traditional academies. Gyms oriented towards sport BJJ don't have any use for it and gyms oriented towards MMA typically bring in Muay Thai or Karate instruction for a more comprehensive approach to kicking.


----------



## Drose427

Tony Dismukes said:


> Believe it or not - yes! Kicking has been part of the BJJ curriculum from the very beginning. These days you mostly see it in the more traditional academies. Gyms oriented towards sport BJJ don't have any use for it and gyms oriented towards MMA typically bring in Muay Thai or Karate instruction for a more comprehensive approach to kicking.



My BJJ knowledge/experience is limited, but BJJ should in theory have something similar to the array or strikes and blocks found in JJJ right? I know Japanese Jujustu has quite a bit of striking, I've judo teaches some as well but I've never seen Judo in action outside of the olympics


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Drose427 said:


> My BJJ knowledge/experience is limited, but BJJ should in theory have something similar to the array or strikes and blocks found in JJJ right? I know Japanese Jujustu has quite a bit of striking, I've judo teaches some as well but I've never seen Judo in action outside of the olympics


Well ... "Japanese Ju Jutsu" covers quite a lot of ground - very different arts with different approaches to striking. Chris Parker could doubtless address some of that variety.

Classic BJJ does include a little  bit of striking, but not that much. Most of it is used to set up grappling techniques. Blocks are even more rare. The preferred approach is to control range - either keep the opponent out of reach or tie him up in a clinch. These days BJJ practitioners who want to develop good striking skills are more likely to cross-train in a striking art than just rely on what's in the old Gracie curriculum


----------



## Zero

Hanzou said:


> Martial Arts do not evolve by actively taking techniques from other systems and pretending that they've been within that system the entire time.


Well, actually, there may well be a few MAs that have evolved (or even come into existence) by doing just that Hanzou...


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> Yes, BJJ did. But the grappling in Shotokan, comes from Judo/Jujustu/and Tegumi. If you read the articles I posted, you'd see where funakoshi was talking about how Tegumi played a role in his Okinawan Karate training years before founding Shotokan. So no, it isnt a modern invention. BJJ shares a lineage with the systems that Karate takes its grappling from. Seeing similar concepts isnt surprising.
> 
> 
> 
> Because we dont feel the need to record every second of our training? You dont see 100 videos online of a doctor learning an appendectomy, does that mean Doctors dont learn it?
> 
> Better yet, you don't see videos of a Pathologist performing physicals. So I can assume they cant right?


First, I've really enjoyed the discussion so far.  I think there have been a lot of great points on both sides of the debate. 
Regarding videos of doctors videos, there are plenty.   The lay person may not have easy access to them, but there are plenty of videos of properly performed appendectomy and every other facet of medicine.   While the doctors may not post them to youtube, the videos exist.   It's not unreasonable in this day and age that training be documented in video.   Further, that the standard for training within a school or style be documented for many reasons.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Drose427

Steve said:


> First, I've really enjoyed the discussion so far.  I think there have been a lot of great points on both sides of the debate.
> Regarding videos of doctors videos, there are plenty.   The lay person may not have easy access to them, but there are plenty of videos of properly performed appendectomy and every other facet of medicine.   While the doctors may not post them to youtube, the videos exist.   It's not unreasonable in this day and age that training be documented in video.   Further, that the standard for training within a school or style be documented for many reasons.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I do agree that recording training is more feasible now, and if one looks they can find documentation of schools making groundwork part of their program to some degree. 

Most schools you can usually find at least a demo or a round or two of tournament sparring. But obviously that's a poor representation of that schools training.  When regardless of style or system you're missing important parts of training like conditioning, drills, etc.

Some folks simply don't care about recording their training and putting it online. Many times when they do record, they're gonna show what they feel will bring In the target demographic. Not a typical day of training. This is why I've never heard a school tell an interested party to go watch a demo video instead of coming and watching a class. 

I can't even find videos online of all of our forms. I can usually find variations of one or two, but not how our System or how I've seen other MDK schools do them.

Maybe in 10 years I will, as more and more things move online. But right now I cant. The implication that we don't do those forms because I can't find documentation of those forms is crazy.

There are exceptions obviously, some popular schools, schools with tech say instrcutors, or commercialized schools may regularly upload! But there are many, many who do not and cannot find accurate videos online of how they train.


----------



## Tez3

Drose427 said:


> I can't even find videos online of all of our forms



That's where we are lucky in Wado Ryu, the founder was filmed doing ours and of course have been made into videos. It's a very important legacy.


----------



## Drose427

Tez3 said:


> That's where we are lucky in Wado Ryu, the founder was filmed doing ours and of course have been made into videos. It's a very important legacy.


 
Lucky...We're MDK TSD. I can find stuff from goju, shoring ryu, or sometimes shotokan that's close, but the Korean influence gets in there so usually things are inevitablely different.

What's ironic is there's tribute footage ad pictures of my GM doing parts of forms,  demos, Breakig, teaching on base, etc. But none as a teaching tool as far as I can find. Other than my sahbumnim doing bassai here to compare ours with others, which is really one of forms we do closest to common videos out there


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> I do agree that recording training is more feasible now, and if one looks they can find documentation of schools making groundwork part of their program to some degree.
> 
> Most schools you can usually find at least a demo or a round or two of tournament sparring. But obviously that's a poor representation of that schools training.  When regardless of style or system you're missing important parts of training like conditioning, drills, etc.
> 
> Some folks simply don't care about recording their training and putting it online. Many times when they do record, they're gonna show what they feel will bring In the target demographic. Not a typical day of training. This is why I've never heard a school tell an interested party to go watch a demo video instead of coming and watching a class.
> 
> I can't even find videos online of all of our forms. I can usually find variations of one or two, but not how our System or how I've seen other MDK schools do them.
> 
> Maybe in 10 years I will, as more and more things move online. But right now I cant. The implication that we don't do those forms because I can't find documentation of those forms is crazy.
> 
> There are exceptions obviously, some popular schools, schools with tech say instrcutors, or commercialized schools may regularly upload! But there are many, many who do not and cannot find accurate videos online of how they train.


 I appreciate the response.  I want to be clear, I see both sides to this discussion.  I'm not suggesting that anyone MUST record their training to be legitimate.  What I do think, is that in this day and age, the odds are SOMEONE will have recorded it.  A scarcity of video support is understandable and reasonable.  A complete lack of video support for something is a little more unlikely, IMO.

And this is not just martial arts.  I could think of any kind of esoteric pursuit and find not only video support, but very likely, an extensive body of online documentation for it.  I have found detailed documentation and instructions on all manner of obscure things on the internet. 

So, to sum up, I have no real opinion on ground fighting within Karate.  It may be there, or not.  I have no idea, as I don't train in Karate.  But, a dearth of video online is a red flag.  In this day and age, while technically possible, it's highly likely that some percentage (however small) of karateka who exist will have documented the style online.  Whether it's to sell DVDs, calibrate their curriculum or just get some face time because they have a touch of narcissism, in the world, there are always at least a few.


----------



## Drose427

Steve said:


> I appreciate the response.  I want to be clear, I see both sides to this discussion.  I'm not suggesting that anyone MUST record their training to be legitimate.  What I do think, is that in this day and age, the odds are SOMEONE will have recorded it.  A scarcity of video support is understandable and reasonable.  A complete lack of video support for something is a little more unlikely, IMO.
> 
> And this is not just martial arts.  I could think of any kind of esoteric pursuit and find not only video support, but very likely, an extensive body of online documentation for it.  I have found detailed documentation and instructions on all manner of obscure things on the internet.
> 
> So, to sum up, I have no real opinion on ground fighting within Karate.  It may be there, or not.  I have no idea, as I don't train in Karate.  But, a dearth of video online is a red flag.  In this day and age, while technically possible, it's highly likely that some percentage (however small) of karateka who exist will have documented the style online.  Whether it's to sell DVDs, calibrate their curriculum or just get some face time because they have a touch of narcissism, in the world, there are always at least a few.



Ah, I was misunderstanding your scarcity vs. Nonexistence.

You can find some documention, I found a couple Goju and shorin schools who show live submission wrestling in the demo/commercial videos, which many of us in this thread have said is more than we even do. But it's far from the typical videos you'll see and weren't first page results.

As for the last part, this is definitely true across martial arts. But an important thing to note is they're only going to showcase certain things. I.e. there is some striking in classic BJJ, but the typical BJJ video doesn't show any, choosing to focus their screen time on teaching grappling. It's a matter of appeal. If you wanna see instructional striking tutorials, would you buy a BJJ video or a Karate video? And vice versa.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> I understand bunkai perfectly. However my understanding of it is far more cynical and negative than your understanding of it.


This statement is patently untrue. When you first came on this forum you asked me to explain the difference between kata and kata bunkai. You had no knowledge of bunkai then and you are continually demonstrating in your posts that you have chosen to ignore the explanations that have been given by the numerous members, who actually practise bunkai, since.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> The upa video was only one explanation. given by abernathy.
> 
> The Ando tekki shodan video was another where the movement he used to escape was the same movement in the opening of the form as taught in his association. This movement long precedes BJJ and he didnt teach the BJJ way of doing it. He taught it from the ground exactly the same way as he did standing.



If Ando said or implied that, he's being dishonest.

The movements he's doing are common in Bjj, an art that he's trained in. What's more, they're the fundamental stuff that you'd learn in your first weeks at any reputable Bjj school, which is exactly what Ando claimed to do. The idea that you could derive such complex movements and transitions from the opening of a completely unrelated kata is simply silly and nonsensical.

What's more, the only example I've seen of anyone saying that those movements are based on Shotokan kata is that single video from Ando himself, and frankly I don't believe that even he is making those claims. If he is, please post those claims. From the video I saw, he made it pretty clear that all of this dawned on him while he was practicing Bjj.



> When Karate/tegumi/JJJ taught that specific movement for many, many years before BJJ existed, its hard to claim that movement as BJJ. Theyre in Karate because of the Wrestling and JJJ influence in Karate, and are still common in Okinawan schools.



Bull. If that's true, where is it in Karate beyond Ando's vid? I did Shotokan for many years, and there was never a point where we got on the ground and started performing escapes from the mount on each other. Even after learning Tekki Shodan, no one ever said anything about being able to apply the kata on the ground. Again, the Ando video is the first, and only bunkai I've ever seen that states that Tekki Shodan can be applied from the ground range. The problem is that his entire movement set is pretty much exactly how a white belt would perform basic Bjj.

Karate/Tegumi/JJJ taught the Guard and Elbow escape where and when exactly? Historically, JJJ and Judo have never held ground fighting in high regard. Kano himself never made it a secret that he preferred Nagewaza over Newaza, and Bjj style-ground fighting is practically unheard of in classical JJJ, and was neglected for decades in Judo. As for Maeda, the father of Bjj, he left Japan before Funakoshi arrived in Japan to teach Shotokan, and I have never heard of any link between classical JJJ, Kano Juijitsu, and Okinawan folk wrestling/Tegumi until this thread.

Again, all of this just smacks of a bunch of Karate guys simply incorporating modern Bjj and Judo and saying their art is "complete" because their students are demanding an answer to MMA.



> Nobody here is saying we _invented _any of this. We took it from Wrestling, JJJ, and Judo just like BJJ did. We simply stole the basics, and stole them first.



Interesting, because the wrestling root of Bjj comes from Sumo and western Catch Wrestling, not Okinawan Tegumi. Further, Maeda traveled to the west to learn Catch Wrestling. Catch didn't arrive in Japan until much later.



> The only one claiming Karates Grappling is out of fashion was Hanzou, the rest of us are actively drilling our ground locks, chokes, and escapes as our associations have for many many years.



You can't have it both ways here. Either you're claiming that Karate has an active and competitive form of submission grappling, or you're saying that a bunch of Karatekas are just messing around with the basics of grappling.


----------



## Hanzou

Zero said:


> Well, actually, there may well be a few MAs that have evolved (or even come into existence) by doing just that Hanzou...



Which ones? Just curious.


----------



## Tez3

Honestly, I don't think it would matter if there were an abundance of videos showing karateka doing any sort of groundwork at all because it would be rubbished immediately however good, however genuine or however original it was. This is because minds are made up that there is no groundwork/grappling in karate whatsoever so any attempts to prove there is are dismissed as stealing it from somewhere else, made up or laughably poor.
I've often wondered why it bothers some so much that there is grappling in karate, why someone would deny something that is patently there. It doesn't diminish BJJ, it doesn't affect anyone training in BJJ so why the constant denying? Why not a 'well good for you lot' and 'isn't ground work great'?
'There's striking in BJJ', that's cool. Notice I don't say there isn't, there can't be because when I train BJJ ( and I do) we don't do any striking therefore it doesn't exist. Why so much aggro when we talk about karate and what's in it? Don't like karate, don't like kata, don't like bunkai, fine don't do it, it's really as easy as that, there's just no need to disrespect karateka so much just because you had a poor teacher, if indeed you did, perhaps though it's the pupil that was lacking?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> If Ando said or implied that, he's being dishonest.
> 
> The movements he's doing are common in Bjj, an art that he's trained in. What's more, they're the fundamental stuff that you'd learn in your first weeks at any reputable Bjj school, which is exactly what Ando claimed to do. The idea that you could derive such complex movements and transitions from the opening of a completely unrelated kata is simply silly and nonsensical.
> 
> What's more, the only example I've seen of anyone saying that those movements are based on Shotokan kata is that single video from Ando himself, and frankly I don't believe that even he is making those claims. If he is, please post those claims. From the video I saw, he made it pretty clear that all of this dawned on him while he was practicing Bjj.
> 
> 
> 
> Bull. If that's true, where is it in Karate beyond Ando's vid? I did Shotokan for many years, and there was never a point where we got on the ground and started performing escapes from the mount on each other. Even after learning Tekki Shodan, no one ever said anything about being able to apply the kata on the ground. Again, the Ando video is the first, and only bunkai I've ever seen that states that Tekki Shodan can be applied from the ground range. The problem is that his entire movement set is pretty much exactly how a white belt would perform basic Bjj.
> 
> Karate/Tegumi/JJJ taught the Guard and Elbow escape where and when exactly? Historically, JJJ and Judo have never held ground fighting in high regard. Kano himself never made it a secret that he preferred Nagewaza over Newaza, and Bjj style-ground fighting is practically unheard of in classical JJJ, and was neglected for decades in Judo. As for Maeda, the father of Bjj, he left Japan before Funakoshi arrived in Japan to teach Shotokan, and I have never heard of any link between classical JJJ, Kano Juijitsu, and Okinawan folk wrestling/Tegumi until this thread.
> 
> Again, all of this just smacks of a bunch of Karate guys simply incorporating modern Bjj and Judo and saying their art is "complete" because their students are demanding an answer to MMA.
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting, because the wrestling root of Bjj comes from Sumo and western Catch Wrestling, not Okinawan Tegumi. Further, Maeda traveled to the west to learn Catch Wrestling. Catch didn't arrive in Japan until much later.
> 
> 
> 
> You can't have it both ways here. Either you're claiming that Karate has an active and competitive form of submission grappling, or you're saying that a bunch of Karatekas are just messing around with the basics of grappling.



Sumo came from tegumi....if you looked at the info on tegumi we gave you you'd have known that.

We gave you 4 other groundfighting/ground defense  bunkai from other forms than Shodan. 

No, I'm saying most Karate schools teach basic grappling as part of Bunkai to teach students how to escape, get back up, or submit. Yours didnt, but many many others do both on this forum and not and have since Funakoshi was training. 

For someone who trained extensively in Shotokan, you've always had trouble understanding bunkai and applications. 

Even know after we've explained it, you're still trying to say that we're telling you there's this full system of grappling and nobody has said that other than you.

Does BJJ have an "entire system of striking" because classic BJJ had a few strikes? No.

It's the same concept, you're simply refusing to see that so you can keep saying BJJ is better grappling (which nobody has contested) and reiterating that your one school didnt.


----------



## Flying Crane

Flying Crane said:


> Still waiting for answers to the earlier questions.
> 
> But this answer here is quite telling.


Still.  Waiting.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> The movements he's doing are common in Bjj, an art that he's trained in. What's more, they're the fundamental stuff that you'd learn in your first weeks at any reputable Bjj school, which is exactly what Ando claimed to do. The idea that you could derive such complex movements and transitions from the opening of a completely unrelated kata is simply silly and nonsensical.


And you are the only one suggesting it so I assume you are the one being silly and twisting the facts.



Hanzou said:


> What's more, the only example I've seen of anyone saying that those movements are based on Shotokan kata is that single video from Ando himself, and frankly I don't believe that even he is making those claims. If he is, please post those claims. From the video I saw, he made it pretty clear that all of this dawned on him while he was practicing Bjj.


And everyone accepts that.



Hanzou said:


> Bull. If that's true, where is it in Karate beyond Ando's vid? I did Shotokan for many years, and there was never a point where we got on the ground and started performing escapes from the mount on each other. Even after learning Tekki Shodan, no one ever said anything about being able to apply the kata on the ground. Again, the Ando video is the first, and only bunkai I've ever seen that states that Tekki Shodan can be applied from the ground range. The problem is that his entire movement set is pretty much exactly how a white belt would perform basic Bjj.


Firstly you stated earlier you never had any bunkai in your Shotokan training and as I said earlier, I have heard you could use kata bunkai for ground fighting but had never seen it. But the fact remains, bunkai is a personal thing. The applications you have for one persons bunkai is different to another's. If someone is clever enough to develop a bunkai for Naihanchi incorporating BJJ techniques we should be applauding as that is what bunkai really is. 



Hanzou said:


> Karate/Tegumi/JJJ taught the Guard and Elbow escape where and when exactly? Historically, JJJ and Judo have never held ground fighting in high regard. Kano himself never made it a secret that he preferred Nagewaza over Newaza, and Bjj style-ground fighting is practically unheard of in classical JJJ, and was neglected for decades in Judo. As for Maeda, the father of Bjj, he left Japan before Funakoshi arrived in Japan to teach Shotokan, and I have never heard of any link between classical JJJ, Kano Juijitsu, and Okinawan folk wrestling/Tegumi until this thread.


I'm not sure who linked Tegumi to anything. I certainly didn't. Tegumi is a regular part of my training but it had absolutely nothing to do with BJJ.



Hanzou said:


> Again, all of this just smacks of a bunch of Karate guys simply incorporating modern Bjj and Judo and saying their art is "complete" because their students are demanding an answer to MMA.


Crap! That is only your opinion. I haven't heard or seen anyone make that claim.



Hanzou said:


> Interesting, because the wrestling root of Bjj comes from Sumo and western Catch Wrestling, not Okinawan Tegumi. Further, Maeda traveled to the west to learn Catch Wrestling. Catch didn't arrive in Japan until much later.


Again Tegumi is nothing to do with BJJ. Get a life. Stick to facts and stop throwing in claims that no one else had made.




Hanzou said:


> You can't have it both ways here. Either you're claiming that Karate has an active and competitive form of submission grappling, or you're saying that a bunch of Karatekas are just messing around with the basics of grappling.


Karate never had and never will have submission grappling. That is sport and although a lot of karate has gone down that track traditional karate has not. Karate has always been able to use techniques on the ground, certainly basic ones but with strikes and chokes. There is no rule that I have seen that says karate cannot develop to maintain its edge. If that involves adopting certain techniques from BJJ then I have no problem with that. If someone is clever enough to include those techniques into a kata bunkai, then more power to his arm.


----------



## K-man

Drose427 said:


> Sumo came from tegumi....if you looked at the info on tegumi we gave you you'd have known that.


In fairness, I think it is more likely that the Okinawan version of Sumo may have come from Tegumi, but not the Japanese version.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Sumo came from tegumi....if you looked at the info on tegumi we gave you you'd have known that.



Sumo did NOT come from Tegumi. We have evidence of Sumo wrestling taking place in Japan as early as the third century AD. Is there even evidence of Tegumi existing in Okinawa during that period? Much less being codified enough for the Japanese to derive Sumo wrestling from it?

Seriously, these claims are becoming more and more outlandish.



> We gave you 4 other groundfighting/ground defense  bunkai from other forms than Shodan.



Where? You gave me a reading list. Where are videos of Karatekas practicing this high level ground fighting? Ando was performing high level ground fighting, despite it being very basic. So where else can I find it?



> For someone who trained extensively in Shotokan, you've always had trouble understanding bunkai and applications.



I trained in Shotokan before this grappling Bunkai craze hit the art (late 90s). Back when I practiced Shotokan, a punch was a punch, and a kick was a kick. We didn't believe that a kick and a punch followed by an elbow strike was an upside-down spinning pile driver.

I think some have simply taken this Bunkai business a bit too far in an effort to make Karate all things to all people. Even Abernathy himself states that Karate is mostly taught as a kicking and punching system, and grappling is rarely if ever explored. That matches my experience perfectly. This Karate that you mention is completely alien to me,



> Even know after we've explained it, you're still trying to say that we're telling you there's this full system of grappling and nobody has said that other than you.
> 
> Does BJJ have an "entire system of striking" because classic BJJ had a few strikes? No.



Really? You said that Ando's Bunkai was commonly practiced in legitimate dojos around the world. You said that you guys are actively practicing ground fighting. Sounds like a full system of grappling to me.

Where is anyone saying that Bjj has an entire system of striking? I'm certainly not. Where did I say that my Bjj class is punching, kicking, and throwing elbow strikes? That's not what we do in Bjj, and its a limit of the system that I have no problem admitting exists. I wish Karate practitioners around these parts could do the same, instead of pretending that every thing under the sun is hidden within the movements of kata.


----------



## K-man

Drose427 said:


> For someone who trained extensively in Shotokan, you've always had trouble understanding bunkai and applications.


He didn't. He trained as a junior and achieved the rank of Shodan. That is simply the end of the training of basics. Everything Hanzou had described since relates to kihon, no advanced training has ever been mentioned.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> And you are the only one suggesting it so I assume you are the one being silly and twisting the facts.
> 
> 
> And everyone accepts that.



Clearly you're not reading Drose's posts.



> Firstly you stated earlier you never had any bunkai in your Shotokan training and as I said earlier, I have heard you could use kata bunkai for ground fighting but had never seen it. But the fact remains, bunkai is a personal thing. The applications you have for one persons bunkai is different to another's. If someone is clever enough to develop a bunkai for Naihanchi incorporating BJJ techniques we should be applauding as that is what bunkai really is.



I have no problem applauding someone who believes that you can derive Bjj techniques from Tekki Shodan (I personally don't see it, but whatever). What I have issue with is the belief that Tekki Shodan has always had those techniques hidden within it, and that a Karateka could pull those techniques and make them effective with no Bjj training at all.



> I'm not sure who linked Tegumi to anything. I certainly didn't. Tegumi is a regular part of my training but it had absolutely nothing to do with BJJ.
> 
> Karate never had and never will have submission grappling. That is sport and although a lot of karate has gone down that track traditional karate has not. Karate has always been able to use techniques on the ground, certainly basic ones but with strikes and chokes. There is no rule that I have seen that says karate cannot develop to maintain its edge. If that involves adopting certain techniques from BJJ then I have no problem with that. If someone is clever enough to include those techniques into a kata bunkai, then more power to his arm.



Again, you're not reading Drose's posts.


----------



## Tez3

It's Iain ABERNETHY. One should at least be precise.

I was learning Bunkai before the 90s, in the _70s_ in fact. We also had grappling techniques in it then too. My style, Wado Ryu has always had groundwork in it, it was put there by the founder who certainly didn't put it in there to compete with MMA. Iain Abernethy doesn't say that there is no grappling in karate, he says there is but then he also started in Wado so he knows there is grappling whether it's taught much is a different subject.
This argument has gone on for months now, good karatekas have tried to explain what we do, it isn't sinking in, it's like trying to herd cats quite frankly. Only cats at least can be excused they aren't trying to be disrespectful, they are just being cats.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> I trained in Shotokan before this grappling Bunkai craze hit the art (late 90s). Back when I practiced Shotokan, a punch was a punch, and a kick was a kick. We didn't believe that a kick and a punch followed by an elbow strike was an upside-down spinning pile driver.
> 
> .



Forms were never as simple as "a punch is a punch and a kick is a kick". That has nothing to do with the times, thats a fault of your school. 



Hanzou said:


> Really? You said that Ando's Bunkai was commonly practiced in legitimate dojos around the world. You said that you guys are actively practicing ground fighting. Sounds like a full system of grappling to me.
> 
> Where is anyone saying that Bjj has an entire system of striking? I'm certainly not. Where did I say that my Bjj class is punching, kicking, and throwing elbow strikes? That's not what we do in Bjj, and its a limit of the system that I have no problem admitting exists. I wish Karate practitioners around these parts could do the same, instead of pretending that every thing under the sun is hidden within the movements of kata.



No, we've said there were applications or bunkai. That when it is practiced, its as drilling, not live wrestling. Basic concepts like sprawling or getting back up or the occasional choke does not imply a "full complex grappling system" If us saying theres rudimentary drilling is the same as "having a full system" that logic means BJJ having a few strikes means BJJ must have a full striking system.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Forms were never as simple as "a punch is a punch and a kick is a kick". That has nothing to do with the times, thats a fault of your school.
> 
> 
> 
> No, we've said there were applications or bunkai. That when it is practiced, its as drilling, not live wrestling. Basic concepts like sprawling or getting back up or the occasional choke does not imply a "full complex grappling system" *If us saying theres rudimentary drilling is the same as "having a full system" that logic means BJJ having a few strikes means BJJ must have a full striking system.*







Drose427 said:


> The Ando tekki shodan video was another where the movement he used to escape was the same movement in the opening of the form as taught in his association.* This movement long precedes BJJ and he didnt teach the BJJ way of doing it. He taught it from the ground exactly the same way as he did standing.*
> 
> When Karate/tegumi/JJJ taught that specific movement for many, many years before BJJ existed, its hard to claim that movement as BJJ. *Theyre in Karate because of the Wrestling and JJJ influence in Karate, and are still common in Okinawan schools.*



So which is it? You're sending mixed messages here.


----------



## Tez3

Copied in full from Iain Abernethy's article in 'USA Dojo'  Iain started his Bunkai training and teaching before the MMA craze started btw.


"To adequately defend yourself in a real fight you will need a knowledge of all the various ranges of combat. In a sporting contest there is no need for skills at every range, e.g. a boxer does not need to know how to kick in order to win his bouts, nor will a judoka need a knowledge of punching. However, in a real fight the opponent will not ‘play by the rules’, and if you should find yourself in an unfavourable position there will be no referee to interject and to restart the bout at a range where the combatants know what they are doing! As Geoff Thompson once said, “You can be a 10th Dan on your feet, and a white-belt on your back.”

Karate is most commonly thought of as a kicking and punching system. The scientific principles involved in karate’s striking methods make them very powerful. But what are we to do if our opponent gets inside punching range and we begin to grapple, or worse still, end up fighting on the floor? Karate – as it is commonly practised – is at its best when applied at middle to long range. The unfortunate but true fact is that most real fights begin close up and almost always include some form of grappling. So why doesn’t modern karate include grappling in its curriculum? It stands to reason that the older versions of the martial arts would cover every range, because to omit any range could very well lead to defeat in combat. So if real self-defence skills are our aim perhaps we should look at the older versions of karate? Within the katas are recorded the original fighting methods of karate. The katas record the original karate system and hence the katas contain techniques and concepts for use at every range, including grappling.

The grappling & seizing aspects of karate are rarely practised today, but it is vital to understand that grappling was once as much a part of karate as the striking techniques most commonly associated with the art today. Shigeru Egami, in his book “The Heart of Karate-do” wrote, “There are also throwing techniques in karate… Throwing techniques were practised in my day, and I recommend that you reconsider them.” Gichin Funakoshi also makes reference to grappling techniques in “Karate-Do Kyohan”. Funakoshi wrote, “…in Karate, hitting, thrusting, and kicking are not the only methods, throwing techniques and pressure against joints are included.” All of karate’s grappling techniques are recorded within the katas, and it is within the katas we need to look if we wish to resurrect this vitally important part of the art.

Tegumi (grappling hands) was the term used to describe the grappling aspect of old style karate. “Tegumi” is also used to describe an indigenous style of wrestling practised in Okinawa. It is believed that the native wrestling art of Tegumi, along with the Kempo systems brought to Okinawa by the Chinese, were forerunners of the art that eventually became known as karate. Some say that this is reflected in the name chosen for the art. “Karate” (which could also be pronounced as "to-de") was made up of two characters, the first meaning “China”, to represent the Chinese Kempo influence, and “Te” meaning “hand”, to represent the Tegumi (grappling) influence. As an aside, a differing initial character is used today for “Kara” which means “Empty” – different meaning but pronounced the same; like “which” & “witch” – but originally the character for “China” was used.

Before 1900, karate placed just as much emphasis on the Tegumi elements of the art as it did upon the striking. Karate training would include throws, joint-locks, chokes, strangles, grips, counters etc. In fact, in karate’s early days many practitioners would test their skills in bouts of Kakedameshi (see 'Tales of Okinawa's Great Masters' by Shoshin Nagamine - Translated by Patrick McCarthy). The combatants would interlock their arms and the aim was to knock your opponent to the floor using both Tegumi and striking techniques. These bouts would include a wide array of karate techniques (grappling & striking) and were very different indeed from the striking only sparring of today. In the book, ‘Ryukyu Karate Kempo’ Choki Motobu wrote, “Kumite is an actual fight using many basic styles of kata to grapple with the opponent.” It is apparent that the karate practitioners of the past would utilise grappling techniques from the kata in their training and sparring.

At around 1905 – when karate underwent many changes such that it would be suitable for the physical education for Okinawa’s school children – the regular practice of the more dangerous techniques was discouraged. This rationalisation of karate training meant that many aspects of Tegumi were abandoned. It is mainly because of this ‘sanitising’ of karate that grappling is no longer a common sight in the majority of today’s karate dojos. However, if we wish to practice karate as a complete system of fighting, we should endeavour to include Tegumi in our practice. The wonderful thing is that the katas provide a living record of these methods! If we study the katas in sufficient depth, all aspects of the original fighting art of karate are there for the taking (including Tegumi). Within the katas there are a great deal of grappling techniques in addition to the commonly taught striking methods, with the majority of kata techniques showing the integrated use of both methods. If fact, Toshihisa Sofue 7th Dan has stated that “Eighty percent of karate kata is throwing and locking.” And yet you rarely see throws and locks in today’s dojos!

There are various sub-divisions of Grappling / Tegumi; Tuidi (Grabbing), Nage-Waza (Throws & Takedowns), Kansetsu-Waza (Joint-Locks), Shime-waza (Chokes & Strangles), Ne-Waza (Ground-Fighting), etc. All of which can be found within the katas. If we study the katas to a sufficient depth, we can begin to employ these highly potent methods in our everyday training such that we will not be at a total loss if the fight goes to close-range (as it nearly always does!).

Many Tegumi techniques are fairly brutal. A simple and very effective grappling method can be found within Seishan / Hangetsu kata. You’ll recognise the technique demonstrated in the picture that accompanies this article as the application of the inward pull prior to the first 180-degree turn. The index fingers are inserted into the opponent’s mouth and pulled apart (commonly called “fish-hooking”). It is important to keep sufficient tension in the opponent’s cheeks such that they are unable to turn the head and bite the fingers. If I were to pull strongly to the sides – as per the Shotokan version of the katas – I would cause severe damage to my opponent’s face. Obviously the use of this technique would only be justified in very extreme circumstances.

It is important to understand that the katas are first and foremost a record of combative concepts and principles. These concepts and principles are infinitely more important than the techniques used to demonstrate them. We should study the grappling methods of the kata to such a depth that we are able to adapt the techniques – in line with the principles upon which they rest – for use in whatever circumstances we may find ourselves. Master Chotoku Kyan (1870-1945) – one of his favourite katas being Seishan – adapted the Fish-Hooking technique shown in the picture to good effect during a challenge bout with a 6th Dan Judoka called Shinzou Ishida. Master Kyan was visiting mainland Japan in order to give a karate demonstration. Ishida, being a skilled grappler, had asked Kyan for a match because he wished to ascertain the value of karate. When Ishida reached out to seize his opponent, Kyan slipped to the side and thrust his thumb into Ishida’s mouth. Kyan closed his fingers, stamped on Ishida’s foot and then pulled the off balance judoka to the floor by his cheek. Kyan then delivered a hammer fist to Ishida’s jaw, stopping it just short of the target. Ishida was impressed by Master Kyan’s skill and went onto receive daily instruction from him until he returned to Okinawa. This is a fine example of how the Tegumi principles recorded within the katas can be used to good effect.

To be an effective fighter it is imperative that you have a knowledge of all ranges of fighting. Hence, it is vital that Tegumi forms part of our practice, just as it did for the masters of the past who formulated karate. Thankfully, those same masters recorded their grappling methods in the katas they developed. The key thing is to ensure that you study your katas to a sufficient depth. Thanks for taking the time to read this article. I hope you found it interesting."  *Iain Abernethy.*


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> So which is it? You're sending mixed messages here.



no I'm not. Youre having a real issue discerning bunkai with free-rolling/live wrestling within a grappling style.


----------



## Drose427

Tez3 said:


> *There are various sub-divisions of Grappling / Tegumi; Tuidi (Grabbing), Nage-Waza (Throws & Takedowns), Kansetsu-Waza (Joint-Locks), Shime-waza (Chokes & Strangles), Ne-Waza (Ground-Fighting), etc. All of which can be found within the katas. If we study the katas to a sufficient depth, we can begin to employ these highly potent methods in our everyday training such that we will not be at a total loss if the fight goes to close-range (as it nearly always does!).*
> 
> 
> *It is important to understand that the katas are first and foremost a record of combative concepts and principles. These concepts and principles are infinitely more important than the techniques used to demonstrate them. We should study the grappling methods of the kata to such a depth that we are able to adapt the techniques – in line with the principles upon which they rest – for use in whatever circumstances we may find ourselves. Master Chotoku Kyan (1870-1945) – one of his favourite katas being Seishan – adapted the Fish-Hooking technique shown in the picture to good effect during a challenge bout with a 6th Dan Judoka called Shinzou Ishida. Master Kyan was visiting mainland Japan in order to give a karate demonstration. Ishida, being a skilled grappler, had asked Kyan for a match because he wished to ascertain the value of karate. When Ishida reached out to seize his opponent, Kyan slipped to the side and thrust his thumb into Ishida’s mouth. Kyan closed his fingers, stamped on Ishida’s foot and then pulled the off balance judoka to the floor by his cheek. Kyan then delivered a hammer fist to Ishida’s jaw, stopping it just short of the target. Ishida was impressed by Master Kyan’s skill and went onto receive daily instruction from him until he returned to Okinawa. This is a fine example of how the Tegumi principles recorded within the katas can be used to good effect.*
> 
> *To be an effective fighter it is imperative that you have a knowledge of all ranges of fighting. Hence, it is vital that Tegumi forms part of our practice, just as it did for the masters of the past who formulated karate. Thankfully, those same masters recorded their grappling methods in the katas they developed. The key thing is to ensure that you study your katas to a sufficient depth.* Thanks for taking the time to read this article. I hope you found it interesting."  *Iain Abernethy.*



for added measure!


----------



## Tez3

Another good read concerning Karate, specifically Shotokan, Bunkai and grappling.
http://www.norwichshotokan.co.uk/downloads/Thesis.pdf


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> I have no problem applauding someone who believes that you can derive Bjj techniques from Tekki Shodan (I personally don't see it, but whatever). What I have issue with is the belief that Tekki Shodan has always had those techniques hidden within it, and that a Karateka could pull those techniques and make them effective with no Bjj training at all.
> 
> Again, you're not reading Drose's posts.


Firstly, I have read all of Drose's posts and they are pretty close to the mark. Yours, on the other hand, are always twisting the facts to give a distorted picture.

This post is a prime example. Nobody, but nobody, is suggesting that any BJJ technique is hidden inside any traditional kata but this has nothing to do with kata. As many of us have tried to explain time after time, bunkai is the personal interpretation of kata. To fulfil the requirements of bunkai the succession of techniques is such that if the first technique fails the flow is to the next technique automatically. What that technique is is irrelevant as long as the movement remains faithful to the kata. If a practitioner is astute enough to recognise a technique fits the criteria then it is his interpretation of the kata, even though the kata remains the same. If someone like Ando is able to craft his BJJ skills into a bunkai for ground fighting then I believe he would possibly be the first to achieve, it and it is a formidable achievement.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Copied in full from Iain Abernethy's article in 'USA Dojo'  Iain started his Bunkai training and teaching before the MMA craze started btw.



However, that article though was written in 2010, during the height of the MMA craze.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> However, that article though was written in 2010, during the height of the MMA craze.



Sooooo no instead of "understanding what karate is" abernethy is lying and making up examples from before that time simply to appeal? 

You changed opinion of him pretty quickly


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> However, that article though was written in 2010, during the height of the MMA craze.




Ah more Deja Moo......


----------



## K-man

Tez3 said:


> Copied in full from Iain Abernethy's article in 'USA Dojo'  Iain started his Bunkai training and teaching before the MMA craze started btw.
> 
> 
> "To adequately defend yourself in a real fight you will need a knowledge of all the various ranges of combat. In a sporting contest there is no need for skills at every range, e.g. a boxer does not need to know how to kick in order to win his bouts, nor will a judoka need a knowledge of punching. However, in a real fight the opponent will not ‘play by the rules’, and if you should find yourself in an unfavourable position there will be no referee to interject and to restart the bout at a range where the combatants know what they are doing! As Geoff Thompson once said, “You can be a 10th Dan on your feet, and a white-belt on your back.”
> 
> Karate is most commonly thought of as a kicking and punching system. The scientific principles involved in karate’s striking methods make them very powerful. But what are we to do if our opponent gets inside punching range and we begin to grapple, or worse still, end up fighting on the floor? Karate – as it is commonly practised – is at its best when applied at middle to long range. The unfortunate but true fact is that most real fights begin close up and almost always include some form of grappling. So why doesn’t modern karate include grappling in its curriculum? It stands to reason that the older versions of the martial arts would cover every range, because to omit any range could very well lead to defeat in combat. So if real self-defence skills are our aim perhaps we should look at the older versions of karate? Within the katas are recorded the original fighting methods of karate. The katas record the original karate system and hence the katas contain techniques and concepts for use at every range, including grappling.
> 
> The grappling & seizing aspects of karate are rarely practised today, but it is vital to understand that grappling was once as much a part of karate as the striking techniques most commonly associated with the art today. Shigeru Egami, in his book “The Heart of Karate-do” wrote, “There are also throwing techniques in karate… Throwing techniques were practised in my day, and I recommend that you reconsider them.” Gichin Funakoshi also makes reference to grappling techniques in “Karate-Do Kyohan”. Funakoshi wrote, “…in Karate, hitting, thrusting, and kicking are not the only methods, throwing techniques and pressure against joints are included.” All of karate’s grappling techniques are recorded within the katas, and it is within the katas we need to look if we wish to resurrect this vitally important part of the art.
> 
> Tegumi (grappling hands) was the term used to describe the grappling aspect of old style karate. “Tegumi” is also used to describe an indigenous style of wrestling practised in Okinawa. It is believed that the native wrestling art of Tegumi, along with the Kempo systems brought to Okinawa by the Chinese, were forerunners of the art that eventually became known as karate. Some say that this is reflected in the name chosen for the art. “Karate” (which could also be pronounced as "to-de") was made up of two characters, the first meaning “China”, to represent the Chinese Kempo influence, and “Te” meaning “hand”, to represent the Tegumi (grappling) influence. As an aside, a differing initial character is used today for “Kara” which means “Empty” – different meaning but pronounced the same; like “which” & “witch” – but originally the character for “China” was used.
> 
> Before 1900, karate placed just as much emphasis on the Tegumi elements of the art as it did upon the striking. Karate training would include throws, joint-locks, chokes, strangles, grips, counters etc. In fact, in karate’s early days many practitioners would test their skills in bouts of Kakedameshi (see 'Tales of Okinawa's Great Masters' by Shoshin Nagamine - Translated by Patrick McCarthy). The combatants would interlock their arms and the aim was to knock your opponent to the floor using both Tegumi and striking techniques. These bouts would include a wide array of karate techniques (grappling & striking) and were very different indeed from the striking only sparring of today. In the book, ‘Ryukyu Karate Kempo’ Choki Motobu wrote, “Kumite is an actual fight using many basic styles of kata to grapple with the opponent.” It is apparent that the karate practitioners of the past would utilise grappling techniques from the kata in their training and sparring.
> 
> At around 1905 – when karate underwent many changes such that it would be suitable for the physical education for Okinawa’s school children – the regular practice of the more dangerous techniques was discouraged. This rationalisation of karate training meant that many aspects of Tegumi were abandoned. It is mainly because of this ‘sanitising’ of karate that grappling is no longer a common sight in the majority of today’s karate dojos. However, if we wish to practice karate as a complete system of fighting, we should endeavour to include Tegumi in our practice. The wonderful thing is that the katas provide a living record of these methods! If we study the katas in sufficient depth, all aspects of the original fighting art of karate are there for the taking (including Tegumi). Within the katas there are a great deal of grappling techniques in addition to the commonly taught striking methods, with the majority of kata techniques showing the integrated use of both methods. If fact, Toshihisa Sofue 7th Dan has stated that “Eighty percent of karate kata is throwing and locking.” And yet you rarely see throws and locks in today’s dojos!
> 
> There are various sub-divisions of Grappling / Tegumi; Tuidi (Grabbing), Nage-Waza (Throws & Takedowns), Kansetsu-Waza (Joint-Locks), Shime-waza (Chokes & Strangles), Ne-Waza (Ground-Fighting), etc. All of which can be found within the katas. If we study the katas to a sufficient depth, we can begin to employ these highly potent methods in our everyday training such that we will not be at a total loss if the fight goes to close-range (as it nearly always does!).
> 
> Many Tegumi techniques are fairly brutal. A simple and very effective grappling method can be found within Seishan / Hangetsu kata. You’ll recognise the technique demonstrated in the picture that accompanies this article as the application of the inward pull prior to the first 180-degree turn. The index fingers are inserted into the opponent’s mouth and pulled apart (commonly called “fish-hooking”). It is important to keep sufficient tension in the opponent’s cheeks such that they are unable to turn the head and bite the fingers. If I were to pull strongly to the sides – as per the Shotokan version of the katas – I would cause severe damage to my opponent’s face. Obviously the use of this technique would only be justified in very extreme circumstances.
> 
> It is important to understand that the katas are first and foremost a record of combative concepts and principles. These concepts and principles are infinitely more important than the techniques used to demonstrate them. We should study the grappling methods of the kata to such a depth that we are able to adapt the techniques – in line with the principles upon which they rest – for use in whatever circumstances we may find ourselves. Master Chotoku Kyan (1870-1945) – one of his favourite katas being Seishan – adapted the Fish-Hooking technique shown in the picture to good effect during a challenge bout with a 6th Dan Judoka called Shinzou Ishida. Master Kyan was visiting mainland Japan in order to give a karate demonstration. Ishida, being a skilled grappler, had asked Kyan for a match because he wished to ascertain the value of karate. When Ishida reached out to seize his opponent, Kyan slipped to the side and thrust his thumb into Ishida’s mouth. Kyan closed his fingers, stamped on Ishida’s foot and then pulled the off balance judoka to the floor by his cheek. Kyan then delivered a hammer fist to Ishida’s jaw, stopping it just short of the target. Ishida was impressed by Master Kyan’s skill and went onto receive daily instruction from him until he returned to Okinawa. This is a fine example of how the Tegumi principles recorded within the katas can be used to good effect.
> 
> To be an effective fighter it is imperative that you have a knowledge of all ranges of fighting. Hence, it is vital that Tegumi forms part of our practice, just as it did for the masters of the past who formulated karate. Thankfully, those same masters recorded their grappling methods in the katas they developed. The key thing is to ensure that you study your katas to a sufficient depth. Thanks for taking the time to read this article. I hope you found it interesting."  *Iain Abernethy.*


Are you sure Iain wrote this? It's pretty much word for word what I have been trying to say to Hanzou.

But, I keep returning to the term 'advanced beginner'. You can train the kihon for fifty years and get to 8th or 9th dan but if your understanding hasn't changed over your years of training you really know very little. It comes down to which is better, twenty years of practising the same thing over and over or twenty years of training and expanding your understanding?


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Sooooo no instead of "understanding what karate is" abernethy is lying and making up examples from before that time simply to appeal?
> 
> You changed opinion of him pretty quickly



Where did I say he was lying? I'm simply pointing out that Karate just happened to rediscover its grappling roots during the height of the MMA craze where grappling is of tantamount importance to many MA practitioners and potential students.


----------



## Tez3

K-man said:


> Are you sure Iain wrote this?



I'm sure lol, but you need read it in Iain's Cumbrian accent, have you heard his podcasts?

On the subject of karate trying to compete with MMA, in the UK at least MMA ( sadly I have to say) isn't as popular as traditional martial arts when it comes to people who actually train so MMA isn't considered here as a rival for students. MMA is fairly popular to watch but even the UFC doesn't get full houses, small local shows with local fighters can do well but no one makes money from MMA either promoting or teaching. We have a few big gyms who teach MMA but will also have fitness classes and traditional classes as well. for training the traditional styles are still well out in the lead for students, no one needs to make stuff up about karate to get students in. We also have here traditional karate places that encourage students to train MMA, Neil Grove is an example of this. We simply don't have the competition for students that perhaps the US has. We also don't have many 'commercial' schools or chains of schools either. BJJ is becoming more popular but we've also got a big Judo base here, always have done, it's been here since the 19th century as has traditional JJ.
To suggest that Iain is making things up because he needs to compete for students, is risible quite frankly and shows a complete lack of understanding of martial arts in the UK. I wish we could get more students to MMA classes but it's far harder than you think, traditional styles still have the edge though the two are closer in understanding than perhaps they are in the States.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Where did I say he was lying? I'm simply pointing out that Karate just happened to rediscover its grappling roots during the height of the MMA craze where grappling is of tantamount importance to many MA practitioners and potential students.




Well the craze gets here I'm sure we'll let you know. It's really not such a big thing here you know. TKD is bigger because we have successful Olympians and most non martial arts people think we all do Judo anyway.  My instructors were teaching us grappling in the 1970s, guess that was the height of the MMA craze too? Iain started in Wado too so has been grappling in karate since he was a young boy.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Where did I say he was lying? I'm simply pointing out that Karate just happened to rediscover its grappling roots during the height of the MMA craze where grappling is of tantamount importance to many MA practitioners and potential students.



So _now_ Karate has ground fighting applications that can be found in its kata and simply were "re-discovered?"

Cause Abernerthy is discussing Newaza always existing in kata. Earlier you called that "laughable"

Nobody "Just happened" upon anything. Ian wrote that article in 2010, but everything he discussed and used as examples in evidence happened and existed long before the days of BJJ and MMA.

None of the info on grappling in Karate is new or a mystery.

I can write a book on smithing practices during the 1600s this year, but I'm not just "rediscovering" folded steel because people like Katanas.


----------



## Drose427

Tez3 said:


> Well the craze gets here I'm sure we'll let you know. It's really not such a big thing here you know. TKD is bigger because we have successful Olympians and most non martial arts people think we all do Judo anyway.  My instructors were teaching us grappling in the 1970s, guess that was the height of the MMA craze too? Iain started in Wado too so has been grappling in karate since he was a young boy.



Completely different note:

Is Aaron Cook still fighting for Isle of Man or has Britain finally got their head on straight?


----------



## Tez3

Drose427 said:


> Completely different note:
> 
> Is Aaron Cook still fighting for Isle of Man or has Britain finally got their head on straight?




Seems he's still 'Isle of Man' but he is eligible for the British team in the Olympics etc, like Cavendish in cycling. TKD made a big splash in the Olympics and it's seen here as a tough sport not a 'kiddie' one so is very popular. It's a whole different cultural thing, we have quite a few MMA fighters from TKD.  Judo is much more the driving force in ground fighting with Judo Olympians coaching and now UK Judo has got into a partnership with the UFC here.
I would say if anyone where to make something up to get students in it would be the BJJ people, I hasten to add they _don't_ though. We have only a few BJJ higher grades here spread out over the country, they have a good reputation though we have had some dodgy Brazilians come across, at least two are in prison.


----------



## Flying Crane

Tez3 said:


> Well the craze gets here I'm sure we'll let you know. It's really not such a big thing here you know. TKD is bigger because we have successful Olympians and most non martial arts people think we all do Judo anyway.  My instructors were teaching us grappling in the 1970s, guess that was the height of the MMA craze too? Iain started in Wado too so has been grappling in karate since he was a young boy.


It's not really that much of a craze here either. It's a vocal venue, I guess that's about advertising for events, it's certainly on television enough. But here too, by far most schools, gyms, clubs, dojo, dojang and kwoon are NOT mma.

I'd say some folks get wrapped up in something and they start to believe that the rest of the world is as wrapped up in it as they are.  It just isn't true.


----------



## K-man

Tez3 said:


> Another good read concerning Karate, specifically Shotokan, Bunkai and grappling.
> http://www.norwichshotokan.co.uk/downloads/Thesis.pdf


Brilliant! I hope Hanzou takes the time to read it. It means that I am not alone in my style of training and that this style of training is even available to students of Shotokan. I was getting quite a complex being told time after time that my training wasn't real, that I didn't train Tegumi, grappling etc, then that my training wasn't typical etc.

But I really liked this ...
_"I would like to think my findings have brought consideration to a subject which I believe is declining in today’s modern approach to karate. It is my intention, along with other likeminded people who choose to address this subject, to educate and spread the word to as many *willing and “open minded” students *of karate-do as possible. 

I have explained the meaning of kata and the way it should be used, how it has changed over the years and the real purpose of kata - almost lost to “modernization”. *Of course the world evolves and so does karate. Bunkai can and should be developed in the same way; “evolution” should not be used as an excuse to leave behind the true meaning of kata.*"_

Pity "willing and open minded" isn't more common. 

Great post Tez!


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> However, that article though was written in 2010, during the height of the MMA craze.


So? At least half of those techniques shown in chapter 2 I have been doing long before MMA was even heard of.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Well the craze gets here I'm sure we'll let you know. It's really not such a big thing here you know. TKD is bigger because we have successful Olympians and most non martial arts people think we all do Judo anyway.



Yet we're not talking about TKD or Judo. We're talking about Karate.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> So _now_ Karate has ground fighting applications that can be found in its kata and simply were "re-discovered?"



Not what I said. I said that its interesting that Karate suddenly began to rediscover its grappling roots during a period where grappling was becoming increasingly popular among martial arts practitioners. I have yet to see any reputable, native Karate ground work displayed by anyone. All I've seen are two examples of ground work, and both _clearly_ come from Bjj.



> Cause Abernerthy is discussing Newaza always existing in kata. Earlier you called that "laughable"



Well again, I respect Abernerthy, but I have yet to see any evidence of newaza within kata. If he's trying to say that that Bjj mount escape in that video you posted is kata bunkai, then yes it IS laughable.



> Nobody "Just happened" upon anything. Ian wrote that article in 2010, but everything he discussed and used as examples in evidence happened and existed long before the days of BJJ and MMA.
> 
> None of the info on grappling in Karate is new or a mystery.
> 
> I can write a book on smithing practices during the 1600s this year, but I'm not just "rediscovering" folded steel because people like Katanas.



Then why does Abernathy call that article Tez posted; Tegumi - Karate's *Forgotten* Range? Doesn't the term "forgotten" indicate that it has been lost to mainstream Karate practice for some time?

From the article Tez posted;



> The grappling & seizing aspects of karate are *rarely practised* today, but it is vital to understand that grappling was *once as much a part of karate as the striking techniques most commonly associated with the art today*. Shigeru Egami, in his book “The Heart of Karate-do” wrote, “There are also throwing techniques in karate… Throwing techniques were practised in my day, and I recommend that you reconsider them.” Gichin Funakoshi also makes reference to grappling techniques in “Karate-Do Kyohan”. Funakoshi wrote, “…in Karate, hitting, thrusting, and kicking are not the only methods, throwing techniques and pressure against joints are included.” All of karate’s grappling techniques are recorded within the katas, and it is within the katas we need to look if we wish to *resurrect* this vitally important part of the art.



Rarely practised? You said that all the good Karate instructors are teaching this. What gives? Why would Abernathy state that there is a need to resurrect this vitally important part of the art if all the "real" Karate practitioners are already doing it?

Continued;



> At around 1905 – when karate underwent many changes such that it would be suitable for the physical education for Okinawa’s school children – the regular practice of the more dangerous techniques was discouraged. This rationalisation of karate training meant that *many aspects of Tegumi were abandoned.* It is mainly because of this ‘sanitising’ of karate that *grappling is no longer a common sight in the majority of today’s karate dojos.*However, if we wish to practice karate as a complete system of fighting, we should endeavour to include Tegumi in our practice. The wonderful thing is that the katas provide a living record of these methods! If we study the katas in sufficient depth, all aspects of the original fighting art of karate are there for the taking (including Tegumi). Within the katas there are a great deal of grappling techniques in addition to the commonly taught striking methods, with the majority of kata techniques showing the integrated use of both methods. If fact, Toshihisa Sofue 7th Dan has stated that “Eighty percent of karate kata is throwing and locking.” *And yet you rarely see throws and locks in today’s dojos!*



Many aspects of Tegumi were abandoned, Grappling is no longer a common sight in the majority of today's karate dojos, you rarely see throws and locks in today's dojos....

Yet we get this (ironically from the exact same group that posted this article);



K-man said:


> Brilliant! I hope Hanzou takes the time to read it. It means that I am not alone in my style of training and that this style of training is even available to students of Shotokan. * I was getting quite a complex being told time after time that my training wasn't real, that I didn't train Tegumi, grappling etc, then that my training wasn't typical etc.*





Tez3 said:


> My instructors were teaching us grappling in the 1970s, guess that was the height of the MMA craze too? Iain started in Wado too so has been grappling in karate since he was a young boy.




See this is what I'm talking about. On one hand I have you, Tez, and K-Man saying that Karate grappling is widely practiced, then I get Abernathy saying that its rarely practiced, is largely forgotten, and is urging the Karate community to bring it back into practice again. The ironic thing is that you guys are using Abernathy as an example when he's contradicting your entire argument in the first place.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Yet we're not talking about TKD or Judo. We're talking about Karate.



Look, I was replying to your accusation that Iain wrote the article in order to 'compete' with MMA for students, you are taking a sentence totally out of context and trying to make it mean something else. I can't help if you don't understand how a rebuttal is phrased.

You are wilfully misunderstanding, misquoting and generally trolling around the posts, *good grief* *you can't even get Iain's name* *right.* We are responsible for what we write, we aren't responsible for the fact you aren't understanding it. This has been the pattern of your posting since you got here, hit and run, trying to be as disruptive by deliberately misreading what others write.
I'm sorry but it's really sad that someone has to be this way.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Look, I was replying to your accusation that Iain wrote the article in order to 'compete' with MMA for students, you are taking a sentence totally out of context and trying to make it mean something else. I can't help if you don't understand how a rebuttal is phrased.



Actually the rebuttal was spot on. Your deflection had little to do with my point, which was all of these tales of grappling in Karate didn't start popping up until MMA arrived on the scene. Again, before the UFC, even Judo schools were neglecting Newaza practice, and they were neglecting it for decades. So much so that when Bjj emerged on the world stage, it was like an entirely different system.

If Judoka were barely doing Newaza, its laughable to think that Karateka were doing it in any serious manner.


----------



## TimoS

Hanzou said:


> On one hand I have you, Tez, and K-Man saying that Karate grappling is widely practiced, then I get Abernathy saying that its rarely practiced, is largely forgotten, and is urging the Karate community to bring it back into practice again.


I think Abernethy's pretty right in saying that it has been largely forgotten by mainstream karate. For that we can thank the focusing on competitions in favor of learning kata. By kata I don't mean just the solo form, but also the contents. And I think you are right in guessing that many who are now teaching grappling, especially on the ground, in karate have taken those lessons from somewhere else. That doesn't mean that it hasn't been practiced all along by many, without outside influences. The ground fighting is, IMO, just about totally lacking in karate and that's fine by me. If I want to learn that, I'll join a BJJ club. There are locks and throws in karate kata, maybe not as much as some seem to think, but they are there. They just have to be learned and then also to some extent pressure tested. If you can't use techniques from kata under pressure, then what good are they?


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Then why does Abernathy call that article Tez posted; Tegumi - Karate's *Forgotten* Range? Doesn't the term "forgotten" indicate that it has been lost to mainstream Karate practice for some time?


Hanzou, you must be being deliberately obtuse. I have explained to you many times there is a huge difference between Japanese karate and Okinawan karate. Tegumi is regularly practised in Okinawa. You will find it mainly spoken of as Kakie. It hasn't been lost to mainstream practise in Okinawa. 



Hanzou said:


> Rarely practised? You said that all the good Karate instructors are teaching this. What gives? Why would Abernathy state that there is a need to resurrect this vitally important part of the art if all the "real" Karate practitioners are already doing it?


There is a need to put it back into the styles that let it go and concentrated on the sporting aspect of karate. That is nothing you do with 'real' karate practitioners. You know what you know. I hadn't heard of Tegumi and the grappling aspects of karate either. The difference between you and me is when I was told about it and shown it I embraced it with both arms. You, on the other hand, are in denial.



Hanzou said:


> Many aspects of Tegumi were abandoned, Grappling is no longer a common sight in the majority of today's karate dojos, you rarely see throws and locks in today's dojos....
> 
> Yet we get this (ironically from the exact same group that posted this article);
> 
> See this is what I'm talking about. On one hand I have you, Tez, and K-Man saying that Karate grappling is widely practiced, then I get Abernathy saying that its rarely practiced, is largely forgotten, and is urging the Karate community to bring it back into practice again. The ironic thing is that you guys are using Abernathy as an example when he's contradicting your entire argument in the first place.


Again you distort what we have said. No one had said it is widely practised within Japanese karate. There are more and more schools reintroducing it, but in the Japanese styles that could well take time as often their training is far more regimented than the informal Okinawan training. Nothing Iain Abernethy has said contradicts what I have said. I'm on his song sheet 100%. His style is Japanese so grappling is not so common, as you have discovered. My style is Okinawan where it is a regular part of practise. 

As for Tez, she's been fortunate. She's been training Wado Ryu which has had grappling since its inception.  Hironori Ōtsuka was astute enough to realise what was missing from Japanese karate back in the 1930s and opened his own school with training that included Jiu Jutsu. I had to wait until I accidently stumbled across it 70 years later.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Actually the rebuttal was spot on. Your deflection had little to do with my point, which was all of these tales of grappling in Karate didn't start popping up until MMA arrived on the scene. Again, before the UFC, even Judo schools were neglecting Newaza practice, and they were neglecting it for decades. So much so that when Bjj emerged on the world stage, it was like an entirely different system.
> 
> If Judoka were barely doing Newaza, its laughable to think that Karateka were doing it in any serious manner.


Again you distort the truth. No one that I have seen has claimed Ne-waza is a big part of karate. On the other hand, Katame-waza has always been a big part of Okinawan karate and obviously Wado Ryu as well.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Actually the rebuttal was spot on. Your deflection had little to do with my point, which was all of these tales of grappling in Karate didn't start popping up until MMA arrived on the scene. Again, before the UFC, even Judo schools were neglecting Newaza practice, and they were neglecting it for decades. So much so that when Bjj emerged on the world stage, it was like an entirely different system.
> 
> If Judoka were barely doing Newaza, its laughable to think that Karateka were doing it in any serious manner.




Really? And you are an expert on Judo as well as karate now? Just because you say something doesn't make it actually what is happening *everywhere*.. Just because you didn't do something doesn't mean others don't do it, unless your ego is so monstrous that unless you are doing something then it simply doesn't exist? So, all around the world no karateka has been doing no grappling at all, ever because you say so and because something has been 'forgotten' it will always stay forgotten even if people talk about it, practice it, it will be forever forgotten?
Then we come to the nub of all your posts, the superiority to everything of BJJ, we get that you love your BJJ, that it's your saviour, you've seen the light and given your soul to the great being that is BJJ. Well, good for you, it doesn't however make you an expert on all martial arts nor even an expert on BJJ. It makes you someone who enjoys his style and has a modicum of knowledge, that should be satisfying to anyone, learning something, improving it and enjoying it but no, what is really enjoyable is baiting people on the internet by rubbishing their style, trolling long and loud about how useless they are and generally being offensive. It's a style of posting designed to create the maximum amount of irate responders ( yes *it's the style of posting I'm deploring* not the person who I'm sure wouldn't be rude enough to do it to people's faces)
Good people have given time over to considered posts on karate, to see them treated as though they were idiots is disappointing, to see their words twisted to mean something else in order to try to win points is sad, it's not worthy of martial artists who should at least have respect for other martial artists even if they consider what they do ineffective or useless because the truth is that those martial artists may well know something you don't.
A person's style doesn't look any better or shine as a style when you rubbish someone else's martial arts, it just tarnishes both styles.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Then why does Abernathy call that article Tez posted; Tegumi - Karate's *Forgotten* Range? Doesn't the term "forgotten" indicate that it has been lost to mainstream Karate practice for some time


Obviously someone remembered it.


----------



## Hanzou

TimoS said:


> I think Abernethy's pretty right in saying that it has been largely forgotten by mainstream karate. For that we can thank the focusing on competitions in favor of learning kata. By kata I don't mean just the solo form, but also the contents. And I think you are right in guessing that many who are now teaching grappling, especially on the ground, in karate have taken those lessons from somewhere else. That doesn't mean that it hasn't been practiced all along by many, without outside influences. The ground fighting is, IMO, just about totally lacking in karate and that's fine by me. If I want to learn that, I'll join a BJJ club. There are locks and throws in karate kata, maybe not as much as some seem to think, but they are there. They just have to be learned and then also to some extent pressure tested. If you can't use techniques from kata under pressure, then what good are they?



Yeah, and I have no issue with that. What I have issue with is training in an outside style, going back to Karate and saying that the outside style you learned was actually hidden inside Karate the entire time. Then when someone says that they never learned that stuff you just snuck into Karate, that person is accused of not learning "real" Karate.

Your viewpoint is right alongside Abernathy's. He says pretty plainly that if you want to learn grappling, learn it outside of Karate. That also aligns right along with my experience in Shotokan.


----------



## TimoS

Hanzou said:


> What I have issue with is training in an outside style, going back to Karate and saying that the outside style you learned was actually hidden inside Karate the entire time. Then when someone says that they never learned that stuff you just snuck into Karate, that person is accused of not learning "real" Karate.


Well, I agree with you on that. Sure you can bring some outside influences back into karate and to me, that's fine. Just as long as you are honest about where you learned the stuff and don't (radically) change things. An example: our style's European chief instructor is also I believe a 7. dan in aikido, so every once in a while he teaches some techniques slightly differently than others, but the basic principle remains the same, only some of the minor details are changed (e.g. the direction of certain finishes. It's a bit hard to describe these in words and there's no video available that would show these differences)


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> He says pretty plainly that if you want to learn grappling, learn it outside of Karate.



Nobody here has saI'd other than yourself that it's a proper way to learn grappling. Several times we've said just the opposite. 

Again, you're twisting words here



Hanzou said:


> That also aligns right along with  _my _experience in Shotokan.



there it is again, _ your _training didn't have it. So no one's does. 

I have no BJJ experience, and I walked you through 2 applications from our forms

Danny T talked about doing wrestling like drills in his Shot okay

Goju and Wadu Ryu do this drills frequently.  5 or 6 people now have chimed in on how and what they do for grappling and ground applications in their Karate Training long before the BJJ/MMA craze.

Not to mention the books from we've given you discussing it that were written some 20-30 years before MMA. 

But I guess the experience of the many is a lie because it doesn't fit the experience of the few?



TimoS said:


> (It's a bthere's no video available that would show these differences)



According to Hanzou, this means the differences don't exist


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Hanzou, you must be being deliberately obtuse. I have explained to you many times there is a huge difference between Japanese karate and Okinawan karate. Tegumi is regularly practised in Okinawa. You will find it mainly spoken of as Kakie. It hasn't been lost to mainstream practise in Okinawa.



Please point out anywhere in that article where Abernethy distinguishes between the two. He simply says Karate in general, so how am I being obtuse when he himself is saying that Karate in general rarely practices Tegumi or grappling?

Further, we ARE talking about Shotokan in this thread, not whatever Okinawan style you practice.



> There is a need to put it back into the styles that let it go and concentrated on the sporting aspect of karate. That is nothing you do with 'real' karate practitioners. You know what you know. I hadn't heard of Tegumi and the grappling aspects of karate either. The difference between you and me is when I was told about it and shown it I embraced it with both arms. You, on the other hand, are in denial.



I haven't been shown it. What I've been shown are stories about Funakoshi wrestling in Okinawa, a Karateka who took some Bjj lessons and awkwardly applied those techniques to Tekki Shodan, and Abernethy doing a common Bjj mount escape and someone claiming that it was Kata bunkai. Given that small amount of evidence, I think I have a right to be skeptical.



> Again you distort what we have said. No one had said it is widely practised within Japanese karate.





Drose427 said:


> Except very clearly, you do not. You know what _your_ training was. Where the rest of us can recognize when a movement from a kata can be applied in groundfighting and groundwork and how thats been taught to us, you've have taken every opportunity to say nothing more than, "No, we never did that at my old school so clearly it isnt there! BJJ is still better for grappling!" When many different people from different schools here have explained that its *common in Dojos everywhere and effectiveness against a grappler was never the question.*





Drose427 said:


> The movement he demonstrated on his partner were _exactly_ the same as the first moves of the form. You may have a way of doing it in BJJ, but what he demonstrated was right out of that kata, unadulterated, unchanged. I never said where he learned it, *but that exact movement  is from the kata, is taught in Karate as a means of getting back up exactly as he demonstrated, in schools all over.* He said he noticed the familiar movement during BJJ practice, he didnt learn it there. Again, same concept as a boxer using a hook from his back. Its a familiar movement all the same. He even demonstrated and described the movements when teaching form standing in the video as he did from the back. Nothing distinction it as BJJ, especially when the EXACT MOVEMENT is in the video you posted of Tekki Shodan.
> 
> Even with zero BJJ training, if he had been working on groundwork he would have recognized that position from Tekki Shodan and would still apply and teach it that way.
> 
> Saying he only say that because of his BJJ is giving incorrect credit.





Drose427 said:


> He didnt "discover" it, that moves always been there.. Other schools have taught [Shotokan Ground Fighting]_ that way. _Attributing it to him would be like saying the Gracies invented the Armbar. Not to mention the examples Paul D and K-Man gave from other forms if you'd like other examples. At this point, you're simply in denial because your Shotokan was lacking so you assume all else does as well.





> There are more and more schools reintroducing it, but in the Japanese styles that could well take time as often their training is far more regimented than the informal Okinawan training.



So Abernethy is only talking about Japanese karate? Interesting that he never made that distinction in any of his articles. If what you say is true, you would think that if one wanted to learn karate grappling, they would simply go learn it from the Okinawan styles, instead of trying to decode the techniques from kata. Further, you would think Abernethy would point out that the Okinawan styles of karate haven't forgotten grappling techniques. It seems strange that he would make a claim that Karate has forgotten grappling, when the Okinawan styles of Karate are supposedly still practicing it.



> Nothing Iain Abernethy has said contradicts what I have said. I'm on his song sheet 100%. His style is Japanese so grappling is not so common, as you have discovered. My style is Okinawan where it is a regular part of practise.



That's strange, because Tez said that Abernathy had plenty of grappling experience in his Karate since his youth. Yet now you say that since his style is *Japanese*, grappling isn't so common.



Tez3 said:


> My instructors were teaching us grappling in the 1970s, guess that was the height of the MMA craze too?* Iain started in Wado too so has been grappling in karate since he was a young boy.*




I wish you'd both get your stories straight.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> I haven't been shown it. What I've been shown are stories about Funakoshi wrestling in Okinawa,



Clearly you haven't actually read the article. The full excerpt is far more than Funakoshi remisnicisng. He explains how and we're he used it in his karate. 

Abernathy even mentions more than Funakoshi just wrestling with the excerts he used from a book from the 70s in t
his article.

So his sources saying the same thing we all have been are from 20 years before MMA, but grappling in karate is a modern invention?

You still keep avoiding all the other forms we've walked you through the moves, the drills, the majority of people here, some having not trained in karate for years, telling you it was a part of their training many years before BJJ.

Again, you're one person whose training didn't have it. There's 5 or 6 here who have been training that way since long before MMA/BJJ. 

Hard to say we only started doing it to appeal to MMA guys when:

1. We've been very clear it's not a complex grappling system like BJJ

2. We've been practicing and training like this since 20 years before MMA hit.


----------



## TimoS

Hanzou said:


> Further, we ARE talking about Shotokan in this thread,


I would say that this thread WAS about Shotokan, but hasn't been for a long time anymore


----------



## Hanzou

TimoS said:


> I would say that this thread WAS about Shotokan, but hasn't been for a long time anymore



Well this entire dust up started because I said that Shotokan had no answer for the ground. So I'm not so sure we've completely left the topic.


----------



## TimoS

Hanzou said:


> Well this entire dust up started because I said that Shotokan had no answer for the ground. So I'm not so sure we've completely left the topic.


True and the way I see it, the whole point of kicks, punches, "blocks" etc. is to avoid having to go to ground. I don't know of any Okinawan master who teaches ground fighting, at least nowhere near the level of e.g. judo or BJJ. Do they know the stuff? Probably, at least to some extent. Hell, some of them are even fairly high ranking judoka. It's just that all the bunkai demos from Okinawan masters I've seen are for when you're standing up. I don't think that's a coincidence. Can you use some of the stand-up stuff on the ground? Maybe, but mainly against an unskilled opponent, I'd guess. There are after all only a number of ways the human body can move, so some BJJ moves will probably resemble moves from kata, but, to me at least, that's coincidence and not design


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Clearly you haven't actually read the article. The full excerpt is far more than Funakoshi remisnicisng. He explains how and we're he used it in his karate.
> 
> Abernathy even mentions more than Funakoshi just wrestling with the excerts he used from a book from the 70s in t
> his article.
> 
> So his sources saying the same thing we all have been are from 20 years before MMA, but grappling in karate is a modern invention?



Abernethy also says that Karate grappling is largely forgotten, rarely taught, and crude. Given that, any high level grappling found being used by a Karateka would almost certainly be coming from an outside source.

Are you saying that Abernethy is wrong, and that he is just as "clueless" as I am about Karate grappling?



> You still keep avoiding all the other forms we've walked you through the moves, the drills, the majority of people here, some having not trained in karate for years, telling you it was a part of their training many years before BJJ.



They can say whatever they like, that is merely anecdotal evidence. I need to see evidence that it is widespread, and exactly what level of ground fighting we're talking about. What Ando and Abernethy were doing in their vids were clearly Bjj techniques learned from Bjj. 



> Again, you're one person whose training didn't have it. There's 5 or 6 here who have been training that way since long before MMA/BJJ.



Ah, so once again, I'm the *rare* person who got no grappling training in my Karate dojo, despite Abernethy saying that such training is forgotten and rare. Implying that the majority of Karatekas out there ARE getting grappling training, and that my training was simply sub-par.

Hopefully K-man is reading this. 



> Hard to say we only started doing it to appeal to MMA guys when:
> 
> 1. We've been very clear it's not a complex grappling system like BJJ
> 
> 2. We've been practicing and training like this since 20 years before MMA hit.



If this grappling/ground fighting system has been utilized for that long, why is there literally no evidence of it beyond historical documents and accounts from Okinawa? Why is Abernethy saying that its largely forgotten and rarely taught? Why are there no Karate schools advertising this ground fighting on their site? Surely, a Karate style offering a simple, yet competent grappling system would be highly sought after.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Abernethy also says that Karate grappling is largely forgotten, rarely taught, and crude. Given that, any high level grappling found being used by a Karateka would almost certainly be coming from an outside source.
> 
> Are you saying that Abernethy is wrong, and that he is just as "clueless" as I am about Karate grappling?
> 
> 
> 
> They can say whatever they like, that is merely anecdotal evidence. I need to see evidence that it is widespread, and exactly what level of ground fighting we're talking about. What Ando and Abernethy were doing in their vids were clearly Bjj techniques learned from Bjj.
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, so once again, I'm the *rare* person who got no grappling training in my Karate dojo, despite Abernethy saying that such training is forgotten and rare. Implying that the majority of Karatekas out there ARE getting grappling training, and that my training was simply sub-par.
> 
> Hopefully K-man is reading this.
> 
> 
> 
> If this grappling/ground fighting system has been utilized for that long, why is there literally no evidence of it beyond historical documents and accounts from Okinawa? Why is Abernethy saying that its largely forgotten and rarely taught? Why are there no Karate schools advertising this ground fighting on their site? Surely, a Karate style offering a simple, yet competent grappling system would be highly sought after.




You're the only one arguing it's a whole grappling system. 

The rest of us have tried explaining to you its bunkai.

Does karate have a full standing grappling system like Judo just because we do take downs? 

No. 



Abernathy article is referring to full tegumi (free wrestling),  he even says that the bunkai are still commonly taught In the article.

I also posted 2 videos of goju schools teaching and practicing full on tegumi. Which is more than many of us do. If you actually look, it isn't too difficult to find schools advertising some fashion of Tegumi or wrestling in their classes. 

As we have said and reiterated, its bunkai that's taught. 

You're looking for something not a single person here has claimed for validation that BJJ grappling is superior.


----------



## Tez3

TimoS said:


> but mainly against an unskilled opponent



That's what karate is designed for....civilian self defence against the unskilled. Staying on your feet as everyone knows is the ideal but one needs a plan B when things go pear shaped, ground work is plan B. It doesn't have to be pretty or hugely technical, it has to work and the grappling in karate works, it does the job you train for. It's not got the technical beauty of BJJ, it's rough and ready but it's there.

The point of the argument however is that one person who has scant knowledge of the subject has taken upon himself to decide exactly what karate is and that it is inferior to BJJ.  Those who do have that knowledge of karate and who practice what they preach have disagreed unsurprisingly.

That someone hasn't seen something or doesn't have knowledge of something doesn't preclude that that something exists. I haven't been to America, I haven't been to New York, I haven't been to a baseball game but I have no doubts that all these exist and wouldn't dream of arguing otherwise. That a non or poorly trained in karate person insists that something doesn't exist purely on the basis that he hasn't seen it amazes me.
I know that in my karate there is ground work and grappling, why do I know that? Simply because the founder put it in there and demonstrated it to boot. So yes there is grappling in my karate. Karate by the way is a fairly generic term, much like using the word 'Hoover' to mean all makes of vacuum cleaners. Shotokan has shown, also from the founder of the style that there is grappling in it, why argue with the founders? You could argue they could have put in better techniques, more pretty moves, made it more joined up but you can't say it doesn't exist when the founders say it does, who would know better than they?
It may have been forgotten but has been rediscovered, that rediscovery has nothing to do with BJJ becoming popular as it's not popular everywhere. Boxing had throws and grappling but the current rules preclude that, doesn't mean it wasn't there just because we haven't seen it.

I haven't seen anyone on MT train or fight but that doesn't mean they can't.................

Something that is forgotten at the time of someone writing doesn't meant it stays forgotten. Something that is not trained much at the time of writing doesn't mean it stays not trained. Common sense tells us that when someone brings things to the attention of martial artists after a lot of research that resonates with what karateka think then it will become popular and revert to the original type of training. Many of us 'oldies' do remember early training where grappling was common, many of us have always trained with grappling in our karate.


----------



## TimoS

I think a problem in this discussion is the definition of grappling. Hanzou, you seem to think it means rolling on the ground, somewhat of the way BJJ or judo does it.

The way I see it, that isn't really part of traditional karate. Some modern instructors have incorporated it into what they teach, sure, but I guess it's mainly from BJJ. Now, some stand-up grappling, i.e. locks and throws etc., is very much a part of karate.


----------



## Tez3

TimoS said:


> I think a problem in this discussion is the definition of grappling. Hanzou, you seem to think it means rolling on the ground, somewhat of the way BJJ or judo does it.
> 
> The way I see it, that isn't really part of traditional karate. Some modern instructors have incorporated it into what they teach, sure, but I guess it's mainly from BJJ. Now, some stand-up grappling, i.e. locks and throws etc., is very much a part of karate.




Whose traditional karate though, as I said in mine we've always had grappling, meaning basic ground work not from BJJ but from traditional JJ. BJJ is relatively new compared to 'karate' and a lot of techniques predate BJJ.


----------



## Drose427

TimoS said:


> I think a problem in this discussion is the definition of grappling. Hanzou, you seem to think it means rolling on the ground, somewhat of the way BJJ or judo does it.
> 
> The way I see it, that isn't really part of traditional karate. Some modern instructors have incorporated it into what they teach, sure, but I guess it's mainly from BJJ. Now, some stand-up grappling, i.e. locks and throws etc., is very much a part of karate.



The problem is it is part of Karate, mostly okinawan. But it is there in a rough sense and has been.

In the early parts of this debate, many people here who trained long before the time of BJJS popularity were doing groundwork in their training. I believe Danny T says he was doing a former of live wrestling in his Shotokan school.


If you look, you can still find schools that do it. It's not that rare, there are schools advertising it as tegumi on their website. Usually, okinawan, but not always.

It's not BJJ, it's not anywhere near that refined. It's primitive, (sprawl, choke here or there, maimy though it's just a brief lock to get back to standing)

Most importantly, most of the time it isn't free wrestling. It's more like drilling.

We've also been clear over and over again, it's not comparable to BJJS competency on the ground. This has never been a "our grappling better" debate to anyone but Hanzou. Simply that simple, basic, rough groundstuff meant for the unskilled guy Is in here. 

Nobodies claiming we invented any of this either. All the techniques came from Judo JJ and Okinawan wrestling.

One of the schools I posted do it as free wrestling, a member here said they did it that way long before BJJ.

Hanzou  has a difficult time understanding the difference bunkai and live wrestling.


----------



## Tez3

Reading this article I can see why a BJJ person cannot see the techniques that are in karate.  Some BJJ people cannot see how their style differs from JJ from whence came our techniques in karate, perhaps learning the difference between BJJ and JJ may help, of course though only if one is open to it and not intent on proving that BJJ is the best EVA..
Traditional Jiu-Jitsu Vs. Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu A Thorough Look


----------



## Danny T

Hanzou
You are correct in that BJJ/GJJ/Wrestling/Judo all have more and a much higher level of groundwork than any of the martial systems 'I' have trained other than BJJ/GJJ/Wrestling etc. However, you do not know of what my training nor that of what anyone else has been. 
My shotokan had standing grappling and ground fighting. You tell us no it didn't because your shotokan didn't.
My goju ryu what little I did had standing grappling and ground fighting. You say no because your karate didn't.
There are others who have stated the same in that they experienced grappling and ground fighting in their training. You say no because your karate didn't.

Why, what in your DNA will not allow you to accept that there are others who have gotten grappling and ground fight experience even though you did not?
No one has claimed our groundwork is or has been as extensive as yours yet you continue to argue we are wrong. Why do you argue vs something you have no idea as to others experiences.

I believe you have a excellence sense of BJJ and could be a good source of information for ground work. However your incessant arguing shows you are not wanting to discuss issues you are wanting argument. In discussion people acknowledge others opinions state theirs and the discussion move along. In every attempted discussion with you there is little discussion but argument. This forum is for the discussion of the martial arts. Within this community I have found fun, friendly and informational people as well as those simply wanting to learn more about their perspective arts and about others. With you it is always, in every discussion an argument. It does make for longer threads but when reviewing the many posts within these threads there is little more than argument, argument, argument and though it will mean little I for one am tired of it. 

I hope all the best for you sir in your endeavors and training. Enjoy your journey.
Danny Terrell


----------



## Hanzou

TimoS said:


> I think a problem in this discussion is the definition of grappling. Hanzou, you seem to think it means rolling on the ground, somewhat of the way BJJ or judo does it.
> 
> The way I see it, that isn't really part of traditional karate. Some modern instructors have incorporated it into what they teach, sure, but I guess it's mainly from BJJ. Now, some stand-up grappling, i.e. locks and throws etc., is very much a part of karate.



No, the problem in this discussion is that Karate as it is commonly taught has no answer for someone taking you to the ground. Abernethy himself has said that grappling *in its entirety* is rarely taught in Karate. Not just ground fighting, but standing locks and throws;



> *The grappling & seizing aspects of karate are rarely practised today, but it is vital to understand that grappling was once as much a part of karate as the striking techniques most commonly associated with the art today. *Shigeru Egami, in his book “The Heart of Karate-do” wrote, “There are also throwing techniques in karate… Throwing techniques were practised in my day, and I recommend that you reconsider them.” Gichin Funakoshi also makes reference to grappling techniques in “Karate-Do Kyohan”. Funakoshi wrote, “…in Karate, hitting, thrusting, and kicking are not the only methods, throwing techniques and pressure against joints are included.” All of karate’s grappling techniques are recorded within the katas, and it is within the katas we need to look if we wish to resurrect this vitally important part of the art - See more at: Tegumi - Karate s Forgotten Range Iain Abernethy




So I find it curious that I'm attacked for saying the same thing. I suppose it feels better when Abernethy says it.....


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> So I find it curious that I'm attacked for saying the same thing. I suppose it feels better when Abernethy says it.....



You do realise that _he wrote that in the past_ and the situation has improved since he wrote it, largely due to him I'll add? Something doesn't stay true for perpetuity because you want it to. Iain writes about resurrecting it ( therefore meaning it was there to start with, not that it didn't exist), well, guess what, *it has been resurrected,* imagine that eh!

Also 'rarely' practised doesn't mean not practiced at all which is what you've been telling us. You also said Iain just made up the stuff about grappling being in karate because of the MMA fervour. Make your mind up or perhaps better still just give it up, it surely can't mean that much to you, you can't be so invested in proving that there's no groundwork in karate that you cannot stop trying to wind people up?

We would have to adjust our thoughts about a lot of things, in science for example, if we held that what was once true is always true...things like the sun going around the Earth, that must be true because someone wrote and actually believed it once, also that the Earth was flat, that too must be still true according to your way of thinking. Illness is caused by 'bad humours', I can cite you a long article about that, it must still be true because why would anything change?


----------



## Mephisto

Honzou isn't the only one with these questions. Sorry I'm coming back in late but I've been training a lot the past couple of days. Abernathys article clearly states that grappling is uncommon in karate, I think honzou has reached a perfectly reasonable conclusion. I think largely it is safe to say that karate does not have an answer to ground grappling. That may be changing, but on the whole it seems your common karate school teaches no grappling. Also cross training is common among martial artists so I'm curious if the karate schools that have done grappling now and in the past owe that ground grappling to a prominent instructor within the system who trained a grappling style. If wado has had ground grappling all along and it is common within wado, surely theres video of it somewhere. I see no problem with karate adding ground fighting to the syllabus, it makes sense to reuse kata movements for a new purpose since that seems to be what bunkai is all about. The real problem here is weather karate or more specifically shortokan commonly does karate. There may be a few schools that do limited ground grappling there may have always been some schools that do limited grappling, but it doesn't seem to be commonplace.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> You do realise that _he wrote that in the past_ and the situation has improved since he wrote it, largely due to him I'll add? Something doesn't stay true for perpetuity because you want it to. Iain writes about resurrecting it ( therefore meaning it was there to start with, not that it didn't exist), well, guess what, *it has been resurrected,* imagine that eh!



So grappling in Karate went from being rare and forgotten to widely taught and understood in a little over 4 years?

You'll excuse me if I don't buy that.



> Also 'rarely' practised doesn't mean not practiced at all which is what you've been telling us. You also said Iain just made up the stuff about grappling being in karate because of the MMA fervour. Make your mind up or perhaps better still just give it up, it surely can't mean that much to you, you can't be so invested in proving that there's no groundwork in karate that you cannot stop trying to wind people up?



Rarely practiced means that its rarely practiced. If its rare to see grappling in Karate schools, that means the vast majority of Karate schools DON'T teach it. I find it interesting that my training was considered poor when I mentioned that I never experienced grappling in my Shotokan training, yet now you acknowledge that up to at least 4 years ago someone teaching any type of grappling in a Karate dojo was rare. 

Funny how that works.



> We would have to adjust our thoughts about a lot of things, in science for example, if we held that what was once true is always true...things like the sun going around the Earth, that must be true because someone wrote and actually believed it once, also that the Earth was flat, that too must be still true according to your way of thinking. Illness is caused by 'bad humours', I can cite you a long article about that, it must still be true because why would anything change?



Usually it requires *evidence* to change a long-held belief. So far, solid evidence of native Karate ground fighting has been on the very light side of things. Some pictures or vids of Karateka actually doing it would help matters a bit.


----------



## Tez3

Oh so something doesn't exist unless it's on You Tube? Glad we cleared that up then. There was no life before video, history doesn't exist.
 'If Wado' has grappling? The founder was a JJ master, he has stated that there *is* grappling in Wado but it can't be true because it's not on You Tube! What would the founder of Wado Ryu know about Wado Ryu eh! Well now I know that the founder was wrong all along and I was training Scotch Mist rather than karate with grappling in I'll go back to my cave, pull the animal skin over my head and just pretend I exist.

Oh did you know there's no self defence in BJJ? I train it and I've never been shown any self defence techniques at all, I've only seen Gi and No Gi comps in BJJ, there's absolutely no SD at all in BJJ, it's utterly useless, I've never seen anyone in a video defend themselves in a *real* attack with BJJ. It just doesn't exist.


----------



## Tez3

I think it's time to draw a close to this thread quite frankly. it's one thing to question people's beliefs, their ideas and their training practises but I think when people start disbelieving other posters when they say they train a certain way it's time to stop. It's calling people liars. Perhaps what I think is wrong, what I deduce from something is wrong, my beliefs can be called into question but when I and others say 'look we train karate with groundwork and grappling' and people tell us we don't do that because it doesn't exist, it's calling into question our integrity. I said I train Wado Ryu which has always had JJ in it because the founder put it there, why is that hard to believe or do you think I'm lying?
Iain Abernethy has been working on kata, grappling within karate and such like since the late 1990s, many of us knew about his work long before he published or made videos. He's not the only martial artist to do this, there's quite a few others. There have been people who have worked on translations of Japanese documents about martial arts, others who have researched the katas. It's an on going work being done by many. The founders of both Wado and Shotokan has said they put groundwork and grappling in, why disbelieve them? Are they liars then? it's what is being said and I for one don't like the tone of posts that angle things that way. If you don't accept what we say and we say it with honesty, I can't help that. Your disrespect in calling us liars is sad and benefits no one. As for the if it's not on video it doesn't exist argument, that's just even sadder. If people believe that they are missing so much that has happened in life and for that I'm sorry for them.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Oh so something doesn't exist unless it's on You Tube? Glad we cleared that up then. There was no life before video, history doesn't exist.



Didn't Iain Abernethy himself say that grappling was rarely taught in Karate? Didn't you yourself directly link that very article to this thread? So is Abernethy incorrect in stating that grappling is traditionally rarely taught in Karate, or are you going to continue to ignore that and pretend that I'm the only one saying it?



> 'If Wado' has grappling? The founder was a JJ master, he has stated that there *is* grappling in Wado but it can't be true because it's not on You Tube! What would the founder of Wado Ryu know about Wado Ryu eh! Well now I know that the founder was wrong all along and I was training Scotch Mist rather than karate with grappling in I'll go back to my cave, pull the animal skin over my head and just pretend I exist.



Japanese Jujutsu isn't Okinawan Tegumi. Wado Ryu isn't Shotokan Karate.



> Oh did you know there's no self defence in BJJ? I train it and I've never been shown any self defence techniques at all, I've only seen Gi and No Gi comps in BJJ, there's absolutely no SD at all in BJJ, it's utterly useless, I've never seen anyone in a video defend themselves in a *real* attack with BJJ. It just doesn't exist.












Enjoy.


----------



## Tez3

ROFLMAO. The irony was lost wasn't it? Straight over the head. 

I have nothing more to say about karate, grappling etc, you will believe what you want, you want to be right so much I can smell it. Fine you're right, happy now?
  No, I didn't think so because your basic dissatisfaction is never going to be resolved until you accept that others have their experiences too and they are every bit as valid as your own. You can't call everyone you disagree with a liar, there's just too many of us. Anyway enjoy your training, live long and prosper.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Please point out anywhere in that article where Abernethy distinguishes between the two. He simply says Karate in general, so how am I being obtuse when he himself is saying that Karate in general rarely practices Tegumi or grappling?


he doesn't have to distinguish between the two because Japanese Karate is basically what took the world by storm thanks to the fantastic promotional work of Gogen Yamaguchi (Goju Kai) and the JKF. Most karate outside Japan is derived from Japanese styles which in the main have a strong sport component rather than bunkai. That doesn't mean bunkai wasn't there for those who wanted to explore it. Tegumi is a different thing totally. I agree it is not widely practised outside of Okinawa but grappling is not Tegumi. Even in Goju Kai we had an element of stand up grappling.



Hanzou said:


> Further, we ARE talking about Shotokan in this thread, not whatever Okinawan style you practice.


Ah, yes of course. My style is unique. For the record it is Goju, hardly unique, but it was you who switched the thread from Shotokan to the more generic 'Karate'. You can say that In the Shotokan dojo you attended they didn't have grappling but once you step outside that and make it 'Karate' had no grappling you are just plain wrong and there is ample evidence in this thread alone to prove you know very little about Karate outside your limited experience.

Out of interest, here is the post that switched it from Shotokan to 'Karate' about ten pages back.


Hanzou said:


> Flak for what? Pointing out that *Karate* is lacking when it comes to ground fighting, and that lack can be detrimental or deadly in a self defense situation?
> 
> Perhaps, but the difference is that MMA has an answer for all the steps in that scenario. *Karate's* answer stops as soon as the fight hits the pavement.





Hanzou said:


> I haven't been shown it. What I've been shown are stories about Funakoshi wrestling in Okinawa, a Karateka who took some Bjj lessons and awkwardly applied those techniques to Tekki Shodan, and Abernethy doing a common Bjj mount escape and someone claiming that it was Kata bunkai. Given that small amount of evidence, I think I have a right to be skeptical.


Everyone has the right to be skeptical but when evidence is presented common sense should determine whether what is presented is valid.



Hanzou said:


> So Abernethy is only talking about Japanese karate? Interesting that he never made that distinction in any of his articles. If what you say is true, you would think that if one wanted to learn karate grappling, they would simply go learn it from the Okinawan styles, instead of trying to decode the techniques from kata. Further, you would think Abernethy would point out that the Okinawan styles of karate haven't forgotten grappling techniques. It seems strange that he would make a claim that Karate has forgotten grappling, when the Okinawan styles of Karate are supposedly still practicing it.


Here we go, twisting it yet again. What has learning karate grappling got to do with decoding the techniques from kata? You haven't understood anything. You don't learn grappling from kata and you don't have to train an Okinawan style of karate to learn grappling. Your sense of logic is amazing.

And Iain didn't say "karate has forgotten grappling". He said it is rarely practised.

_"The grappling & seizing aspects of karate are rarely practised today, but it is vital to understand that grappling was once as much a part of karate asthe striking techniques most commonly associated with the art today."_

He also said that perhaps to find the grappling skills you should look at the older versions of karate. That could imply Okinawan but he goes on to say that what he is looking for is in the kata anyway.

_"So if real self-defence skills are our aim perhaps we should look at the older versions of karate? Within the katas are recorded the original fighting methods of karate. The katas record the original karate system and hence the katas contain techniques and concepts for use at every range, including grappling."_



Hanzou said:


> That's strange, because Tez said that Abernathy had plenty of grappling experience in his Karate since his youth. Yet now you say that since his style is *Japanese*, grappling isn't so common.
> 
> I wish you'd both get your stories straight.


Nothing wrong with the story as far as I'm concerned. As you pointed out, grappling isn't so common in Japanese karate. This is not the same as saying grappling in Japanese karate doesn't exist. Again, just because you didn't experience it in your limited training no one else could be doing it. Cool!

I think the main difference between you and Iain, apart from the enormous gap in experience, is that Iain has an enquiring mind where yours is ... um ... closed.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> he doesn't have to distinguish between the two because Japanese Karate is basically what took the world by storm thanks to the fantastic promotional work of Gogen Yamaguchi (Goju Kai) and the JKF. Most karate outside Japan is derived from Japanese styles which in the main have a strong sport component rather than bunkai. That doesn't mean bunkai wasn't there for those who wanted to explore it. Tegumi is a different thing totally. I agree it is not widely practised outside of Okinawa but grappling is not Tegumi. Even in Goju Kai we had an element of stand up grappling.



Typically, if someone tells me that "Grappling is rarely taught in Karate", I'm going to guess that they're talking about all forms of Karate, including the Okinawan variety. It also seems odd that Abernethy wouldn't make the distinction since he's talking about a form Okinawan grappling. If you're saying that Okinawan Tegumi is largely absent from Japanese Karate, wouldn't you take great pains to make the distinction that it IS present in Okinanwan Karate?

I think a more sensible conclusion is that Abernethy was talking about ALL forms of Karate when he says that grappling is rarely taught in *Karate*.



> You can say that In the Shotokan dojo you attended they didn't have grappling but once you step outside that and make it 'Karate' had no grappling you are just plain wrong and there is ample evidence in this thread alone to prove you know very little about Karate outside your limited experience.



I'm pretty sure I was talking about ground fighting.

However, wouldn't it be fair to say that Karate lacks grappling if its an established fact that grappling is rarely taught and is a forgotten aspect of Karate practice?




> And Iain didn't say "karate has forgotten grappling". He said it is rarely practised.
> 
> _"The grappling & seizing aspects of karate are rarely practised today, but it is vital to understand that grappling was once as much a part of karate asthe striking techniques most commonly associated with the art today."_



The title of the article is Tegumi - Karate s Forgotten Range Iain Abernethy

Wouldn't that imply that *Karate* grappling is largely forgotten?


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Wouldn't that imply that *Karate* grappling is largely forgotten?



correction...WAS NOT IS. You did say btw that there was never any grappling in karate so now you agree there is. 

You are arguing for the sake of it


----------



## Mephisto

Tez3 said:


> Oh so something doesn't exist unless it's on You Tube? Glad we cleared that up then. There was no life before video, history doesn't exist.
> 'If Wado' has grappling? The founder was a JJ master, he has stated that there *is* grappling in Wado but it can't be true because it's not on You Tube! What would the founder of Wado Ryu know about Wado Ryu eh! Well now I know that the founder was wrong all along and I was training Scotch Mist rather than karate with grappling in I'll go back to my cave, pull the animal skin over my head and just pretend I exist.
> 
> Oh did you know there's no self defence in BJJ? I train it and I've never been shown any self defence techniques at all, I've only seen Gi and No Gi comps in BJJ, there's absolutely no SD at all in BJJ, it's utterly useless, I've never seen anyone in a video defend themselves in a *real* attack with BJJ. It just doesn't exist.



No one ever said "something doesn't exist unless it's on youtube", at this point you're just being obtuse. If grappling is in Wado, and it is common i'd expect it to be on youtube. It's entirely possible that it's not on youtube, all you have to say is that you are unable to find it. You could find something else like a drawing or photo ot copy of a syllabus. Part of being scientific about something is presenting evidence. If you want to change minds or convince someone of something you've got to present evidence. I didn't read every link that was provided in this thread, I skimmed over some of the lengthy posts. If you think you've already presented sufficient evidence, restate it or copy and paste the most relevant quotes and they can be analyzed. I'm not going to read every diatribe linked. I think evidence has been presented that the founders of some karate styles had some ground  grappling knowledge and it's reasonable to assume they knew some ground grappling. However, the debate here is to how common ground grappling is in karate.


Tez3 said:


> correction...WAS NOT IS. You did say btw that there was never any grappling in karate so now you agree there is.
> 
> You are arguing for the sake of it


Did he say "there was never any grappling in karate"? Didn't he say that karate was lacking when it comes to ground fighting? He was speaking in much less absolute terms than you are here, just like you stated that no history existed before youtube. All that can be said is that there is some grappling in some karate schools but it is not mainstream. You can't infer that Hanzou's karate training was inferior if it is commonplace for karate schools to not train ground fighting. If ground fighting is common in karate there should be video somewhere.

Check out the video below. As has been stated any ground fighting that may or may not be present in karate is minimalist, the below link is a match between several karate guys and some Gracie practitioners including Gracie family members. I wouldn't expect someone with minimal ground fighting to out grapple a GJJ expert but I would expect someone with some ground fighting knowledge to at lead attempt a hip escape,upa, or some fundamental escape technique. The karate guys in the video clearly have no ground fighting knowledge, and that's fine neither does your average boxer. Maybe these guys were some of the few poorly trained karate guys that missed the ground fighting memo? I don't think so.


----------



## Mephisto

just for s & gs I youtube "karate grappling" and found this




Check out the 1:07 mark, karate grappling! Referred to as tegumi! How hard was that? Here we have evidence of some brief limited karate grappling. It took me two seconds to find this, if some here care enough to convince others that karate does have ground grappling more videos like this should be presented. After it is established that several videos exist it we can look more in depth as to where the grappling originated and how long it has been part of these systems. But instead a few links were provided and you guys have just kept assuring us karate grappling does exist and you keep referring back to the same links. If karate grappling is common it won't de difficult to find demonstrable evidence of it.


----------



## Drose427

Mephisto said:


> just for s & gs I youtube "karate grappling" and found this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check out the 1:07 mark, karate grappling! Referred to as tegumi! How hard was that? Here we have evidence of some brief limited karate grappling. It took me two seconds to find this, if some here care enough to convince others that karate does have ground grappling more videos like this should be presented. After it is established that several videos exist it we can look more in depth as to where the grappling originated and how long it has been part of these systems. But instead a few links were provided and you guys have just kept assuring us karate grappling does exist and you keep referring back to the same links. If karate grappling is common it won't de difficult to find demonstrable evidence of it.



We've said several times it's not that difficult to find if you actually look for it. 

we've also given a thesis with pictures, I posted a video of kids competing with it during what looks like a belt test.

You may not find it as demonstration videos like BJJ, but you can find pictures and demos from schools still doing it. 

Some places don't record and upload videos, that's hardly A good way to judge something.


----------



## Hanzou

Tong Dojo has a Brazilian Juijitsu instructor, and another of their main instructors has freestyle grappling experience, So its not surprising that they have grappling;

Martial Arts Classes Instructors Atlanta GA

Its not Tegumi, its Bjj and wrestling.


----------



## Mephisto

another 2 secs and I found this:




At 4:28, he addresses tegumi and ground fighting. Where he basicall states some limited ground grappling did exist in classical karate but it was never a focus or specialty. Note, he also mentions how karate is known for strikes but that it does have some standing up joint lock techniques and throws. No where does he state that ground fighting is common or that it exists in karate at present time. I can't do all of your homework guys, but given some more in depth examples you might be able to make a compelling argument for groundfighting in karate. Of course, what intially brought up ground fighting was a knife attack on the ground, so the limited ground fighting of karate still might not have been much good in that specific scenario.


----------



## Mephisto

Hanzou said:


> Tong Dojo has a Brazilian Juijitsu instructor, and another of their main instructors has freestyle grappling experience, So its not surprising that they have grappling;
> 
> Martial Arts Classes Instructors Atlanta GA
> 
> Its not Tegumi, its Bjj and wrestling.


Yeah, I figured some analysis might be necessary. But my point still stands, provide evidence and video if you want to change minds.


----------



## Mephisto

Drose427 said:


> We've* said* several times it's not that difficult to find if you actually look for it.
> 
> we've also given a thesis with pictures, I posted a video of kids competing with it during what looks like a belt test.
> 
> You may not find it as demonstration videos like BJJ, but you can find pictures and demos from schools still doing it.
> 
> Some places don't record and upload videos, that's hardly A good way to judge something.


Repost the thesis and repost the pictures, share specific quotes. You can't convince anyone by saying your opinion over and over, you need evidence and facts. Telling me to look it up myself isn't going to convince me, that's your job.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Typically, if someone tells me that "Grappling is rarely taught in Karate", I'm going to guess that they're talking about all forms of Karate, including the Okinawan variety. It also seems odd that Abernethy wouldn't make the distinction since he's talking about a form Okinawan grappling. If you're saying that Okinawan Tegumi is largely absent from Japanese Karate, wouldn't you take great pains to make the distinction that it IS present in Okinanwan Karate?


The statement, "Grappling is rarely taught in Karate" may well apply to generic 'karate' but it doesn't apply to Okinawan karate where it is still being taught as it always was. Iain's point is that overall Tegumi is absent from Karate where the bulk of the karate is Japanese. Get a life. The point has been addressed and explained.



Hanzou said:


> I think a more sensible conclusion is that Abernethy was talking about ALL forms of Karate when he says that grappling is rarely taught in *Karate*.


I think the most sensible conclusion is that when Okinawan karate was taken to Japan it was taken more for its health benefits that the actual fighting aspect. 




Hanzou said:


> I'm pretty sure I was talking about ground fighting.
> 
> However, wouldn't it be fair to say that Karate lacks grappling if its an established fact that grappling is rarely taught and is a forgotten aspect of Karate practice?


Not at all. Your command of the English language is lacking if you can't understand what Iain is saying. You are twisting words. I'm not sure that there is any 'established fact' here at all. There is an opinion, with which I agree, that "grappling is rarely taught and is a forgotten aspect of karate practise", karate being the genetic term.  "Grappling is rarely taught" and "karate lacks grappling" are two totally different things. Grappling is inherent in karate whether it is taught or not. Tegumi is 'forgotten' in Japanese karate but it is still inherent in the kata, a fact that Iain has pointed out.





Hanzou said:


> The title of the article is Tegumi - Karate s Forgotten Range Iain Abernethy
> 
> Wouldn't that imply that *Karate* grappling is largely forgotten?


Let's look at what Iain actually wrote ..
_"The grappling & seizing aspects of karate are rarely practised today, but it is vital to understand that grappling was once as much a part of karate as the striking techniques most commonly associated with the art today."
_
I don't see where it implies grappling itself is forgotten. He is talking about Tegumi, the style of grappling that is inherent in karate.


----------



## Tez3

Mephisto said:


> If grappling is in Wado, and it is common i'd expect it to be on youtube. It's entirely possible that it's not on youtube, all you have to say is that you are unable to find it. You could find something else like a drawing or photo ot copy of a syllabus. Part of being scientific about something is presenting evidence. If you want to change minds or convince someone of something you've got to present evidence. I didn't read every link that was provided in this thread, I skimmed over some of the lengthy posts. If you think you've already presented sufficient evidence, restate it or copy and paste the most relevant quotes and they can be analyzed. I'm not going to read every diatribe linked. I think evidence has been presented that the founders of some karate styles had some ground grappling knowledge and it's reasonable to assume they knew some ground grappling. However, the debate here is to how common ground grappling is in karate.



I don't know if there's anything on You Tube, never looked, I simply don't care. You don't believe we are telling the truth then you prove we are lying mate. Oh and good luck on that one.

I don't want to change minds at all, I don't actually care whether I'm believed or not _however_ if I say that I do something I don't expect to be called a liar and have to present visual evidence to prove I did it. I'm not presenting evidence to be judged by you or anyone, what we are saying is that we do it, if you don't think we do, fine but it makes you look bad not us. We haven't suggested you don't train martial arts or that you are lying about what you do so why are you suggesting and inferring we are lying which is what you are doing when you say 'oh if it were so it would be on You Tube'.
 Please post up everything you do in martial arts because I don't believe that you actually train unless I see videos of you training on a video. See, that's not good is it? Demanding evidence because you don't believe someone when they give you their experiences is on the whole a nasty thing to do. As my mother would have said it's a very common thing to do and she brought me up not to be common. Common in this sense in the UK is not a good thing to be. this is a place for discussion and there has to be a certain trust before any sensible discussions are held, that hasn't been the case, for months now and on several different threads there have been posts constantly trashing karate for one thing or another. It's a personal vendetta and one that has some jumping on the band wagon. don't be that person that sees someone attacking others and jumps in with the boot.

You have already judged karate and karateka, it's obvious by your comments. Whatever 'proof' we gave you would be dismissed so all in all discussing this further would be time I'd never get back.  I hope you find your way back off your high horse and become grounded again, perhaps we can have a proper discussion sometime but sure as eggs is eggs this isn't the one.


----------



## Drose427

Mephisto said:


> another 2 secs and I found this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 4:28, he addresses tegumi and ground fighting. Where he basicall states some limited ground grappling did exist in classical karate but it was never a focus or specialty. Note, he also mentions how karate is known for strikes but that it does have some standing up joint lock techniques and throws. No where does he state that ground fighting is common or that it exists in karate at present time. I can't do all of your homework guys, but given some more in depth examples you might be able to make a compelling argument for groundfighting in karate. Of course, what intially brought up ground fighting was a knife attack on the ground, so the limited ground fighting of karate still might not have been much good in that specific scenario.





Mephisto said:


> Repost the thesis and repost the pictures, share specific quotes. You can't convince anyone by saying your opinion over and over, you need evidence and facts. Telling me to look it up myself isn't going to convince me, that's your job.



If you wanna learn, put in the work to read 2 pages. 

lif we link to books predating bjj, most won't read past the first paragraph.

If we show an article discussing evidence from before BJJ, but the article is from 2010, it's all a modern invention.

Frankly, even if I or others personally made videos showing The applications on the ground or ground drills we've been doing since day one, it'd be "something we stole from BJJ/MMA to catch up with their popularity."  

Earlier in this we walked through ground applications from 3 Pinan forms. If we made a video on it,  "it wouldn't have been from Karate."

We cant change a stubborn persons opinion, even with pictures or video or documentation. 

If you actually care to learn, go looks at the links we've posted and look into it on your own.


----------



## K-man

Mephisto said:


> Repost the thesis and repost the pictures, share specific quotes. You can't convince anyone by saying your opinion over and over, you need evidence and facts. Telling me to look it up myself isn't going to convince me, that's your job.


If you can't be bothered reading what has already been posted, don't hold your breath.

As to your remarks about Wado Ryu and grappling. They demonstrate you have no knowledge of the origins of Wado that is actually regarded as a style of Jujutsu by some, or maybe you think you can practise jujutsu without touching someone like a no touch KO.



> From one point of view, Wadō-ryū might be considered a style of jūjutsu rather than karate. It should be noted that Hironori Ōtsuka embraced Shotokan and was its chief instructor for a time. When Ōtsuka first registered his school with the Dai Nippon Butoku Kai in 1938, the style was called "Shinshu Wadō-ryū Karate-Jūjutsu," a name that reflects its hybrid character. Ōtsuka was a licensed Shindō Yōshin-ryū practitioner and a student of Yōshin-ryū when he first met the Okinawan karate master Gichin Funakoshi. After having learned from Funakoshi, and after their split, with Okinawan masters such asKenwa Mabuni and Motobu Chōki, Ōtsuka merged Shindō Yōshin-ryū with Okinawan karate. The result of Ōtsuka's efforts is Wadō-ryū Karate.
> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadō-ryū


----------



## Mephisto

K-man said:


> The statement, "Grappling is rarely taught in Karate" may well apply to generic 'karate' but it doesn't apply to Okinawan karate where it is still being taught as it always was. Iain's point is that overall Tegumi is absent from Karate where the bulk of the karate is Japanese. Get a life. The point has been addressed and explained.


Now you're differentiating okinawan from the rest of karate a distinction that hasn't been emphasized before. If the original quote said that groundfighting in karate is lacking, and you agree with this than why not just say so? but add the qualifier that it is more present in okinawan. This seems to be the gist of what you are saying. You agree that grappling is not common in the majority of karate, correct?



K-man said:


> I think the most sensible conclusion is that when Okinawan karate was taken to Japan it was taken more for its health benefits that the actual fighting aspect.


I agree with this, but the implications that japanese karate isn't for fighting are far more likely to cause disagreement, which is another completely different issue, but still worth discussing. So, perhaps shotokan isn't good for self defense if karate in japan's main puropse is health benefits. 



K-man said:


> Not at all. Your command of the English language is lacking if you can't understand what Iain is saying. You are twisting words. I'm not sure that there is any 'established fact' here at all. There is an opinion, with which I agree, that "grappling is rarely taught and is a forgotten aspect of karate practise", karate being the genetic term.  "Grappling is rarely taught" and "karate lacks grappling" are two totally different things. Grappling is inherent in karate whether it is taught or not. Tegumi is 'forgotten' in Japanese karate but it is still inherent in the kata, a fact that Iain has pointed out.



Personal attacks aren't the way to have a productive debate. Questioning Honzou's training and his "command of the english language" are personal attacks. The fact that you've had this long drawn out debate shows he must be able to communicate well enough. "grappling is rarely taught" and "karate lacks grappling" are similar statements and much less absolute than you assume.



K-man said:


> Let's look at what Iain actually wrote ..
> _"The grappling & seizing aspects of karate are rarely practised today, but it is vital to understand that grappling was once as much a part of karate as the striking techniques most commonly associated with the art today."
> _
> I don't see where it implies grappling itself is forgotten. He is talking about Tegumi, the style of grappling that is inherent in karate.


I'd say rarely practiced counts as an implication that it has been forgotten. It may bnot be forgotten by all but if it's rare than grappling has been forgotten by the majority.


----------



## Tez3

I've just seen a T shirt for sale. It says on the front " I CAN EXPLAIN IT TO YOU BUT I CAN'T UNDERSTAND IT FOR YOU"

Nuff said.


----------



## Mephisto

K-man said:


> If you can't be bothered reading what has already been posted, don't hold your breath.
> 
> As to your remarks about Wado Ryu and grappling. They demonstrate you have no knowledge of the origins of Wado that is actually regarded as a style of Jujutsu by some, or maybe you think you can practise jujutsu without touching someone like a no touch KO.


Exactly, I have no knowledge of Wado and never claimed such. Not sure why you'd assume that I believe in the existence of no touch k.o.s unless you're just resorting to personal attacks again. If grappling is common in Wado post a link or a pic. You're losing the argument and getting upset, that's why you're resorting to personal attacks. Grappling is not common in karate. Do you agree with this?


----------



## Mephisto

Tez3 said:


> I've just seen a T shirt for sale. It says on the front " I CAN EXPLAIN IT TO YOU BUT I CAN'T UNDERSTAND IT FOR YOU"
> 
> Nuff said.


Personal attacks again, your t-shirt options are irrelevant.


----------



## Mephisto

Drose427 said:


> If you wanna learn, put in the work to read 2 pages.
> 
> lif we link to books predating bjj, most won't read past the first paragraph.
> 
> If we show an article discussing evidence from before BJJ, but the article is from 2010, it's all a modern invention.
> 
> Frankly, even if I or others personally made videos showing The applications on the ground or ground drills we've been doing since day one, it'd be "something we stole from BJJ/MMA to catch up with their popularity."
> 
> Earlier in this we walked through ground applications from 3 Pinan forms. If we made a video on it,  "it wouldn't have been from Karate."
> 
> We cant change a stubborn persons opinion, even with pictures or video or documentation.
> 
> If you actually care to learn, go looks at the links we've posted and look into it on your own.


If you want to change opinions present your evidence. Forum communication is terribly inefficient and catching up with missed posts is difficult. But I suppose you're right, I should go back and re read if I truly care.


----------



## Drose427

Mephisto said:


> If you want to change opinions present your evidence. Forum communication is terribly inefficient and catching up with missed posts is difficult. But I suppose you're right, I should go back and re read if I truly care.



We have, if you personally don't care to look, that's not our Problem.

I can't force you to read.

Not caring or not putting in the time to learn doesn't mean we arent giving or havent given evidence. 

There's enough in this thread to spark curiosity in anyone who's open minded enough to care. 

Don't confuse stubbornness or indifference with winning or being right. 

Especially when you personally said you didn't train in Wadu.


I haven't trained in BJJ, but when a BJJ explains to me where striking is in classic BJJ, I'm not going pretend I know more than him because 99% of the BJJ videos and demos out there don't include any striking.


----------



## K-man

Mephisto said:


> Now you're differentiating okinawan from the rest of karate a distinction that hasn't been emphasized before. If the original quote said that groundfighting in karate is lacking, and you agree with this than why not just say so? but add the qualifier that it is more present in okinawan. This seems to be the gist of what you are saying. You agree that grappling is not common in the majority of karate, correct?


You haven't bothered to read the thread. The differentiation has been there from way back.

But that aside, yes I agree that grappling on the ground is not common in the majority of karate. Grappling while standing is common.


Mephisto said:


> I agree with this, but the implications that japanese karate isn't for fighting are far more likely to cause disagreement, which is another completely different issue, but still worth discussing. So, perhaps shotokan isn't good for self defense if karate in japan's main puropse is health benefits.


I didn't say that Japanese karate isn't for fighting. I said karate was first introduced to Japan for health reasons and that it has developed mainly down the road of competitive sport.



Mephisto said:


> Personal attacks aren't the way to have a productive debate. Questioning Honzou's training and his "command of the english language" are personal attacks. The fact that you've had this long drawn out debate shows he must be able to communicate well enough. "grappling is rarely taught" and "karate lacks grappling" are similar statements and much less absolute than you assume.


If you can't understand plain English it is a fact, not a personal attack. If you choose to be deliberately obtuse, then you are being deliberately obtuse. Nothing to do with personal attack.



Mephisto said:


> I'd say rarely practiced counts as an implication that it has been forgotten. It may bnot be forgotten by all but if it's rare than grappling has been forgotten by the majority.


'Rarely practised' in Japanese karate does not mean forgotten. If it wasn't taught in the first place it wasn't forgotten. If a style is practising kata then it is inherently there, just not being trained, if the bunkai is not being explored. 

But you are just rehashing old news. Do you have anything to add to the discussion?


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> The statement, "Grappling is rarely taught in Karate" may well apply to generic 'karate' but it doesn't apply to Okinawan karate where it is still being taught as it always was. Iain's point is that overall Tegumi is absent from Karate where the bulk of the karate is Japanese. Get a life. The point has been addressed and explained.



Again, I find it astonishing that you make that distinction, yet Abernethy didn't. Is Abernethy wrong in his statement that Grappling is rarely taught in *Karate*? 



> I think the most sensible conclusion is that when Okinawan karate was taken to Japan it was taken more for its health benefits that the actual fighting aspect.



So basically Japanese Karate is watered down Karate, and Okinawan Karate is "real" Karate?

Nice.




> Not at all. Your command of the English language is lacking if you can't understand what Iain is saying. You are twisting words. I'm not sure that there is any 'established fact' here at all. There is an opinion, with which I agree, that "grappling is rarely taught and is a forgotten aspect of karate practise", karate being the genetic term.  "Grappling is rarely taught" and "karate lacks grappling" are two totally different things.



If the majority of Karate students are coming out of Karate not knowing grappling (which is what would happen since its rarely taught), wouldn't they have a lack of grappling knowledge? 




> Let's look at what Iain actually wrote ..
> _"The grappling & seizing aspects of karate are rarely practised today, but it is vital to understand that grappling was once as much a part of karate as the striking techniques most commonly associated with the art today."_


_
_
You do remember that the *title of the article* is called Tegumi - Karate s Forgotten Range Iain Abernethy

Why would he entitle it "Karate's *Forgotten* Range" if its not really in fact forgotten?


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> I haven't trained in BJJ, but when a BJJ explains to me where striking is in classic BJJ, I'm not going pretend I know more than him because 99% of the BJJ videos and demos out there don't include any striking.



Except this Bjj just also happens to be a Shodan in Shotokan Karate do.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Except this Bjj just also happens to be a Shodan in Shotokan Karate do.


 
one who was time and time again not understood the concept of Bunkai or how it relates to forms. 

When a shodan can't understand that, it brings up questions of how well they understand Karate


----------



## Mephisto

K-man said:


> yes I agree that grappling on the ground is not common in the majority of karate. Grappling while standing is common.


Progress, I don't think anyone disagrees with you. Karate is lacking when it comes to ground grappling, because as you say ground grappling is not common in the majority of karate. Which is fine.



K-man said:


> I didn't say that Japanese karate isn't for fighting. I said karate was first introduced to Japan for health reasons and that it has developed mainly down the road of competitive sport.


So karate was brought to japan for health reasons, not fighting. Karate was developed for sport, not self defense. As has been determined before sport is completely different than self defense. So karate or s per the thread title, shotokan is not for self defense.It's purpose is sport and promotion health. Which is also fine.




K-man said:


> But you are just rehashing old news. Do you have anything to add to the discussion?


Well sometimes it's important to frame a discussion. I didn't realize we both agreed. Here we have established that grappling is not common in karate and that shotokan is not for self defense. I'm glad we can agree!


----------



## Tez3

Mephisto said:


> Exactly, I have no knowledge of Wado and never claimed such. Not sure why you'd assume that I believe in the existence of no touch k.o.s unless you're just resorting to personal attacks again. If grappling is common in Wado post a link or a pic. You're losing the argument and getting upset, that's why you're resorting to personal attacks. Grappling is not common in karate. Do you agree with this?


You didn't understand what was being said if you think there is a personal attack there. You admit to not reading much of the thread nor the links so it's impossible for you to understand what has been said. You said I was being obtuse so you were therefore by your lights making a personal attack on me.


----------



## Mephisto

Tez3 said:


> You didn't understand what was being said if you think there is a personal attack there. You admit to not reading much of the thread nor the links so it's impossible for you to understand what has been said. You said I was being obtuse so you were therefore by your lights making a personal attack on me.


Didn't admit to not reading to "reading much of the thread", I was just saying that I may have missed something along the way as this thread is now gotten very long. I was't making a personal attack on you as you really were being obtuse, unless you really believe that Honzou thinks that anything that is not on youtube does not exist. But the point is moot. All this discussion has gone in circles to establish that 1)ground grappling is not common in karate and that 2)shotokan is not meant for self defense. Which I have been a proponent of all along.


----------



## K-man

Mephisto said:


> another 2 secs and I found this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 4:28, he addresses tegumi and ground fighting. Where he basicall states some limited ground grappling did exist in classical karate but it was never a focus or specialty. Note, he also mentions how karate is known for strikes but that it does have some standing up joint lock techniques and throws. No where does he state that ground fighting is common or that it exists in karate at present time. I can't do all of your homework guys, but given some more in depth examples you might be able to make a compelling argument for groundfighting in karate. Of course, what intially brought up ground fighting was a knife attack on the ground, so the limited ground fighting of karate still might not have been much good in that specific scenario.


So who is *he* and what are his credentials?

What a surprise! "Some limited ground grappling did exist in classical karate but it was never a focus or specialty." Yep, I can live with that. By the way, no one has mentioned that ground fighting is common. As to no evidence of ground fighting ... I suppose Karate being just striking is so effective that we never end up on the ground. Right, that makes sense. So let's be realistic and say that the objective for most martial artists ,in other than competition, is to get up from the ground as soon as practical. Oh yes, *he* said that too didn't he?

Why do we need to give compelling arguement for ground fighting in karate? No one I have seen is claiming that karate has an extensive ground fighting system. If you cared to read the thread you will find that my comment was that if someone was clever enough to incorporate BJJ techniques into a bunkai it would be a great effort.

As you state, it was Hanzou's post of the stabbing on the ground that introduced the ground game. I would suggest that the defence against knife that we train *every* session would put any of my guys at least on an even footing with guys trained in BJJ even if we don't train it on the ground. I'll try that out at training this week.

By the way, *he* is Matthew Apsokardu. Out of interest he practises a style called Okinawan Kenpo, not one of the traditional ones but seems to have the right principles.

Which brings up another point. What are your credentials?


----------



## Mephisto

K-man said:


> So who is *he* and what are his credentials?
> 
> What a surprise! "Some limited ground grappling did exist in classical karate but it was never a focus or specialty." Yep, I can live with that. By the way, no one has mentioned that ground fighting is common. As to no evidence of ground fighting ... I suppose Karate being just striking is so effective that we never end up on the ground. Right, that makes sense. So let's be realistic and say that the objective for most martial artists ,in other than competition, is to get up from the ground as soon as practical. Oh yes, *he* said that too didn't he?
> 
> Why do we need to give compelling arguement for ground fighting in karate? No one I have seen is claiming that karate has an extensive ground fighting system. If you cared to read the thread you will find that my comment was that if someone was clever enough to incorporate BJJ techniques into a bunkai it would be a great effort.
> 
> As you state, it was Hanzou's post of the stabbing on the ground that introduced the ground game. I would suggest that the defence against knife that we train *every* session would put any of my guys at least on an even footing with guys trained in BJJ even if we don't train it on the ground. I'll try that out at training this week.
> 
> By the way, *he* is Matthew Apsokardu. Out of interest he practises a style called Okinawan Kenpo, not one of the traditional ones but seems to have the right principles.
> 
> Which brings up another point. What are your credentials?


You as well as some others were suggesting ground grappling was common in karate and Honzou just received inferior training because he didn't do any ground training in karate. Now you have backpedaled and completely changed your stance. No one here was criticizing karate for lacking an extensive ground grappling curriculum, what we were looking for was any evidence of ground grappling at all. Which has been shown to exist in early okinawan karate but doesn't seem to exist elsewhere, if so it is uncommon. I would really question your standing karate game as being effective for knife defense on the ground. Standing grappling and knife defense does not cover principals of position and control on the ground, a BJJ guy would still be better off IMO. By posting that video I was demonstrating that evidence does exist that grappling has been used in karate as was corroborated by Apsokardu in the video. You just have to be willing to look for evidence and present it to the discussion rather than talking in circles and restating opinion. My credentials? In karate, I have none. I'm here to learn. But i've been into martial arts for almost eleven years 9 of that in FMA as well as a number of other styles, but no serious karate. A JJJ school I trained at incorporated some karate strikes and kata into the curriculum but I don't really consider it in depth. But my credentials really don't matter, this is a discussion and anyone can contribute.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Mephisto said:


> You as well as some others were suggesting ground grappling was common in karate and Honzou just received inferior training because he didn't do any ground training in karate.



Yeah ... that's *not* what K-man (or anyone else that I've noticed) said. The comments about Hanzou's "inferior" training mostly is carrying over from arguments in numerous other threads about the effectiveness of karate, the existence of any form of grappling in karate, and the usefulness of kata in general.

Part of what's making this thread contentious is that some people are settled into a determination to prove the other guy wrong and are reading each other's posts in whatever way will support that argument.

Let's see if I can summarize some points which shouldn't be controversial.

Traditional Okinawan karate contained and contains a significant amount of stand-up grappling (throws, sweeps, joint locks). This grappling is integrated with the striking and is primarily intended for civilian self-defense against an untrained attacker. It is not developed to the level appropriate for entering grappling competitions against grappling specialists.

Any ground grappling in that might have existed in traditional karate would have been minimal and rudimentary.

When the Japanese adopted Karate (i.e. Shotokan) the grappling aspects were significantly de-emphasized in favor of striking. The official Shotokan syllabus has a few throws, but those are practiced (when they are practiced) through drilling rather than through live practice.

A large percentage of Japanese karate schools worldwide practice very little, if any, grappling. _A large percentage_ does not mean _all_.

Wado Ryu is a Japanese style founded by a practitioner of Karate and Jujutsu, and thus has always contained grappling. (In fact, it was originally named Shinshu Wadoryu _Karate-Jujutsu_). This is mostly stand-up grappling, not ground grappling.

You can provoke arguments among many karateka by raising the question of whether Shotokan is traditional or not, sport-oriented or not, self-defense-oriented or not.

Different karateka have very different ideas about what the meaning of kata and the correct applications of the techniques in kata are. Some will refer to those with different ideas on those subjects as flat out wrong or suggest that their understanding of the kata is lacking.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

BTW - with all the arguments about what it means for grappling to be inherent in kata and the value of finding new applications in kata, I'm disappointed that no one has responded to a hopefully relevant post I made yesterday: Shotokan for self defence. Page 16 MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community

You guys don't have to argue with Hanzou all the time. You _could_ argue with me instead. I guess nobody cares enough to tell me why _my_ ideas are stupid. *sniff*


----------



## Mephisto

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yeah ... that's *not* what K-man (or anyone else that I've noticed) said. The comments about Hanzou's "inferior" training mostly is carrying over from arguments in numerous other threads about the effectiveness of karate, the existence of any form of grappling in karate, and the usefulness of kata in general.
> 
> Part of what's making this thread contentious is that some people are settled into a determination to prove the other guy wrong and are reading each other's posts in whatever way will support that argument.
> 
> Let's see if I can summarize some points which shouldn't be controversial.
> 
> Traditional Okinawan karate contained and contains a significant amount of stand-up grappling (throws, sweeps, joint locks). This grappling is integrated with the striking and is primarily intended for civilian self-defense against an untrained attacker. It is not developed to the level appropriate for entering grappling competitions against grappling specialists.
> 
> Any ground grappling in that might have existed in traditional karate would have been minimal and rudimentary.
> 
> When the Japanese adopted Karate (i.e. Shotokan) the grappling aspects were significantly de-emphasized in favor of striking. The official Shotokan syllabus has a few throws, but those are practiced (when they are practiced) through drilling rather than through live practice.
> 
> A large percentage of Japanese karate schools worldwide practice very little, if any, grappling. _A large percentage_ does not mean _all_.
> 
> Wado Ryu is a Japanese style founded by a practitioner of Karate and Jujutsu, and thus has always contained grappling. (In fact, it was originally named Shinshu Wadoryu _Karate-Jujutsu_). This is mostly stand-up grappling, not ground grappling.
> 
> You can provoke arguments among many karateka by raising the question of whether Shotokan is traditional or not, sport-oriented or not, self-defense-oriented or not.
> 
> Different karateka have very different ideas about what the meaning of kata and the correct applications of the techniques in kata are. Some will refer to those with different ideas on those subjects as flat out wrong or suggest that their understanding of the kata is lacking.


Well there's this: Drose427: "
No, I'm saying most Karate schools teach basic grappling as part of Bunkai to teach students how to escape, get back up, or submit. Yours didnt, but many many others do both on this forum and not and have since Funakoshi was training. "
The above post seems to reference ground fighting because Drose specifies "get back up" as part of the grappling taught in "most karate schools". Others seemed to agree and support that ground grappling at a basic level is a commonality among karate practitioners. However, some confusion may have arisen as grappling and ground fighting can entail vary different skills. So for future reference on all parts there is a need to clarify if ground fighting is meant when grappling becomes a topic of argument. It seems though that ground fighting is not common in karate and that is now agreed despite what Drose and others may have said or inferred. 

I don't think anyone has issues with karate specifically. The point IMO is to recognize where your arts specialty applies and where your art has limitations. When practitioners think there art has the answer for everything dispute can arise. Some arts are more all inclusive than others but the more complex an art the less refinement they have in any given area. Many karate systems may have weapons training but i'd argue that a filipino system would offer better and more specialized weapons training because that is the specialty of most filipino systems. However, karate will provide more specialized striking compared to the filipino systems. As am FMA practitioner I realize the specialty and shortcomings of my art. Some FMA guys will still insist that FMA has it all and won't concede that karate may provide superior striking training in some or many schools. The same seems to be true with karate. Some guys don't seem to be willing to simply concede that other arts are better for a certain skill.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> So who is *he* and what are his credentials?
> 
> What a surprise! "Some limited ground grappling did exist in classical karate but it was never a focus or specialty." Yep, I can live with that. By the way, no one has mentioned that ground fighting is common. As to no evidence of ground fighting ... I suppose Karate being just striking is so effective that we never end up on the ground. Right, that makes sense. So let's be realistic and say that the objective for most martial artists ,in other than competition, is to get up from the ground as soon as practical. Oh yes, *he* said that too didn't he?



Unless your assailant just happened to wrestle or play American football in High School (which for Americans is a very real possibility, since those are the two most popular scholastic sports in the US for males). In that case your ability to get back to your feet is greatly diminished, since it was supposedly only designed to fight off "untrained" people.


----------



## Drose427

Tony Dismukes said:


> BTW - with all the arguments about what it means for grappling to be inherent in kata and the value of finding new applications in kata, I'm disappointed that no one has responded to a hopefully relevant post I made yesterday: Shotokan for self defence. Page 16 MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community
> 
> You guys don't have to argue with Hanzou all the time. You _could_ argue with me instead. I guess nobody cares enough to tell me why _my_ ideas are stupid. *sniff*



I actually used that post as reference talking to one of my MMA friends lol

He actively trains in his college Chun do Kwan TKD, wit his MMA training and we were talking to one of his gym buddies who wondered about forms training Vs non for training.

Both are valid, just different methods Of learning the same material! Just like any other subject, people learn best different ways and as a result we have different training methods

you brought up a good point in that not everyone can visualize and for many that becomes an issue with forms training. Especially in schools that don't put emphasize on teaching students how to draw from Kata and drill, drill, drill.

As for arguing with you instead, we could but I believe you've already said  you believed moves could be adapted and applied by others so it'd have to be just for fun 



Mephisto said:


> Well there's this: Drose427: "
> 
> No, I'm saying most Karate schools teach basic grappling as part of Bunkai to teach students how to escape, get back up, or submit. Yours didnt, but many many others do both on this forum and not and have since Funakoshi was training. "
> The above post seems to reference ground fighting because Drose specifies "get back up" as part of the grappling taught in "most karate schools". Others seemed to agree and support that ground grappling at a basic level is a commonality among karate practitioners. However, some confusion may have arisen as grappling and ground fighting can entail vary different skills. So for future reference on all parts there is a need to clarify if ground fighting is meant when grappling becomes a topic of argument. It seems though that ground fighting is not common in karate and that is now agreed despite what Drose and others may have said or inferred.
> 
> I don't think anyone has issues with karate specifically. The point IMO is to recognize where your arts specialty applies and where your art has limitations. When practitioners think there art has the answer for everything dispute can arise. Some arts are more all inclusive than others but the more complex an art the less refinement they have in any given area. Many karate systems may have weapons training but i'd argue that a filipino system would offer better and more specialized weapons training because that is the specialty of most filipino systems. However, karate will provide more specialized striking compared to the filipino systems. As am FMA practitioner I realize the specialty and shortcomings of my art. Some FMA guys will still insist that FMA has it all and won't concede that karate may provide superior striking training in some or many schools. The same seems to be true with karate. Some guys don't seem to be willing to simply concede that other arts are better for a certain skill.



Me and the others have been speaking in regards to Bunkai the entire time. Which is very different than actively live wrestling. This is where one of the big points of confusion seems to lie In A disconnect between training the bunkai, and full on submission wrestling. The latter, we have all admitted is much harder to find than the former.

Secondly, no karaetka here has said BJJ was inferior in anyway. We've recommended it as the best ground fighting option you can find within this thread.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> one who was time and time again not understood the concept of Bunkai or how it relates to forms.
> 
> When a shodan can't understand that, it brings up questions of how well they understand Karate



If you're taking apart kata the way they were clearly intended to be taken apart, I have no issue with bunkai. The only point when I have issue with bunkai is when people take it into directions it was clearly never intended to be taken into. Such as saying that Tekki Shodan is a ground fighting form.

Of course, I don't have a very high opinion of kata in the first place.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> If you're taking apart kata the way they were clearly intended to be taken apart, I have no issue with bunkai. The only point when I have issue with bunkai is when people take it into directions it was clearly never intended to be taken into. Such as saying that Tekki Shodan is a ground fighting form.
> 
> Of course, I don't have a very high opinion of kata in the first place.



Nobody claimed tekki shodan as a form was a ground fighting for other than yourself

Again, there isn't an intended interpretation of forms. Not understanding that is why people question your opinion and knowledge of Karate.


.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Nobody claimed tekki shodan as a form was a ground fighting for other than yourself





Drose427 said:


> The beginning of that clip is _exactly_ the movement Ando is doing from his back..
> 
> If you need it broken down:
> 
> The knees tightening and hands crossing and coming up then down, which is a common variation....exactly like ando did. You clip he simply doesnt bring his hands as high
> 
> Considering he walks you through the form both standing and from guard the _same way as when he was standing_, its pretty clear he got it from that form.....and yes, because the rest of us dont record everything we teach we must not teach it!
> 
> Also, he "dabbled" in BJJ according to his website, and used a move he learned _from a karate kata_...but he was on his back so i guess your point is its only karate if he's standing?



You did.




> Again, there isn't an intended interpretation of forms. Not understanding that is why people question your opinion and knowledge of Karate.



I disagree. There's an intended purpose for every form. Tekki Shodan for example is clearly designed for close quarter fighting against multiple opponents in a limited space. The movements of the kata itself support that interpretation.

Here's the Japanese/JKA Tekki Shodan bunkai, which frankly makes more sense than some of the more liberal interpretations of the kata;






Starts at 7:06

In the end, nothing about Tekki Shodan supports the notion that its for ground fighting.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> You did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. There's an intended purpose for every form. Tekki Shodan for example is clearly designed for close quarter fighting against multiple opponents in a limited space. The movements of the kata itself support that interpretation.
> 
> Here's the Japanese/JKA Tekki Shodan bunkai, which frankly makes more sense than some of the more liberal interpretations of the kata;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Starts at 7:06
> 
> In the end, nothing about Tekki Shodan supports the notion that its for ground fighting.



Again, nobody other than you have said tekki shodan was meant for ground fighting.

since the beginning of karate, Bunkai has has different "groups". Literal, Hidden, and True.

The most basic movement in any for is block to the down and punch. 

When teaching a new student, that's how we explain it.

But it's actually a takedown And zero changes need to be made.

Earlier I gave an example of how a punch/block into a hidden fist chamber was in the beginning of Pinan odan. 

Again, to those learning the form, that's the movement. 

But it's a gi choke, again with no change in technique. The punch/block lines your hands up perfectly to grab the collar. 

Forms have never been as black\white as "a punch is a punch" or having a specific Intention with highly specific moves.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Drose427 said:


> you brought up a good point in that not everyone can visualize and for many that becomes an issue with forms training. Especially in schools that don't put emphasize on teaching students how to draw from Kata and drill, drill, drill.
> 
> As for arguing with you instead, we could but I believe you've already said you believed moves could be adapted and applied by others so it'd have to be just for fun


Any comment on my assertion that the movements of the kata were fundamentally not the same as the movements of the demonstrated bunkai?



Drose427 said:


> Again, there isn't an intended interpretation of forms.
> Not understanding that is why people question your opinion and knowledge of Karate.



Interesting assertion, and one that provokes some questions:

Did the creators of the kata not have a specific idea of what the movements of the kata were meant to represent?

If the movements were intended to represent generalized movement patterns that could represent a variety of different techniques as interpreted by the practitioner rather than a set, specific function, then does the exact sequence of those movements in the kata matter (as some insist they do)? If so, why?

How close does a movement in the kata have to be to its intended application in order to gain any benefit in skill for the intended application? For example, in the bunkai video by Mr. Ando, do you feel you could improve your skill in the demonstrated ground-fighting applications by practicing the kata with those applications in mind?

Should performance of a kata look different depending on what applications you are visualizing as you practice it? For example, if the practitioner intends a given movement to be a throw, should it look different than if he intends it to be a block? If not, why not?


----------



## Drose427

Tony Dismukes said:


> Any comment on my assertion that the movements of the kata were fundamentally not the same as the movements of the demonstrated bunkai?
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting assertion, and one that provokes some questions:
> 
> Did the creators of the kata not have a specific idea of what the movements of the kata were meant to represent?
> 
> If the movements were intended to represent generalized movement patterns that could represent a variety of different techniques as interpreted by the practitioner rather than a set, specific function, then does the exact sequence of those movements in the kata matter (as some insist they do)? If so, why?
> 
> How close does a movement in the kata have to be to its intended application in order to gain any benefit in skill for the intended application? For example, in the bunkai video by Mr. Ando, do you feel you could improve your skill in the demonstrated ground-fighting applications by practicing the kata with those applications in mind?
> 
> Should performance of a kata look different depending on what applications you are visualizing as you practice it? For example, if the practitioner intends a given movement to be a throw, should it look different than if he intends it to be a block? If not, why not?



I believe the movement he was intending as using was more of the opening to shodan than the first moves. I.e. the prepping for chumbee, as in the knees come together (from standing you lift onto your toes) and the hands come up(in most styles. Some they come steaught up, some they come out from the face abit such as our where they go just out from your brow before coming back down, and some schools don't raise the hands at all). I could also be wrong with An do video. Such is why I've tried to walk through other forms grounder bunko where I could not find video. I.e. Gi choke in our form Pina odan. Not as street applicable as Samoan from the thesis someone else showed, but the gi choke takes virtually no change in technique. It'so actually simpler from the ground because the block\punch isn't really necessary. The wrap for it provides better coverage while also allowing you to crash or control the head and get you hands near the collar. Where as standing, the hands aren't both there without sliding in farther.

as for your other questions:

I'm sure the was some idea but more so on the individual techniques.

I.e. Pina odan. the literal movement in the hidden fist chamber is a called a setup move. When teahcing its a simple side block, punch. Done with a partner, these first 3 moves are easily seen as a choke on a single opponent.

The next 3 moves are the same thing mirrored to the other side.

It's unlikely that they accidentally put in a gi choke, even if the movement equating to the  actual choke is considered a set up move. Did they intend this choke to be used from your back? I can't say. But it can be done fairly easily without a huge warp of the movement.

I would say the literal interpretations are important for learning proper waist, technique, targeting, angles, in many schools cases conditioning i.e. if a series of attacks is done from a deep stance in your school not shortchanging helps build considerable muscle. Many moves in forms done out of order will throw off your angles and positioning. This is where I believe it's important to do forms with other people. Sometimes a student won't understand why being a little out of position is important, but they do when I can step in and show them that out of position they may still be in range to get hit, their opponent may be out of range, or they may have no leverage.

Imo, one of the most important is learning simple combinations and bunkai. At white belt,  student have specific things for SD. At gold belt we tell students to start looking at forms As a way of easing them into understanding how to adapt forms. If they learn a move as a basic block to the down then punch, it's far simpler for them to understand how that is then a takedown and now they understand the technique of it. Students go from learning to use the block-step in- punch, to then seeing how it's a takedown. 

This question is one of opinion moreso than fact. While I don't feel that a move in forms needs to exactly the same, the mechanics should be Or should be very close. Keecho IL boo and the Block to the down punch is a good example. As a takedown, tends to look a little different then the form. But the block, stepping in and deep for the trip is nearly the same lower body movement.

In the form it's very distinct whereas in bunks it isn't as pretty, but the positioning and body mechanics are the nearly same. With the takedown method putting more emphasis on a deep stance and being hip to hip if you choose to do it on the outside. But then, it doesn't look as much like the form. Although the actual trip is very similar. I'd if it's been posted here but Aberethy did a good video on this exact application.


For me, performance of Kata as you are describing is  training the whole Kata either by myself or with an instructor or fellow student. For this, I would say no For the simple fact that aside from minor adaption it'd be bad for me to change a move completely from what I was taught during forms at a tourney or test.They'd wanna see the form as its taught, not bunkai.

As bunkai, you should be drilling it as however you intend the move to be. Take the previous takedown example. In forms, a very distinct block to the down followed by a very distinct punch to the solar plexus.

As a takedown in bunkai, I'm more likely to push in with more of boxing style block and jab while i step my leg into position behind theirs for the trip. I personally now prefer to block and go for the collargrab/elbow while going for the trip, but the trip itself remains the same.

As a brief disclaimer, your last two questions are more opinion than anything. I personally have been able to apply bunkai from taken from Kata and adapt them if need be as easily as when I was learning the very straightforward way back in boxing.

This is not everyone and makes it difficult to say if forms should or should be a certain way.

Imo, when you limit something to only being used "this way" or being specifically "this" you affect your students ability to change or adapt in in various situations thus affecting their ability to grow as a martial artist and find a fighting style best suited to them.

I.e and examples for grappling would be saying you could only run an omoplata from guard, or could only run a headlock in wrestling if you chained it from a Cowboy. When obviously you could run it from a failed Peterson or roll or found the position in general scrambling


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> .things like the sun going around the Earth, that must be true because someone wrote and actually believed it once, also that the Earth was flat, that too must be still true according to your way of thinking.


It is sad that some people today still think that.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Typically, if someone tells me that "Grappling is rarely taught in Karate", I'm going to guess that they're talking about all forms of Karate, including the Okinawan variety. It also seems odd that Abernethy wouldn't make the distinction since he's talking about a form Okinawan grappling. If you're saying that Okinawan Tegumi is largely absent from Japanese Karate, wouldn't you take great pains to make the distinction that it IS present in Okinanwan Karate?
> 
> I think a more sensible conclusion is that Abernethy was talking about ALL forms of Karate when he says that grappling is rarely taught in *Karate*


I am wondering if Iain Abernathy had said that grappling was common in karate would you be trying so hard to agree with him?


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Again, nobody other than you have said tekki shodan was meant for ground fighting.
> 
> since the beginning of karate, Bunkai has has different "groups". Literal, Hidden, and True.
> 
> The most basic movement in any for is block to the down and punch.
> 
> When teaching a new student, that's how we explain it.
> 
> But it's actually a takedown And zero changes need to be made.
> 
> Earlier I gave an example of how a punch/block into a hidden fist chamber was in the beginning of Pinan odan.
> 
> Again, to those learning the form, that's the movement.
> 
> But it's a gi choke, again with no change in technique. The punch/block lines your hands up perfectly to grab the collar.



A takedown and standing gi choke isn't ground fighting.

Again, the point was that karate has no answer when you hit the pavement.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> A takedown and standing gi choke isn't ground fighting.


 
No but that gi choke is easily done from a BJJ guard. I've said that every time I brought it up.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> No but that gi choke is easily done from a BJJ guard. I've said that every time I brought it up.



Oh?  And what would be the name of this gi choke?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Oh?  And what would be the name of this gi choke?



Couldn't tell you.  It's just a gi choke.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Couldn't tell you.  It's just a gi choke.



There's dozens of Gi chokes with dozens of variations. 

Are you talking about this;


----------



## drop bear

Ok. So even if your system has grappling you are going to benefit from learning from specialists.

We do it and we definitely have grappling.

Now here is the thingy thing. BJJ has grappling AND learns from specialist grapplers from other systems. 

And this is because the specialist are better at it.  Better systems and better practitioners.

So a karate guy will be a better karate guy if he also does judo. A BJJ guy will be a better BJJ guy if he does judo.

And you will become a better all round fighter.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> There's dozens of Gi chokes with dozens of variations.
> 
> Are you talking about this;



The fact that you've pulled up a shodan video when I've clearly been talking about a different form shows how much you're paying attention..

But, walking you through it through text, as best I can (only the actual choke)

Right hand grabs opponents right side lappel knuckles up thumb in. Left hand grabs other side and inverted. Pulling the hands away from each and towards your hip (where we teach because the similarity of the form)  causes the choke. Simple common gi choke done in multiple martial arts.

To be fair, in the form we come straight back whereas from your back it has to come out at more of an angle or you'd break your elbow


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Ok. So even if your system has grappling you are going to benefit from learning from specialists.
> 
> We do it and we definitely have grappling.
> 
> Now here is the thingy thing. BJJ has grappling AND learns from specialist grapplers from other systems.
> 
> And this is because the specialist are better at it.  Better systems and better practitioners.
> 
> So a karate guy will be a better karate guy if he also does judo. A BJJ guy will be a better BJJ guy if he does judo.
> 
> And you will become a better all round fighter.


 
I agree, everyone in this thread has


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> I agree, everyone in this thread has



You would be amazed how much people wander off this idea. The original premise was that karate has pretty bloody non existent ground work.

And now there has been many incredibly entertaining pages about how it is in the kata and the herp derp. Mabye it is. Mabye it isn't. But it is the wrong place to look. Because if you want to understand a thing you have go to a guy who does it.

This has been touched on actually by the suggestion that you do another style to understand the kata. Which is half right. But it is based on the assumption that the kata will contain all the elements of fighting you need to know. You just have to believe in it enough or something which is just dumb.

You cant assume the kata is right based on the fact it is the kata. That is dogma.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> You would be amazed how much people wander off this idea. The original premise was that karate has pretty bloody non existent ground work.
> 
> And now there has been many incredibly entertaining pages about how it is in the kata and the herp derp. Mabye it is. Mabye it isn't. But it is the wrong place to look. Because if you want to understand a thing you have go to a guy who does it.
> 
> This has been touched on actually by the suggestion that you do another style to understand the kata. Which is half right. But it is based on the assumption that the kata will contain all the elements of fighting you need to know. You just have to believe in it enough or something which is just dumb.
> 
> You cant assume the kata is right based on the fact it is the kata. That is dogma.



Again nobody here has said to train in Karate if you want Good grappling skills.

The premise is that kata has things that can be applied to the ground. Not that it's some full be all end all grappling system.

Not a single person has made that claim. We've all said in very plain english, if grappling what you want BJJ/Judo are the best ways to get it.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> The fact that you've pulled up a shodan video when I've clearly been talking about a different form shows how much you're paying attention..
> 
> But, walking you through it through text, as best I can (only the actual choke)
> 
> Right hand grabs opponents right side lappel knuckles up thumb in. Left hand grabs other side and inverted. Pulling the hands away from each and towards your hip (where we teach because the similarity of the form)  causes the choke. Simple common gi choke done in multiple martial arts.
> 
> To be, in the form we come straight back whereas from your back it has to come out at more of an angle or you'd break your elbow



So is it this choke?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> So is it this choke?



Yup, in the form it's done standing. But personally, its simply easier to get on the ground. Instead on the sideblock/punch, you use the wrap for them which gives you coverage over your face using your forearms, the option to control or crash their head, and it just plain get your hands there better.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> What rubbish! Our training tonight was almost entirely on the ground although primarily focused on getting up from the ground. Where you get this notion that karate is purely a stand up martial art just shows how much *your* karate training was lacking, not that karate is lacking.



now we start with ground fighting karatekas.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> My style of karate has ground fighting, something that doesn't surprise people who know who the founder of Wado Ryu was.



Wadao ryu are ground fighting machines apparently.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Again nobody here has said to train in Karate if you want Good grappling skills.
> 
> The premise is that kata has things that can be applied to the ground. Not that it's some full be all end all grappling system.
> 
> Not a single person has made that claim. We've all said in very plain english, if grappling what you want BJJ/Judo are the best ways to get it.



Look at the above two posts and it just rolls on from there.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Look at the above two posts and it just rolls on from there.



Neither one of those are saying Karate Grappling and ground applications are better than BJJ....if you actually paid attention in this thread, you'd know that both of them have also said BJJ was far superior for grappling.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Neither one of those are saying Karate Grappling and ground applications are better than BJJ....if you actually paid attention in this thread, you'd know that both of them have also said BJJ was far superior for grappling.



No i wasn't paying attention. Please show me where they said that.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> No i wasn't paying attention. Please show me where they said that.




We've reiterated it several times, you can almost litreally choose a random page and find someone saying it.  

I'm not your mom, if you wanna see it go look.

I'm not their mom either, I'm sure they'll link you to a few of the times they said it when it isn't 4 am.

But if you think anyone other than handouts here has said there's a full grappling system you either:

1. Haven't been paying attention and reading this thread

Or

2. Don't understand the difference application/bunkai training and full extensive live wrestling.

I'm sure you'll see a full rebuttal from k-man and tecz later


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> We've reiterated it several times, you can almost litreally choose a random page and find someone saying it.
> 
> I'm not your mom, if you wanna see it go look.
> 
> I'm not their mom either, I'm sure they'll link you to a few of the times they said it when it isn't 4 am.
> 
> But if you think anyone other than handouts here has said there's a full grappling system you either:
> 
> 1. Haven't been paying attention and reading this thread
> 
> Or
> 
> 2. Don't understand the difference application/bunkai training and full extensive live wrestling.
> 
> I'm sure you'll see a full rebuttal from k-man and tecz later



you made the statement you find the evidence. It is not about being my mum it is about supporting what you say.

which you haven't done in a surprise twist.

which means that.

1 you haven't read the thread properly.
or
2. You don't understand how bunk applies to kata.


----------



## Drose427

You made the accusation that any of were saying BJJ was inferior or that the grappling and groundwork done was anything more than drilling and applications. 

You should probably at least actually read what we've said instead of skimming until you find something you disagree with


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> You made the accusation that any of were saying BJJ was inferior or that the grappling and groundwork done was anything more than drilling and applications.
> 
> You should probably at least actually read what we've said instead of skimming until you find something you disagree with



Where did i make that accusation?


----------



## K-man

Mephisto said:


> Exactly, I have no knowledge of Wado and never claimed such. Not sure why you'd assume that I believe in the existence of no touch k.o.s unless you're just resorting to personal attacks again. If grappling is common in Wado post a link or a pic. You're losing the argument and getting upset, that's why you're resorting to personal attacks. Grappling is not common in karate. Do you agree with this?


You keep asserting that Wado Ryu doesn't include grappling when it is based on jujutsu. Perhaps you can explain to me how you can train jujutsu without grappling. I haven't resorted to personal attacks at all. Practising jujutsu without grappling makes the same sense as expecting no touch knockouts to work. Why would I bother to post a video of Wado. I know what it is, what it contains and where it comes from. If you were to pick any style to say it doesn't contain grappling then Wado would be one of the last ones you would think of.

As to grappling in karate, I do not agree that it is not common. It is very common. What is not common is ground fighting and I don't see that changing anytime soon. I teach enough ground fighting for someone taken to the ground to get back on their feet.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> You keep asserting that Wado Ryu doesn't include grappling when it is based on jujutsu. Perhaps you can explain to me how you can train jujutsu without grappling. I haven't resorted to personal attacks at all. Practising jujutsu without grappling makes the same sense as expecting no touch knockouts to work. Why would I bother to post a video of Wado. I know what it is, what it contains and where it comes from. If you were to pick any style to say it doesn't contain grappling then Wado would be one of the last ones you would think of.
> 
> As to grappling in karate, I do not agree that it is not common. It is very common. What is not common is ground fighting and I don't see that changing anytime soon. I teach enough ground fighting for someone taken to the ground to get back on their feet.



So as an example more or less grappling than Thai?


----------



## drop bear

drop bear said:


> So as an example more or less grappling than Thai?



More or less than boxing?


----------



## Drose427

Tez3 said:


> It's not got the technical beauty of BJJ, it's rough and ready but it's there.



There's Tecz. 

 K-man, Danny T and myself have all said this same thing. I'd find more for you but I realized you probably won't read them anyways.





drop bear said:


> No i wasn't paying attention. Please show me where they said that.



I gave you one and  I'm sure k-man can link you all the times he's said it in this thread.


This isn't a question of evidence, this is quite literally just you being unwilling to read earlier pages.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> You made the accusation that any of were saying BJJ was inferior or that the grappling and groundwork done was anything more than drilling and applications.
> 
> You should probably at least actually read what we've said instead of skimming until you find something you disagree with



The accusation basically is that karate is cross training in something grapple good and re branding it as karate. Then trying to say that it is not a result of cross training but was in the system all the time.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> There's Tecz.
> 
> K-man, Danny T and myself have all said this same thing. I'd find more for you but I realized you probably won't read them anyways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I gave you one and  I'm sure k-man can link you all the times he's said it in this thread.
> 
> 
> This isn't a question of evidence, this is quite literally just you being unwilling to read earlier pages.



So then why the fifty page rage fest when hanzau claims from a bjj point of view karate grappling is basically non existent?

I mean if a whit belt bjjer is subbing out a black belt karate guy. Non existent while mean might not far from the truth.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> The accusation basically is that karate is cross training in something grapple good and re branding it as karate. Then trying to say that it is not a result of cross training but was in the system all the time.



Try telling that to all the folks in this thread doing grappling 20-30 years before MMA or BJJS popularity. The majority of karateka in this thread all did some in their training.

because it does exist. In a simplistic form.

A white belt in BJJ can tap out your average wrestler, is grappling non existent in wrestling on those grounds?

this isn't a "karate  grappling vs BJJ grappling" debate.  If you actually read the posts  you see we've all said BJJ is a far more refined grappling system.

"nonexistent" isn't true. The debate and edginess is because it's been 5 or 6 karate saying its always been apart of their training to some extent, and 2 or 3 others who aren't karateka or in hanzous case, were karateka and yet still don't understand the difference between bunkai and live wrestling.


----------



## drop bear

See in context here I would say my grappling as rudimentary. Enough to get a fat guy off me to stand up or to keep a guy on the ground if i want.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> See in context here I would say my grappling as rudimentary. Enough to get a fat guy off me to stand up or to keep a guy on the ground if i want.



This is quite literally what we have said the entire time


----------



## K-man

Mephisto said:


> You as well as some others were suggesting ground grappling was common in karate and Honzou just received inferior training because he didn't do any ground training in karate.


That is a deliberate lie. I have never suggested ground grappling was common in karate. Also I have never stated that Hanzou received inferior training because he didn't do any ground grappling in his Shotokan training. Stick to facts and what has been written. Hanzou is the one claiming his training in Shotokan was a waste of time. He even restated this in one of the earlier posts in this thread.



Mephisto said:


> Now you have backpedaled and completely changed your stance. No one here was criticizing karate for lacking an extensive ground grappling curriculum, what we were looking for was any evidence of ground grappling at all. Which has been shown to exist in early okinawan karate but doesn't seem to exist elsewhere, if so it is uncommon.


Why would you be looking for evidence when you guys are the only ones suggesting that there is evidence. Where it exists in Okinawa is in Tegumi. Tegumi or its near relation Kakie but both of these are standup. Now if you are grappling standing up and you put your opponent on the ground there is a chance you might also be taken to the ground. Obviously we train to regain our feet. That is using rudimentary ground skills, all we are claiming.



Mephisto said:


> I would really question your standing karate game as being effective for knife defense on the ground. Standing grappling and knife defense does not cover principals of position and control on the ground, a BJJ guy would still be better off IMO. By posting that video I was demonstrating that evidence does exist that grappling has been used in karate as was corroborated by Apsokardu in the video. You just have to be willing to look for evidence and present it to the discussion rather than talking in circles and restating opinion.


I'm not sure I have to produce anything. I know what I know, I know what I have trained in Okinawa and I know what I teach. I don't give a stuff what you think because you have no experience in this field.



Mephisto said:


> My credentials? In karate, I have none. I'm here to learn. But i've been into martial arts for almost eleven years 9 of that in FMA as well as a number of other styles, but no serious karate. A JJJ school I trained at incorporated some karate strikes and kata into the curriculum but I don't really consider it in depth. But my credentials really don't matter, this is a discussion and anyone can contribute.


If you are here to learn, great. A lot of people here have many years of experience covering many styles of martial arts. When you start questioning how and what those people train without any knowledge of the subject it should not be surprising that we take offence when you tell us our training is other than what we know and teach.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Try telling that to all the folks in this thread doing grappling 20-30 years before MMA or BJJS popularity. The majority of karateka in this thread all did some in their training.
> 
> because it does exist. In a simplistic form.
> 
> A white belt in BJJ can tap out your average wrestler, is grappling non existent in wrestling on those grounds?
> 
> this isn't a "karate  grappling vs BJJ grappling" debate.  If you actually read the posts  you see we've all said BJJ is a far more refined grappling system.
> 
> "nonexistent" isn't true. The debate and edginess is because it's been 5 or 6 karate saying its always been apart of their training to some extent, and 2 or 3 others who aren't karateka or in hanzous case, were karateka and yet still don't understand the difference between bunkai and live wrestling.



see my impression was that judo,wrestling or one of those specialized grappling arts have been part of the well rounded training that were being conducted by stand up guys. 

and that is not really the same as hidden in the secret depths of kata.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> This is quite literally what we have said the entire time



Yeas and why we set different standards at rudimentary


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Yeas and why we set different standards at rudimentary



Not really. Exactly what you said is the exact length.


drop bear said:


> see my impression was that judo,wrestling or one of those specialized grappling arts have been part of the well rounded training that were being conducted by stand up guys.
> 
> and that is not really the same as hidden in the secret depths of kata.



Again, not quite true.

My school has no instructor with any grappling experience outside of what's in our system. I was the first wrestler when I walked in the door.

But we teach the gi choke from our form from both standing and a guard type position. 

Applying simple techs to the ground really isn't that hard.

I can't speak for all the branch schools of course, or our grandmasters training in Seoul in the 50s. But I can tell you no of the instructors teaching me have any extensive or comparable ground training.

Not to mention the other folks here who have chimed in about theirs.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Not really. Exactly what you said is the exact length.
> 
> 
> Again, not quite true.
> 
> My school has no instructor with any grappling experience outside of what's in our system. I was the first wrestler when I walked in the door.
> 
> But we teach the gi choke from our form from both standing and a guard type position.
> 
> Applying simple techs to the ground really isn't that hard.
> 
> I can't speak for all the branch schools of course, or our grandmasters training in Seoul in the 50s. But I can tell you no of the instructors teaching me have any extensive or comparable ground training.
> 
> Not to mention the other folks here who have chimed in about theirs.



rudimentary for me is a passable system of basic skills. Non existent is a system with a high percentage of spazzy flailing. Objective I know.

What system do you do?


----------



## Tez3

Mephisto said:


> Didn't admit to not reading to "reading much of the thread", I was just saying that I may have missed something along the way as this thread is now gotten very long. I was't making a personal attack on you as you really were being obtuse, unless you really believe that Honzou thinks that anything that is not on youtube does not exist. But the point is moot. All this discussion has gone in circles to establish that 1)ground grappling is not common in karate and that 2)shotokan is not meant for self defense. Which I have been a proponent of all along.




You decided I was being obtuse not I, you did say you hadn't read posts on here but hey I wouldn't let that stop you judging us or trying to make the remarks personal. You are obviously a very experienced karateka and have trained for decades to be able to decide what Shotokan is, perhaps you trained, like me, in the 1970s? Perhaps too you would share with us your karate training experience? What rank are you in Shotokan? I would love to know who you have trained with,  Shotokan has some awesome full contact fighters, have you competed against them?

You jumped in with some pretty wild misconceptions about what has been written, you have now made some wild assertions about something I suspect you actually know little to nothing about. Do you not feel that perhaps you've put yourself in over your head by trying to support someone else's unsupportable position? I mean this kindly to hopefully get you to look at your own ideas not someone elses, hanzou is trying to bully through his own perceptions and ideas about Shotokan, you are standing there holding his coat and shouting support from the sidelines by parroting his words, it's not a good look quite frankly. Hanzou's posts are original  and we will debate them with him.  You are making assumptions about Shotokan without any proof which is something you accused everyone else of not providing, do you see how this looks? It seems whatever we write has to be proved (condescendingly you said we could draw pictures if we couldn't find a video) but you can make statements with no proof what so ever. Why is that? why are you screaming 'personal attack' at us when it's you who are making it personal?


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> BTW - with all the arguments about what it means for grappling to be inherent in kata and the value of finding new applications in kata, I'm disappointed that no one has responded to a hopefully relevant post I made yesterday: Shotokan for self defence. Page 16 MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community
> 
> You guys don't have to argue with Hanzou all the time. You _could_ argue with me instead. I guess nobody cares enough to tell me why _my_ ideas are stupid. *sniff*


OK! I went back and read your post and to be honest I am very disappointed. What you have posted is very hard to argue against, especially when it is pretty close to my understanding. 

Could I give you some advice? If you want me to argue with me don't post information that is similar to my own experience. Perhaps you could misquote me or at least accuse me of personally attacking you. Try posting something bagging one of my MAs, or even someone else's. Another way is to tear down one of the guys who I have looked up to in my training. Start bagging Iain Abernethy or Geoff Thompson, or tell me that Kevin O'Hagen is a fraud. That should do it.

So don't be upset, I'm happy to argue with you ... but if you continue to make logical and sensible statements all you can expect from me is a civil discussion along similar lines.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> I disagree. There's an intended purpose for every form. Tekki Shodan for example is clearly designed for close quarter fighting against multiple opponents in a limited space. The movements of the kata itself support that interpretation.


 Sorry, no kata is designed for multiple opponents. That implies choreography. You are fighting one attacker and the next guy gets into the right position and strikes at exactly the right time in the kata ... I don't think so! Karate kata are all for close quarter fighting and are for one opponent. The turns and angles represent your position relative to your opponent.



Hanzou said:


> Here's the Japanese/JKA Tekki Shodan bunkai, which frankly makes more sense than some of the more liberal interpretations of the kata;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Starts at 7:06


OMG! That is real? No wonder you have such a poor opinion of kata and bunkai. Unbelievable! At its best it is kihon. Beyond that it doesn't make any sense at all. If you want to see some realistic bunkai from Naihanchi, see if you can get hold of some of George Dillman's videos from 25 years ago. They were the first I came across giving a good explanation of bunkai.



Hanzou said:


> In the end, nothing about Tekki Shodan supports the notion that its for ground fighting.


And nobody ever suggested it did. However, the bunkai may be adapted to whatever scenario the practitioner wants it to be. The only restriction is that you follow the rules of bunkai.


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> Any comment on my assertion that the movements of the kata were fundamentally not the same as the movements of the demonstrated bunkai?


The movements of the kata may or may not be the same as the kata as the turns in the kata represent your position relevant to your opponent. This can be achieved by moving yourself, ie stepping off the line, or by turning your opponent. Furthermore, kata can be 'unpacked'. By that I mean it can be performed in a straight line. This better shows the movement you might find in the bunkai. And, finally stepping forward into a stance say with the right foot is the same as stepping back into the same stance with the left foot. The kata is to teach the sequence, angle and direction.



Tony Dismukes said:


> Interesting assertion, and one that provokes some questions:
> 
> Did the creators of the kata not have a specific idea of what the movements of the kata were meant to represent?


Obviously there were movements that the creators intended. But for any given movement in the kata there can be numerous explanations. That gives rise to an infinite number of sequences if you want. It also depends on your physical stature as to what technique any particular move might be. The one certainty is that there are no blocks. A block means that there has been a punch and to say that an attacker must punch at a particular time is purely choreography. Kata works on predicted response. Your opponent blocks or he gets hit. If he lifts his arm to block then obviously your strike has failed so you restrain his arm and attack with the next move of the kata.



Tony Dismukes said:


> If the movements were intended to represent generalized movement patterns that could represent a variety of different techniques as interpreted by the practitioner rather than a set, specific function, then does the exact sequence of those movements in the kata matter (as some insist they do)? If so, why?


First part, spot on. There is no set specific function although some moves are pretty obvious as the groin strike in Seipai kata. But the sequence is critical. If one attack fails you move to the next and the kata provides the information. But having said that there is no requirement to proceed to the next step if a better opportunity offers. In that case you may move to another place in the kata or even change kata. 



Tony Dismukes said:


> How close does a movement in the kata have to be to its intended application in order to gain any benefit in skill for the intended application? For example, in the bunkai video by Mr. Ando, do you feel you could improve your skill in the demonstrated ground-fighting applications by practicing the kata with those applications in mind?


In principle yes, but I think it would be extremely difficult to make a kata work on the ground as was shown, at least without an extensive knowledge of ground fighting. In normal kata, yes I envisage what the kata means to me, but in a standing grappling scenario.



Tony Dismukes said:


> Should performance of a kata look different depending on what applications you are visualizing as you practice it? For example, if the practitioner intends a given movement to be a throw, should it look different than if he intends it to be a block? If not, why not?


I don't believe so. The kata is the kata. Kata is kihon or basics. Basics are performed in a particular manner so it should always be the same.

However, there is always the exception. Kata also has an advanced form. It may be in a straight line, it may be performed with different emphasis. If you are performing your advanced form of the kata, then it is yours to do with what you want. If you want to bend with a throw, by all means do that, but, when you are performing the kihon, that is what you must do. When you are teaching, you always teach the kihon. That way succeeding generations are all provided with the same blueprint.


----------



## K-man

RTKDCMB said:


> It is sad that some people today still think that.


Some people also think kata is a waste of time. Also sad.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Again, the point was that karate has no answer when you hit the pavement.


Um, no. And just no! When you hit the pavement, even without advanced grappling skills, you still have a multitude of strikes, locks and holds that are available for you to use. The idea that the moment you hit the ground you are defenceless is ludicrous.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> now we start with ground fighting karatekas.


What are you talking about? One minute you say there is no ground fighting in karate and I tell you we spent the night on the ground doing basic drills to regain your feet. What sort of martial art stops the minute you hit the ground?  Get over it!


----------



## Tez3

K-man said:


> That way succeeding generations are all provided with the same blueprint.



I like the analogy to a blue print. I was reading another thread on here about the 'old style' martial artists just practising one stance ( horse stance in the thread) for a very long time and it made me think that it seems people want to have everything handed to them on a plate now, there's no time for taking the long view. Working out the Bunkai of a kata is too time consuming, so everything must be taught immediately, heaven forfend that one should have to work things out yourself. It's all show me, show me NOW! Rather than work on your kata it seems the thing is that you have to be shown every move, every nuance so that you know it's 'real'. And of course you have to video it! We have a joke on an MMA site I go on, whenever someone boasts about some thing, it's 'post video or it didn't happen', it is a joke but I also think it's the way modern thought is angled now, not just to martial arts though, life. Video it or it didn't happen.

I like the blueprint idea, that we are learn good basics and have to work it out for ourselves. It makes sense to me that you do that, there's certain techniques I struggle with because of lack of size or height others that work well for the same reasons, working it out means a personalised armoury of techniques for me.

It does seem that anything that takes time to learn and grow into like kata is looked down on these days, it's a shame, I believe you can miss so much by not taking that time. I don't think any martial art is enhanced by rushing through it, boxing for example looks simple but is so much better when you take time to learn it properly. Patience is a lost art sadly. Style hopping seems to be something that many do these days as well, _not cross training_ but spending a few weeks or months in one style then another then another, always just skimming the surface but never learning much beyond the idea, it's martial arts for the bored and hyperactive. It doesn't enhance your learning just makes you more and more dissatisfied with whatever you are currently learning because you are always looking over your shoulder for the next style to 'do'. To these types kata is always going to be boring and useless I'm afraid. Kata like marriages take work and time spent on them.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> So as an example more or less grappling than Thai?


Interesting question. Grappling in MT with gloves on is limited and I've not trained in Wado. However, I believe Wado would have about the same as Goju. If that assumption is correct then you would have a lot more than MT.



drop bear said:


> More or less than boxing?


Certainly more than boxing. Boxing is clinching followed by separation.


----------



## K-man

Drose427 said:


> There's Tecz.
> 
> K-man, Danny T and myself have all said this same thing. I'd find more for you but I realized you probably won't read them anyways.
> 
> I gave you one and  I'm sure k-man can link you all the times he's said it in this thread.
> 
> This isn't a question of evidence, this is quite literally just you being unwilling to read earlier pages.


Mate, it's hardly worth the effort. I love BJJ and have unashamedly pinched techniques from it to enhance my own training. There are some arts I would never train based on my understanding of them but I could well be wrong. I always looked at Aikido as being a bit wussy, then I found a guy who could make his techniques work and now I'm in my ninth year as his student. Only people with limited understanding bag the other martial arts. Martial arts are there because they are effective, or at least have been in the past. If they now come across as ineffective it is the fault of the instructors or the organisations, not the style itself. How many people would do Tai Chi as their main martial art? I look around and what I see mostly is very poor, but if you look at what Erle Montaigue could do, I'd sign up with him tomorrow.

These guys are straw men. Their arguements make sense to people with no understanding but to those who do understand their arguments are false. We will never convince them so really I wonder why we even bother. Then occasionally someone pops up who genuinely is interested in furthering their knowledge or understanding and that makes the frustration worth while.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Yup, in the form it's done standing. But personally, its simply easier to get on the ground. Instead on the sideblock/punch, you use the wrap for them which gives you coverage over your face using your forearms, the option to control or crash their head, and it just plain get your hands there better.



I find it interesting that your bunkai utilizes a training/competition choke as a self defense tool. I certainly hope you guys are learning the modifications of that choke, and not just copying the supposed bunkai with no modifications to real world applications. As good as the cross collar can be against someone wearing a gi, its effectiveness drops considerably against someone not wearing a gi unless you modify it.

And I highly doubt that you guys are modifying it.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Um, no. And just no! When you hit the pavement, even without advanced grappling skills, you still have a multitude of strikes, locks and holds that are available for you to use. The idea that the moment you hit the ground you are defenceless is ludicrous.



Attempting to use techniques designed for stand-up fighting is not an answer for ground fighting. Once you hit the ground, your skill set goes out the window, because its not designed for that range of fighting. Now instead of you being the Karateka with kicks and punches coming off of powerful stances, you become the guy on his back struggling against someone on top of them. If he's heavier and stronger than you, you better hope for that lucky throat strike or eye gouge, because he's now in the better position to do a lot of damage to you. Heaven help you if your assailant just happened to learn some wrestling or MMA along the way.


----------



## andreyshvets

Application of Tekki (shodan, nidan, sandan)





Application of Heyan Nidan:


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> OMG! That is real? No wonder you have such a poor opinion of kata and bunkai. Unbelievable! At its best it is kihon. Beyond that it doesn't make any sense at all. If you want to see some realistic bunkai from Naihanchi, see if you can get hold of some of George Dillman's videos from 25 years ago. They were the first I came across giving a good explanation of bunkai.



Isn't Dillman that guy who was doing the fraudulant chi KO stuff?

I think I'll pass.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Try telling that to all the folks in this thread doing grappling 20-30 years before MMA or BJJS popularity. The majority of karateka in this thread all did some in their training.
> 
> because it does exist. In a simplistic form.
> 
> A white belt in BJJ can tap out your average wrestler, is grappling non existent in wrestling on those grounds?
> 
> this isn't a "karate  grappling vs BJJ grappling" debate.  If you actually read the posts  you see we've all said BJJ is a far more refined grappling system.
> 
> "nonexistent" isn't true. The debate and edginess is because it's been 5 or 6 karate saying its always been apart of their training to some extent, and 2 or 3 others who aren't karateka or in hanzous case, were karateka and yet still don't understand the difference between bunkai and live wrestling.



Well, that would explain the presence of a Judo-based sport choke in an ancient Okinawan karate kata.....


----------



## tshadowchaser

Hanzou said:


> Isn't Dillman that guy who was doing the fraudulant chi KO stuff?



yep Dillman got into that stuff later in life but before he went that route he was one hell of a martial artiest. He knew his stuff and could back up his words back in the 70's  then he started his nonsense of no touch.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Well, that would explain the presence of a Judo-based sport choke in an ancient Okinawan karate kata.....



Every grappling tech in karate came from Judo/ Jujustu...they were there in Karate inception too. Nobody is claiming karate invented any of the grappling.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Every grappling tech in karate came from Judo/ Jujustu...they were there in Karate inception too. Nobody is claiming karate invented any of the grappling.



I never made that argument either. I was simply curious as to why you guys are wasting time learning a sport choke. The collar choke pretty much only works if someone is wearing a kimono, or a business suit. I mean we learn it in Bjj because it's a wonderful choke for competition.

However, for self defense, we would use something else entirely, or use the heavily modified version. It should be noted though that even the heavily modified version has very limited use.

That's the benefit of rolling with wrestlers, MMArs, and other no gi grapplers.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> I never made that argument either. I was simply curious as to why you guys are wasting time learning a sport choke. The collar choke pretty much only works if someone is wearing a kimono, or a business suit. I mean we learn it in Bjj because it's a wonderful choke for competition.
> 
> However, for self defense, we would use something else entirely, or use the heavily modified version. It should be noted though that even the heavily modified version has very limited use.
> 
> That's the benefit of rolling with wrestlers, MMArs, and other no gi grapplers.




It works in t-shirts pretty easily as well. It doesn't require heavy modification, but it does ruin the shirt.

I'm on mobile so I can't link but you can find this on YouTube with relative ease.

This is only one example from forms. A common one we teach because it require almost no change from the actual for whereas other need to be adapted better.


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> It works in t-shirts pretty easily as well. It doesn't require heavy modification, but it does ruin the shirt.
> 
> I'm on mobile so I can't link but you can find this on YouTube with relative ease.
> 
> This is only one example from forms. A common one we teach because it require almost no change from the actual for whereas other need to be adapted better.


This is true.    Collar chokes work great unless you're grappling wit someone who isn't wearing a shirt.  Sleeve controls are iffy on anything less than a jacket, though.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> It works in t-shirts pretty easily as well. It doesn't require heavy modification, but it does ruin the shirt.
> 
> I'm on mobile so I can't link but you can find this on YouTube with relative ease.
> 
> This is only one example from forms. A common one we teach because it require almost no change from the actual for whereas other need to be adapted better.



I'll save you the trouble;

BJJ Self Defense w Street Clothes T-Shirt Cross Collar Choke Gulfport

If you notice, the entry point is different, and the choke has to be modified to compensate for the more elastic quality of a t-shirt to polo. 

The notion that it requires "no change" is completely wrong.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> I'll save you the trouble;
> 
> BJJ Self Defense w Street Clothes T-Shirt Cross Collar Choke Gulfport
> 
> If you notice, the entry point is different, and the choke has to be modified to compensate for the more elastic quality of a t-shirt to polo.
> 
> The notion that it requires "no change" is completely wrong.



I can't link, but the video is "X choke or collar choke with Allan burresse"

He goes in for the time shirt the same way as the gi. Same hand placement, configuration, and technique.

It should look familiar since you posted it a bit ago.


----------



## K-man

Drose427 said:


> Every grappling tech in karate came from Judo/ Jujustu...they were there in Karate inception too. Nobody is claiming karate invented any of the grappling.


Perhaps not, with the exception of Wado Ryu. It may be fair to say that they were influenced by jujutsu but karate basically originated from China. Almost all the karate kata are variations of the Chinese forms found in Kung fu. That is not to say that the locks, holds and chokes etc are not very similar but the origin is China, not Japan.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Attempting to use techniques designed for stand-up fighting is not an answer for ground fighting. Once you hit the ground, your skill set goes out the window, because its not designed for that range of fighting. Now instead of you being the Karateka with kicks and punches coming off of powerful stances, you become the guy on his back struggling against someone on top of them. If he's heavier and stronger than you, you better hope for that lucky throat strike or eye gouge, because he's now in the better position to do a lot of damage to you. Heaven help you if your assailant just happened to learn some wrestling or MMA along the way.


Hanzou, I don't know what you did in your karate classes but it doesn't seem that you learned much at all. Perhaps you were as in attentive in those classes as you have been here. Karate is for all ranges including clinching. Have you heard of cavity strikes? Basically on the ground they utilise your body weight for maximum effect. There are so many karate techniques available. I marvel at your lack of knowledge of them. Then you talk of all the kicks. Well surprisingly for you perhaps we don't use many kicks because we are normally engaged at close range. We use a lot of knees but kicking is normally longer range or for multiple attackers and we don't have high kicks at all. 

Punching off a powerful stance? I don't think so. You are talking kihon again. All our punching is from moto dachi which is a natural stance similar to a boxer's stance. This explains how you reckon karate people don't fight like karate people in the ring. You are expecting to see kihon. In a clinch or on the ground, using effective punches at close range is much more difficult. Normally, I wouldn't bother unless I was in a mount. That's why you don't see a lot of punches in kata. Unless you can make distance the punches may have little effect.

Fighting off my back, ok, more difficult, but hat's why we train to get off the ground.


Hanzou said:


> Isn't Dillman that guy who was doing the fraudulant chi KO stuff?
> 
> I think I'll pass.


As *tshadowchaser* said, Dillman in his early days was a pioneer of karate in the US and was among the first to teach the applications of kata in other than the basic way that many still teach today.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Hanzou, I don't know what you did in your karate classes but it doesn't seem that you learned much at all. Perhaps you were as in attentive in those classes as you have been here. Karate is for all ranges including clinching. Have you heard of cavity strikes? Basically on the ground they utilise your body weight for maximum effect. There are so many karate techniques available. I marvel at your lack of knowledge of them. Then you talk of all the kicks. Well surprisingly for you perhaps we don't use many kicks because we are normally engaged at close range. We use a lot of knees but kicking is normally longer range or for multiple attackers and we don't have high kicks at all.
> 
> Punching off a powerful stance? I don't think so. You are talking kihon again. All our punching is from moto dachi which is a natural stance similar to a boxer's stance. This explains how you reckon karate people don't fight like karate people in the ring. You are expecting to see kihon. In a clinch or on the ground, using effective punches at close range is much more difficult. Normally, I wouldn't bother unless I was in a mount. That's why you don't see a lot of punches in kata. Unless you can make distance the punches may have little effect.



Haven't we already established that Japanese karate is different than Okinawan Karate? In fact, you've established that Japanese karate is watered down compared to your Okinawan Karate, since we weren't taught the grappling and ground tactics of "real" Okinawan karate.  Since we've already established that, why would my inferior Japanese Karate training be similar to yours?



> Fighting off my back, ok, more difficult, but hat's why we train to get off the ground.



Yes, against an unskilled assailant. So if your assailant has some grappling skill, are you simply screwed?


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Haven't we already established that Japanese karate is different than Okinawan Karate? In fact, you've established that Japanese karate is watered down compared to your Okinawan Karate, since we weren't taught the grappling and ground tactics of "real" Okinawan karate.  Since we've already established that, why would my inferior Japanese Karate training be similar to yours?


Hanzou, this is an offensive post. Yes, I have suggested Okinawan karate is different to Japanese Karate and there is a lot of evidence to support this. I have *never* said Japanese karate is a watered down version. In karate there is kihon and advanced training. I have no doubt advanced training exists in Japanese Karate. Because a lot of Japanese karate is sport oriented, you may not see a lot of the more advanced training until you reach a higher level.

That brings us again to your training. Yes, from what you have posted your training would appear to be lacking because you were taught very little of what every other karateka here had been taught. If you had been taught by a competent instructor we wouldn't be having this discussion. 

Apart from distorting the truth yet again, "real" Okinawan karate utilises "real" karate techniques on the ground, not specialised grappling.


----------



## Hanzou

Didn't you type this?



K-man said:


> I think the most sensible conclusion is that when Okinawan karate was taken to Japan it was taken more for its health benefits that the actual fighting aspect.



Sounds like a watering down to me, along with your argument that grappling and Tegumi is supposedly being taught widely in the Okinawan systems, and rarely taught in the Japanese systems.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Sounds like a watering down to me, along with grappling and Tegumi supposedly being taught widely in the Okinawan systems, and rarely taught in the Japanese systems.



well for one...Tegumi is _Okinawan _wrestling

Kendo isn't taught in European Fencing when kendo is Japanese fencing.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> well for one...Tegumi is _Okinawan _wrestling
> 
> Kendo isn't taught in European Fencing when kendo is Japanese fencing.



Funakoshi was Okinawan, as was his Karate system before he clearly "watered it down" for the Japanese audience.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Didn't you type this?
> 
> Sounds like a watering down to me, along with your argument that grappling and Tegumi is supposedly being taught widely in the Okinawan systems, and rarely taught in the Japanese systems.


What might sound watered down might just be your lack of knowledge of the history of karate or you might be just trolling. In the very early part of the 20th century karate was introduced to the schools in Okinawa as physical training. When the Japanese saw the benefits as in the physical development of the Japanese children they wanted to do the same in Japan, hence my comment that initially it was the health benefit of karate rather than the fighting benefit. Why would the Japanese take it for the fighting benefit when they already had so many other effective martial arts? Or, are you suggesting that the style of karate you trained was better than all those?

When karate was introduced to the University there was a requirement that, like Judo, it had to have a competitive element, but hey, I've already explained that to you in the past. 

As to Tegumi. In the main it is in karate as Kakie, not Tegumi as such. But I suppose you didn't come across that in your training either. It was there in my Japanese karate, but I guess like so many other things, you may have missed it.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Funakoshi was Okinawan, as was his Karate system before he clearly "watered it down" for the Japanese audience.


Clearly, you never trained what Funakoshi was teaching.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> What might sound watered down might just be your lack of knowledge of the history of karate or you might be just trolling. In the very early part of the 20th century karate was introduced to the schools in Okinawa as physical training. When the Japanese saw the benefits as in the physical development of the Japanese children they wanted to do the same in Japan, hence my comment that initially it was the health benefit of karate rather than the fighting benefit. Why would the Japanese take it for the fighting benefit when they already had so many other effective martial arts? Or, are you suggesting that the style of karate you trained was better than all those?
> 
> When karate was introduced to the University there was a requirement that, like Judo, it had to have a competitive element, but hey, I've already explained that to you in the past.



Yeah, like I said, sounds like a watering down of the art. That explains why so much appears to be seemingly missing from Japanese karate.



> As to Tegumi. In the main it is in karate as Kakie, not Tegumi as such. But I suppose you didn't come across that in your training either. It was there in my Japanese karate, but I guess like so many other things, you may have missed it.



It would appear that my training would be the norm, since according to Abernethy, grappling is rarely taught in Japanese karate. Maybe I should have sought out an Okinawan school to get the "real" stuff. Right?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, like I said, sounds like a watering down of the art. That explains why so much appears to be seemingly missing from Japanese karate.
> 
> 
> 
> It would appear that my training would be the norm, since according to Abernethy, grappling is rarely taught in Japanese karate. Maybe I should have sought out an Okinawan school to get the "real" stuff. Right?



regardless of grappling, if your training was the norm You'd understand how bunkai/applications correlates with forms.

You are the only shodan I have met in nearly 10 years of martial arts who thought in forms  "a punch is a punch." and assume all other Karate schools operate the same way as that.

That is why folks question your training. Not because your school didnt wrestle.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> regardless of grappling, if your training was the norm You'd understand how bunkai/applications correlates with forms.
> 
> You are the only shodan I have met in nearly 10 years of martial arts who thought in forms  "a punch is a punch." and assume all other Karate schools operate the same way as that.
> 
> That is why folks question your training. Not because your school didnt wrestle.



If Karatekas are mastering the bunkai in forms, why do they fight like this?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> If Karatekas are mastering the bunkai in forms, why do they fight like this?




Because its continuous tournament style point sparring.....


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> What are you talking about? One minute you say there is no ground fighting in karate and I tell you we spent the night on the ground doing basic drills to regain your feet. What sort of martial art stops the minute you hit the ground?  Get over it!



did you read that in context?

It is more nuanced than no no ground fighting in karate. I would put it more as it is not good enough.

karatekas who have good enough gound fighting are generally getting it from somewhere else.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> did you read that in context?
> 
> It is more nuanced than no no ground fighting in karate. I would put it more as it is not good enough.
> 
> karatekas who have good enough gound fighting are generally getting it from somewhere else.



Coming from someone who doesnt train in Karate, or has ever mention ever training in karate..........


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> If Karatekas are mastering the bunkai in forms, why do they fight like this?



Bless you, you don't really understand do you? I thought you were trolling and inciting arguments but I've realised now that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about when you say things like this. By the way in karate it's *kata* not forms, just saying.......

I don't think anyone is up for yet another explanation of bunkai are they, it's been explained so many times already. As said before we can explain things to you but we can't understand for you..........................


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Coming from someone who doesnt train in Karate, or has ever mention ever training in karate..........



yes but has ground fought karate guys.

now if we ever find a karate guy who can ground fight we will find has done judo,jujitsu,wrestling or other specialised ground fighting.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> yes but has ground fought karate guys.
> 
> now if we ever find a karate guy who can ground fight we will find has done judo,jujitsu,wrestling or other specialised ground fighting.



You have wrestling/BJJ experience dont you?

How many times in this thread had we said a BJJer will win everytime?

If you think the applications we've explained form karate will ever be on the same level as that you've not been paying attention.

Again no we wont always find "hes has done judo,jujistu or wrestling", refer to the karateka in this thread who learned applications long before any grappling training.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Mate, it's hardly worth the effort. I love BJJ and have unashamedly pinched techniques from it to enhance my own training. There are some arts I would never train based on my understanding of them but I could well be wrong. I always looked at Aikido as being a bit wussy, then I found a guy who could make his techniques work and now I'm in my ninth year as his student. Only people with limited understanding bag the other martial arts. Martial arts are there because they are effective, or at least have been in the past. If they now come across as ineffective it is the fault of the instructors or the organisations, not the style itself. How many people would do Tai Chi as their main martial art? I look around and what I see mostly is very poor, but if you look at what Erle Montaigue could do, I'd sign up with him tomorrow.
> 
> These guys are straw men. Their arguements make sense to people with no understanding but to those who do understand their arguments are false. We will never convince them so really I wonder why we even bother. Then occasionally someone pops up who genuinely is interested in furthering their knowledge or understanding and that makes the frustration worth while.



sort of. 

Martial arts are not there because they are effective they are effective if they are effective. It is again this backwards logic that the martial arts works and is the fault of the practitioner if it doesn't. And is a statement by someone who does not understand martial arts.

Form follows function.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> You have wrestling/BJJ experience dont you?
> 
> How many times in this thread had we said a BJJer will win everytime?
> 
> If you think the applications we've explained form karate will ever be on the same level as that you've not been paying attention.
> 
> Again no we wont always find "hes has done judo,jujistu or wrestling", refer to the karateka in this thread who learned applications long before any grappling training.



There is no long before any grappling training. Formalised grappling is one of the oldest martial arts in the world.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Martial arts are not there because they are effective they are effective if they are effective.



There must be a word for a statement like that, a lollipop to the first one to come up with a description of that sentence.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> There is no long before any grappling training. Formalised grappling is one of the oldest martial arts in the world.




You've misunderstood what he's saying.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> There must be a word for a statement like that, a lollipop to the first one to come up with a description of that sentence.





Tez3 said:


> There must be a word for a statement like that, a lollipop to the first one to come up with a description of that sentence.



true.
give me my lollypop.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> There is no long before any grappling training. Formalised grappling is one of the oldest martial arts in the world.


 
Is english your first language?

I say this becuase sometimes your syntax is confusing and the sentence you were referring to in no way said any martial art preceded grappling...It pretty clearly said the martial artist had no grappling training.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> true.
> give me my lollypop.




It doesn't mean anything, it conveys no meaning what so ever.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Because its continuous tournament style point sparring.....



Full contact isn't very different;


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> You've misunderstood what he's saying.



probably. 

Here is how I see it.

way back when,karate founder A. Had legit judo,sumo etc as well. Did karate and had actual grappling.

At some point the students stopped training in the legit grappling and became crap at it.

Now they are going back to the original idea of cross training and suggesting it was always part of the karate.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Full contact isn't very different;



its still tournament style free sparring vs any kind of RBSD/Bunkai/application training.

Again, you;ve proven you dont understand Bunkai vs. free sparring,


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> It doesn't mean anything, it conveys no meaning what so ever.



It does in context. It is where we find the evidence that stuff works. It doesn't work because people have been doing it for a hundred years.

That is not evidence.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> probably.
> 
> Here is how I see it.
> 
> way back when,karate founder A. Had legit judo,sumo etc as well. Did karate and had actual grappling.
> 
> At some point the students stopped training in the legit grappling and became crap at it.
> 
> Now they are going back to the original idea of cross training and suggesting it was always part of the karate.



Except Karate Founder A didnt have an erroneous amount of cross training or hold rank in a grappling style.......Other than Wadu Ryu but Tecz can fill you in there.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> its still tournament style free sparring vs any kind of RBSD/Bunkai/application training.



Even during a black belt promotion test?








> Again, you;ve proven you dont understand Bunkai vs. free sparring,



Shouldn't aspects of the bunkai be evident during free sparring? You fight like you train after all.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> probably.
> 
> Here is how I see it.
> 
> way back when,karate founder A. Had legit judo,sumo etc as well. Did karate and had actual grappling.
> 
> At some point the students stopped training in the legit grappling and became crap at it.
> 
> Now they are going back to the original idea of cross training and suggesting it was always part of the karate.




Well, the founder of Wado Ryu put grappling in, no big surprise there, he was a JJ master as well as a karate one, the students have always done it and still do it. They never stopped doing it. The founder was alive when I started training. We aren't cross training and it's always been part of our karate.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Well, the founder of Wado Ryu put grappling in, no big surprise there, he was a JJ master as well as a karate one, the students have always done it and still do it. They never stopped doing it. The founder was alive when I started training. We aren't cross training and it's always been part of our karate.



yeah that is how it normally gets into the style. The students really need to follow that founders example and keep training in the jits as well as the karate.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Even during a black belt promotion test?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shouldn't aspects of the bunkai be evident during free sparring? You fight like you train after all.



This is only one aspect.

You realize in free sparring many schools dont even do takedowns or face punches? 

No elbows, usually no knees, no headbutts, usually no clinching, etc.

it isnt meant to prepare you for getting punched in the face or defending yourself.

Most schools do bunkai as full speed, contact straight to the center of the nose. All counters legal. Done in both the step way and as more of a boxing drill where your partner can hammer you if you dont react properly so you learn how to defend yourself.

Which is a far more realistic method than one that A. last far longer than an average street fight and B. sets limitations on moves/target areas.

its funny how folks use the "fight like you train argument" for TMAS, but tell an MMA guy that if hes attacked he wont use groin strikes, gouges, bites, or scratches in an altercation because he trains to not do those things, and they call bs.....


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Except Karate Founder A didnt have an erroneous amount of cross training or hold rank in a grappling style.......Other than Wadu Ryu but Tecz can fill you in there.



And their grappling suffers because of it.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> yeah that is how it normally gets into the style. The students really need to follow that founders example and keep training in the jits as well as the karate.



Then theres those of use whos founders (Hwang Kee for example) had no grappling style training, or our instructors, and I was still able to walk Hanzou through a gi choke from a move in our forms.....strange.....



drop bear said:


> And their grappling suffers because of it.



Nobody  has said it was on par with BJJ or a dedicated grappling style.....many many times we've said its only viable against your common untrained guy.

you should really slow up on the need to imply "BJJ grappling is best" Nobody has contested that and we never will.

The whole point was that there are ground applications. The only people believing anyone has said theres a full grappling system are you non Karateka...


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> This is only one aspect.
> 
> You realize in free sparring many schools dont even do takedowns or face punches?
> 
> No elbows, usually no knees, no headbutts, usually no clinching, etc.
> 
> it isnt meant to prepare you for getting punched in the face or defending yourself.
> 
> Most schools do bunkai as full speed, contact straight to the center of the nose. All counters legal. Done in both the step way and as more of a boxing drill where your partner can hammer you if you dont react properly so you learn how to defend yourself.
> 
> Which is a far more realistic method than one that A. last far longer than an average street fight and B. sets limitations on moves/target areas.
> 
> its funny how folks use the "fight like you train argument" for TMAS, but tell an MMA guy that if hes attacked he wont use groin strikes, gouges, bites, or scratches in an altercation because he trains to not do those things, and they call bs.....



It is a different argument. You can use groin shots etc. But there is enough hurt in the mma system to incapacitate someone by fighting exactly how you train.

You can incapacitate someone with 16 ounce gloves on.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> It is a different argument. You can use groin shots etc. But there is enough hurt in the mma system to incapacitate someone by fighting exactly how you train.
> 
> You can incapacitate someone with 16 ounce gloves on.



No not really. When we normally train against some throwing full speed bareknuckle punches dead center to the face by countering with takedown, or most importantly, elbows, punches, and kicks, we can incapacitate someone using the same methods.

The only difference is we dont drill for three 5 minute rounds.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Then theres those of use whos founders (Hwang Kee for example) had no grappling style training, or our instructors, and I was still able to walk Hanzou through a gi choke from a move in our forms.....strange.....
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody  has said it was on par with BJJ or a dedicated grappling style.....many many times we've said its only viable against your common untrained guy.
> 
> you should really slow up on the need to imply "BJJ grappling is best" Nobody has contested that and we never will.
> 
> The whole point was that there are ground applications. The only people believing anyone has said theres a full grappling system are you non Karateka...



I am not saying bjj is best. I am saying get your grappling training from grapplers.

This half,half stuff is going to shoot you in the foot.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> No not really. When we normally train against some throwing full speed bareknuckle punches dead center to the face by countering with takedown, or most importantly, elbows, punches, and kicks, we can incapacitate someone using the same methods.
> 
> The only difference is we dont drill for three 5 minute rounds.



you actually knock out drop or submit people in training?


----------



## drop bear

drop bear said:


> you actually knock out drop or submit people in training?








dearl(the other guy) was one of our guys. Incapacitation is a real risk in sparring.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> I am not saying bjj is best. I am saying get your grappling training from grapplers.
> 
> This half,half stuff is going to shoot you in the foot.



"where to get your grappling" has never been the debate.

Boxers hahve proven basics are suffice for your average street attack. Which is exactly what we've said.

If you want more go to Judo or BJJ



drop bear said:


> you actually knock out drop or submit people in training?



If they dont get out of the way.

We've gotten out the cane many, many times. 

Even the 12 year olds get in trouble if their walking thorough it or are too far away,

I dont know anyone whos trained for at least a year who hasnt been dropped, got a chipped tooth, or a broken nose or some other injury at least once because their reaction or timing or position was off.

For the record and sake of general dexterity, we also use Kyukoshin style contact. But we are a Korean style, as was Kykushins founder. 

If two adults wanna spar hard, they spar hard.

I've only ever seen instructors intervene once because what was hard sparring become a bloodthirsty title bout. I believe you said you box so Im assuming you know the difference between weekly hard sparring and fighting a full on bout.

Ive worked with many outside schools and again, 9/10s in Bunkai that punch is coming full speed to your face and will go straight through your nose if you dont move. Regardless of if its done in the traditional stance method, as more of a boxing drill, or a combination of both.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> dearl(the other guy) was one of our guys. Incapacitation is a real risk in sparring.




Absolutely.

In free sparring we've had broken ribs, knock out, teeth lost, blood peed.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> This is only one aspect.
> 
> You realize in free sparring many schools dont even do takedowns or face punches?
> 
> No elbows, usually no knees, no headbutts, usually no clinching, etc.
> 
> it isnt meant to prepare you for getting punched in the face or defending yourself.
> 
> Most schools do bunkai as full speed, contact straight to the center of the nose. All counters legal. Done in both the step way and as more of a boxing drill where your partner can hammer you if you dont react properly so you learn how to defend yourself.
> 
> Which is a far more realistic method than one that A. last far longer than an average street fight and B. sets limitations on moves/target areas.



You mean like this?






That's a more realistic method than free sparring?



> its funny how folks use the "fight like you train argument" for TMAS, but tell an MMA guy that if hes attacked he wont use groin strikes, gouges, bites, or scratches in an altercation because he trains to not do those things, and they call bs.....



It's doubtful that they would, since those moves have a low chance of being successful, while a choke, break, hold, etc. have a much higher chance of success.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> You mean like this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a more realistic method than free sparring?
> 
> 
> 
> It's doubtful that they would, since those moves have a low chance of being successful, while a choke, break, hold, etc. have a much higher chance of success.



You do realize thats a demonstration of a drill for the class and not the drill itself right?

Im saying whats most realistic is drilling where you can actually punch to the face, do takedowns, or even hit specific targets that will drop a guy like the groin.

Especially when your average assailant isnt going to bother with footwork, circling, throw a myriad of kicks, etc. 

Ive never seen a drunk guy at a bar or a cocky frat boy do either or those. 

usually its just some crazy uncontrolled flailing towards the head..

Which is something most schools replicate in SD, not Free Sparring

And oh? So if a chokes not working for whatever reason biting an ear off like Tyson or popping out an eye with your thumb is useless?

Coming from a guy in another thread who said he doesnt take SD training outside of his BJJ?

Id better tell than to Militarys all over the world.

I know for a fact Marines are taught to go for that, spent yesterday training with one fresh outta basic.

 Im assume israeli soldiers are too since its a basic part of Krav


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> You do realize thats a demonstration of a drill for the class and not the drill itself right?



Then please post an example of what exactly you're talking about.



> And oh? So if a chokes not working for whatever reason biting an ear off like Tyson or popping out an eye with your thumb is useless?



If applied correctly, there's no reason a choke shouldn't work. All brains require oxygen to function.

On the other hand, Biting off an ear, and eye gouging, doesn't guarentee that you'll end the confrontation. Evander Holyfield and Yuki Naki were both still able to continue fighting after both of those incidents happened to them.


----------



## Steve

Guys, just fair warning, there's a lot of sniping on both sides of the debate.   If you're getting heated, maybe take a break.  If you thinks it's all been said and you're just repeating yourself, consider leting it go. 

This thread is going to get locked, if you kids keep this up.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> In free sparring we've had broken ribs, knock out, teeth lost, blood peed.



Here it is not a style debate as much as a train with resistance debate. 

So if you spar with contact you are going to get results.


----------



## K-man

OK. Let's try another tack. The OP was about using Shotokan karate for self defence and I believe that it is every bit as good as any other style of martial art including BJJ. 

Have you guys with limited karate experience ever wondered why karate classes for eight or ten year olds are pretty much teaching the same stuff as they teach in the adult classes? Karate in its early days was designed to maim and kill and here we are teaching the same stuff to an eight year old as we teach to an adult. Clearly what it being taught at that basic kihon level won't kill anyone unless you get lucky with a punch and I'd give you a hundred to one on that.

To imagine that the karate you teach to school children is what was taught in secret as a lethal art a hundred years ago is patently stupid. So why is this the case? Well, as the OP attests, the information is there if you want to find it. If you want to do the same training as the kids do and expect it to be effective in a fight in that form then good luck to you. I don't teach kids for a very good reason. I don't want kids running around at school using the techniques and applications I teach to adults.

Hanzou was only trained to this level. He said so himself. He never saw bunkai and he never saw grappling in his karate training. He wasn't aware that there are advanced forms of the kata. He has only ever seen kihon kata. Every video he posts is kihon. When he joined the forum we had to explain bunkai to him, yet when he posts bunkai to show how unreal it is he still posts kihon. The sparring he posts is mainly point sparring. That is why the traditional styles of karate don't spar. That type of fighting is not real. It has a purpose and if sport is your desire it is a big part of that, but it is not real fighting. That is why Funakoshi was so against the sport aspect of his art. 

I think I will slide back into the shadows. I am developing a headache from beating my head against the wall.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Especially when your average assailant isnt going to bother with footwork, circling, throw a myriad of kicks, etc.



they might. My view is if you train for good fighters the crap ones take care of themselves.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> OK. Let's try another tack. The OP was about using Shotokan karate for self defence and I believe that it is every bit as good as any other style of martial art including BJJ.
> 
> Have you guys with limited karate experience ever wondered why karate classes for eight or ten year olds are pretty much teaching the same stuff as they teach in the adult classes? Karate in its early days was designed to maim and kill and here we are teaching the same stuff to an eight year old as we teach to an adult. Clearly what it being taught at that basic kihon level won't kill anyone unless you get lucky with a punch and I'd give you a hundred to one on that.
> 
> To imagine that the karate you teach to school children is what was taught in secret as a lethal art a hundred years ago is patently stupid. So why is this the case? Well, as the OP attests, the information is there if you want to find it. If you want to do the same training as the kids do and expect it to be effective in a fight in that form then good luck to you. I don't teach kids for a very good reason. I don't want kids running around at school using the techniques and applications I teach to adults.
> 
> Hanzou was only trained to this level. He said so himself. He never saw bunkai and he never saw grappling in his karate training. He wasn't aware that there are advanced forms of the kata. He has only ever seen kihon kata. Every video he posts is kihon. When he joined the forum we had to explain bunkai to him, yet when he posts bunkai to show how unreal it is he still posts kihon. The sparring he posts is mainly point sparring. That is why the traditional styles of karate don't spar. That type of fighting is not real. It has a purpose and if sport is your desire it is a big part of that, but it is not real fighting. That is why Funakoshi was so against the sport aspect of his art.
> 
> I think I will slide back into the shadows. I am developing a headache from beating my head against the wall.



Why wouldn't you teach children grappling. I thought that would be better than face punching from a PC point of view.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> If applied correctly, there's no reason a choke shouldn't work. All brains require oxygen to function.
> 
> On the other hand, Biting off an ear, and eye gouging, doesn't guarentee that you'll end the confrontation. Evander Holyfield and Yuki Naki were both still able to continue fighting after both of those incidents happened to them.



Sort of. Any technique is as good as the other guys defence. Coming from someone who uses punching to apply rear nakeds.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Then please post an example of what exactly you're talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> If applied correctly, there's no reason a choke shouldn't work. All brains require oxygen to function.
> 
> On the other hand, Biting off an ear, and eye gouging, doesn't guarantee that you'll end the confrontation. Evander Holyfield and Yuki Naki were both still able to continue fighting after both of those incidents happened to them.



A lot of Abernethys Bunkai Drills are common. He isnt just "inventing" them. He just started bringing a camera to class.

As I said to drop bear, most schools even when doing it as step sparring come out full speed and full power. 90% of the videos on youtube are meant for demonstration so the partner lets the instructor move.

Ive never seen Striking martial art not do this drill.






The demonstrated drill isnt wrong, its the walking through it.

and oh? You'll be able to get whatever takedown you go for? People must pay thousands to learn from you!

Maybe we should just have you teach SD


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> And oh? So if a chokes not working for whatever reason biting an ear off like Tyson or popping out an eye with your thumb is useless?



Ok. I get where this is going. There is a movement that believes that you can dirty your way out of trouble rather than spend hard work on good basics.

What you want to do is have really good basics and then dirty on top. Then you don't have to compromise.

And tell the military they are notorious for exactly that.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Ok. I get where this is going. There is a movement that believes that you can dirty your way out of trouble rather than spend hard work on good basics.
> 
> What you want to do is have really good basics and then dirty on top. Then you don't have to compromise.
> 
> And tell the military they are notorious for exactly that.



Actually no, I've said exactly what you just have. In another thread Hanzou boasted he didnt believe in Normal SD training because of his size and BJJ experience.

Thats putting all your eggs into one basket, which is dangerous and potentially deadly.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Actually no, I've said exactly what you just have. In another thread Hanzou boasted he didnt believe in Normal SD training because of his size and BJJ experience.
> 
> Thats putting all your eggs into one basket, which is dangerous and potentially deadly.



And i disagree with hanzou a bit on the details of this. Good sport basics. Then good situational defence is optimum.

And. A discussion on mcmap.
MCMAP training not good


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> And i disagree with hanzou a bit on the details of this. Good sport basics. Then good situational defence is optimum.
> 
> And. A discussion on mcmap.
> MCMAP training not good



Yeah, fresh outta basic MCMAP isnt as in depth as many people believe. 

Kickboxing, some grappling, disarms,etc.

Depending on your MOS you may get more, i.e. security forces get more grappling and restraint training usually.

One of the biggest things they teach is the "kill or die" mindset. It months of hammering that into you.

Before I got dq'd because of a prior shoulder injury, my recruiter was pushing me towards becoming an instructor because I already had many of the skills they learn form TSD, Boxing, and my HS Wrestling.

They dont _usually_ come out as ninja badasses, but they still  arent people you wanna end up in an altercation with


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Yeah, fresh outta basic MCMAP isnt as in depth as many people believe.
> 
> Kickboxing, some grappling, disarms,etc.
> 
> Depending on your MOS you may get more, i.e. security forces get more grappling and restraint training usually.
> 
> One of the biggest things they teach is the "kill or die" mindset. It months of hammering that into you.
> 
> Before I got dq'd because of a prior shoulder injury, my recruiter was pushing me towards becoming an instructor because I already had many of the skills they learn form TSD, Boxing, and my HS Wrestling.
> 
> They dont _usually_ come out as ninja badasses, but they still  arent people you wanna end up in an altercation with



As opposed to your sports fighter that is inherently mentally weak?

All i train with are people who are strong physically,strong mentality and have no real mental hang ups about hurting people.

The kill or be killed attitude is really only dangerous if the other guy is winning because he may not stop attacking you after you cannot defend yourself.

You don't train to be dangerous when you are winning. You train to be dangerous when you are loosing.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Yeah, fresh outta basic MCMAP isnt as in depth as many people believe.
> 
> Kickboxing, some grappling, disarms,etc.
> 
> Depending on your MOS you may get more, i.e. security forces get more grappling and restraint training usually.
> 
> One of the biggest things they teach is the "kill or die" mindset. It months of hammering that into you.
> 
> Before I got dq'd because of a prior shoulder injury, my recruiter was pushing me towards becoming an instructor because I already had many of the skills they learn form TSD, Boxing, and my HS Wrestling.
> 
> They dont _usually_ come out as ninja badasses, but they still  arent people you wanna end up in an altercation with



A mma program run by an ex serviceman. 
Ian Bone Courage under fire TheGo - Townsville s Active CommunityTheGo Townsville s Active Community


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> As opposed to your sports fighter that is inherently mentally weak?
> 
> All i train with are people who are strong physically,strong mentality and have no real mental hang ups about hurting people.
> 
> The kill or be killed attitude is really only dangerous if the other guy is winning because he may not stop attacking you after you cannot defend yourself.
> 
> You don't train to be dangerous when you are winning. You train to be dangerous when you are loosing.



Nobody has made that claim other than you.....

ACtually no, people train to be dangerous when their attacked. Regardless of winning or losing. 

Many, many, many, schools tell you to attack first when you know you're in danger.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Nobody has made that claim other than you.....
> 
> ACtually no, people train to be dangerous when their attacked. Regardless of winning or losing.
> 
> Many, many, many, schools tell you to attack first when you know you're in danger.



Ok your claim was that the military teaches a kill or be killed attitude that gives them an edge in a fight.

And i don't Think it does because there are plenty of people out there who are trained in strong mental attitude that is every bit as effective as what you get in the military.

And kill or be killed as an attitude sounds a lot better in theory than in practice. 

I have fought guys who have had a kill or be killed attitude that were not mentally tough. One does not equal the other.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Ok your claim was that the military teaches a kill or be killed attitude that gives them an edge in a fight.
> 
> And i don't Think it does because there are plenty of people out there who are trained in strong mental attitude that is every bit as effective as what you get in the military.
> 
> And kill or be killed as an attitude sounds a lot better in theory than in practice.
> 
> I have fought guys who have had a kill or be killed attitude that were not mentally tough. One does not equal the other.



I didnt say that it gives them in edge.

Not once.

I said it was a big, one of the biggest, parts of their training.

Youre putting words in my mouth for the sake of argument.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> I didnt say that it gives them in edge.
> 
> Not once.
> 
> I said it was a big, one of the biggest, parts of their training.
> 
> Youre putting words in my mouth for the sake of argument.



really?

So are you saying it doesn't give them an edge?


----------



## RTKDCMB

tshadowchaser said:


> He knew his stuff and could back up his words back in the 70's then he started his nonsense of no touch


No-touch is real, as soon as you tell people you can do no-touch knockouts no one wants to touch you.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> You mean like this?
> 
> That's a more realistic method than free sparring?


Except that is not free sparring.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> dearl(the other guy) was one of our guys. Incapacitation is a real risk in sparring.


Which one is the other guy?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


>


This is different from these:



Hanzou said:


>



The first one is engage, retreat, reengage, the other two are stand and trade, they are distinctly differerent.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> This is different from these:
> 
> The first one is engage, retreat, reengage, the other two are stand and trade, they are distinctly differerent.



I'm talking about the movements. There's no complex blocking or anything that you would find in the kata. It's just generally punching and kicking. In competitions,mi can see why you wouldn't see a throw, or a lock. However you should expect to see those movements in sparring if they're being trained effectively.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> There's no complex blocking



What is 'complex' blocking?

I think you missed the memo sent out *repeated* times that kata is for self defence, sparring is not self defence it's, well, sparring.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> What is 'complex' blocking?
> 
> I think you missed the memo sent out *repeated* times that kata is for self defence, sparring is not self defence it's, well, sparring.



I never said that sparring is self defense. I'm saying that sparring should reflect your fighting style, because its you performing techniques against a resisting opponent. If you don't spar, you don't develop your fighting ability.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> I never said that sparring is self defense. I'm saying that sparring should reflect your fighting style, because its you performing techniques against a resisting opponent. If you don't spar, you don't develop your fighting ability.




Ooops, you 've missed it again, you are muddling up things. You don't get it do you despite being told numerous times on here and presumably were taught something when you did karate. We didn't say we didn't spar btw. I don't think frankly I have the patience to explain, sparring, kata, bunkai etc etc to you again. It's discouraging because we are trying to explain what we do but constantly you troll and twist things that are said, it seems a personal mission to you to keep having a go at karateka. You seem to take it upon yourself to try to upset karateka on here, constantly harrying posters, posting contentious statements to try to goad into arguments. It's as if you want the thread to be closed. Why do you hate karate and it's practitioners so much that you goad, troll and generally try to wind people up?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> I never said that sparring is self defense.



I'm glad you didn't, because it isn't.



Hanzou said:


> If you don't spar, you don't develop your fighting ability.



Utter rubbish  

Reality demonstrates quite effectively that you're wrong.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> What is 'complex' blocking?


That is when your blocks have a real part and an imaginary part that is it's conjugate (math humor).


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I'm talking about the movements. There's no complex blocking or anything that you would find in the kata. It's just generally punching and kicking. In competitions,mi can see why you wouldn't see a throw, or a lock. However you should expect to see those movements in sparring if they're being trained effectively.


They are both competition sparring.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> There must be a word for a statement like that, a lollipop to the first one to come up with a description of that sentence.


Nonsensical.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Karate grappling:


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Which one is the other guy?



the one who got ko,ed by eli Madigan.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> the one who got ko,ed by eli Madigan.


And he is from your gym?


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> They are both competition sparring.



Sparring for belt promotion purposes is not.


----------



## Hanzou

Kong Soo Do said:


> I'm glad you didn't, because it isn't.
> 
> Utter rubbish
> 
> Reality demonstrates quite effectively that you're wrong.



So if someone never learns timing, how to manage someone's pressure or weight, or how to take a hit, they'll be fully capable of fighting someone off of them in a bad situation?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> So if someone never learns timing, how to manage someone's pressure or weight, or how to take a hit, they'll be fully capable of fighting someone off of them in a bad situation?



You are assuming that sparring is the only way to gain these skills.  Bad assumption.


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> You are assuming that sparring is the only way to gain these skills.  Bad assumption.



It is an element that enhances those skills. You will find a few examples where people can fight and don't spar.  But the general trend is that people who fight well rely on it.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

drop bear said:


> It is an element that enhances those skills. You will find a few examples where people can fight and don't spar.  But the general trend is that people who fight well rely on it.



The general trend?  I'd like to see your presentation of data to back this statement up.  Please include you source material.


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> The general trend?  I'd like to see your presentation of data to back this statement up.  Please include you source material.



ok we will look at this sample of successful fighters.
List of UFC champions - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

do you need proof that that the majority spar?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> ok we will look at this sample of successful fighters.
> List of UFC champions - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> do you need proof that that the majority spar?




That's competition fighting, against a predetermined opponent of the same weight and gender whom you can study and plan a tactical fight against. If you are going to compete then sparring is a good idea but that's not what we are talking about.
The OP is about self defence. Do you need to 'spar' to be able to defend yourself?
I spar but I wouldn't say there weren't other methods to train to deal with a confrontation. I would not disbelieve someone who does something differently from the way I do things. I'd be interested in what other methods are and whether I could do them, I would take it in with an open mind and learn.

Fighting for points, money or just fun isn't self defence.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I was reading some interesting comments fro mark McYoung the other day where he spoke about wha
> 
> 
> 
> That's competition fighting, against a predetermined opponent of the same weight and gender whom you can study and plan a tactical fight against. If you are going to compete then sparring is a good idea but that's not what we are talking about.
> The OP is about self defence. Do you need to 'spar' to be able to defend yourself?
> I spar but I wouldn't say there weren't other methods to train to deal with a confrontation. I would not disbelieve someone who does something differently from the way I do things. I'd be interested in what other methods are and whether I could do them, I would take it in with an open mind and learn.
> 
> Fighting for points, money or just fun isn't self defence.



It is the only sample we have. So your argument can be used to counter any claim of evidence that sparring is essential to self defence. But the you cannot consistently find any evidence that anything else works.

There is no data on self defence that we can access.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> That's competition fighting, against a predetermined opponent of the same weight and gender whom you can study and plan a tactical fight against. If you are going to compete then sparring is a good idea but that's not what we are talking about.



To be fair, in early MMA/Vale Tudo fights there were no weight classes, very limited rules, and the fights were entirely random. I'm willing to bet that the winners tended to be the guys who sparred the most. Hence why competitive MAs tended to (and still do) dominate.



> The OP is about self defence. Do you need to 'spar' to be able to defend yourself?



You need to be able to fight to defend yourself.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> You need to be able to fight to defend yourself.



Tell that to correctional officers, orderlies, doormen, and more who can't for legal reasons or don't fight in the process of defending themselves.


----------



## Flying Crane

drop bear said:


> ok we will look at this sample of successful fighters.
> List of UFC champions - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> do you need proof that that the majority spar?


Given that probably everyone who enters into UFC competition does sparring as part of their training regimen, it's really not surprising that the list of UFC champions do, um...sparring.

That's not even what could be called a limited sample.  I'd call that an extremely specialized sample that has little or nothing to do with all but the very tiniest percentage of the population.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> You need to be able to fight to defend yourself.



No, you don't.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Tell that to correctional officers, orderlies, doormen, and more who can't for legal reasons or don't fight in the process of defending themselves.



Just because you know how to fight, doesn't mean that you bash everyone's face in during a confrontation.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Just because you know how to fight, doesn't mean that you bash everyone's face in during a confrontation.



Yeah you realize not everyone in these jobs has had any combat/fighting/or restraining training other than the brief training some will get on the job right?

so unless learning to hold down a Patient refusing to relax or a drunk guy is now full on fighting, plenty of folks can't fight and still do their jobs in those fields...


----------



## Flying Crane

Here's the thing, folks.  Hanzou engages in a bankrupt method of debate that is often seen in politics.  His goals and needs do not include proving his position to be correct.  His interests are met if he can simply sow doubt.  So all he needs to do is sit there and say, "huh-uh, does not" and then he sits back while others scramble around doing a bunch of work to prove your point in contrast to that.  His position requires zero actual work on his part.  He doesn't need to hunt down any real evidence to support his position of denial.  All he needs to do is repeats various renditions of "I don't believe it" and then throw out some shallow talking point.  And then everyone else scrambles around all over again to pile up more evidence to show him where he is wrong.  To which he again simply states, "I don't believe" and he throws out another reference to mma and ufc.  It's nonsense.  We used to see this style of debate a lot back when the site still had political discussions in The Basement.

So I just gotta ask:  why does anyone care what hanzou thinks? He's obviously of no consequence in the world of martial arts and in your real lives.  Given the track record of debates in which he has engaged, why would anyone care what he thinks? Why does anyone continue to respond to his bating?


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Yeah you realize not everyone in these jobs has had any combat/fighting/or restraining training other than the brief training some will get on the job right?
> 
> so unless learning to hold down a Patient refusing to relax or a drunk guy is now full on fighting, plenty of folks can't fight and still do their jobs in those fields...




Holding down drunks as a bouncer and restraining patients as an orderly isn't "self defense".


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Holding down drunks and restraining patients isn't "self defense".



........defending yourself or another from a mental patient flipping beds during a psychotic break, or a drunk beligerent by restraining them isn't self-defense?

Solid logic.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

drop bear said:


> It is the only sample we have... But the you cannot consistently find any evidence that anything else works...There is no data on self defence that we can access.



Yes, there is quite a plethora of data.  The Boatman Edged Weapon program has years of statistical data, both in the UK and in the U.S.  This is why many L.E. agencies, including mine, have adopted it.  No sparring involved.  Last statistical data from the North Hamptonshire P.D. for G.B. as a whole indicates that prior to the adoption of the program, officers were injured 78% of the time in an edged weapon altercation (very prevalent in the U.K).  After adoption of the program the injury rate dropped to 17%.  More importantly, since it is based upon gross motor skill, it is retained in long term memory.  This means that remedial training went from annually to every 18 months.  Our retraining rate is 12-24 months depending upon the cycle the Deputy is in at the time.

L.E. doesn't use sparring, at least none that I'm aware of when we're discussing in-service training.  Rather it is quite often scenario-based training which has already been discussed in other threads.  

WWII combatives, possibly the most effective long term program, and certainly amount the most brutal never used sparring.  In fact the actual training program was quite brief.  Yet again, based upon gross motor skills the retention rate actually spanned into decades.  Anyone in the combatives community knows of the effectiveness of the program.  

My school never sparred.  Yet our own data spanned women preventing date rapes, Correction Officers, Deputies and Baliffs had successful uses-of-force as well as Executive Protection Agents I've taught (one of which is now a fellow Deputy on my shift).  

Since we're discussing self defense and not competitions, MMA using sparring as a training platform is not evidence for it's effectiveness or necessity.  As noted in this and a multitude of other threads they are two separate animals and one training methodology that is effective in one venue doesn't constitute effectiveness in the other.  And as I've pointed out multiple times, one methodology can actually be detrimental for an opposing venue.  

Take home point, while sparring may be beneficial in a sport setting, it isn't necessary for self-defense.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Holding down drunks as a bouncer and restraining patients as an orderly isn't "self defense".



This is one of the stupidest things I've seen posted in a long, long time. Someone is trying to hurt you. You stop them. How is that NOT self defense?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> Holding down drunks as a bouncer and restraining patients as an orderly isn't "self defense".



Yes, it can be an example of one specific scenario/situation.  One still has to protect themselves (and others) even when initiating the action in a confrontation or over-coming the unlawful use of force of another with greater lawful force designed to regain control of the situation.  Our policy and state statute specifically states that we can use greater force (usually one level higher but depends on the situation) to control (subdue/incapacitate etc) and that it is a *defensive* action on the part of the Officer/Deputy/Trooper.  That term is used to encompass both self defense and defense of others.


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> This is one of the stupidest things I've seen posted in a long, long time. Someone is trying to hurt you. You stop them. How is that NOT self defense?



Every drunk getting escorted out of a bar, and every patient that needs to be restrained isn't a self defense situation, nor are they always trying to hurt you.

However, we're getting away from the point; If you don't know how to fight, you're going to have a hard time defending yourself.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Every drunk getting escorted out of a bar, and every patient that needs to be restrained isn't a self defense situation, nor are they always trying to hurt you.
> 
> However, we're getting away from the point; If you don't know how to fight, you're going to have a hard time defending yourself.



If a patient isn't trying to hurt themselves or others they don't get restrained.....I also specifically said beligerent drunks, which are obviously those who are trying to pick fights or harm someone. Both are dangers if someone is having to intervene. Clearly you haven't worked either job

Still the cop argument.

Most cops aren't actively training boxing or any kind of striking. the only ones I know who have striking training get it from a boxing gym.

Sparring isn't that big of a part of  either of the academies in our area.

Again, their focus is on restraining not fighting.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> If a patient isn't trying to hurt themselves or others they don't get restrained.....I also specifically said beligerent drunks, which are obviously those who are trying to pick fights or harm someone. Both are dangers if someone is having to intervene.



Which aren't always trying to hurt YOU specifically. So I wouldn't consider that a self defense situation.



> Still the cop argument.
> 
> Most cops aren't actively training boxing or any kind of striking. the only ones I know who have striking training get it from a boxing gym.
> 
> Sparring isn't that big of a part of  either of the academies in our area.
> 
> Again, their focus is on restraining not fighting.



There's plenty of cops who train at my Bjj gym. Again, just because you know how to fight doesn't mean you need to bash someone's face in during a confrontation. Ever see the Ryan Hall in the restaurant video? He restrained the guy without ever hurting him. Why? Because he's an excellent Bjj fighter.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Every drunk getting escorted out of a bar, and every patient that needs to be restrained isn't a self defense situation, nor are they always trying to hurt you.



Your ignorance is showing. Not for the first time.
If they weren't a danger, we wouldn't be restraining them.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Which aren't always trying to hurt YOU specifically. So I wouldn't consider that a self defense situation.
> 
> 
> 
> There's plenty of cops who train at my Bjj gym. Again, just because you know how to fight doesn't mean you need to bash someone's face in during a confrontation. Ever see the Ryan Hall in the restaurant video? He restrained the guy without ever hurting him. Why? Because he's an excellent Bjj fighter.



Lol now you're just splitting hairs to try and be right 

And here it is again.

"BJJ is the answer for everything" argument you've been pushing  since you came to these forums

What a surprise 

Many cops and many many other folks at other jobs DONT know how to fight, have no regular MA training,  and are still more than capable of defending themselves.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> There's plenty of cops who train at my Bjj gym. Again, just because you know how to fight doesn't mean you need to bash someone's face in during a confrontation. Ever see the Ryan Hall in the restaurant video? He restrained the guy without ever hurting him. Why? Because he's an excellent Bjj fighter.



I restrain people all the time without hurting them. I've never studied BJJ or any other ground art. My primary art is TKD, which is heavily striking oriented. And yet, I manage to do what, according to you, can only be done by "an excellent Bjj fighter". 
I guess the non-existent (according to you) grappling techniques in TKD do work...


----------



## Drose427

Dirty Dog said:


> I restrain people all the time without hurting them. I've never studied BJJ or any other ground art. My primary art is TKD, which is heavily striking oriented. And yet, I manage to do what, according to you, can only be done by "an excellent Bjj fighter".
> I guess the non-existent (according to you) grappling techniques in TKD do work...



According to Hanzou, not unless we record it on video


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> Your ignorance is showing. Not for the first time.
> If they weren't a danger, we wouldn't be restraining them.



Someone else being in danger isn't a self defense situation. Self defense means YOU are in danger.


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> I restrain people all the time without hurting them. I've never studied BJJ or any other ground art. My primary art is TKD, which is heavily striking oriented. And yet, I manage to do what, according to you, can only be done by "an excellent Bjj fighter".
> I guess the non-existent (according to you) grappling techniques in TKD do work...



That's interesting, because I never said that *only* an excellent Bjj fighter can restrain people.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Lol now you're just splitting hairs to try and be right
> 
> And here it is again.
> 
> "BJJ is the answer for everything" argument you've been pushing  since you came to these forums
> 
> What a surprise



Nah, you just haven't been paying attention.



> Many cops and many many other folks at other jobs DONT know how to fight, have no regular MA training,  and are still more than capable of defending themselves.



Did you conduct a nation wide poll of police forces around the country to come to that conclusion? Even if that's the case, the police receive pretty substantial training in order to do their jobs.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Nah, you just haven't been paying attention.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you conduct a nation wide poll of police forces around the country to come to that conclusion? Even if that's the case, the police receive pretty substantial training in order to do their jobs.



Officers receive restraint training. Freesparring and fighting isn't that big of a part of the police academy. Some officers choose to study more, but it isn't a standard of Training.

I live and work with cadets. We have 3 forces in my area, there's one cop at my gym, none at the one I go to. Even if you don't want anecdotes, you can find their training. "Fighting" isn't a big part of it.  The hand to hand training they do receive is simple restraints and takedowns. Which isn't really "fighting" 

Earlier someone posted statistics, you can also find stats on officer training if you look. Many don't have MA training and can still defend themselves.

Then there still other jobs where  many many folks who have no training are able to restrain someone and defend themselves or others as we've said


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> ...the police receive pretty substantial training in order to do their jobs.



I can't speak for every state, but our state has 106 hours of Defensive Tactics training in the academy (I was an academy instructor).  Perhaps 4-8 hours annually in-service (I am an in-service instructor).  Because of the way the training is designed (gross motor/flinch response etc) it is adequate.  Doesn't make one a world champion or ninja, but it is generally adequate.  I always advocate additional training during one's off-time as long as the training is applicable i.e. non-sport based.  Doesn't mean that the program can't contain 'some' sport applications but it shouldn't be the focus.  

For example, sport based BJJ or MMA (where the goal is to submit a single opponent, using a specific rule set, in an artificial environment) isn't good training for the job or general self defense.  An art that trains to stay on your feet as well as regaining your feet as quickly as possible, by whatever means is necessary and appropriate to the situation (read movements that would not be allowed in a sport setting in situations requiring such action) and/or training against multiple (possibly armed) attackers using weapons, improvised weapons and all the other tactics I've previously described in SD methodology is good training for the job and/or general self defense.


----------



## drop bear

Flying Crane said:


> Given that probably everyone who enters into UFC competition does sparring as part of their training regimen, it's really not surprising that the list of UFC champions do, um...sparring.
> 
> That's not even what could be called a limited sample.  I'd call that an extremely specialized sample that has little or nothing to do with all but the very tiniest percentage of the population.



well it is a sample of successful fighters who test against successful fighters in a sterile environment. A lot of the variables are removed so we can focus on some constants.

One of which is everybody spars. 

hence we see a trend.

A tiniest example is the definition of a sample.


----------



## drop bear

Dirty Dog said:


> This is one of the stupidest things I've seen posted in a long, long time. Someone is trying to hurt you. You stop them. How is that NOT self defense?



So a mma fight. Or a karate competition is self defence. And we are back to looking at my sample.


----------



## Hanzou

Kong Soo Do said:


> I can't speak for every state, but our state has 106 hours of Defensive Tactics training in the academy (I was an academy instructor).  Perhaps 4-8 hours annually in-service (I am an in-service instructor).  Because of the way the training is designed (gross motor/flinch response etc) it is adequate.  Doesn't make one a world champion or ninja, but it is generally adequate.  I always advocate additional training during one's off-time as long as the training is applicable i.e. non-sport based.  Doesn't mean that the program can't contain 'some' sport applications but it shouldn't be the focus.
> 
> For example, sport based BJJ or MMA (where the goal is to submit a single opponent, using a specific rule set, in an artificial environment) isn't good training for the job or general self defense.  An art that trains to stay on your feet as well as regaining your feet as quickly as possible, by whatever means is necessary and appropriate to the situation (read movements that would not be allowed in a sport setting in situations requiring such action) and/or training against multiple (possibly armed) attackers using weapons, improvised weapons and all the other tactics I've previously described in SD methodology is good training for the job and/or general self defense.



And what about Kata bunkai, and kata? Would you say that that's good training for the job or self defense?


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Tell that to correctional officers, orderlies, doormen, and more who can't for legal reasons or don't fight in the process of defending themselves.



Well they do. But you have to then accept that a street fight has rules.

Something I am constantly reminded of.


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> Yes, there is quite a plethora of data.  The Boatman Edged Weapon program has years of statistical data, both in the UK and in the U.S.  This is why many L.E. agencies, including mine, have adopted it.  No sparring involved.  Last statistical data from the North Hamptonshire P.D. for G.B. as a whole indicates that prior to the adoption of the program, officers were injured 78% of the time in an edged weapon altercation (very prevalent in the U.K).  After adoption of the program the injury rate dropped to 17%.  More importantly, since it is based upon gross motor skill, it is retained in long term memory.  This means that remedial training went from annually to every 18 months.  Our retraining rate is 12-24 months depending upon the cycle the Deputy is in at the time.
> 
> L.E. doesn't use sparring, at least none that I'm aware of when we're discussing in-service training.  Rather it is quite often scenario-based training which has already been discussed in other threads.
> 
> WWII combatives, possibly the most effective long term program, and certainly amount the most brutal never used sparring.  In fact the actual training program was quite brief.  Yet again, based upon gross motor skills the retention rate actually spanned into decades.  Anyone in the combatives community knows of the effectiveness of the program.
> 
> My school never sparred.  Yet our own data spanned women preventing date rapes, Correction Officers, Deputies and Baliffs had successful uses-of-force as well as Executive Protection Agents I've taught (one of which is now a fellow Deputy on my shift).
> 
> Since we're discussing self defense and not competitions, MMA using sparring as a training platform is not evidence for it's effectiveness or necessity.  As noted in this and a multitude of other threads they are two separate animals and one training methodology that is effective in one venue doesn't constitute effectiveness in the other.  And as I've pointed out multiple times, one methodology can actually be detrimental for an opposing venue.
> 
> Take home point, while sparring may be beneficial in a sport setting, it isn't necessary for self-defense.



And here of course you show the source of this data yes"


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> And what about Kata bunkai, and kata? Would you say that that's good training for the job or self defense?



Kata bunkai are trained the same way cadets train their takedown and grapples.....drilling and resistance training with a partner


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Officers receive restraint training. Freesparring and fighting isn't that big of a part of the police academy. Some officers choose to study more, but it isn't a standard of Training.
> 
> I live and work with cadets. We have 3 forces in my area, there's one cop at my gym, none at the one I go to. Even if you don't want anecdotes, you can find their training. "Fighting" isn't a big part of it.  The hand to hand training they do receive is simple restraints and takedowns. Which isn't really "fighting"
> 
> Earlier someone posted statistics, you can also find stats on officer training if you look. Many don't have MA training and can still defend themselves.
> 
> Then there still other jobs where  many many folks who have no training are able to restrain someone and defend themselves or others as we've said



In the self defence thread i said it is more accurately situational defence.

The police have a whole bunch of tools at their disposal that that reduce the need to be unarmed combat experts.

So if we are focusing on the whole thing it becomes different to looking at specifics.

I would not suggest sparring assists with all elements of self defence. It is an important element if you are attacked.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> ok we will look at this sample of successful fighters.
> List of UFC champions - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> do you need proof that that the majority spar?


The majority of what?


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> I can't speak for every state, but our state has 106 hours of Defensive Tactics training in the academy (I was an academy instructor).  Perhaps 4-8 hours annually in-service (I am an in-service instructor).  Because of the way the training is designed (gross motor/flinch response etc) it is adequate.  Doesn't make one a world champion or ninja, but it is generally adequate.  I always advocate additional training during one's off-time as long as the training is applicable i.e. non-sport based.  Doesn't mean that the program can't contain 'some' sport applications but it shouldn't be the focus.
> 
> For example, sport based BJJ or MMA (where the goal is to submit a single opponent, using a specific rule set, in an artificial environment) isn't good training for the job or general self defense.  An art that trains to stay on your feet as well as regaining your feet as quickly as possible, by whatever means is necessary and appropriate to the situation (read movements that would not be allowed in a sport setting in situations requiring such action) and/or training against multiple (possibly armed) attackers using weapons, improvised weapons and all the other tactics I've previously described in SD methodology is good training for the job and/or general self defense.



Cops carry guns,tazers and made. That is a big factor.

I know cops and they dismiss hand to hand based on that.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> The majority of what?



The majority of people who fight professionally and competitively.

Fighters who fight fighters. These are the guys who given time to prepare in the best manner possible. Prepare in a certain way.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> The majority of people who fight professionally and competitively.
> 
> Fighters who fight fighters. These are the guys who given time to prepare in the best manner possible. Prepare in a certain way.


People who spar for living spar?

I never would have guessed


----------



## RTKDCMB

Flying Crane said:


> Here's the thing, folks.  Hanzou engages in a bankrupt method of debate that is often seen in politics.  His goals and needs do not include proving his position to be correct.  His interests are met if he can simply sow doubt.  So all he needs to do is sit there and say, "huh-uh, does not" and then he sits back while others scramble around doing a bunch of work to prove your point in contrast to that.  His position requires zero actual work on his part.  He doesn't need to hunt down any real evidence to support his position of denial.  All he needs to do is repeats various renditions of "I don't believe it" and then throw out some shallow talking point.  And then everyone else scrambles around all over again to pile up more evidence to show him where he is wrong.  To which he again simply states, "I don't believe" and he throws out another reference to mma and ufc.  It's nonsense.  We used to see this style of debate a lot back when the site still had political discussions in The Basement.
> 
> So I just gotta ask:  why does anyone care what hanzou thinks? He's obviously of no consequence in the world of martial arts and in your real lives.  Given the track record of debates in which he has engaged, why would anyone care what he thinks? Why does anyone continue to respond to his bating?


It's good to practice arguing for your position. Watch the following video:


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> People who spar for living spar?
> 
> I never would have guessed



People who fight for a living spar.

Mostly.


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> For example, sport based BJJ or MMA (where the goal is to submit a single opponent, using a specific rule set, in an artificial environment) isn't good training for the job or general self defense








ok a sample mma fight. How would this be considered bad self defence?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> And what about Kata bunkai, and kata? Would you say that that's good training for the job or self defense?



I've said so a multitude of times.  This is one of the methods I employ when I teach off duty professionals.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

drop bear said:


> ok a sample mma fight. How would this be considered bad self defence?



How many times does the same thing need to be repeated?  Do self defense situations have a weigh in, photo op, referee, gloves and cups, a rule set, time outs, tap outs, only single opponents that obey the rules, soft surface that's flat, dry and level with no opportunity to escape, evade, de-escalate or use an improvised weapon?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

drop bear said:


> Cops carry guns,tazers and made. That is a big factor.
> 
> I know cops and they dismiss hand to hand based on that.



Then you know cops that are not very experienced, seasoned or wise.


----------



## Drose427

Kong Soo Do said:


> How many times does the same thing need to be repeated?  Do self defense situations have a weigh in, photo op, referee, gloves and cups, a rule set, time outs, tap outs, only single opponents that obey the rules, soft surface that's flat, dry and level with no opportunity to escape, evade, de-escalate or use an improvised weapon?



no, but its full contact! 

......Until an official decides one party is in real danger........Or someone taps.....


----------



## Hanzou

Kong Soo Do said:


> I've said so a multitude of times.  This is one of the methods I employ when I teach off duty professionals.



So prancing/dancing around in solo patterns is a better for self defense practice than sparring/rolling/randori training?

Hilarious.


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> How many times does the same thing need to be repeated?  Do self defense situations have a weigh in, photo op, referee, gloves and cups, a rule set, time outs, tap outs, only single opponents that obey the rules, soft surface that's flat, dry and level with no opportunity to escape, evade, de-escalate or use an improvised weapon?





Dirty Dog said:


> This is one of the stupidest things I've seen posted in a long, long time. Someone is trying to hurt you. You stop them. How is that NOT self defense


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> So prancing/dancing around in solo patterns is a better for self defense practice than sparring/rolling/randori training?
> 
> Hilarious.



Again You prove you don't understand bunkai or how to practice it....

And you say you were a shodan? 

_That's _hilarious


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Again You prove you don't understand bunkai or how to practice it....
> 
> And you say you were a shodan?
> 
> _That's _hilarious



Considering that several highly effective arts don't have kata or bunkai, does one really _need_ to understand it?


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> no, but its full contact!
> 
> ......Until an official decides one party is in real danger........Or someone taps.....



untill one party can no longer fight back. 

Do you feel there is an important part of self defence that progresses past that?

Fighting back after you are unconscious or continuing to bash them when they are?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> The majority of people who fight professionally and competitively.
> 
> Fighters who fight fighters. These are the guys who given time to prepare in the best manner possible. Prepare in a certain way.


Stands to reason.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Someone else being in danger isn't a self defense situation. Self defense means YOU are in danger.


No, it is a self defense situation for the one getting attacked and anyone who steps in to defend them.


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> Then you know cops that are not very experienced, seasoned or wise.



And yet they manage to be police officers all the same. 

The system isn't justified because cops do it.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Considering that several highly effective arts don't have kata or bunkai, does one really _need_ to understand it?



If youre a high ranking student in a style that does... thats been proven effective in MMA which according to you is one of the best ways to judge effectiveness.... than yeah understanding thems pretty important....



drop bear said:


> untill one party can no longer fight back.
> 
> Do you feel there is an important part of self defence that progresses past that?
> 
> Fighting back after you are unconscious or continuing to bash them when they are?


'
Because a street assailant is going to stop kicking your head in because your eye wont stop bleeding.

Or because he feels you arent hitting back enough

or because you tap out.

Fighting knowing you have an easy out is a far cry from fighting when nobody will help you.

Its a completely different effect on the mind.

How many boxing matches have been ended because one party went down too much even if they get back up every time?

I supposed an assailant will just stop trying to kill me until I stand back up....

How many MMA matches has a ref ended because a fighter got hit in the liver and was completely conscious but was unable to stand and fight?

I suppose an assailant will just go the other side of the alley in that instant...


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> So prancing/dancing around in solo patterns is a better for self defense practice than sparring/rolling/randori training?
> 
> Hilarious.


If you are prancing/dancing around to do your pattern then you are doing it wrong. How about doing a waltz with your partner inside a cage?


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> And yet they manage to be police officers all the same.
> 
> The system isn't justified because cops do it.



you realize how easy it is to become a cop dont you?

takes less than a semester of training in most academies, with only some hand to hand which is oriented around grappling/takedowns with little full on freesparring. That hardly gives them "strong fighting ability" yet most are able to defend themselves or subdue a suspect with hand to hand


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> If youre a high ranking student in a style that does... thats been proven effective in MMA which according to you is one of the best ways to judge effectiveness.... than yeah understanding thems pretty important....
> 
> 
> '
> Because a street assailant is going to stop kicking your head in because your eye wont stop bleeding.
> 
> Or because he feels you arent hitting back enough
> 
> or because you tap out.
> 
> Fighting knowing you have an easy out is a far cry from fighting when nobody will help you.
> 
> Its a completely different effect on the mind.
> 
> How many boxing matches have been ended because one party went down too much even if they get back up every time?
> 
> I supposed an assailant will just stop trying to kill me until I stand back up....
> 
> How many MMA matches has a ref ended because a fighter got hit in the liver and was completely conscious but was unable to stand and fight?
> 
> I suppose an assailant will just go the other side of the alley in that instant...



how do you change your fighting tactics to compensate for that?


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> you realize how easy it is to become a cop dont you?
> 
> takes less than a semester of training in most academies, with only some hand to hand which is oriented around grappling/takedowns with little full on freesparring. That hardly gives them "strong fighting ability" yet most are able to defend themselves or subdue a suspect with hand to hand



well then I should just do a semester of police training and i will be sorted for self defence right?

And not even worry about achieving"strong fighting ability"


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> If youre a high ranking student in a style that does... thats been proven effective in MMA which according to you is one of the best ways to judge effectiveness.... than yeah understanding thems pretty important....
> 
> 
> '
> Because a street assailant is going to stop kicking your head in because your eye wont stop bleeding.
> 
> Or because he feels you arent hitting back enough
> 
> or because you tap out.
> 
> Fighting knowing you have an easy out is a far cry from fighting when nobody will help you.
> 
> Its a completely different effect on the mind.
> 
> How many boxing matches have been ended because one party went down too much even if they get back up every time?
> 
> I supposed an assailant will just stop trying to kill me until I stand back up....
> 
> How many MMA matches has a ref ended because a fighter got hit in the liver and was completely conscious but was unable to stand and fight?
> 
> I suppose an assailant will just go the other side of the alley in that instant...


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> If youre a high ranking student in a style that does... thats been proven effective in MMA which according to you is one of the best ways to judge effectiveness.... than yeah understanding thems pretty important....



Proven effective when propped up by other MA systems.

I would love to see a "pure" Karateka enter a NHB competition and see how he does. The last one that did got obliterated pretty quickly back in the early UFC.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Proven effective when propped up by other MA systems.
> 
> I would love to see a "pure" Karateka enter a NHB competition and see how he does. The last one that did got obliterated pretty quickly back in the early UFC.



More to that story.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> how do you change your fighting tactics to compensate for that?



Fighting for your life has a completely different psychological impact than fighting in a safe controlled environment for pride and money.

Anyone who thinks theyre the same has never had to do the former.

Like kids who think they can take the psychological damage of combat because theyre "MMA/Boxing/wrestling badasses because theyre used to that type of pressure" or my personal favorite living in Appalachia, "I've killed living creatures, humans cant be that much different."

Nobody steps into the ring fearing for their life.



Hanzou said:


> Proven effective when propped up by other MA systems.
> 
> I would love to see a "pure" Karateka enter a NHB competition and see how he does. The last one that did got obliterated pretty quickly back in the early UFC.



Machida  and GSP knock folks out pretty frequently with it..Most folks (even the non karateka) have said many times on this forum now that how they strike without their grappling is exactly what youd see from a high level karateka. 

Its still a hugely popular style in Kickboxing, I suppose kickboxers dont have good fighting ability because they dont grapple though.....



drop bear said:


> well then I should just do a semester of police training and i will be sorted for self defence right?
> 
> And not even worry about achieving"strong fighting ability"



The argument was that ability to fight defines ones ability to defend themselves. Many, many jobs prove that wrong. Cops are just one.

Fighting isnt inherently a necessity to be able to defend oneself


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Considering that several highly effective arts don't have kata or bunkai, does one really _need_ to understand it?


Considering that several highly effective arts DO have kata or bunkai, it doesn't hurt to.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Considering that several highly effective arts DO have kata or bunkai, it doesn't hurt to.



Considering that we don't see any expression of kata within the sparring, competitive, or combative aspect of those arts, I would question the effectiveness of that kata training. Especially since the arts that don't do kata or bunkai can perform at an equal, if not superior level.


----------



## RTKDCMB

.


drop bear said:


>


And?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Considering that we don't see any expression of kata within the sparring, competitive, or combative aspect of those arts, I would question the effectiveness of that kata training. Especially since the arts that don't do kata or bunkai can perform at an equal, if not superior level.



So all of Abernethys combative drills, practices, and techniques he takes from kata are completely bogus?

Bunkai _is_ combative considering theyre drilled at full speed, full contact. 

Not to mention all the takedowns and grappling in kata that are used in Jujustu and Judo...


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Considering that we don't see any expression of kata within the sparring, competitive, or combative aspect of those arts,



Speak for yourself, I have used techniques from patterns in sparring a number of times.



Hanzou said:


> I would question the effectiveness of that kata training. Especially since the arts that don't do kata or bunkai can perform at an equal, if not superior level.



They also can perform at an inferior level, especially when it comes to technique, I have seen it.


----------



## Drose427

RTKDCMB said:


> Speak for yourself, I have used techniques from patterns in sparring a number of times.
> 
> 
> 
> They also can perform at an inferior level, especially when it comes to technique, I have seen it.




Lots of folks in boxing/MMA, even UFC, who's punches are little more than barfight haymakers.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> how do you change your fighting tactics to compensate for that?



To expand on what I said to you here



Drose427 said:


> Fighting for your life has a completely different psychological impact than fighting in a safe controlled environment for pride and money.
> 
> Anyone who thinks theyre the same has never had to do the former.
> 
> Like kids who think they can take the psychological damage of combat because theyre "MMA/Boxing/wrestling badasses because theyre used to that type of pressure" or my personal favorite living in Appalachia, "I've killed living creatures, humans cant be that much different."
> 
> Nobody steps into the ring fearing for their life.
> 
> 
> 
> Machida  and GSP knock folks out pretty frequently with it..Most folks (even the non karateka) have said many times on this forum now that how they strike without their grappling is exactly what youd see from a high level karateka.
> 
> Its still a hugely popular style in Kickboxing, I suppose kickboxers dont have good fighting ability because they dont grapple though.....
> 
> 
> 
> The argument was that ability to fight defines ones ability to defend themselves. Many, many jobs prove that wrong. Cops are just one.
> 
> Fighting isnt inherently a necessity to be able to defend oneself



No amount of regulated/sport fighting can prepare for the psychological impact of fearing for your life.

Getting used to contact helps

With that in mind:

I'd rather train in a school where when we drill our everyday SD/Bunkai, im working with someone twice my size whos swinging full speed right at my face. If I dont move, somethings getting broke or cut and it has been. If my positions off, I dont get the takedown because theres nearly a hundred pound difference in size and couldnt muscle the guy an inch.

The issue with weight classes is they dont get you used to facing an opponent considerably larger than you.

Where Im not told "These are all illegal moves, you cant strike here, here or here, this techs illegal unless youre in this position, etc." and I have full range of attacks and target areas Im allowed to strike.

Where in Free sparring, Im still going up against guys twice my side and have to learn how to adapt from that.

Where instead of training for a very specific ruleset in a 1 v1 match, we frequently mix it up and do 2 v 1, or punches only.

Where we drill, drill, drill full contact SD for a variety of situations. Grabs, intimidators, sitting positions, do  bullpin sparring

I've had just as many injuries in my TSD training as I did when I was competing in Boxing and Wrestling. 

Quite frankly, there is nothing an MMA gym could give me other than a bit of BJJ (which is on my bucket list assuming I can find a school that simply overpriced, commercialized egoism like the current ones in my area) that I cant get with how we train now. They could assimilate me to MMA rules and break habits I have that would get me DQ'd, but thats it.

Everything you could get for SD from MMA, I've gotten from TSD and wrestling. Many people get those things without ever stepping into the cage for a match.

Maybe in the early days of Vale Tudo and MMA, when dang near anything was allowed, it wouldve been a better fit for general SD. But where its at now, its so centralized around the rules of its own competition to be some "superior method"

When both methods use full contact, and neither can prepare you completely for the psychological impact of actually fighting for your life, I'm going to go with the one that doesnt limit what I can do from the start and gives me the most options.


----------



## Tez3

I train MMA and TMA, we train fighters for MMA and we teach SD as part of our TMA classes. What many people forget when praising MMA over TMA is that *MMA is TMA.*
MMA isn't made up of some new style just invented for it, it's an amalgam of styles which have been around for a very long time. People are coming into the sport now who have no previous experience in martial arts but the majority of fighters have come from single traditional styles. That's styles like karate, TKD,MT, boxing as well as Judo, wrestling and BJJ ( which itself comes from a TMA).

Fighters can switch to non rules fighting if they need to and non fighters can fight to rules if they want to. On Iain Abernethy's seminars, if he knows you do MMA he will point out moves and show you moves from kata that are particularly good for that, I take them back to our fighters.

I think it's such a shame that people rush to say kata is pointless and doesn't work, perhaps they don't want to explore it which is fine, I don't want to take up water skiing but I don't rubbish it. I don't like swimming and I don't like vast areas of water, people will point out that learning to swim will save my life, I don't dispute it but I'm not going to learn. On the other hand I'm not going to rubbish swimming coaches, saying they just fuff around in the water being pointless. I know their value. The kata argument is the same, you don't do it so it must be valueless. It's not but you still don't have to do, just accept that others find value in it. I see value in most types of martial arts training, I wouldn't rubbish anything I hadn't tried nor anything that others find works. I'm not into 'breaking' it doesn't help me but many find it a good part of their training, they find it helps them in a lot of ways. Does that mean it's pointless as you can't use it in the cage! No it means I don't get anything from it, that's all. I'm not going to go on a rant about breaking, I'll just leave it to those who do it.

Forget the argument that if it works in MMA it works for self defence, try instead the idea that different people train different ways for different things, they enjoy their training which means they learn better, the truth is no one knows how they will react if attacked in a life threatening situation until that situation happens. If you do know because you've be attacked, well done on surviving, if you don't know, long may that continue. Tolerance towards others training should be the watchword here, not spend pages and months trying to prove that others training doesn't work, being quite spiteful about it, all it does is reflect the person making all the noise about kata being useless. When we rail against others, it's often the fault within ourselves we are railing against not the other person.

Accept that for many of us kata is a hugely useful tool, it doesn't affect the way you train, it doesn't reflect on you, we do it, it's our training. *You don't like it, you don't understand it, fine you have two choices, ignore it or learn it. Either is fine and* *a very adult way to deal with it.*


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> So all of Abernethys combative drills, practices, and techniques he takes from kata are completely bogus?



Where did I say that?



> Bunkai _is_ combative considering theyre drilled at full speed, full contact.
> 
> Not to mention all the takedowns and grappling in kata that are used in Jujustu and Judo...



Yeah, but even you said that it's *behind* Judo, and Bjj in the grappling department, and there's no kata in Bjj. So couldn't I simply take  Bjj and be just fine? Or if I wanted to punch and kick, could I just pick up a kickboxing style that contained no kata and be just as effective as a karateka who spends far more time learning kata and kata bunkai?

Or in my case, simply take the kicks and punches I learned from karate and combine them with my bjj training. No kata or bunkai necessary.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Fighting for your life has a completely different psychological impact than fighting in a safe controlled environment for pride and money.
> 
> Anyone who thinks theyre the same has never had to do the former.



That is a big call by the way.  There are a lot of assumptions.

What are you basing that on


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Where did I say that?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but even you said that it's *behind* Judo, and Bjj in the grappling department, and there's no kata in Bjj. So couldn't I simply take  Bjj and be just fine? Or if I wanted to punch and kick, could I just pick up a kickboxing style that contained no kata and be just as effective as a karateka who spends far more time learning kata and kata bunkai?
> 
> Or in my case, simply take the kicks and punches I learned from karate and combine them with my bjj training. No kata or bunkai necessary.





Tez3 said:


> Forget the argument that if it works in MMA it works for self defence, try instead the idea that different people train different ways for different things, they enjoy their training which means they learn better, the truth is no one knows how they will react if attacked in a life threatening situation until that situation happens. If you do know because you've be attacked, well done on surviving, if you don't know, long may that continue



I agree with a lot of what you say. This one is kind of a misconception though. 

I feel an indication that something works is just better than no indication.

Looking at evidence removes some of the preconceived notions people have.

It is the dogma that is my issue here. I just don't respond to it.


----------



## Steve

On a phone so please forgive spelling errors and such.  Just a few comments on the train wreck so far.  

I'm not a cop, but becoming one isn't easy as some are now suggesting. 

If the definition of self defense is stopping someone from hurting you, then an mma fight is self defense even though there are weigh ins and the rest.  

If you have never had to "fight for your life" nor stepped into a ring against a well prepared opponent, perhaps you aren't in a position to comment on the psycHology of either.


----------



## Paul_D

Steve said:


> If the definition of self defense is stopping someone from hurting you, then an mma fight is self defense even though there are weigh ins and the rest.


I don't see how an MMA fight equates to stopping someone hurting you as MMA fighters don't leave the cage unhurt.  In fact quite the opposite looking at the state of some of them afterwards.

If the definition of  SD is stopping someone from hurting you then running away is SD.  But run away in MMA and you get disqualified.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> I agree with a lot of what you say. This one is kind of a misconception though.
> 
> I feel an indication that something works is just better than no indication.
> 
> Looking at evidence removes some of the preconceived notions people have.
> 
> *It is the dogma that is my issue here*. I just don't respond to it.



The 'dogma' is coming from only one side, that of the kata doesn't work and MMA does.

You can NOT tell if something works by watching a video on You Tube. It is proof of nothing. Hell, they have 'talking dogs' on there, loads of 'fails' so what does that prove. If you want evidence go somewhere where they train whatever it is you want evidence of. Have a look at a few places, do some research don't watch videos.

I know what works for me, after all these years I should but if you don't think it works, I don't care, I don't have to prove anything other than to myself. Others are intent of 'proving' what I say is a lie, instead perhaps they should spend the time they do on here arguing actually training, it would be productive. Calling people liars, trying to 'catch them out', being adamant they are right and we are all wrong is not productive, it's disrespectful and leaves a bad taste in the mouth. How much does us doing kata and bunkai impact on your training? How does the time I spend on Bunkai affect your training? None, you say, so why the need, yes it does seem to be a need, is it for you to be right? If you were to be proved 'right' what then? How would that change anything, yippee you won an argument, gosh, impressive. Really, it's time for some to go back to their BJJ and leave the rest of us alone isn't it? If our training worries you so much see a counsellor.


----------



## drop bear

Steve said:


> On a phone so please forgive spelling errors and such.  Just a few comments on the train wreck so far.
> 
> I'm not a cop, but becoming one isn't easy as some are now suggesting.
> 
> If the definition of self defense is stopping someone from hurting you, then an mma fight is self defense even though there are weigh ins and the rest.
> 
> If you have never had to "fight for your life" nor stepped into a ring against a well prepared opponent, perhaps you aren't in a position to comment on the psycHology of either.



The interesting thing here is i know experienced street fighters step into the ring shaking. Not being comfortable does not have to make sense and is different depending on the individual.


----------



## Steve

Paul_D said:


> I don't see how an MMA fight equates to stopping someone hurting you as MMA fighters don't leave the cage unhurt.  In fact quite the opposite looking at the state of some of them afterwards.
> 
> If the definition of  SD is stopping someone from hurting you then running away is SD.  But run away in MMA and you get disqualified.


Using this definition, an mma fight is self defense AND running away is also self defense.   There's room here to be inclusive.  

Also, don't confuse the goal with the result.   The goal is self defense is stopping someone from hurting you.  Neither in the ring nor anywhere else will the result always be so.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> The 'dogma' is coming from only one side, that of the kata doesn't work and MMA does.
> 
> You can NOT tell if something works by watching a video on You Tube. It is proof of nothing. Hell, they have 'talking dogs' on there, loads of 'fails' so what does that prove. If you want evidence go somewhere where they train whatever it is you want evidence of. Have a look at a few places, do some research don't watch videos.
> 
> I know what works for me, after all these years I should but if you don't think it works, I don't care, I don't have to prove anything other than to myself. Others are intent of 'proving' what I say is a lie, instead perhaps they should spend the time they do on here arguing actually training, it would be productive. Calling people liars, trying to 'catch them out', being adamant they are right and we are all wrong is not productive, it's disrespectful and leaves a bad taste in the mouth. How much does us doing kata and bunkai impact on your training? How does the time I spend on Bunkai affect your training? None, you say, so why the need, yes it does seem to be a need, is it for you to be right? If you were to be proved 'right' what then? How would that change anything, yippee you won an argument, gosh, impressive. Really, it's time for some to go back to their BJJ and leave the rest of us alone isn't it? If our training worries you so much see a counsellor.



Inversely then how does watching a youtube video not show something works?  The idea is at least it works somewhere. Otherwise it could be any form of reference news articles,wiki whatever.

If you pick an I am right and you are wrong stance you cant also take the middle ground.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> The 'dogma' is coming from only one side, that of the kata doesn't work and MMA does.



And here specifically no.

It is not my argument that kata does not work. It is that kata is not evidence in itself.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Inversely then how does watching a youtube video not show something works?  The idea is at least it works somewhere. Otherwise it could be any form of reference news articles,wiki whatever.
> 
> If you pick an I am right and you are wrong stance you cant also take the middle ground.



What I said was that what I do works for me, I don't care whether it works for you, that it works for me is enough.
 Posting up random videos does not prove anything, there are loads of videos that show 'fails' including loads of very poor and inept MMA fights, to watch them only would lead you to conclude that MMA was rubbish. If you aren't going to be fair in picking videos, only choosing bad ones it really doesn't prove anything. That's the point of the videos that are put up here, they are deliberately picked to show that something doesn't work all the while cherry picking ones that show BJJ does work, ignoring all the ones that are fails of course.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> And here specifically no.
> 
> It is not my argument that kata does not work. It is that kata is not evidence in itself.




Ones needs bunkai for kata so you haven't understood the concept.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Ones needs bunkai for kata so you haven't understood the concept.



can we really not keep falling back on that. 

Constantly claiming i don't understand the true mysteries of martial arts makes it sound like a cult.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> What I said was that what I do works for me, I don't care whether it works for you, that it works for me is enough.
> Posting up random videos does not prove anything, there are loads of videos that show 'fails' including loads of very poor and inept MMA fights, to watch them only would lead you to conclude that MMA was rubbish. If you aren't going to be fair in picking videos, only choosing bad ones it really doesn't prove anything. That's the point of the videos that are put up here, they are deliberately picked to show that something doesn't work all the while cherry picking ones that show BJJ does work, ignoring all the ones that are fails of course.



If there was a better way of demonstrating a point i would use it. 

My issue is i am wading through all these misconceptions that i can't see are based on anything other than people saying it enough times untill it sounds true.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> can we really not keep falling back on that.
> 
> Constantly claiming i don't understand the true mysteries of martial arts makes it sound like a cult.




Hardly, it's more like saying you need eggs to make an omelette.

why are you wading through anything? Why do you care what others do?


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Ones needs bunkai for kata so you haven't understood the concept.



Yeah, but you don't need kata and/or kata bunkai to be an effective martial artist right? So people who do kata and bunkai are doing more training to reach the same results as those who don't.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, but you don't need kata and/or kata bunkai to be an effective martial artist right? So people who do kata and bunkai are doing more training to reach the same results as those who don't.



*And this worries you why?*

Each to their own, if that's what you think. Why are you spending so much time trying to debunk what we do, why does it matter to you?

Over the years here we've had all sorts of training posts, some people like to hit trees, some like to break pieces of wood, others toughen up their shins by hitting with rolling pins and there's more but the thing is it doesn't impact on anyone else what they do.

Basically I have to think you are trolling, looking to irritate karateka over the way they train. Kata and bunkai aren't compulsory, many don't do either, many do both but what business is it of yours? Do we constantly rubbish the way you train? Do we say well that's obviously not going to work? Do we make snarky comments about your training being like a cult like your offsider?


----------



## tshadowchaser

and now back to the subject of Shotokan Karate and why it works or dose not work , please.

 It would seem that the art has been around for some years now and it must have some good points and it must have proved itself useful for more that exercise over the years else why would it still be around.
  Just because one dose not find you tube videos of it being used in the street dose not mean practitioners have never used their knowledge to defend themselves successfully
 Just because one person sees no benefit in Kata or has not learned what a kata is about dose not mean there is no use for kata
 To me this whole thread is about one or two people trying to STYLE bash yet make it seem like they are not doing that to stay within the rules of the forum.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Constantly claiming i don't understand the true mysteries of martial arts makes it sound like a cult.


Or that you're just not listening.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Hardly, it's more like saying you need eggs to make an omelette.
> 
> why are you wading through anything? Why do you care what others do?



why does anybody?

yet we all seem to.


----------



## Tez3

One thing to look at with Shotokan I think is about whether it's more beneficial for 'larger' people than smaller. I say this because our chief instructor's first karate style was Shotokan, he's well over six foot and well built, he says that he finds Shotokan easier than other styles. He certainly rates it for self defence. He's also trained in quite a few styles as being in the Forces means you move around a lot and train whatever is available where you are posted. He also says Wado is easier for smaller people with it's shorter stances. Any thoughts on this?


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Or that you're just not listening.



I thought it was because i was not agreeing.


----------



## Tez3

No, we don't all wade through stuff, someone here says they do something I don't disbelieve them and troll through videos to prove he/she doesn't. I'm interested in all martial arts but what I know about ALL martial arts isn't very much, so I read and learn.[/


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> One thing to look at with Shotokan I think is about whether it's more beneficial for 'larger' people than smaller. I say this because our chief instructor's first karate style was Shotokan, he's well over six foot and well built, he says that he finds Shotokan easier than other styles. He certainly rates it for self defence. He's also trained in quite a few styles as being in the Forces means you move around a lot and train whatever is available where you are posted. He also says Wado is easier for smaller people with it's shorter stances. Any thoughts on this?



It would make sense if Shotokan outfight more.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> I thought it was because i was not agreeing.




It doesn't matter whether you agree or not, it's just you aren't being very agreeable. Far from it, with the cults crack it seems you are trying to insult.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> It would make sense if Shotokan outfight more.




What does that mean? "outfight"?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> No, we don't all wade through stuff, someone here says they do something I don't disbelieve them and troll through videos to prove he/she doesn't. I'm interested in all martial arts but what I know about ALL martial arts isn't very much, so I read and learn.[/



so you are not proving that you are right at this very moment?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> It doesn't matter whether you agree or not, it's just you aren't being very agreeable. Far from it, with the cults crack it seems you are trying to insult.



you probably just don't understand my point.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> What does that mean? "outfight"?



To fight using range and distance.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> I thought it was because i was not agreeing.


There's a difference between not agreeing with someone and thinking you know better than those who are knowledgeable on the subject. It feels like an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> so you are not proving that you are right at this very moment?



Right about what? I have no idea what you are talking about and you haven't answered my question.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> To fight using range and distance.




If you 'outfight' them it means you are better than them ie "Mohammed Ali outfought most of his opponents" it doesn't mean to fight using range and distance. What means that is "to fight using range and distance."


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> So prancing/dancing around in solo patterns is a better for self defense practice than sparring/rolling/randori training?
> 
> Hilarious.



Congratulations, you've demonstrated that you don't have a CLUE what you're talking about.  Well done.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> Considering that several highly effective arts don't have kata or bunkai, does one really _need_ to understand it?



Quite apparent that you don't.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> If you 'outfight' them it means you are better than them ie "Mohammed Ali outfought most of his opponents" it doesn't mean to fight using range and distance. What means that is "to fight using range and distance."



or it means what i said.
outfighting - definition of outfighting by The Free Dictionary

Speaking of posting in a disrespectful manner. Constantly correcting peoples English is incredibly irritating.


----------



## Tez3

* English definition of “outfight” *
See all translations
*outfight*
verb [T] uk   /ˌaʊtˈfaɪt/ ( past tense and past participle outfought) us  
fight better than someone: The former heavyweight champion was outwitted and outfought.

From the Cambridge Dictionary.


----------



## Tez3

English Dictionary

*Definitions*
*verb *
-fights, -fighting, -*fought*



*(transitive) to surpass in fighting*
(transitive) (obsolete) to conquer
(intransitive) (obsolete) to escape by means of fighting


----------



## Tez3

The Free Dictionary

*outfight*
*v. t.* *1.* to exceed in fighting; fight more competently; as, He outfought his challengers; the boxer outfought his opponent for eight rounds but lost the bout in the ninth on a knockout.
*2.* to defeat in a battle; as, The French forces outfought the Germans.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> Proven effective when propped up by other MA systems.
> 
> I would love to see a "pure" Karateka enter a NHB competition and see how he does. The last one that did got obliterated pretty quickly back in the early UFC.



I'd do it providing that my opponent has to abide by the normal rules that they train for and I abide by the normal rules that I train for.  Which means I don't have to wear protective gear, wear their little shorts, listen to anything the referee says, nor can he interfere in anything I do and the opponent is NOT allowed to tap out and there are no time outs.  Oh, and the fight takes place in some other locale besides the controlled environment of the ring/octagon.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> Considering that we don't see any expression of kata within the sparring, competitive, or combative aspect of those arts...



Sure you do.  Everything they do (and quite a bit more) is contained in kata and has been since well before the oldest competitor was born.  The fact that you don't see it expressed is because you don't know what you're talking about.  

Let's cut to the chase.  We're right and you're wrong.  Simple as that.  Have a nice day.


----------



## Tez3

Why does the 'proof' that a martial art works for _self defence_ have to be provided by fighting in a competition? I can understand trying to prove an art is good for a specific competition type by competing in those competitions but fail to see why something for a different purpose must prove itself in a competitive fight.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> *And this worries you why?*
> 
> Each to their own, if that's what you think. Why are you spending so much time trying to debunk what we do, why does it matter to you?
> 
> Over the years here we've had all sorts of training posts, some people like to hit trees, some like to break pieces of wood, others toughen up their shins by hitting with rolling pins and there's more but the thing is it doesn't impact on anyone else what they do.
> 
> Basically I have to think you are trolling, looking to irritate karateka over the way they train. Kata and bunkai aren't compulsory, many don't do either, many do both but what business is it of yours? Do we constantly rubbish the way you train? Do we say well that's obviously not going to work? Do we make snarky comments about your training being like a cult like your offsider?




Well the argument is that my karate training was poor because I didnt learn the greatness of kata, or its bunkai. Instead, I bypassed that and simply took up Bjj instead, which is acknowledged as a superior grappling method to that found in the katas. So I'm just curious as to why you would need to know the kata or the bunkai at all, when all you would need to do is pick up Judo or Bjj.


----------



## Hanzou

Kong Soo Do said:


> Sure you do.  Everything they do (and quite a bit more) is contained in kata and has been since well before the oldest competitor was born.  The fact that you don't see it expressed is because you don't know what you're talking about.
> 
> Let's cut to the chase.  We're right and you're wrong.  Simple as that.  Have a nice day.



Yet we have other artists who fight in a similar fashion at an equal, if not superior level who don't train in kata at all.

If Muay Thai and Kyokushin look similar during combat, what's the point of Kyokushin's katas if the end result is looking exactly like a kickboxing style w/o katas? Couldn't you simply bypass the katas entirely and still perform high level Kyokushin?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> The Free Dictionary
> 
> *outfight*
> *v. t.* *1.* to exceed in fighting; fight more competently; as, He outfought his challengers; the boxer outfought his opponent for eight rounds but lost the bout in the ninth on a knockout.
> *2.* to defeat in a battle; as, The French forces outfought the Germans.



There's a sign on the wall but she wants to be sure
 'Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings

you don't feel you are trying too hard to be right here?


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> That is a big call by the way.  There are a lot of assumptions.
> 
> What are you basing that on



Growing up in indianapolis, I've been in _both._ A lot of the guys at the gym I go to on occasion and guys from my association who done both have been deployed and competed.

Jitters during a match is a far cry from truly fearing for your life (which no one does in the ring). 

You don't see MMA causing PTSD after all


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Growing up in indianapolis, I've been in _both._ A lot of the guys at the gym I go to on occasion and guys from my association who done both have been deployed and competed.
> 
> Jitters during a match is a far cry from truly fearing for your life (which no one does in the ring).
> 
> You don't see MMA causing PTSD after all



Are you equating self defence with war?


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Yet we have other artists who fight in a similar fashion at an equal, if not superior level who don't train in kata at all.
> 
> If Muay Thai and Kyokushin look similar during combat, what's the point of Kyokushin's katas if the end result is looking exactly like a kickboxing style w/o katas? Couldn't you simply bypass the katas entirely and still perform high level Kyokushin?



If you are achieving a similar result with two methods. Why is one method superior?


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Well the argument is that my karate training was poor because I didnt learn the greatness of kata, or its bunkai. Instead, I bypassed that and simply took up Bjj instead, which is acknowledged as a superior grappling method to that found in the katas. So I'm just curious as to why you would need to know the kata or the bunkai at all, when you would need to do is pick up Judo or Bjj.




That's disingenuous to be honest, you started the 'kata is rubbish' stuff long before anyone commented on your karate training. You have brought the subject up several times on several threads, about how kata is useless etc. It's your particular bête noir we get that but don't blame us for that. Live with it or give it up. 

You assume training in BJJ and Judo is easy to find, clearly you don't live in the country where finding any martial arts is difficult as is decent transport anywhere. You must also be relatively young, I'm not I started training in karate in the 70s, no BJJ around in the UK then. There was Judo but not where I lived but I found Wado Ryu which contains what I want, what I need and I enjoy training. In the last couple of years our Wado club closed due to the council here shutting the gym down and selling it to turn into flats. Lack of anywhere to train meant the club moves hours away. Luckily I was also training with a work colleague who when he was posted in started a martial arts club.

Do I *need* to know kata? probably not, but I do and I continue to use kata and Bunkai because it satisfies what I need to know, I go to Iain Abernethy's seminars and come away inspired with techniques I've learnt. I enjoy kata, it works for me, I like understanding it, working at it. To be honest it's not for you to rubbish my training, it has immense value for those who train it. It makes for well rounded martial artists in my opinion.

How would you feel if we said that you could just as easily train wrestling so why bother with BJJ? That BJJ is just for competitions it has no value for anything else? You left karate because it wasn't for you, fine but don't pretend you left because you learnt all there was to know about karate. Everyone is different, you don't find value in kata others do, each to their own. You just want to prove that BJJ is better than _anything_, better than karate better than WC ( you posted a lot about that too, how it's rubbish in MMA comps) better than anything anyone could ever do.  Instead you could just leave everyone alone and desist from posting up how you think everyone's training is really bad because "it doesn't work in MMA". You stay on your side and we'll stay on ours.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Are you equating self defence with war?




You misunderstand again. PTSD can be caused by any traumatic event such as being attacked, raped, threatened, stalked etc.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Yet we have other artists who fight in a similar fashion at an equal, if not superior level who don't train in kata at all.
> 
> If Muay Thai and Kyokushin look similar during combat, what's the point of Kyokushin's katas if the end result is looking exactly like a kickboxing style w/o katas? Couldn't you simply bypass the katas entirely and still perform high level Kyokushin?




People like to train in different ways, some are visual learners, some can just be told how to do things. Others will take weeks to learn one technique as they like to pull it to pieces examining every nuance before using it, others have an instinctive appreciation for techniques which means they can do them after being shown just once. The end result will be the same but we all gravitate towards a style of learning that suits us so why worry about some who do katas when others don't. *It's a choice.*


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> I'd do it providing that my opponent has to abide by the normal rules that they train for and I abide by the normal rules that I train for.  Which means I don't have to wear protective gear, wear their little shorts, listen to anything the referee says, nor can he interfere in anything I do and the opponent is NOT allowed to tap out and there are no time outs.  Oh, and the fight takes place in some other locale besides the controlled environment of the ring/octagon.



too deadly to spar.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Are you equating self defence with war?



No I'm trying to explain to someone who's clearly not had to fight for his life, that it isn't the same as pre match jitters.

When you actually live through a SD potential life or death situation, like combat, or being jumped and beaten outside of a Double 8 By 2 gentlemen twice your size, you'll understand how much more intimidating or psychologicallly damaging it is than stepping into a safe, controlled environment with someone of comparable size and skill.

Saying the fear is the same as full on life/death SD shows you havent ever had to really fear for your life.



drop bear said:


> If you are achieving a similar result with two methods. Why is one method superior?



This is what we've been telling Hanzou for a long time now.

But HE doesn't like forms,


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> too deadly to spar.



You don't know whether he is or not. So that was a bit snarky.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> You misunderstand again. PTSD can be caused by any traumatic event such as being attacked, raped, threatened, stalked etc.



do we know enough about ptsd to accurately predict a self defence situation will cause it and a ring fight wont?


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> No I'm trying to explain to someone who's clearly not had to fight for his life, that it isn't the same as pre match jitters.
> 
> When you actually live through a SD potential life or death situation, like combat, or being jumped and beaten outside of a Double 8 By 2 gentlemen twice your size, you'll understand how much more intimidating or psychologicallly damaging it is than stepping into a safe, controlled environment with someone of comparable size and skill.
> 
> Saying the fear is the same as full on life/death SD shows you havent ever had to really fear for your life.
> 
> 
> 
> This is what we've been telling Hanzou for a long time now.
> 
> But HE doesn't like forms,



I have done both soo your conclusions are out.

And hanzou doesn't have to like forms if he doesn't want to.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> You don't know whether he is or not. So that was a bit snarky.



No the too deadly to spar is a real thing. Not just a tsd thing.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> do we know enough about ptsd to accurately predict a self defence situation will cause it and a ring fight wont?



Name one known MMA fighter who has developed PTSD..........

It's not difficult find people seeking treatment for PTSD after combat, being shot in the street, raped, beaten within an inch of their lives, etc.



drop bear said:


> I have done both soo your conclusions are out.
> 
> And hanzou doesn't have to like forms if he doesn't want to.



Considering you've been attempting to say fearing for your life or the life of someone close to you is the same as worrying about getting punched I'm the face or losing pride in an environment with a safety net, I find that hard to believe.

And right, he doesn't have to. But that doesn't mean he's right about them being useless or that not doing them is some super secret better method.

Lots of fighters in kickboxing and MMA did and still do forms and their Karate Striking is the same quality as Muay Thai or savate.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

drop bear said:


> No the too deadly to spar is a real thing. Not just a tsd thing.



Out of curiosity, where did you get TSD in a Shotokan thread?


----------



## Kong Soo Do

drop bear said:


> And hanzou doesn't have to like forms if he doesn't want to.



No, he doesn't have to like them.  But commenting on the effectiveness of a training technique he is ignorant on is, well...ignorant.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> No the too deadly to spar is a real thing. Not just a tsd thing.



Still snarky




drop bear said:


> do we know enough about ptsd to accurately predict a self defence situation will cause it and a ring fight wont?



Is competitive fighting a traumatic event? I have two military psyche nurses who fight plus our other military fighters who have been in Afghan and Iraq who say no, competitive fighting is fun. 




drop bear said:


> And hanzou doesn't have to like forms if he doesn't want to.



No one said he has to like them, but his not liking them doesn't meant he gets to rubbish them with impunity.


----------



## OldKarateGuy

I read this entire thread, some parts twice and I have a headache. I did kodokan judo for about 20 years, and then switched to JKA, later to tsd because of a move, no JKA school nearby but have maintained shotokan training too, 20 years now. I was a cop for 32 years overlapping judo to JKA. I was in many fights and used a blunt object when I could. Did a (very) little BJJ early on with the Gracies when they first came to US. Just my opinion: grappling stuff was very useful in work when actually handcuffing or taking down suspects, but limited because it's good only for one bad guy at a time. In a real fight, it's not always safe to assume only one opponent, so it's better to stand up and punch them out (see 'blunt object', also kick, sweep, etc). Karate kata were very useful to me in training for the street, maybe because I learned power and balance, speed...I don't know that I actually learned fighting combinations, but it's very hard to separate karate training into what worked for real world and what didn't. It's a package. So talk of dropping kata from MA training for real world results seems rather...stupid to me. Just my opinion. Maybe others can do without kata. I can't. I have to do the old fashioned kata, kihon, kumite thing to make it work. But it's not theoretical or tournament in my case. I have been in a lot of fights/scuffles/resisting/pushing-and-shoving/drunken-brawls/spouse-stabbing/nutcase/whacked-on-drugs/whatever in my career. I did kata in both judo and karate. It helped.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Still snarky
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is competitive fighting a traumatic event? I have two military psyche nurses who fight plus our other military fighters who have been in Afghan and Iraq who say no, competitive fighting is fun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one said he has to like them, but his not liking them doesn't meant he gets to rubbish them with impunity.



see i still wouldn't have compared your average self defence or a ring fight to war.

It would be taken for granted that war would be more traumatic.

If you think someone is wrong then spell out where they are wrong. If the conversation is infuriating you stop having it.

I mean why do you care?
(see what I did there?)


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> Out of curiosity, where did you get TSD in a Shotokan thread?



Supposed to be ksd.

The no rules challenge match in a car park is a ploy people use to ego stroke generally.
creating so many conditions as to never get challenged.

Sometimes they actually go ahead. But they don't achieve much.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> see i still wouldn't have compared your average self defence or a ring fight to war.
> 
> It would be taken for granted that war would be more traumatic.
> 
> If you think someone is wrong then spell out where they are wrong. If the conversation is infuriating you stop having it.
> 
> I mean why do you care?
> (see what I did there?)




You don't have to compare to war.

Show me one MMA fighter who got PTSD from the cage.

you can find 100 PYDD patients who have it because of being raped, jumped, stabbed, or beaten In street SD.

If the psychological impact in the cage was the same, we'd see PTSD among fighters.


----------



## Tez3

yes I saw, you misunderstood the post again then posted stuff that doesn't make sense so that we have no idea what you are talking about.

No one is comparing a competitive fight to war other than you and now you are saying you didn't.

Where did I say the conversation is irritating me? Where did that spring from? Why do I care about what?[/QUOTE]


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Supposed to be ksd.
> 
> The no rules challenge match in a car park is a ploy people use to ego stroke generally.
> creating so many conditions as to never get challenged.
> 
> Sometimes they actually go ahead. But they don't achieve much.





Guess you haven't met the travellers here lol, when they challenge to a 'car park' fight it's for real. Quite entertaining actually, I believe there's even You Tube videos of their fights.


----------



## Hanzou

Kong Soo Do said:


> No, he doesn't have to like them.  But commenting on the effectiveness of a training technique he is ignorant on is, well...ignorant.



You act as if I'm the first person in the history of martial arts to discard forms/kata from practice.

I've done kata, so I'm hardly ignorant of it. I simply believe that it's an obsolete method of training. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> You don't have to compare to war.
> 
> Show me one MMA fighter who got PTSD from the cage.
> 
> you can find 100 PYDD patients who have it because of being raped, jumped, stabbed, or beaten In street SD.
> 
> If the psychological impact in the cage was the same, we'd see PTSD among fighters.



ptsd is not defined by the level of psychological impact though. Not everybody who goes through bad stuff gets ptsd.

So it is not a good gauge to define what is traumatic and what isn't.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Guess you haven't met the travellers here lol, when they challenge to a 'car park' fight it's for real. Quite entertaining actually, I believe there's even You Tube videos of their fights.



I was thinking about that when I wrote the post.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> ptsd is not defined by the level of psychological impact though. Not everybody who goes through bad stuff gets ptsd.
> 
> So it is not a good gauge to define what is traumatic and what isn't.




Actually  yeahh it is... nobody gets PTSD from baking cookies or hitting bag.

Not everyone who suffers gets PTSD, but everyone with PTSD went through something traumatic. That's the "Trauma" in the name of the disorder.

i.e. Not everyone who eats gets fat but that doesn't mean fried chicken isn't fattening....especially when it's a common meal among the obese.

That's why it's do easy to find PTSD sufferers after rapes, assuaults, etc. 

But you can't find a fighter who got it from MMA. 

There a whole list of common PTSD causing events....


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> I simply believe that it's an obsolete method of training



that's not how it comes across though is it, you don't just say 'oh I think they are obsolete' you actually attack people who don't think like you, you say they make things up, steal techniques from other styles and get quite irate when people disagree with you. You think kata is obsolete, fine, you've said it and there's nothing else to add.





drop bear said:


> I was thinking about that when I wrote the post.




You haven't seen any of them if you meant what you said.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Actually  yeahh it is... nobody gets PTSD from baking cookies or hitting bag.
> 
> Not everyone who suffers gets PTSD, but everyone with PTSD went through something traumatic. That's the "Trauma" in the name of the disorder.
> 
> i.e. Not everyone who eats gets fat but that doesn't mean fried chicken isn't fattening....especially when it's a common meal among the obese.
> 
> That's why it's do easy to find PTSD sufferers after rapes, assuaults, etc.
> 
> But you can't find a fighter who got it from MMA.
> 
> There a whole list of common PTSD causing events....



So a rape that does not result in ptsd was not all that traumatic?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> The no rules challenge match in a car park is a ploy people use to ego stroke generally.creating so many conditions as to never get challenged.
> Sometimes they actually go ahead. But they don't achieve much.



I find it ironic that you mention this after you post videos like these:


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> So a rape that does not result in ptsd was not all that traumatic?




Wow, now that is really going to far in putting words into someone's mouth. You really should apologise for that, it's dreadful.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> So a rape that does not result in ptsd was not all that traumatic?



That's nowhere near what I said at all....


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> So a rape that does not result in ptsd was not all that traumatic?


http://www.tomshw.it/forum/attachme...879396-approccio-ragazze-picard-facepalm1.jpg


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> that's not how it comes across though is it, you don't just say 'oh I think they are obsolete' you actually attack people who don't think like you, you say they make things up, steal techniques from other styles and get quite irate when people disagree with you. You think kata is obsolete, fine, you've said it and there's nothing else to add.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You haven't seen any of them if you meant what you said.



I really wish people wouldn't just join unrelated conclusion's 







Tez3 said:


> that's not how it comes across though is it, you don't just say 'oh I think they are obsolete' you actually attack people who don't think like you, you say they make things up, steal techniques from other styles and get quite irate when people disagree with you. You think kata is obsolete, fine, you've said it and there's nothing else to add.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You haven't seen any of them if you meant what you said.



there are people who are serious about that kind of thing and people who want to sound serious.

The ones that want to fight in a flash Gordon style death arena are usually the latter


----------



## drop bear

L





Drose427 said:


> That's nowhere near what I said at all....



You are saying the level of trauma is defined by whether or not you get ptsd.

It clearly isn't.


----------



## Tez3

This is way, way off topic, now we have rape being used to disparage someone. That's nasty. Time to either get back on subject or leave methinks.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> I really wish people wouldn't just join unrelated conclusion's


And what does that video have to do with anything?


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> L
> 
> You are saying the level of trauma is defined by whether or not you get ptsd.
> 
> It clearly isn't.



Are you trolling?

No that's not what I'm saying... 

Do you realize you can literally find a list of common PTSD causes. They're always traumatic Life threatening events..

Again, if MMA is anywhere as Traumatic as rape, getting beaten with in inch of your life or jumped,  getting shot at or assaulted with a weapon as a cop, show me one MMA Fighter who got it from the cage.

By even putting those in the same category as regulated, civilized, and controlled sport is literally a disrespectful act of desperation. You're downplaying _actual traumatic events.
_
When thousands of people get PTSD from any of those events, but not a single fighter has been recorded as getting it from MMA, one is clearly less Traumatic than the other......


----------



## RTKDCMB

Drose427 said:


> Do you realize you can literally find a list of common PTSD causes. They're always traumatic


Hence the 'T'.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

drop bear said:


> Supposed to be ksd.
> 
> The no rules challenge match in a car park is a ploy people use to ego stroke generally.
> creating so many conditions as to never get challenged.
> 
> Sometimes they actually go ahead. But they don't achieve much.



No ego involved.  You two try to equate the ring with SD.  We're telling you they are two different things.  And you can't judge one by the other.  So in a 'challenge' you have to have each person abide by their training.  The BJJ guy trains for one, unarmed opponent who plays by the rules, gets to tap out if the going gets too tough, gets a time out to catch his breath, gets some advice from his corner guys in addition to being prepped for the next round and all of it takes place on a nice soft, dry, level mat.  And let's not forget the protective equipment so they don't injure their hands or testicles.  Well I don't train with all of your fluffy luxuries.  And I don't have to abide by your rules.  And I don't need your protective gear.  And I don't require your soft, padded flooring.  And I don't have to spar to be effective, I have life and actual/practical experience instead as well as an understanding of viable training methods that you and Hanzou don't have.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> That's nowhere near what I said at all....



Ok then I am sorry if that was mean.

We will try this on a nicer track.
why do some people get ptsd and others don't?


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> there are people who are serious about that kind of thing and people who want to sound serious.
> 
> The ones that want to fight in a flash Gordon style death arena are usually the latter



What on earth is this about, it had nothing to do with my post you quoted. And the video? What has that got to do with Shotokan and self defence or even kata? 'Unrelated conclusions'? mate, you make totally unrelated posts.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> And what does that video have to do with anything?



It got trapped in there for no good reason. Sometimes this phone just goes a bit weird


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Ok then I am sorry if that was mean.
> 
> We will try this on a nicer track.
> why do some people get ptsd and others don't?




Way off topic again but perhaps if you read this you will stop posting stuff up that has nothing to do with the topic.
NIMH Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Ok then I am sorry if that was mean.
> 
> We will try this on a nicer track.
> why do some people get ptsd and others don't?



Ask a shrink.

Why do some jaws break easier than others?

That doesn't make the punch any less powerful.

But there has to be "traumatic stress" to cause PTSD. 

Common SD situations are common causes i.e. rape, assaults, stabbings, etc. You can find many people suffering from PTSD after that.

Name one MMA fighter who got it in the cage.

If MMA was traumatic stress like rapes, assaults, and stabbings we'd have a considerable amount of fighters with PTSD.

When thousands of people suffer from PTSD from the same events, and you can't give us one record a single fighter getting it it's hard to claim it holds the same amount of stress as Rapes, Assaults, etc.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Way off topic again but perhaps if you read this you will stop posting stuff up that has nothing to do with the topic.
> NIMH Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD



I didn't raise the ptsd subject.


----------



## Tez3

Drose427 said:


> Name one MMA fighter who got it in the cage.



One of our fighters has PTSD, *not* from fighting in MMA but because as a medic in Iraq he had to deal with a situation where service people were burnt to death, he throws up now if he smells bacon cooking. He finds martial arts and fighting helps with the stress. he likes the rules of MMA comps, that he will be stopped if it looks like he'll hurt someone. It's quite the opposite he finds of his ordeal in that he knows the outcome...a win, loss or draw without anyone dying or being seriously hurt, he likes the discipline and the sportsmanship he finds among fighters, no one judges him. He likes that there's no hatred only a competitive spirit between him and his opponent. All in all not traumatic for him, it's more of a comfort zone


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Ask a shrink.
> 
> Why do some jaws break easier than others?
> 
> That doesn't make the punch any less powerful.
> 
> But there has to be "traumatic stress" to cause PTSD.
> 
> Common SD situations are common causes i.e. rape, assaults, stabbings, etc. You can find many people suffering from PTSD after that.
> 
> Name one MMA fighter who got it in the cage.
> 
> If MMA was traumatic stress like rapes, assaults, and stabbings we'd have a considerable amount of fighters with PTSD.
> 
> When thousands of people suffer from PTSD from the same events, and you can't give us one record a single fighter getting it it's hard to claim it holds the same amount of stress as Rapes, Assaults, etc.



who knows?

Ptsd is not an indicator of how great the trauma was.


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> No ego involved.  You two try to equate the ring with SD.  We're telling you they are two different things.  And you can't judge one by the other.  So in a 'challenge' you have to have each person abide by their training.  The BJJ guy trains for one, unarmed opponent who plays by the rules, gets to tap out if the going gets too tough, gets a time out to catch his breath, gets some advice from his corner guys in addition to being prepped for the next round and all of it takes place on a nice soft, dry, level mat.  And let's not forget the protective equipment so they don't injure their hands or testicles.  Well I don't train with all of your fluffy luxuries.  And I don't have to abide by your rules.  And I don't need your protective gear.  And I don't require your soft, padded flooring.  And I don't have to spar to be effective, I have life and actual/practical experience instead as well as an understanding of viable training methods that you and Hanzou don't have.



Do you spar?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> One of our fighters has PTSD, *not* from fighting in MMA but because as a medic in Iraq he had to deal with a situation where service people were burnt to death, he throws up now if he smells bacon cooking. He finds martial arts and fighting helps with the stress. he likes the rules of MMA comps, that he will be stopped if it looks like he'll hurt someone. It's quite the opposite he finds of his ordeal in that he knows the outcome...a win, loss or draw without anyone dying or being seriously hurt, he likes the discipline and the sportsmanship he finds among fighters, no one judges him. He likes that there's no hatred only a competitive spirit between him and his opponent. All in all not traumatic for him, it's more of a comfort zone



This is fair enough too.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> I find it ironic that you mention this after you post videos like these:



Two different things.


----------



## Drose427

Tez3 said:


> One of our fighters has PTSD, *not* from fighting in MMA but because as a medic in Iraq he had to deal with a situation where service people were burnt to death, he throws up now if he smells bacon cooking. He finds martial arts and fighting helps with the stress. he likes the rules of MMA comps, that he will be stopped if it looks like he'll hurt someone. It's quite the opposite he finds of his ordeal in that he knows the outcome...a win, loss or draw without anyone dying or being seriously hurt, he likes the discipline and the sportsmanship he finds among fighters, no one judges him. He likes that there's no hatred only a competitive spirit between him and his opponent. All in all not traumatic for him, it's more of a comfort zone



Its awesome he found something that helps him cope! One of my cousins got it bad, and like many service members the first outlet she went to was addiction. She had it rough her first year back. Eventually she got it together got her degree and joined the peace corps. Shes spent more time in Ukraine than home since her discharge.

One of our guys at my dojang works at the veterans hospital in my area. Hes always trying to get them to come train for those reasons exactly



drop bear said:


> who knows?
> 
> Ptsd is not an indicator of how great the trauma was.



If there was any real traumatic stress in MMA we'd see at least one fighter getting it from the cage by sheer volume of practitioners alone........

If MMA had the same psychological stress and impact as "fight for your life" SD situations, it would have the same repercussions, dangers, and affect on the mind.

It simply doesnt.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> If there was any real traumatic stress in MMA we'd see at least one fighter getting it from the cage by sheer volume of practitioners alone........
> 
> If MMA had the same psychological stress and impact as "fight for your life" SD situations, it would have the same repercussions, dangers, and affect on the mind.
> 
> It simply doesnt.



Are all sd fight for your life?


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Are all sd fight for your life?



obviously not, but thats what im referring to.

But again, if these situations consistently cause PTSD, but MMA does not, its hard to argue theyre equally traumatic and stressing.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

drop bear said:


> Do you spar?



Are you serious?  Or are you admitting you haven't read any of my posts/replies to you?


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> obviously not, but thats what im referring to.
> 
> But again, if these situations consistently cause PTSD, but MMA does not, its hard to argue theyre equally traumatic and stressing.



That's the thing if you are arguing that the worst possible thing that can happen to a person is worse than a ring fight. Then yeah no brainer.


----------



## drop bear

Kong Soo Do said:


> Are you serious?  Or are you admitting you haven't read any of my posts/replies to you?



 if you don't spar of course you don't need mats rules and protective gear.


----------



## OldKarateGuy

Hanzou said:


> You act as if I'm the first person in the history of martial arts to discard forms/kata from practice.
> 
> I've done kata, so I'm hardly ignorant of it. I simply believe that it's an obsolete method of training. Your mileage may vary.


Hanzou is certainly not the only experienced karateka to have this opinion, including some very good fighters. Personally, I don't get it, and I think you deny yourself an important part of the experience, maybe the that whole spiritual/mental feeling of the art (if you're into that), but no one can deny that some seriously dangerous people feel the very same way. No need for a lack of respect either way. In those immortal words...You work your side of the street, I'll work mine. Or something.


----------



## Jaeimseu

This is a wild thread. I can't believe you are still at it. 

Maybe I've missed something, but what does PTSD have to do with training methods? I don't think anyone is in fear of being raped or killed while training bunkai or while sparring. 

In relation to the OP, my opinion would be that Shotokan is sometimes useful for self defense, similar to just about any form of MA training.


----------



## Flying Crane

Tez3 said:


> You assume training in BJJ and Judo is easy to find, clearly you don't live in the country where finding any martial arts is difficult as is decent transport anywhere...


Well at the least he assumes that everyone WANTS to train BJJ, but that simply isn't true.  For me, I simply have no interest.  Zero.  Zip.  None.  Plenty of schools around here, but it's not for me.  Hanzou can't understand that.  It blows his mind.  But there are many things in life, and in the martial arts, that he simply does not and can not and never will, understand.  It's the way of things.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I've done kata, so I'm hardly ignorant of it.


Just because you have done it, doesn't mean you understand it.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Two different things.


One is like a challenge match, the other we don't know what it is.


----------



## Steve

I think the lack of Ptsd in MMA is a function of the overall supportive atmosphere regardless of the background of the student.  It's less,to,do,with the training or violence as the general atmosphere of respect in most MMA gyms.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> obviously not, but thats what im referring to.
> 
> But again, if these situations consistently cause PTSD, but MMA does not, its hard to argue theyre equally traumatic and stressing.



that is still relying on the idea that ptsd is consistent to the level of trauma suffered. And I don't see how it is.

Because we can have identical incidents where one person suffers ptsd and another does not. 

But i really was here comparing incidents that were similar to what would be faced in the ring rather than the worst incidents we can think up.

SD has a pretty large spectrum.


----------



## drop bear

Steve said:


> I think the lack of Ptsd in MMA is a function of the overall supportive atmosphere regardless of the background of the student.  It's less,to,do,with the training or violence as the general atmosphere of respect in most MMA gyms.



I was going to suggest that. Or that a mental toughening process occurs or even that it is an environment where ptsd is less likely to be reported.

I mean as a side there is almost no work related mental illness in the security industry. Which has nothing at all with the threat you would get fired if you tried to claim it.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> One is like a challenge match, the other we don't know what it is.



One is an actual fight. And one isn't. If i say i want to fight you but we both must be riding grizzly bears then i don't really want to fight you.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> that is still relying on the idea that ptsd is consistent to the level of trauma suffered. And I don't see how it is.



It is much more complicated than that as it depends on a number of factors including the human factor and the person's state of mind at the time.



drop bear said:


> Because we can have identical incidents where one person suffers ptsd and another does not.



There are far too many variable for two incidents to be identical.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Drose427 said:


> You do realize thats a demonstration of a drill for the class and not the drill itself right?


|
I like how you isolated that inaccuracy out.  If we reference a video demonstrating a point, the video should be relevant to the specific point.  I think the vid would have been acceptable as a lead-in....  continued below....  



Drose427 said:


> Im saying whats most realistic is drilling where you can actually punch to the face, do takedowns, or even hit specific targets that will drop a guy like the groin.


|
...But a vid of the actual drill should have been the follow-up....  You take it a farther with easily-damaged targets.  Not typically what traditional Shotokan trains under it's rule set....



Drose427 said:


> Especially when your average assailant isnt going to bother with footwork, circling, throw a myriad of kicks, etc.
> 
> Ive never seen a drunk guy at a bar or a cocky frat boy do either or those. / usually its just some crazy uncontrolled flailing towards the head....


|
Again, the relevant point.  Shotokan self defense is designed against the types of common attacks you speak of. 



Drose427 said:


> Which is something most schools replicate in SD, not Free Sparring....


|
There's the common tendency to take a part of the  traditional karate curriculum out of context.  The parts of the curriculum are not isolated, unrelated drills.  Moreover, there's a safety element built into traditional karate, particularly the Japanese styles onward.
|
There's too much 'backward' extrapolation; such as if head punches aren't allowed in sparring, the karateka of that style can't conceive of a punch to the head.
|
As I've said, you're the instructor.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> Here is some simple bunkai that gives a basic understanding of the techniques in the kata.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now to my understanding, the Heian series of kata were instructional kata, not necessarily designed as a fighting system.  The bunkai shown here is not realistic in that it is choreographed but that doesn't take away from its primary purpose, giving a simple explanation of the kata, but again kihon....


|
I always preface my talks about Shotokan in saying it's not my favorite style.  OTOH, Shotokan makes an excellent teaching style.  And so I want to key off of your term 'INSTRUCTIONAL...."
|
The Ian A. vid I edited out shows some more effective application that the traditional Heian kata.  I think most all serious karateka can accept that.   In defense of Shotokan tradition, the Ian A. interpretations to me, seems to be more Okinawan in style.  So why not practice Okinawan karate if that is your criticism of Shotokan.
|
IMO, the value of Shotokan is that as conventionally taught, it's more of a KISS karate.  Let's not overcomplicated things.  Let's keep it simple & let's do SIMPLE right.
|
THAT'S THE FIRST THING THE HEIAN KATA SO DEMONSTRATED IN THE VID ARE TRYING TO GET ACROSS.

p.s. Huge thread, as it should be....


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> And here specifically no.
> 
> It is not my argument that kata does not work. It is that kata is not evidence in itself.


|
I just made a post about this @ another thread.  If you look at the traditional karate curriculum, take for instance the JKA Shotokan karate, or other Shotokan sub-style, the parts are to function in that the sum of the parts is not only necessary; *the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.*  And that's not the final answer to your supposition, which same was perfect for discussion purposes.
|
So isolating out kata, technically speaking, is incompetent by traditional karate principles.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tony Dismukes said:


> ...Hmm. It's all rather stylized. Many of the techniques could work, more or less, although they would look a bit different against a less stylized attack. Others seem rather impractical, regardless of the style of attack. None of it seems as realistic as what Abernathy was showing in your second and third video.  None are as _bad_ as the first sequence in the first video you posted.


|
Now again, I want to preface my vid with some specifics, which is often omitted when these are use for illustration.

1. It is a demo, not an actual fight.
2. The karateka display some athletically trained ability considerable compared to average karate practitioner.

With those set forth........................
|
The value of the Heian kata (bunkai) vid I quoted from K_MAN is that it builds this:


----------



## drop bear

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> I just made a post about this @ another thread.  If you look at the traditional karate curriculum, take for instance the JKA Shotokan karate, or other Shotokan sub-style, the parts are to function in that the sum of the parts is not only necessary; *the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.*  And that's not the final answer to your supposition, which same was perfect for discussion purposes.
> |
> So isolating out kata, technically speaking, is incompetent by traditional karate principles.



You are basing the weight of evidence on the wrong thing. It is assumed kata has a practical application and that should it fall short of the ideal then the kata is not taken to task,the practitioner is for not understanding the kata.

Which is training based on a house of cards.

If the kata is found wanting and you get smashed. It is an issue you can never fix because all the understanding in the universe wont fix a brocken technique.


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> You are basing the weight of evidence on the wrong thing. It is assumed kata has a practical application and that should it fall short of the ideal then the kata is not taken to task,the practitioner is for not understanding the kata.
> 
> Which is training based on a house of cards.
> 
> If the kata is found wanting and you get smashed. It is an issue you can never fix because all the understanding in the universe wont fix a brocken technique.


|
I will agree completely with the addition of the following qualifier:  IN YOUR OPINION.
|
EDIT: Just posted a Shotokan kumite demonstration vid.  See above.  MY criticism of the vid is that the intro defines karate as a set of martial techniques (pretty good list, IMO).  Traditional karate is not a set of techniques for fighting.  That is an application, an outward observation....


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> You are basing the weight of evidence on the wrong thing. It is assumed kata has a practical application and that should it fall short of the ideal then the kata is not taken to task,the practitioner is for not understanding the kata.


|
How many karateka can do kata according the Masters?  How many karateka can meet Gichin Funakoshi's standards for traditional karate training?
|
The TRADITIONAL KARATE answer is that the failure is not in the kata (not that kata is perfect, or doesn't have weak points in how it's taught); the failure is in the practitioner to meet the standards DEMANDED BY SUCCESSFUL KATA (KARATE) Practice.
|
That's what the video demonstrates, IN MY OPINION.
|
NOW TO DO A LITTLE SYNTHESIS (_FOR THOSE WHO ASKED ME ABOUT THE KIAI MASTER OVER & OVER_), please compare the Shotokan vid I posted above, with the Shotokan vs. Gracie JuiJitus that Matt Bryers posted in the Paul Vunak Thread:




|
NOW, do you think the Gracie BJJ is going to be able to handle the Shotokan stylists in my vid the way he did in the Gracie vid?


----------



## Zero

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Now again, I want to preface my vid with some specifics, which is often omitted when these are use for illustration.
> 
> 1. It is a demo, not an actual fight.
> 2. The karateka display some athletically trained ability considerable compared to average karate practitioner.
> 
> With those set forth........................
> |
> The value of the Heian kata (bunkai) vid I quoted from K_MAN is that it builds this:


Enjoyable vid, it was a fun watch with, umm, plenty of blood  : )


----------



## Tez3

Zero said:


> Enjoyable vid, it was a fun watch with, umm, plenty of blood  : )




Glad I'm not washing those Gis!
Flashy, entertaining video but it does give a good flavour of karate, when done not for video you can actually see that without the extraneous movements for the video karate strikes will be effective, look at the strikes themselves not necessarily the long showy stances which not all karate styles do btw. I wouldn't say that a flying sidekick is a good defensive move ( unless of course your opponent is on a pony or small horse....joke!) but it did look good, shows we can do the TKD flashy stuff too  ( well not me personally, my old bones won't make it though I do a very nice sidekick to the knee)
As with ALL videos you have to keep the purpose it was made in mind but you can see there's some very good strikes available to the karateka.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Zero said:


> Enjoyable vid, it was a fun watch with, umm, plenty of blood  : )


|
Yeah, theatrical as a I prefaced.  Beats run-of-mill UFC advertising....


Tez3 said:


> Glad I'm not washing those Gis!
> Flashy, entertaining video but it does give a good flavour of karate, when done not for video you can actually see that without the extraneous movements for the video karate strikes will be effective, look at the strikes themselves not necessarily the long showy stances which not all karate styles do btw. I wouldn't say that a flying sidekick is a good defensive move ( unless of course your opponent is on a pony or small horse....joke!) but it did look good, shows we can do the TKD flashy stuff too  ( well not me personally, my old bones won't make it though I do a very nice sidekick to the knee)
> As with ALL videos you have to keep the purpose it was made in mind but you can see there's some very good strikes available to the karateka.


|
That's essentially what I was trying to get across.  You don't see the typical bouncing around / reverse speed punch of run-of-mill sport karate.
|
The 'extraneous' moves are a separate issue....  *traditional karate has a different foundation than the 'natural' fighting & kickboxing claim contact karate has.*    They are not just using 'long showy stances' to look good.  It's a legitimate part of the Shotokan karate style.  Same for traditional TKD.

BOTTOM LINE: These Shotokan guys are the contrast to the Gerard Grodeau KYO-kickboxing types.  Their demonstration of kata is very, very good by my martial art evaluation, forget formal kata competition...


----------



## Paul_D

drop bear said:


> It is assumed kata has a practical application



It's not assumed at all, what do you think kata was invented for? They didnt; have you-tube and most people where illiterate, so the only way to record tehcnaiuws was physically, they didn't invent kata's to win plastic trophies in competitions.



drop bear said:


> should it fall short of the ideal then the kata is not taken to task,the practitioner is for not understanding the kata.


By your logic then, if I plumb my washing machine in incorrectly and it floods my kitchen it's the fault isn't mine for not following the instructions, it's the of the washing machine. 

If your interpretation of the kata movement doesn't work then of course it's your fault, it's not the kata's fault you don't understand it.


----------



## Drose427

Paul_D said:


> It's not assumed at all, what do you think kata was invented for? They didnt; have you-tube and most people where illiterate, so the only way to record tehcnaiuws was physically, they didn't invent kata's to win plastic trophies in competitions.
> 
> 
> By your logic then, if I plumb my washing machine in incorrectly and it floods my kitchen it's the fault isn't mine for not following the instructions, it's the of the washing machine.
> 
> If your interpretation of the kata movement doesn't work then of course it's your fault, it's not the kata's fault you don't understand it.



I got one too!

Is it algebras fault you dont understand Matrices?


----------



## RTKDCMB

ShotoNoob said:


> There's too much 'backward' extrapolation; such as if head punches aren't allowed in sparring, the karateka of that style can't conceive of a punch to the head.


There is precedence for coming to that conclusion. I have personally seen students from other TKD schools train with us that I have had to repeatedly tell to keep their hands up A couple of weeks ago we had a young girl with a black belt from one of those schools she stated that she wasn't used to using her hands.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RTKDCMB said:


> There is precedence for coming to that conclusion. I have personally seen students from other TKD schools train with us that I have had to repeatedly tell to keep their hands up A couple of weeks ago we had a young girl with a black belt from one of those schools she stated that she wasn't used to using her hands.


|
Yes I agree.  We have this syndrome in our own dojo.
|
That's one reason for the pressure testing of sparring in the MMA arena, at a RBSD environment such as you  espouse, or karate sparring which is more akin to traditional karate which, first off in kihon, trains punches to the head.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> They are not just using 'long showy stances' to look good. It's a legitimate part of the Shotokan karate style. Same for traditional TKD.



Ah but my Wado trained brain however says that long stances aren't necessary, we don't do those. To my eyes they are too long.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> Ah but my Wado trained brain however says that long stances aren't necessary, we don't do those. To my eyes they are too long.


|
Of course such low stances require more thought in action.  It's not necessary.  Yet Shotokan has a martial reason for the low stances.  Wado moves back away from that principle, according to you.  It's why looking @ different style's help's frame the issues.
|
To me, Gichin Funakoshi had a definite reason for the low stances.  These guys can fight powerfully from low stances.  Is there a lesson here?  I think so.
|
Do I myself fight from such low stances.  Rarely.  And I mean rarely.  Do I fight from traditional karate stances such as front stance or lunge stance or horse stance (Shotokan) modified higher.  Yes.  I never use boxing stances, kickboxing stances or guards, or 'footwork.'    NEVER.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> Ah but my Wado trained brain however says that long stances aren't necessary, we don't do those. To my eyes they are too long.


|
As I continue to say, I personally won't train Shotokan, I don't like it.  Yet as representation of traditional karate for most of us, I've really grown to appreciate it's teachings.  Especially the flaws....


----------



## Drose427

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> As I continue to say, I personally won't train Shotokan, I don't like it.  Yet as representation of traditional karate for most of us, I've really grown to appreciate it's teachings.  Especially the flaws....



It's always been my understanding that deep stances(particularly in Japanese karate)  are there because when Okinawa karate (which uses high stances) came to the mainland and went to the universities, they begin to focus on conditioning. Which, deep stances out great for.

Conditioning is the big reason we do them deep in my TSD association. One or two takedowns are easier with a good horse stance, but generally we tell our students who ask why we go so deep that conditioning and flexibility or the biggest 2.

I believe a lot of things happened in Karate growth that Funakoshi didn't particularly agree with, but he and his students wanted it to spread. So changes had to be made.

Justhe like how it's common for owners of commercial schools or gyms to make changes to their normal curriculum or classes to appeal to whatever their market is


----------



## ShotoNoob

HERE'S SOME SHOTOKAN "SELF DEFENSE" I'M NOT HOT ON"




|
Brief Negative:  I think some of the conventions with knifehand have been changed to much from the Okinawan origins.
Brief Positive: Who says traditional karate kumite is a speed reverse punch to the body....
|
EDIT: I do like the vid as a way to meet girls....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Drose427 said:


> It's always been my understanding that deep stances(particularly in Japanese karate)  are there because when Okinawa karate (which uses high stances) came to the mainland and went to the universities, they begin to focus on conditioning. Which, deep stances out great for.


|
That is my understanding also.  However, the older styles of karate, particularly Chinese karate do use lower stances in fighting applications.  Are the low stances dominant, no.



Drose427 said:


> Conditioning is the big reason we do them deep in my TSD association. One or two takedowns are easier with a good horse stance, but generally we tell our students who ask why we go so deep that conditioning and flexibility or the biggest 2.


|
Again, I'm right with you.  Yet the strength & flexibility built works in launching power from the whole body.  Should you throw or knock down your standing opponent, then sink into a low stance for the finishing-power hand strike to head, solar plexus, etc.  This tradition is seen all over traditional karate kumite competition vids....



Drose427 said:


> I believe a lot of things happened in Karate growth that Funakoshi didn't particularly agree with, but he and his students wanted it to spread. So changes had to be made.


|
Again, Funakoshi's karate-do evolved into Shotokan & Japanese karate.  Yet if we look to Funakoshi and keep that perspective when looking at the more modern & sporting evolutions--we now have a standard on when most of the typical karate practice has strayed too far from principle....  When all the critics of karate become justified....
|
I train to principle, not suspended speed balls for kicking.  That latter is sporty, recreational stuff.



Drose427 said:


> Just he like how it's common for owners of commercial schools or gyms to make changes to their normal curriculum or classes to appeal to whatever their market is


|
Certainly.  Traditional karate is very demanding.  The general public has neither the time nor inclination to do what it takes to excel.
|
This is where Matt Bryers has spearheaded BJJ that is both competent & practical to learn--a winning martial art business strategy.
|
To get traditional karate to the tipping point where you can challenge Matt Bryers' guys is years.  I would say never shorter than 3, probably 5 years of proper training on average.  Once you are there, though, look out.


----------



## ShotoNoob

TOM BLOOM KARATE EXAMPLE: ASHLEY TESORO
|
I don't necessarily agree with all expressed in the vid.  Yet here is a young woman who started like Drose427... and now exposed to martial arts.... has decided to go the traditional route.  Sure, there is a commercial aspect.




|
bottom line:  TMA is an arduous progression.   She's working on it.
|
EDIT: Tom Bloom is a Tang Soo Do stylist who began under Chuck Norris Tang Soo Do.
EDIT2: Would love to see a female Tang Soo Do stylist take on Ronda Rousey.  No such luck yet....


----------



## drop bear

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> How many karateka can do kata according the Masters?  How many karateka can meet Gichin Funakoshi's standards for traditional karate training?
> |
> The TRADITIONAL KARATE answer is that the failure is not in the kata (not that kata is perfect, or doesn't have weak points in how it's taught); the failure is in the practitioner to meet the standards DEMANDED BY SUCCESSFUL KATA (KARATE) Practice.
> |
> That's what the video demonstrates, IN MY OPINION.
> |
> NOW TO DO A LITTLE SYNTHESIS (_FOR THOSE WHO ASKED ME ABOUT THE KIAI MASTER OVER & OVER_), please compare the Shotokan vid I posted above, with the Shotokan vs. Gracie JuiJitus that Matt Bryers posted in the Paul Vunak Thread:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> |
> NOW, do you think the Gracie BJJ is going to be able to handle the Shotokan stylists in my vid the way he did in the Gracie vid?


from a demo you cant really tell much.

Why would you think he wouldn't?


----------



## Zero

ShotoNoob said:


> TOM BLOOM KARATE EXAMPLE: ASHLEY TESORO
> |
> I don't necessarily agree with all expressed in the vid.  Yet here is a young woman who started like Drose427... and now exposed to martial arts.... has decided to go the traditional route.  Sure, there is a commercial aspect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> |
> bottom line:  TMA is an arduous progression.   She's working on it.
> |
> EDIT: Tom Bloom is a Tang Soo Do stylist who began under Chuck Norris Tang Soo Do.
> EDIT2: Would love to see a female Tang Soo Do stylist take on Ronda Rousey.  No such luck yet....



Rousey is in great form and shape and formidable.  Perhaps unfair from just one clip but I would place my money on Rousey every time over that particular TSD girl (for a start, that TSD girl's hook is horrifically telegraphed...and poor power generation on back kick, again maybe unfair from just one quick vid).  As for any other TSD gal...they better have a great counter submission game, Rousey was/is a world class judoka and that is clear from how she finishes her fights!  : )


----------



## ShotoNoob

Zero said:


> Rousey is in great form and shape and formidable.  Perhaps unfair from just one clip but I would place my money on Rousey every time over that particular TSD girl (for a start, that TSD girl's hook is horrifically telegraphed...and poor power generation on back kick, again maybe unfair from just one quick vid).  As for any other TSD gal...they better have a great counter submission game, Rousey was/is a world class judoka and that is clear from how she finishes her fights!  : )


|
Right on, thanks for the critique.  The TSD young lady is trying... yet way far, far away.
|
Rousey is formidable.  I just do NOT see any one in her "class."  The Judo base alone gives her a huge advantage, IMO.  The opponents who go up against her & lose... no shame....
|
A TSD stylist from Tom Bloom karate taking on RR, it's on my wish list!


----------



## ShotoNoob

MACHIDA / ROCKHOLD @ UFC FIGHT NIGHT 15 COMING UP APRIL 18.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> Rousey is formidable. I just do NOT see any one in her "class." The Judo base alone gives her a huge advantage



There are at least two girls better than her at Judo, the silver and gold Olympic medallists, perhaps if they came into MMA she would get beaten more easily. However humour apart, the UFC will hand pick her opponents to make sure she has the very best chance of winning until they can wring no more money out of her performances. When people stop talking about her and she's far less marketable their next golden girl will be chosen and they will pick an opponent who can beat Rousey.
When discussing who wins and who loses in the UFC style wise  it should be remembered that the first consideration is money, the UFC is a business, opponents are chosen to reflect those business interests not totally fair and impartial match making.


----------



## Drose427

Tez3 said:


> There are at least two girls better than her at Judo, the silver and gold Olympic medallists, perhaps if they came into MMA she would get beaten more easily. However humour apart, the UFC will hand pick her opponents to make sure she has the very best chance of winning until they can wring no more money out of her performances. When people stop talking about her and she's far less marketable their next golden girl will be chosen and they will pick an opponent who can beat Rousey.
> When discussing who wins and who loses in the UFC style wise  it should be remembered that the first consideration is money, the UFC is a business, opponents are chosen to reflect those business interests not totally fair and impartial match making.



Yup, 

Just like connor Macgregor getting a title when there were several fighters above him for it. He didnt earn it, he beat siver then made a scene in front of Aldos family.

Also a reason some superfights never have and never will take place. I.e. Jones vs Silva 

Milking it makes Dana a lot more money than not worrying about drama and fan favoritism


----------



## Zero

Tez3 said:


> There are at least two girls better than her at Judo, the silver and gold Olympic medallists, perhaps if they came into MMA she would get beaten more easily. However humour apart, the UFC will hand pick her opponents to make sure she has the very best chance of winning until they can wring no more money out of her performances. When people stop talking about her and she's far less marketable their next golden girl will be chosen and they will pick an opponent who can beat Rousey.
> When discussing who wins and who loses in the UFC style wise  it should be remembered that the first consideration is money, the UFC is a business, opponents are chosen to reflect those business interests not totally fair and impartial match making.


So cynical...so true...

And she probably did deserve/merit if from the get go, but she was handed the initial top slot in her new weight division not from fighting in UFC but coming straight over/out of the subsumed/defunct Strike Force.  But again, she does kick butt. 

Given she is now building up experience in striking it may be that the higher ranked female judoka would now first need to do some cross-training to have a good shot at beating her, rather than coming to UFC straight from judo...


----------



## Zero

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Right on, thanks for the critique.  The TSD young lady is trying... yet way far, far away.


She is pretty darn good at doing a plait (sp?) though, will give her that.  Got a young daughter so notice those things now, particularly as my attempts have resulted in nothing more than abominations for the poor child!! hehe!  :  )


----------



## Zero

Uggh, who is still stuck at work (on UK time)?!!  What a drag, was meant to be going out for drinks but got shafted, so to speak!!! Almost consumed my last lot of chicken in the work fridge also, things are looking real GRIM.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> There are at least two girls better than her at Judo, the silver and gold Olympic medallists, perhaps if they came into MMA she would get beaten more easily. However humour apart, the UFC will hand pick her opponents to make sure she has the very best chance of winning until they can wring no more money out of her performances. When people stop talking about her and she's far less marketable their next golden girl will be chosen and they will pick an opponent who can beat Rousey.
> When discussing who wins and who loses in the UFC style wise  it should be remembered that the first consideration is money, the UFC is a business, opponents are chosen to reflect those business interests not totally fair and impartial match making.


|
I'm glad more than one agrees with taking the larger view.  Within that, I think there are some very good match ups in MMA.  The whole 'pressure testing' that Chris Parker and others are pointing to in a sparring partner; it does exist in MMA.
|
I'm particularly looking forward to the Machida (karate-base) / Rockhold (MMA kickboxing)  bout coming up April 18 @ UFC on Fox 15.  Welcome any T or commentary from MT here....


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> I'm glad more than one agrees with taking the larger view.  Within that, I think there are some very good match ups in MMA.  The whole 'pressure testing' that Chris Parker and others are pointing to in a sparring partner; it does exist in MMA.
> |
> I'm particularly looking forward to the Machida (karate-base) / Rockhold (MMA kickboxing)  bout coming up April 18 @ UFC on Fox 15.  Welcome any T or commentary from MT here....




I'm not a fan of the UFC ( they tried to sue a lot of us in the UK lol) it's a big company and it annoys me when people think it's the be all and end all of MMA comps. It is what it is.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> I'm not a fan of the UFC ( they tried to sue a lot of us in the UK lol) it's a big company and it annoys me when people think it's the be all and end all of MMA comps. It is what it is.


|
Agreed on the typical commercialism you see in many large companies....  The UFC gets a lot of fighter complaints.... about contracts & such.   Randy Couture was a god to them, then at the end was a dog to them..... Yeesh....


----------



## Steve

The antitrust lawsuit against the UFC is ongoing, and I think they have an excellent case.  But, at the same time, anyone making a decent living doing MMA right now, and frankly, most of those people making a decent living in the West doing BJJ, Judo, Muay Thai or any of the ancillary MAs related to MMA owe it all to the UFC.  MMA now is a completely different animal than prior to 2003. 

Regarding Rousey and the fight business, it's entertainment first.  It's a spectator sport, and so the promoters have to play the game to drum up interest in the fights and the fighters.  Rousey is a bona fide badass and no one can currently tough her.  Her fighter's instincts, her technical skill and her particular brand of crazy make her almost unbeatable.  When (if) she loses in the octagon, it will be roughly equivalent to Buster Douglas defeating Mike Tyson.  She is that dominant.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Steve said:


> The antitrust lawsuit against the UFC is ongoing, and I think they have an excellent case.  But, at the same time, anyone making a decent living doing MMA right now, and frankly, most of those people making a decent living in the West doing BJJ, Judo, Muay Thai or any of the ancillary MAs related to MMA owe it all to the UFC.  MMA now is a completely different animal than prior to 2003


Agreed...



Steve said:


> Regarding Rousey and the fight business, it's entertainment first.  It's a spectator sport, and so the promoters have to play the game to drum up interest in the fights and the fighters.  Rousey is a bona fide badass and no one can currently tough her.  Her fighter's instincts, her technical skill and her particular brand of crazy make her almost unbeatable.  When (if) she loses in the octagon, it will be roughly equivalent to Buster Douglas defeating Mike Tyson.  She is that dominant.


Agreed...


----------



## Laplace_demon

I think Kata is a nice feature of Shotokan and not a total waiste. I do contend however that it should be reserved for practitioners approaching expert level (which ever belt it might be), than to drill beginner students with heavy theory and no application. Beginners should be trained evenly in application/theory. Yet they almost always end up in endless kata and little application. I don't think this serves their interest from  a self defence perspective.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> I think Kata is a nice feature of Shotokan and not a total waiste. I do contend however that it should be reserved for practitioners approaching expert level (which ever belt it might be), than to drill beginner students with heavy theory and no application. Beginners should be trained evenly in application/theory. Yet they almost always end up in endless kata and little application. I don't think this serves their interest from  a self defence perspective.




I don't see any reason to keep kata for 'experts', students need to learn and understand all aspects of karate.
I don't know anywhere that drills beginners with theory and nothing else. I also don't know anywhere that just trains kata to the detriment of everything else.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> I think Kata is a nice feature of Shotokan and not a total waiste. I do contend however that it should be reserved for practitioners approaching expert level (which ever belt it might be), than to drill beginner students with heavy theory and no application. Beginners should be trained evenly in application/theory. Yet they almost always end up in endless kata and little application. I don't think this serves their interest from  a self defence perspective.



Kata is a teaching tool. Makes a lot of sense to save the teaching tools for the experts.


----------



## drop bear

The argument again here is whether form follows function or function follows form.

Whether or not you train the practical application to lean the kata or the kata to learn the practical application.

Personally if you can make the technique work on a resisting opponent of some sort of quality but your kata is messy then you are better equipped to defend yourself than if you have nice kata but then have to manipulate the resistance into compliance and dead drilling.

It just depends where your focus lies.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> Kata is a teaching tool. Makes a lot of sense to save the teaching tools for the experts.



*Approaching* expert level, not expert level. May I suggest that you don't skip words. A simple word can make quite difference. 

Makes a lot of sense to teach cycling before walking... Kata isn't an accurate simulation of reality either. Technique learning and practice should be emphasised for beginner and intermediate students, not patterns. Kata should at most be supplementary. Especially given that it's partially demonstration, making it even less relevant as self defence preparation for beginner, all the way to intermediate students. That is if you argue from the perspective of self defence.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> *Approaching* expert level, not expert level. May I suggest that you don't skip words. A simple word can make quite difference.
> 
> Makes a lot of sense to teach cycling before walking... Kata isn't an accurate simulation of reality either. Technique learning and practice should be emphasised for beginner and intermediate students, not patterns. Kata should at most be supplementary. Especially given that it's partially demonstration, making it even less relevant as self defence preparation for beginner, all the way to intermediate students. That is if you argue from the perspective of self defence.



1. Technically Kata IS supplementary. Its one section to other mechanics, the supplement to SD and Free Sparring.

2. It isnt meant to be some ultra accurate realistic sim thats magically gonna make someone able to defend themselves. This isnt The Karate Kid. If you arent drilling techniques within them against resisting opponents throwing nose busters, inside and outside of class, you're missing the point of forms (as intended for SD the other benefits will still be there, but without the pressure and drilling they arent gonna help defend yourself). Most schools do this, in more than one way, at full speed. Why else would many classes do Sd immediately after forms if not to tinker with applications against someone trying to harm you?

3. Generally, kata teaches proper technique...Outside of stances, which some styles deepen for condition, ,many times a move wont have to be changed much if at all. The beginning of Pinan Odan is easily a gi choke. From standing can be done EXACTLY the same way (most proficiently if you slide in), from the ground on your back is the exact same movement as well simply without the need for the block/punch to close the distance. On the ground, the high wrap sets up good head control and positioning to choke your attacker out with their shirt(obviously they wont be in a gi on the street). 

A reverse punch in sparring is the same as a reverse punch in forms, simply without the enunciated stances in some styles.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> 1. Technically Kata IS supplementary. Its one section to other mechanics, the supplement to SD and Free Sparring.



But still over emphasised for beginners.

3. Generally, kata teaches proper technique...
.[/QUOTE]

Kata does not teach you technique alone. It's drowned in other, *irrelevant* aspects (demonstration value, form) for SD. This is time saved if you only taught sheer technique and practise against targets. You can teach individual aspects of Kata without memorizing and training Kata.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> Kata does not teach you technique alone. It's drowned in other, *irrelevant* aspects (demonstration value, form) for SD. This is time saved if you only taught sheer technique and practise against targets. You can teach individual aspects of Kata without memorizing and training Kata.



This would be another of those conclusions you've reached based on years of training, a solid understanding of forms, and experience teaching, right?

Oh, wait.
You don't have any of that.
Never mind...


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> This would be another of those conclusions you've reached based on years of training, a solid understanding of forms, and experience teaching, right?
> .



Correct. I have trained since I was a kid and my father is shihan in Shotokan. Ouch!


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> But still over emphasised for beginners.
> 
> 3. Generally, kata teaches proper technique...
> .



Kata does not teach you technique alone. It's drowned in other, *irrelevant* aspects (demonstration value, form) for SD. This is time saved if you only taught sheer technique and practise against targets. You can teach individual aspects of Kata without memorizing and training Kata.[/QUOTE]

Theyre generally done the same way as the kihon....

So youd be doing the exact same movements from kata..... on pads and partners when applicable, which youd usually being doing with your kata anyway...

Then when youre alone, and have neither partner or pads, drilling the kihon, youd basically be out of order, jumbled up kata.....

So no, there really isnt a bunch of time saved, youre just practicing random kihon over organized kata.


All styles have kata type things.

Boxing has drills with specified series of combos, which many time are drilled alone in shadowboxing(which is exactly like doing a kata) and/or on a bag

Bjj and wrestling have similar transition drills.

None of these hold them off for rising experts.

itd be like teaching you proper technique of a jab or a front kick, but not giving you the understanding of how to apply them to an opponent and go about practing them on your own.

Again yeah i could just teach the kihon, but youd still be drilling alone or with a partner it the exact same you youd be practicing the kata and its applications....

You should know all this considering who you claim your father is...


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> Correct. I have trained since I was a kid



Odd... a week ago you were a yellow belt with a few months training (albeit already thinking you're better than the black belts).



Laplace_demon said:


> and my father is shihan in Shotokan. Ouch!



You've made a lot of unsupported claims about your father. You've claimed he was "one of the top 3", but you've also said he was a 5th Dan (which is far from "one of the top 3"). 
But regardless of who you claim your father was, that really has no bearing on your own knowledge, which, to anybody reading your posts, is clearly pretty minimal. Quite in keeping with your claim to be a yellow belt with a few months of training, but pathetically inadequate for someone with years of training.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> *Approaching* expert level, not expert level. May I suggest that you don't skip words. A simple word can make quite difference.
> 
> Makes a lot of sense to teach cycling before walking... Kata isn't an accurate simulation of reality either. Technique learning and practice should be emphasised for beginner and intermediate students, not patterns. Kata should at most be supplementary. Especially given that it's partially demonstration, making it even less relevant as self defence preparation for beginner, all the way to intermediate students. That is if you argue from the perspective of self defence.




May I suggest you spend less time criticising people and more actually learning about the subjects you pontificate on?


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> Odd... a week ago you were a yellow belt with a few months training (albeit already thinking you're better than the black belts).
> 
> 
> 
> You've made a lot of unsupported claims about your father. You've claimed he was "one of the top 3", but you've also said he was a 5th Dan (which is far from "one of the top 3").
> But regardless of who you claim your father was, that really has no bearing on your own knowledge, which, to anybody reading your posts, is clearly pretty minimal. Quite in keeping with your claim to be a yellow belt with a few months of training, but pathetically inadequate for someone with years of training.



You do know that Shotokan and ITF TKD are not synonyms, right? My father has competed in JKA in the late 70s and early 80s, collecting gold and silver medals in kumite, in both World and European championships. That would make him a top Karate fighter by definition. You also clearly can't read, since I wrote that it took him 23 years to have a total of 5 dan, and another 7 years for his 6th. I never said how many dan he has as of this day. And he is shihan in the shotokan organisation that he belongs to.

If you think that forms demonstration (Kata) help beginner and intermediate students in self defence scenarios, where the attacker is out to kill or seriously hurt, then we live in separate universes. But I am not suprised that a traditional martial artist would still hold these views in the 2015.


----------



## Tez3

Claiming knowledge vicariously through your father is an interesting way to go.

Kata ( not forms btw in karate) and what you do with it, how *we* teach it certainly and I know many others do as well *is for* self defence.
What are the true applications of Kata Iain Abernethy


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> 3.* Generally, kata teaches proper tec*hnique...Outside of stances, which some styles deepen for condition, ,many times a move wont have to be changed much if at all. *The beginning of Pinan Odan is easily a gi choke. From standing can be done EXACTLY the same way (most proficiently if you slide in), from the ground on your back is the exact same movement as well simply without the need for the block/punch to close the distance. On the ground, the high wrap sets up good head control and positioning to choke your attacker out with their shirt(obviously they wont be in a gi on the street).*
> 
> A reverse punch in sparring is the same as a reverse punch in forms, simply without the enunciated stances in some styles.


This is a problem for me.  I learned a cross collar gi choke in about 5 minutes.  Doing it a thousand times on hundreds of different people with different levels of skill, different neck sizes, different gi sizes, different set ups, and dozens of other small differences, that's how I learned EXACTLY how to execute the technique.  Not from the drill. 

I think there's plenty of great reasons to do kata.  But if learning technique is one of them, I question the usefulness of the exercise.  Exploring uses for techniques one already knows?  Great.  I get it.  Learning a technique?  Not so much.


----------



## Steve

Laplace_demon said:


> You do know that Shotokan and ITF TKD are not synonyms, right? My father has competed in JKA in the late 70s and early 80s, collecting gold and silver medals in kumite, in both World and European championships. That would make him a top Karate fighter by definition. You also clearly can't read, since I wrote that it took him 23 years to have a total of 5 dan, and another 7 years for his 6th. I never said how many dan he has as of this day. And he is shihan in the shotokan organisation that he belongs to.
> 
> If you think that forms demonstration (Kata) help beginner and intermediate students in self defence scenarios, where the attacker is out to kill or seriously hurt, then we live in separate universes. But I am not suprised that a traditional martial artist would still hold these views in the 2015.


 Laplace_demon, if you keep bringing your father up to legitimize your arguments, you're going to have to tell us who he is.  The assertion isn't credible unless the source is credible.  If you're making things up, please stop.  If you're not, then please cite the source so we can independently decide how credible he is.  I don't know what it looks like to you, but to me, it's appears you're just saying whatever pops into your head, and then citing some make believe, external authority.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Steve said:


> Laplace_demon, if you keep bringing your father up to legitimize your arguments, you're going to have to tell us who he is.  The assertion isn't credible unless the source is credible.  If you're making things up, please stop.  If you're not, then please cite the source so we can independently decide how credible he is.  I don't know what it looks like to you, but to me, it's appears you're just saying whatever pops into your head, and then citing some make believe, external authority.



 Your moderator initiated the ad hominems. Don't try and make it out like that i write "my father is a karate shihan" in every single post out of nowhere.


----------



## Steve

Laplace_demon said:


> Your moderator initiated the ad hominems. Don't try and make it out like that i write "my father is a karate shihan" in every single post out of nowhere.


I don't really have a dog in this hunt, but it sure seems like your dad comes up pretty often as support for some questionable assertions.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## RTKDCMB

Tez3 said:


> Claiming knowledge vicariously through your father is an interesting way to go.


Maybe he has some kind of genetic memory.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Steve said:


> I don't really have a dog in this hunt, but it sure seems like your dad comes up pretty often as support for some questionable assertions.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Claiming that I lack exposure to Shotokan when I have both trained it and have a father who's a gold medalist in JKA, is not that well thought out.  Do you think this makes it less or more likely that I would have experience in Shotokan?  Like I care if anyone in here believes it. People who don't even come close to that rank and merits. They are like kindergarden in comparison, yet tell me I lack experience.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> Claiming that I lack exposure to Shotokan when I have both trained it and have a father who's a gold medalist in JKA, is not that well thought out.  Do you think this makes it less or more likely that I would have experience in Shotokan?  Like I care if anyone in here believes it. People who don't even come close to that rank and merits. They are like kindergarden in comparision, yet tell me I lack experience.




We question your experience because you've shown and made yellow belt arguements, told people far superior to yourself they were wrong and you were right, and are clinging to the arrogance by that fact that your father was knowledgeable and accomplished (or so you claim, but thats not the point)

You are not him.

You dont have those accomplishments.
You dont have his rank.

And it shows in your responses.

Making claims online to justify opinions memebers with easily verifiable track records (i.e. BB numbers, a member operating school in korea in another thread, proper history of associations, etc.) have refuted is one thing, but you cant justify it because you say your father was a JKA champ and master.

I can say my uncle was Royce Gracie, Grandfather was taught by Ip Man and my Dad is an world class Boxer from the 80s.

That make it true without proof. Even if it did, if i showed a blatant lack of understanding and knowledge on the 3 it would show their accomplishments mean very little to my ability or knowledge.

You cant keep hiding behind your dad like his accomplishments are also yours.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> I can say my uncle was Royce Gracie, Grandfather was taught by Ip Man and my Dad is an world class Boxer from the 80s.
> 
> That make it true without proof. Even if it did, if i showed a blatant lack of understanding and knowledge on the 3 it would show their accomplishments mean very little to my ability or knowledge.
> 
> You cant keep hiding behind your dad like his accomplishments are also yours.



My father is closer than a grandfather. Your counter has no validity. He has had a big impact on my life and my interest in martial arts, which is most probably inherited.


----------



## Gnarlie

What rank do you hold in Shotokan, Laplace? Just out of interest.


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> The argument again here is whether form follows function or function follows form.
> 
> Whether or not you train the practical application to lean the kata or the kata to learn the practical application.
> 
> Personally if you can make the technique work on a resisting opponent of some sort of quality but your kata is messy then you are better equipped to defend yourself than if you have* nice* kata but then have to manipulate the resistance into compliance and dead drilling.
> 
> It just depends where your focus lies.


|
In traditional karate, _Function follows Form_.  No bigger illustration of this than Shotokan karate.
|
There is no such thing in _*traditional*_ karate as _NICE_ kata.  Kata is not about form, it's about function provided by performing kata true to form.
|
Demonstrating the physical form of kata by itself is meaningless in traditional karate, other than you have knowledge of the physical description of kata steps.  You can recite the physical steps.  It's the foundational internal skills invisible to the uninitiated that matter.
|
Kata is not a physical gym routine.  It's about getting the mind & body to work in unison--under the guide of the "mental clarity" dimension.  Development of Mental discipline is the emphasis.
|
I agree you don't need kata to become a good fighter.  However, the role of resistance as a training tool is not the emphasis in traditional martial arts, karate.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> My father is closer than a grandfather. Your counter has no validity. He has had a big impact on my life and my interest in martial arts, which is most probably inherited.



Yes, which is why i also used uncle and Father as examples.......

Again, his impact on your life and interest, does not translate to you having his knowledge or ability, inherited or learned.

You are not him.

You are not amazing or knowledgable simply because he is.

That makes you sound about as arrogant and ignorant as they come


----------



## ShotoNoob

At UFC Fox 15 {last Saturday}, Luke Rockhold wiped out Machida in short order.  Why?
|
As sharp MMA journalists have pointed out, Machida's form made him vulnerable to a counter-knockdown which then led Machida to his doom.
|
Shotokan form provides function.  Shotokan form develops function.  Stray too far from form and you forfeit functionality.


----------



## Steve

Laplace_demon said:


> Claiming that I lack exposure to Shotokan when I have both trained it and have a father who's a gold medalist in JKA, is not that well thought out.  Do you think this makes it less or more likely that I would have experience in Shotokan?  Like I care if anyone in here believes it. People who don't even come close to that rank and merits. They are like kindergarden in comparison, yet tell me I lack experience.


 Laplace_demon, I'm sure you're very knowledgeable.  The problem is that you're relying on what's called an appeal to authority.  We don't know you, nor do we know your father.  When you make an assertion that cuts against the grain, it's just common sense that you would be prepared to justify your assertions with credible sources.   When people are making things up as they go, appealing to an unknown authority is a common tactic, and one we're very wary of.

If you don't care what anyone here believes, that's your choice.  But bear in mind, this is also a tactic common to people who are being called out for making things up as they go.  This makes your posts "sound" defensive and aggressive, surely more than you intend.

Bottom line, you might be a very knowledgeable martial artist.  Who knows for sure?  But you aren't proving to be a very good communicator, and at best, your message is getting completely lost in translation.


----------



## drop bear

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> In traditional karate, _Function follows Form_.  No bigger illustration of this than Shotokan karate.
> |
> There is no such thing in _*traditional*_ karate as _NICE_ kata.  Kata is not about form, it's about function provided by performing kata true to form.
> |
> Demonstrating the physical form of kata by itself is meaningless in traditional karate, other than you have knowledge of the physical description of kata steps.  You can recited the physical steps.  It's the foundational internal skills invisible to the uninitiated that matter.
> |
> Kata is not a physical gym routine.  It's about getting the mind & body to work in unison--under the guide of the "mental clarity" dimension.  Development of Mental discipline is the emphasis.
> |
> I agree you don't need kata to become a good fighter.  However, the role of resistance as a training tool is not the emphasis in traditional martial arts, karate.


 
Which in my eyes is backwards. And I think internal skills are a bit like saying because magic.

I rate a technique on its ability to be used. I judge its ability to be used by seeing it used. Using it or having it used on me. This is where I would gain confidence in a skill set for self defence.


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> 1. Which in my eyes is backwards. And I think internal skills are a bit like saying because magic.
> 
> 2. I rate a technique on its ability to be used. I judge its ability to be used by seeing it used. Using it or having it used on me. This is where I would gain confidence in a skill set for self defence.


|
1. I know.  yet there is an article & post here @ MT re the comparisons of Shotokan & Korean Karates such as Tang Soo do that speak to the three kinds of martial potential, which can/ are all developed internally....  Not just the magic "ki." element so many broadly confuse as "internal" when describing martial arts styles....
|
2. Right, we have to be practical, and traditional karate form isn't uniformly practical.  But bunkai that is practical does make martial arts traditional.  it's the internal foundation that makes traditional martial arts traditionally effective.  And the main driver of that is mental.  Not physical techniques....
|
In the end, traditional karate & everything else martial is after practicality.  It's what defines the skill set and how to get that skill set that make arts traditional versus sport /athletically oriented.
|
Even MMA, which IMO is dominated by sport-fighting methods, physical training, it's the mental fighter, the thinking competitors like Jones, Weidman & lately Rockhold who become the most dangerous.  It's not their physicality or technique per se....


----------



## Drose427

ShotoNoob said:


> At UFC Fox 15 {last Saturday}, Luke Rockhold wiped out Machida in short order.  Why?
> |
> As sharp MMA journalists have pointed out, Machida's form made him vulnerable to a counter-knockdown which then led Machida to his doom.
> |
> Shotokan form provides function.  Shotokan form develops function.  Stray too far from form and you forfeit functionality.



I watched that fight, and i can tell you his fighting form wasnt the biggest issue.

Machida didnt really have heart, i mean he basically gave up on the ground game didnt really fight the final choke.



drop bear said:


> Which in my eyes is backwards. And I think internal skills are a bit like saying because magic.
> 
> I rate a technique on its ability to be used. I judge its ability to be used by seeing it used. Using it or having it used on me. This is where I would gain confidence in a skill set for self defence.



I personally dont like shotonoobs explanation of forms as, while it is one good reason for doing them, i dont consider it the most important.

Theyre a supplement like running prespecified combos on mitts or a bag, theyre meant to be taken and applied on opponents. 

To me, when schools or students dont do this properly i consider it a disconnect with their method and an important reason for doing forms.
I call that dancing, not forms.

As one of my instructor says, " I can teach a monkey the form, but he wont be able to grasp the applications and use them."

This is why its important to remember theyre just one supplement, not some hidden mystical method tv and lack of knowledge has let folks believe. Dont like em, dont do em. Theyre hardly a neccessity. 

Like i said in a previous post, i could teach you the specific punches,blocks, and kicks and we could drill\practice/apply. 

But youd be doing many ofnthe same partner drills, and when working alone youd be doing virtually the exact same thing as forms just in no real order.

Its all in preference of how you like to practice.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Drose427 said:


> I watched that fight, and i can tell you his fighting form wasnt the biggest issue.
> 
> Machida didnt really have heart, i mean he basically gave up on the ground game didnt really fight the final choke.


|
You could be right from the outset.  I think Rockhold had Machda very worried.  Notwithstanding, my fighting-form comment is dead-on (like all my posts-ha, ha)....



Drose427 said:


> I personally dont like shotonoobs explanation of forms as, while it is one good reason for doing them, i dont consider it the most important.
> 
> Theyre a supplement like running prespecified combos on mitts or a bag, theyre meant to be taken and applied on opponents.
> 
> To me, when schools or students dont do this properly i consider it a disconnect with their method and an important reason for doing forms.
> I call that dancing, not forms.


|
My comment is not in conflict with yours, because I embrace you position and incorporate it.  You don't need kata to become a good fighter.



Drose427 said:


> As one of my instructor says, " I can teach a monkey the form, but he wont be able to grasp the applications and use them."


|
In my post, I stipulate to that.  Your argument  & your instructor's argument fails, though when you stop with your overall premise becomes your conclusion.  It's (KATA) not about learning MONKEY steps.  Human's are not Monkeys.  To start to get kata, traditional karate in principle you have to go & start with the bedrock human principles of strength.  These are set out in the Shotokan / TSD comparison T.
|
If one presumes that kata is bunch of physical steps we mindlessly recite to instructors & judges to show we can memorize physical moves, your & your instructors argument is 1005 percent correct.  The latter is the same as a gymnist routine, a floor dance.  This is neither the defintion of kata, hyung, forms, poomse, etc. nor it's functionality in self defense.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> I watched that fight, and i can tell you his fighting form wasnt the biggest issue.
> 
> Machida didnt really have heart, i mean he basically gave up on the ground game didnt really fight the final choke.
> 
> 
> 
> I personally dont like shotonoobs explanation of forms as, while it is one good reason for doing them, i dont consider it the most important.
> 
> Theyre a supplement like running prespecified combos on mitts or a bag, theyre meant to be taken and applied on opponents.
> 
> To me, when schools or students dont do this properly i consider it a disconnect with their method and an important reason for doing forms.
> I call that dancing, not forms.
> 
> As one of my instructor says, " I can teach a monkey the form, but he wont be able to grasp the applications and use them."
> 
> This is why its important to remember theyre just one supplement, not some hidden mystical method tv and lack of knowledge has let folks believe. Dont like em, dont do em. Theyre hardly a neccessity.
> 
> Like i said in a previous post, i could teach you the specific punches,blocks, and kicks and we could drill\practice/apply.
> 
> But youd be doing many ofnthe same partner drills, and when working alone youd be doing virtually the exact same thing as forms just in no real order.
> 
> Its all in preference of how you like to practice.



Yeah drills kata and the bunkai all sort of bang around the same area. I look at where the assertion of proof lies and that becomes my argument. Either the drill is right or the application is right. And when they differ what do you do.

 I will change the drill to match the effective technique. In fact I have found people need to be reminded of that or they do the drill to go through the motions.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> Machida didnt really have heart, i mean he basically gave up on the ground game didnt really fight the final choke.



You try having a world class athlete like Rockhold on top of you in a bad position (Machida tripped) and tell me Machida doesn't have heart. Bare in mind that Rockhold is on top of that stronger and bigger.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Drose427 said:


> This is why its important to remember theyre just one supplement, not some hidden mystical method tv and lack of knowledge has let folks believe. Dont like em, dont do em. Theyre hardly a neccessity.
> 
> Like i said in a previous post, i could teach you the specific punches,blocks, and kicks and we could drill\practice/apply.
> 
> But youd be doing many ofnthe same partner drills, and when working alone youd be doing virtually the exact same thing as forms just in no real order.
> 
> Its all in preference of how you like to practice.


|
You can become a good fighter religiously practicing kihon karate.  If you know what kihon "mystically" does.  If you don't know what kata is supposed to be doing, as I've pointed out, it is a complete waste of time.
|
To excel to traditional karate's highest levels of skill... it's kata that takes you there.  This is what all the Okinawan Masters believe....  This is what Funakoshi believed.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> You try having a world class athlete like Rockhold on top of you in a bad position (Machida tripped) and tell me Machida doesn't have heart. Bare in mind that Rockhold is on top of that stronger and bigger.



Machida wasnt in it the whole fight...... from the first bell his performance was off. Either he didnt care, or something else was on his mind. He had a bad night and Rockhold took advantage of it. 

Hes been regularly successful in far worse situations, it wasnt his technique that was off, it was his head.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> You try having a world class athlete like Rockhold on top of you



Oooooo yes please! 

Machida had something missing, he wasn't 'in the fight', perhaps it's time to retire, perhaps he was just off, his heart certainly wasn't in it, whether he's lost heart or not I don't know but I was disappointed for him.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Laplace_demon said:


> You try having a world class athlete like Rockhold on top of you in a bad position (Machida tripped) and tell me Machida doesn't have heart. Bare in mind that Rockhold is on top of that stronger and bigger.


|
Traditional karate is ALL ABOUT DEFEATING THE BIGGER & STRONGER.  It's the mental clarity + knowledge of technique (in simplified terms) that provides this ability.
|
One of the great lessons of Rockhold / Machida is why traditional karate never wants to go to the ground.  That was ugly, way ugly.  Chalk 1 up for the grapplers.... @ Fox 15.
|
The huge Machida FAIL initially scoring hits on Rockhold... Rockhold completely unfazed.  This is completely, I mean completely the opposite outcome for traditional Shotokan Kumite.  Machida gets a BIG, FAT ZERO in MMA & @ a Shotokan Self-Defense T.  At FOX 15, that is.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Tez3 said:


> Oooooo yes please!
> 
> Machida had something missing, he wasn't 'in the fight', perhaps it's time to retire, perhaps he was just off, his heart certainly wasn't in it, whether he's lost heart or not I don't know but I was disappointed for him.



That seems a bit convenient to say after the fact. Machida had won his previous fight by TKO within a minute and won performance of the night.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> That seems a bit convenient to say after the fact. Machida had won his previous fight by TKO within a minute and won performance of the night.



If you watched the fight, it was pretty obvious.

Heck, your hero Joe Rogan called him out on it a couple times


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> If you watched the fight, it was pretty obvious.
> 
> Heck, your hero Joe Rogan called him out on it a couple times



Doesn't mean he would have survived on the ground against a prime Rockhold. I for one don't think he would regardless. Machida was much sharper against Jones a few years back and still had nothing in the groundgame, despite being a skillfull BJJ practitioner. Size does matter, especially when your opponent is as good or better than you in that phase of the game.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> That seems a bit convenient to say after the fact. Machida had won his previous fight by TKO within a minute and won performance of the night.




Fighters aren't machines, despite a friend of mine's nickname ( he was a  UFC fighter, thought I'd name drop there lol )all sorts of things can drag a fighter down, it could be a virus/niggling injury, it could be simply having a bad day. I like Machida, as I said I was disappointed for him as he will be for himself. It was a bad day at the office. There's nothing convenient about 'saying it after the fact, because I couldn't say it before the fight could I?  His heart and/or head wasn't in that fight and he lost. It's fighting, it happens.

I don't understand though why we are discussing MMA fights on a thread about Shotokan and self defence?


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Fighters aren't machines, despite a friend of mine's nickname ( he was a  UFC fighter, thought I'd name drop there lol )all sorts of things can drag a fighter down, it could be a virus/niggling injury, it could be simply having a bad day. I like Machida, as I said I was disappointed for him as he will be for himself. It was a bad day at the office. There's nothing convenient about 'saying it after the fact, because I couldn't say it before the fight could I?  His heart and/or head wasn't in that fight and he lost. It's fighting, it happens.
> 
> I don't understand though why we are discussing MMA fights on a thread about Shotokan and self defence?



Shoto mentioned it as an example of deviating too far from the true karate. 

So probably relevant or something.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Tez3 said:


> There's nothing convenient about 'saying it after the fact, because I couldn't say it before the fight could I?  His heart and/or head wasn't in that fight and he lost. It's fighting, it happens.



You could have speculated that "it's perhaps time to retire" before the fight, instead of basing it off a single match were he was dominated. I mean, how many people were calling out for Lyotos retirement when he beat Dollaway.... I will bet you most people back then said or thought for themselves: The dragon is back!.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> You could have speculated that "it's perhaps time to retire" before the fight, instead given more it off a single match were he was dominated. I mean, how many people were calling out for Lyotos retirement when he beat Dollaway.... I will bet you most people back then said or thought for themselves: The dragon is back!.



What? I wasn't specifically speculating it was time to retire, it was just one thought among many over the reasons he wasn't on form. I've given more reasons as well. Why would I have speculated before the fight? We hadn't seen his lack of form then.
This is way off topic BTW.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> ....I don't understand though why we are discussing MMA fights on a thread about Shotokan and self defence?


|
Machida completely failed to defend himself against a Drose427 counter!!!  Wake up guys (gals).


----------



## ShotoNoob

MACHIDA RETIREMENT?/ Oh no not that line again:
|
Again, the colloquial verbiage to say from armchair internet MMA wannabe nerds....  Rockhold was physically overpowering.  How does traditional karate defend against such?  To do a bit a synthesis, Machida / Rockhold bore a number of similarities with the Karate Gal vs. Streetfighter Guy YT someone posted.
|
Just darting in & landing a strike on a bigger, taller, stronger opponent as she did left her what--completely exposed to what:?--counter smack, counter grabs & manhandling.  Deija Vu anyone?  Didn't StreeFighter drag her all over the floor for awhile?  won't forget that!


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Machida completely failed to defend himself against a Drose427 counter!!!  Wake up guys (gals).




No, that was in an MMA fight not self defence in a non competitive environment. An MMA fight is consensual violence between two competitors, it is not self defence. While I am NOT suggesting it in this case, fights can be fixed, mismatched and generally not an even balance of fighters. Self defence is a person/s having to defend themselves against often arbitrary attacks on their person with then intent to seriously wound or kill. Two very different scenarios.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> No, that was in an MMA fight not self defence in a non competitive environment. An MMA fight is consensual violence between two competitors, it is not self defence. While I am NOT suggesting it in this case, fights can be fixed, mismatched and generally not an even balance of fighters. Self defence is a person/s having to defend themselves against often arbitrary attacks on their person with then intent to seriously wound or kill. Two very different scenarios.


|
I think we are @ cross purposes here.
|
I concur with your descriptive comparison.  Very clear.
|
An opponent trying to punch you out is still / can be a 'self defense' scenario.  That' my point.
|
I look @ TMA's as a set of principles one can apply.  HOw applied depends on environment, of course............


----------



## Tez3

However ithotoNoob, post: 1700710, member: 33216"]|
I think we are @ cross purposes here.
|
I concur with your descriptive comparison.  Very clear.
|
An opponent trying to punch you out is still / can be a 'self defense' scenario.  That' my point.
|
I look @ TMA's as a set of principles one can apply.  HOw applied depends on environment, of course............[/QUOTE]
However it's a very different mindset which changes the situation enormously. I enjoy competitive fighting, I'm not keen on getting punched but in a competition I know I can stop fighting if I want to that makes me quite relaxed. I can afford to take chances, if my moves are sloppy or I'll timed I can lose the fight and I get the mickey taken out of me. In a self defence situation the scenario is very different. That's why competitive fighting is off topic for this thread. It's specifically about Shotokan and self defence.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> No, that was in an MMA fight not self defence in a non competitive environment. An MMA fight is consensual violence between two competitors, it is not self defence. While I am NOT suggesting it in this case, fights can be fixed, mismatched and generally not an even balance of fighters. Self defence is a person/s having to defend themselves against often arbitrary attacks on their person with then intent to seriously wound or kill. Two very different scenarios.



Not in the basic mechanics. Consensual or not. They are trying to beat you up. You are trying to stop them.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Not in the basic mechanics. Consensual or not. They are trying to beat you up. You are trying to stop them.



Some one is trying to hurt you, in a regulated and safe environment with someone having the power to end the fight if they even THINK you're unable to continue.

We've all had this discussion before so I'm gonna just reiterate once and bow out,

Thats a far cry from fighting for your life.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Some one is trying to hurt you, in a regulated and safe environment with someone having the power to end the fight if they even THINK you're unable to continue.
> 
> We've all had this discussion before so I'm gonna just reiterate once and bow out,
> 
> Thats a far cry from fighting for your life.



There is no street fighting trick for continuing after you cannot continue. So a life and death fight might continue but your part in it is basically over. Same as if the ref jumps in and stops a ring fight.

You don't have a magic trick to de unconscious yourself or fight on after a submission. What you have(like everybody else) is hopefully the mechanics to save you getting put in that position in the first place.

The same mechanics. 

This street fighting for the realz is ridiculous. I street fight for the realz. And it is a silly exercise. Have a guy living with me at the moment who bounced in Brisbane and street fought for the realz. Coincidentally is up here teaching wrestling. He worked with my mma coach up there who also street fought for the realz.

And the mechanics are the same.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> There is no street fighting trick for continuing after you cannot continue. So a life and death fight might continue but your part in it is basically over. Same as if the ref jumps in and stops a ring fight.
> 
> You don't have a magic trick to de unconscious yourself or fight on after a submission. What you have(like everybody else) is hopefully the mechanics to save you getting put in that position in the first place.
> 
> The same mechanics.
> 
> This street fighting for the realz is ridiculous. I street fight for the realz. And it is a silly exercise. Have a guy living with me at the moment who bounced in Brisbane and street fought for the realz. Coincidentally is up here teaching wrestling. He worked with my mma coach up there who also street fought for the realz.
> 
> And the mechanics are the same.



Again, not psychologically.

It's the same concept behind people who perform at practice but draw a blank during an actual wrestling match.

The brain knows the difference between regulation and real danger.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Again, not psychologically.
> 
> It's the same concept behind people who perform at practice but draw a blank during an actual wrestling match.
> 
> The brain knows the difference between regulation and real danger.



Ok. These are the same reasons why kata is not viable for self defence then right?

Shotokan trains in a school and there is rarely circumstances where they get beaten to death. 

So they are training different mechanics to what they would use in a street fight.

I mean that's the logic.

We are down to training does not prepare you for self defence. Because it is not the real thing. And that is just false.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Ok. These are the same reasons why kata is not viable for self defence then right?
> 
> Shotokan trains in a school and there is rarely circumstances where they get beaten to death.
> 
> So they are training different mechanics to what they would use in a street fight.
> 
> I mean that's the logic.
> 
> We are down to training does not prepare you for self defence. Because it is not the real thing. And that is just false.



Not a single person has told you or said that training doesnt not _prepare_ you for self defense other than you just now.

Only that a match is not some equivalent to a life-threatening or SD situation.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Not a single person has told you or said that training doesnt not _prepare_ you for self defense other than you just now.
> 
> Only that a match is not some equivalent to a life-threatening or SD situation.



A match is harder. Goes longer, more technical and you are generally fighting a better fighter.

A street fight has more risk. 

Psychologically it is the same. Unless you convince yourself otherwise. And you are not doing yourself any favours by either over thinking one or under thinking the other.

A winning,hard fighting mindset is the same in self defence or ring fight or even training in general. This idea that a self defence is super serious and you are going to die will act against you. If you train people with that mind set. It will act against them.

 You mentality attempt to achieve an emotional plateau. You cant get that if you fill peoples heads full of risk. That is for people who don't fight.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> There is no street fighting trick for continuing after you cannot continue. So a life and death fight might continue but your part in it is basically over. Same as if the ref jumps in and stops a ring fight.
> 
> You don't have a magic trick to de unconscious yourself or fight on after a submission. What you have(like everybody else) is hopefully the mechanics to save you getting put in that position in the first place.
> 
> The same mechanics.
> 
> This street fighting for the realz is ridiculous. I street fight for the realz. And it is a silly exercise. Have a guy living with me at the moment who bounced in Brisbane and street fought for the realz. Coincidentally is up here teaching wrestling. He worked with my mma coach up there who also street fought for the realz.
> 
> And the mechanics are the same.


Simple question, how many competitive matches that have ended with either throwing in the towel or referee stoppage where the losing fighter was still able to continue if his life depended on it? I would guess the number is pretty high.


----------



## Tez3

How nice it would be, on the karate section, to once be able to discuss karate without MMA being brought into it. I love MMA but really would like to discuss karate on a karate thread in the karate section.


----------



## Drose427

Tez3 said:


> How nice it would be, on the karate section, to once be able to discuss karate without MMA being brought into it. I love MMA but really would like to discuss karate on a karate thread in the karate section.



Its kinda like going to a sports bar in the UK to a rugby or cricket match, 

Yeah, boxing and cricket are gonna be there, and folks are gonna wanna talk about then

But you know theres gonna be those guys who just wont shut up about soccer


----------



## Tez3

Drose427 said:


> Its kinda like going to a sports bar in the UK to a rugby or cricket match,
> 
> Yeah, boxing and cricket are gonna be there, and folks are gonna wanna talk about then
> 
> But you know theres gonna be those guys who just wont shut up about soccer




The problem is that people insist on discussing individual fighters and their fights which has nothing to do with Shotokan and self defence, it adds nothing to the conversation.
And Shotonoob, I'm very far from being an armchair MMA fan, as about as far as you can possibly be. The Machida fight was a demo of many things, self defence though wasn't one of them.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Simple question, how many competitive matches that have ended with either throwing in the towel or referee stoppage where the losing fighter was still able to continue if his life depended on it? I would guess the number is pretty high.



I am sure plenty. But it still does not change the mechanics of the fight.

You are not going to count on the slim chance that you will turn around a fight that you are obviously loosing.

That is a really silly place to put yourself in.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> You are not going to count on the slim chance that you will turn around a fight that you are obviously loosing.


Whether you can cont on it or not you might not have much of a choice but to turn it around and that does change the mechanics. You certainly can not count on someone breaking up the fight when you are losing, although it does happen..


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Whether you can cont on it or not you might not have much of a choice but to turn it around and that does change the mechanics. You certainly can not count on someone breaking up the fight when you are losing, although it does happen..



Regardless of the situation you are in you should be defending yourself as hard as possible. There is not a street/sport difference there. It is effective in both environments and is not style specific.

You do understand the aim is not to have the ref come in and save you or in a self defense a bystander come in and save you. But to be in a position where you have saved yourself?

And I would be surprised if Shotokan has a different view on this. Or if they teach people to focus on how badly you could get mangled. Which to me seems counter productive.


----------



## tshadowchaser

A fight is just that a fight, it is not competition and it has moved beyond the first principles of self defense. 
It is about survival, and if Shotokan teaches one to break limbs, take eyes, knock people out while sustaining as little damage as possible to oneself then it has done it's job.
  The self defense happens when you evade a punch, kick, grab,etc. and that I am sure is part of most Shotokan training. If the practitioner learns to do it efficiently or not is another matter.


----------



## Steve

RTKDCMB said:


> Simple question, how many competitive matches that have ended with either throwing in the towel or referee stoppage where the losing fighter was still able to continue if his life depended on it? I would guess the number is pretty high.


 I think the idea is that a towel is thrown in or the referee stopped the fight once the outcome was a foregone conclusion.  If your point is that, because the person wasn't beaten to death, there was still a chance...  sure... I get it.  But I really believe this is a technical "chance" like Jim Carrey in Dumb and Dumber (where he says something like, "What do you think the chances of a girl like you and a guy like me... 1 in 100?"  She replied, "More like 1 in a million."  "So, you're saying there's a chance...." 

Technically, there's a chance that the person could continue fighting for his life, but at the point when the towel is thrown in or the referee stops the fight, it's a matter of just allowing more time to beat the loser to death. 

What you're referring to is called an "early stoppage" and is very much frowned upon in boxing or in MMA.  When the fighter is still intelligently defending himself (or herself) the fight should continue.  It's at the point where he/she is helpless that the fight should be stopped.


----------



## Gnarlie

A few points here. 

You can not be successful in a ring fight by avoiding it completely. 

The chances of someone pulling a concealed weapon in a ring situation are zero if they play by the rules. 

The chances of multiple participants entering the ring unexpectedly is zero. 

The likelihood of one fighter getting a good shot in and then running out of the ring and away to safety is also zero. 

There's no danger of ending up with a criminal record or custodial sentence from a legitimate ring fight. 

None of the above are true in a real confrontation, and those  factors alone justify taking a different approach to sport and self defence in my opinion.

Shotokan trained in the right way, just like any other TMA, has the tools for the job.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> However ithotoNoob, post: 1700710, member: 33216"]|
> I think we are @ cross purposes here....However it's a very different mindset which changes the situation enormously. I enjoy competitive fighting, I'm not keen on getting punched but in a competition I know I can stop fighting if I want to that makes me quite relaxed. I can afford to take chances, if my moves are sloppy or I'll timed I can lose the fight and I get the mickey taken out of me. In a self defence situation the scenario is very different. That's why competitive fighting is off topic for this thread. It's specifically about Shotokan and self defence.


|
Okay, I see your definition.
|
I'm not so concerned with definition, I look @ principles that can be applied in a myriad of situations.  MMA ,self defense, whatever....
|
Synthesis of those principles, whether a demo in traditional karate class, an MMA match, some of the illustrated scenarios presented @ MT like the ground fighting dilemma with the knife wielder , is how I approach these issues.  I tie things together into a package, a solution.  It's called becoming an effective figther....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Gnarlie said:


> A few points here.
> 
> You can not be successful in a ring fight by avoiding it completely....


|
I'll take just one of your points to highlight my approach to self defense.  Just like success in the ring, octagon, you may find yourself in a location where you can not physically escape.  So the escape alternative is off the table.  Could be the situation where the physical route to escape exists, yet the assailant poses a continuing threat that's imminent.  The choice to stand & fight could then be the lower risk alternative.
|
Yet again, the opportunity for you to make a clean break & get away could be clear & certain.  Leaving someone else who is vulnerable & under attack to fend for themselves..???  Should you then come to their aid?
|
These scenarios / issue decision-trees have been spoken to before here @ MT by self defense specialists that I'm sure....


----------



## Tez3

QUOTE="ShotoNoob, post: 1700908, member: 33216"]|
Okay, I see your definition.
|
I'm not so concerned with definition, I look @ principles that can be applied in a myriad of situations.  MMA ,self defense, whatever....
|
Synthesis of those principles, whether a demo in traditional karate class, an MMA match, some of the illustrated scenarios presented @ MT like the ground fighting dilemma with the knife, is how I approach these issues.  I tie things together into a package, a solution.  It's called becoming an effective figther....[/QUOTE]


To be honest you would be better starting a new thread and getting a new conversation started because this thread is specifically about Shotokan, I imagine if the OP had wanted to encompass more styles he would have said so and not just Shotokan, sometimes people just want to discuss something in a more focused, narrow way. Machida may have Shotokan in his background but he was fighting in MMA so it's impossible to say from watching his fight whether Shotokan has anything for self defence, not that you should just look at one fighter anyway to demonstrate a style.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> Just like success in the ring, octagon, you may find yourself in a location where you can not physically escape. So the escape alternative is off the table.



The point is though that one CAN escape from the ring or octagon quite easily if you want to! It is NOT a location you can't escape from!


----------



## ShotoNoob

THE ROCKHOLD ROUND #1 MACHIDA KNOCKDOWN:
|
There are some excellent illustrations of this on the MMA sites.  I think that illustration says a lot on fighting, self defense, whatever you want to call physical conflict.
|
Rockhold & the AKA organization deserve tons of credit, IMO, for planning & training properly to beat Machida.  I think they watched the past fight tapes on Machida, studied the history of his style and competitive outcomes carefully.  Hence Rockhold evolved a striking skill-set superior to Machida as shown by FN 15. PERIOD.
|
Rockhold's knockdown wouldn't have likely been successful on me.  Why, because I DON'T DEFEND MYSELF LIKE MACHIDA.  I don't do karate offense like Machida either....  My fighting style is based on broad principles, not so much a paradigm like Machida.'s brand of Shotokan MMA-Kumite.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> The point is though that one CAN escape from the ring or octagon quite easily if you want to! It is NOT a location you can't escape from!


|
Not as the earlier poster from GeRmany said, AND WIN.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> To be honest you would be better starting a new thread and getting a new conversation started because this thread is specifically about Shotokan, I imagine if the OP had wanted to encompass more styles he would have said so and not just Shotokan, sometimes people just want to discuss something in a more focused, narrow way. Machida may have Shotokan in his background but he was fighting in MMA so it's impossible to say from watching his fight whether Shotokan has anything for self defence, not that you should just look at one fighter anyway to demonstrate a style.


|
Fair enough.  Machida's Shotokan Karate Base is definitely a factor in his success.  Demonstrated in a full contact, pressure-testing environment outside of Sport Karate Point fighting.  That's the "principled" perspective.
|
I have to figure out how to load gifs.... any pointers apprecitated.  Thanks.
|
BTW: I do agree--in principle--with your position on self defense, the larger context....


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> Rockhold's knockdown wouldn't have likely been successful on me. Why, because I DON'T DEFEND MYSELF LIKE MACHIDA.



You give credit to Rockhold's preparation then go on and say this, you don't think that if you were matched against him they would also do some prep? They would and they would plan out the best way to beat you so saying you wouldn't lose because you don't fight like Machida is an empty boast. Every fighter is different, and this still have nothing to do with Shotokan and self defence. I would dare suggest that if attacked on the street Machida would certainly have fought differently and with more conviction...as we all would. You can't compare Shotokan's self defence techniques with one man's fighting style in one fight on one night.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Not as the earlier poster from GeRmany said, AND WIN.



You have the choice to leave, whether you do and whether you then win or lose is a choice you aren't given when you are fighting for your life.


----------



## drop bear

Gnarlie said:


> A few points here.
> 
> You can not be successful in a ring fight by avoiding it completely.
> 
> The chances of someone pulling a concealed weapon in a ring situation are zero if they play by the rules.
> 
> The chances of multiple participants entering the ring unexpectedly is zero.
> 
> The likelihood of one fighter getting a good shot in and then running out of the ring and away to safety is also zero.
> 
> There's no danger of ending up with a criminal record or custodial sentence from a legitimate ring fight.
> 
> None of the above are true in a real confrontation, and those  factors alone justify taking a different approach to sport and self defence in my opinion.
> 
> Shotokan trained in the right way, just like any other TMA, has the tools for the job.



Because the dynamics of Shotokan training are the same as a street fight against multiples and weapons?

Or do I make up my own semantic differences like street fights don't happen in a gi,with bare feet,bowing first,whatever.

I mean you could do Shotokan and learn to avoid incoming shots and reply with hard crippling shots of your own. But because you may be attacked in a slightly different manner to the way you train voids that right?

I really don't get where these differences come from.


----------



## Steve

drop bear said:


> Because the dynamics of Shotokan training are the same as a street fight against multiples and weapons?
> 
> Or do I make up my own semantic differences like street fights don't happen in a gi,with bare feet,bowing first,whatever.
> 
> I mean you could do Shotokan and learn to avoid incoming shots and reply with hard crippling shots of your own. But because you may be attacked in a slightly different manner to the way you train voids that right?
> 
> I really don't get where these differences come from.


Agreed.  If the point is that training for combat sports is less realistic than Shotokan, I don't get it.  Karate trained in a dojo is not any closer to reality than BJJ or MMA.  It's just unrealistic in a different way.

The ancillary, self defense related items can be added to any martial arts training and provide a solid foundation for practical self defense, wether it's Shotokan Karate, BJJ, MMA, TKD or anything else.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Because the dynamics of Shotokan training are the same as a street fight against multiples and weapons?
> 
> Or do I make up my own semantic differences like street fights don't happen in a gi,with bare feet,bowing first,whatever.
> 
> I mean you could do Shotokan and learn to avoid incoming shots and reply with hard crippling shots of your own. But because you may be attacked in a slightly different manner to the way you train voids that right?
> 
> I really don't get where these differences come from.



Because you keep trying to think we're saying one training method is preferable or more realistic, when in reality we've only said a ring match is no equivalent to a life threatening situation.


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> Because you keep trying to think we're saying one training method is preferable or more realistic, when in reality we've only said a ring match is no equivalent to a life threatening situation.


What do you think is in Shotokan Karate that is equivalent to a life threatening situation?

The above statement implies that there is a contrast being made.  In other words, it is irrelevant to the conversation that a sports match is not the same as a life threatening altercation, if somehow there is an aspect of training in Karate that IS equivalent.  Otherwise, why bring it up other than to bash a style?


----------



## Drose427

This is exactly what we're talking about.

We havent said ANYTHING along the lines of "Shotokan vs MMA for realism".

We've all said that that both Shotokan and MMA give you the tools to get the job done, But they arent some equivalent for a Life Threatening situation. 

Not a single person here has claimed Shotokan to be super realistic, youre reaching for words we havent said.

Frankly no ring match (if anything even can be) is. 

It's like than SOI is equal to actual combat.

Stop getting defensive about the style v style and method v method and just read what we're saying.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Because you keep trying to think we're saying one training method is preferable or more realistic, when in reality we've only said a ring match is no equivalent to a life threatening situation.



So If I Shotokan punch someone in the head in a ring and knocks them out. It will for some reason not work if someone is trying to kill me.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> So If I Shotokan punch someone in the head in a ring and knocks them out. It will for some reason not work if someone is trying to kill me.



Already covered Physically Ability, Psychologically Impact, real life threatening danger and how they connect. In this thread and in others. 

Thats the point youre missing.


----------



## Gnarlie

I used the term 'ring match' because it covers both Shotokan and MMA and any other combat sport you might care to mention.

My point was, those 'ancillary' aspects are examples of what needs to be added to make whatever curriculum suitable and practical for use in self defence.

Without them, one has a toolbox full of combative techniques, but not much else.

Not much value in training for a lifetime if in your first confrontation you end up getting stabbed / getting put away for manslaughter / culpable homicide / grievous bodily harm / assault and battery.

Unless one's training encompasses those specifics of self defence and is tailored to the local circumstances, the combative toolkit is likely to be as much of a hindrance as a help. Regardless of art or sport. But we've been around this track a couple of times already.


----------



## Gnarlie

Steve said:


> Agreed.  If the point is that training for combat sports is less realistic than Shotokan, I don't get it.  Karate trained in a dojo is not any closer to reality than BJJ or MMA.  It's just unrealistic in a different way.



That wasn't my point, sorry if it wasn't clear. I included Shotokan in the ring sport group in my mind.



Steve said:


> The ancillary, self defense related items can be added to any martial arts training and provide a solid foundation for practical self defense, wether it's Shotokan Karate, BJJ, MMA, TKD or anything else.



That was my point - this is in danger of turning style vs style or sport vs SD. But my point was unless one is training specifically for SD, one has the tools to do the job but one is just as likely to bring oneself into danger as to safety with them.


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> This is exactly what we're talking about.
> 
> We havent said ANYTHING along the lines of "Shotokan vs MMA for realism".
> 
> We've all said that that both Shotokan and MMA give you the tools to get the job done, But they arent some equivalent for a Life Threatening situation.
> 
> Not a single person here has claimed Shotokan to be super realistic, youre reaching for words we havent said.
> 
> Frankly no ring match (if anything even can be) is.
> 
> It's like than SOI is equal to actual combat.
> 
> Stop getting defensive about the style v style and method v method and just read what we're saying.


I don't know if you're responding to Drop Bear or me.  Speaking for myself, I'm reading what you're writing, and I appreciate the clarification.

I do wnat to point out that NOTHING is equivalent to a life threatening situation but an actual, life threatening situation.  Sales pitch aside, no training can provide an equivalent experience unless they can ACTUALLY make you believe your life is in danger.

If we agree on the above statement, then we are really discussing a spectrum where on one side, we are training in La La land, and on the other, we are training in a focused, self defense curriculum that incorporates scenario based exercises, legal and logistical training, interpersonal/communications training to include deescalation and all manner of other things.  Given that, where does a ring match fall?  I don't know what Shotokan looks like, but I'm familiar with MMA.  In one area of self defense, the actual fighting part of it, the disadvantages are easily overcome and the advantages are numerous.



Gnarlie said:


> I used the term 'ring match' because it covers both Shotokan and MMA and any other combat sport you might care to mention.
> 
> My point was, those 'ancillary' aspects are examples of what needs to be added to make whatever curriculum suitable and practical for use in self defence.
> 
> Without them, one has a toolbox full of combative techniques, but not much else.
> 
> Not much value in training for a lifetime if in your first confrontation you end up getting stabbed / getting put away for manslaughter / culpable homicide / grievous bodily harm / assault and battery.
> 
> Unless one's training encompasses those specifics of self defence and is tailored to the local circumstances, the combative toolkit is likely to be as much of a hindrance as a help. Regardless of art or sport. But we've been around this track a couple of times already.


I'm with you up until the end.  We can agree on every one of your statements up until you conclude "is likely to be as much of a hindrance as a help."  I don't agree that knowing how to fight makes one less capable of self defense, or even that it is neutral, as you suggest.    That conclusion is not supported.  What we can agree is that in addition to knowing how to fight, one should also have solid decision making and critical thinking skills.  The decision of whether to fight or not is about decision making and critical thinking, independent of skill as a fighter.  While these are things that can be improved upon, the fact is, some people are good at decision making and critical thinking, and others are not.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Already covered Physically Ability, Psychologically Impact, real life threatening danger and how they connect. In this thread and in others.
> 
> Thats the point youre missing.



You seem to be suggesting that all things being equal Shotokan punch that works in the ring would not work under the same conditions if the other guy wanted to kill you.


----------



## Drose427

Steve said:


> I don't know if you're responding to Drop Bear or me.  Speaking for myself, I'm reading what you're writing, and I appreciate the clarification.
> 
> I do wnat to point out that NOTHING is equivalent to a life threatening situation but an actual, life threatening situation.  Sales pitch aside, no training can provide an equivalent experience unless they can ACTUALLY make you believe your life is in danger.
> 
> If we agree on the above statement, then we are really discussing a spectrum where on one side, we are training in La La land, and on the other, we are training in a focused, self defense curriculum that incorporates scenario based exercises, legal and logistical training, interpersonal/communications training to include deescalation and all manner of other things.  Given that, where does a ring match fall?  I don't know what Shotokan looks like, but I'm familiar with MMA.  In one area of self defense, the actual fighting part of it, the disadvantages are easily overcome and the advantages are numerous.
> 
> I'm with you up until the end.  We can agree on every one of your statements up until you conclude "is likely to be as much of a hindrance as a help."  I don't agree that knowing how to fight makes one less capable of self defense.  That conclusion is not supported.  What we can agree is that in addition to knowing how to fight, one should also have solid decision making and critical thinking skills.  The decision of whether to fight or not is about decision making and critical thinking, independent of skill as a fighter.  While these are things that can be improved upon, the fact is, some people are good at decision making and critical thinking, and others are not.



I think we are actually in agreement in that NOTHING recreates a life threatening SD.

Both MMA and Shotokan will give you the tools, the mechanics, and Physcial abilitty.

But neither are the same psychologically, which is something you cant really teach. You dont know how youll react unless your life is truly in danger.

One example I gave drop bear (while not a perfect translation) are the guys you see in the gym\wrestling team who perform well at practice or inter school scrimmages, but when theres real pressure like a match, they choke. 

In other post, i believe it was you who said training is about increasing odds more than anything, which I agree with completely.

You simply cant recreate a real SD situation or its pressure, short of maiming someone or worse.

No form of competitive match, or drill is really equivalent. We can come kinda close, but that blankets always gonna have to be there unless you plan on going out and fighting strangers till you get jailed or killed.

Thats the point I originally made to drop bear, who has shown to believe otherwise.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> You seem to be suggesting that all things being equal Shotokan punch that works in the ring would not work under the same conditions if the other guy wanted to kill you.



Again, no thats not what ive said at all.

Figuratively, literally, by implication, or even remotely close wording.


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> I think we are actually in agreement in that NOTHING recreates a life threatening SD.
> 
> Both MMA and Shotokan will give you the tools, the mechanics, and Physcial abilitty.
> 
> But neither are the same psychologically, which is something you cant really teach. You dont know how youll react unless your life is truly in danger.
> 
> *One example I gave drop bear (while not a perfect translation) are the guys you see in the gym\wrestling team who perform well at practice or inter school scrimmages, but when theres real pressure like a match, they choke.*
> 
> In other post, i believe it was you who said training is about increasing odds more than anything, which I agree with completely.
> 
> You simply cant recreate a real SD situation or its pressure, short of maiming someone or worse.
> 
> No form of competitive match, or drill is really equivalent. We can come kinda close, but that blankets always gonna have to be there unless you plan on going out and fighting strangers till you get jailed or killed.
> 
> Thats the point I originally made to drop bear, who has shown to believe otherwise.


I think we're close!   I bolded one statement above, though.  I would say that the guys who perform well in practice but choke under pressure are improving their odds of performing well in a life threatening situation precisely because they're pushing themselves.  If you are never outside of your comfort zone, you are not growing.   The guys who choke in a competition have a lower threshold for pressure than others.  With experience, they will choke less and choke less often.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Again, no thats not what ive said at all.
> 
> Figuratively, literally, by implication, or even remotely close wording.



Ok then the same punch will work in the ring or in a life and death situation?


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Ok then the same punch will work in the ring or in a life and death situation?



Again youve missed the point.

The bullet a soldier puts down range on base will be the same as the on in combat.

That doesnt make target practice a firefight.

They practice firefighting with electronic adapters to their body and rifles knowing their instructors will tear them a new one if they fail or get killed. They could go through SOI and never get killed in these pressured sims. But that isnt the same as combat.

Fireman training involves mock burning buildings rigged with saftey devices. Yeah theres fire, but they still arent the same as running into a burning/collapsing building.

Paramedics, interns, ER nurses, Doctors, all are pressured to keep calm and do things perfectly, be they simple sutures, finding veins, surgery, etc. But some still panic, and people die.

Your technique may be the same, but the situation simply isnt. You cant recreate that.


----------



## Gnarlie

Steve said:


> I don't know if you're responding to Drop Bear or me.  Speaking for myself, I'm reading what you're writing, and I appreciate the clarification.
> 
> I do wnat to point out that NOTHING is equivalent to a life threatening situation but an actual, life threatening situation.  Sales pitch aside, no training can provide an equivalent experience unless they can ACTUALLY make you believe your life is in danger.
> 
> If we agree on the above statement, then we are really discussing a spectrum where on one side, we are training in La La land, and on the other, we are training in a focused, self defense curriculum that incorporates scenario based exercises, legal and logistical training, interpersonal/communications training to include deescalation and all manner of other things.  Given that, where does a ring match fall?  I don't know what Shotokan looks like, but I'm familiar with MMA.  In one area of self defense, the actual fighting part of it, the disadvantages are easily overcome and the advantages are numerous.
> 
> I'm with you up until the end.  We can agree on every one of your statements up until you conclude "is likely to be as much of a hindrance as a help."  I don't agree that knowing how to fight makes one less capable of self defense, or even that it is neutral, as you suggest.    That conclusion is not supported.  What we can agree is that in addition to knowing how to fight, one should also have solid decision making and critical thinking skills.  The decision of whether to fight or not is about decision making and critical thinking, independent of skill as a fighter.  While these are things that can be improved upon, the fact is, some people are good at decision making and critical thinking, and others are not.



Yep. What I mean by hindrance is that it would be easy to land yourself in a world of legal and emotional aftermath without the right knowledge and training to support the use of martial tools.


----------



## Steve

Gnarlie said:


> Yep. What I mean by hindrance is that it would be easy to land yourself in a world of legal and emotional aftermath without the right knowledge and training to support the use of martial tools.


Thanks again for the clarification.  Thsi is a perfect example of hashing things out until we understand each other.  I thought we were talking about a "life threatening situation", in which the legal and emotional aftermath is only relevant if you survive.  Knowledge of the laws doesn't help if you don't survive the encounter.  I have in mind a guy saying, "Hey!  Stop punching me. That's assault and it's illegal, not to mention rude!"  (meant to be lighthearted and not snarky!)

Point being, there are aspects of self defense up to and following a physical altercation.  But knowing how to fight certainly helps with the altercation part.  And MMA (and maybe also Shotokon) is certainly helpful (and not a hindrance) with at least that one part of it.


----------



## Gnarlie

Steve said:


> Thanks again for the clarification.  Thsi is a perfect example of hashing things out until we understand each other.  I thought we were talking about a "life threatening situation", in which the legal and emotional aftermath is only relevant if you survive.  Knowledge of the laws doesn't help if you don't survive the encounter.  I have in mind a guy saying, "Hey!  Stop punching me. That's assault and it's illegal, not to mention rude!"
> 
> Point being, there are aspects of self defense up to and following a physical altercation.  But knowing how to fight certainly helps with the altercation part.  And MMA (and maybe also Shotokon) is certainly helpful (and not a hindrance) with at least that one part of it.



Even in the altercation part, it is important to know when to start, and where to stop, and what you might be dealing with.

That's different in every city and every country.

Capetown. Sharpened bicycle spoke popular shiv weapon, legal implications follow use of the fist, palm heels might be a good idea, and keeping some distance.

Stuttgart. Blade and firearm crime fairly unusual as carried offensive weapons heavily controlled. Violence unusual and most often alcohol related. Serious repercussions for use of kicks, especially for use against a compromised opponent.

I'd adjust my approach to preemption and what I might leave in the toolbox and what I might bring out.


----------



## Steve

Gnarlie said:


> Even in the altercation part, it is important to know when to start, and where to stop, and what you might be dealing with.
> 
> That's different in every city and every country.
> 
> Capetown. Sharpened bicycle spoke popular shiv weapon, legal implications follow use of the fist, palm heels might be a good idea, and keeping some distance.
> 
> Stuttgart. Blade and firearm crime fairly unusual as carried offensive weapons heavily controlled. Violence unusual and most often alcohol related. Serious repercussions for use of kicks, especially for use against a compromised opponent.
> 
> I'd adjust my approach to preemption and what I might leave in the toolbox and what I might bring out.


 AND if you don't survive a "life threatening" encounter, the above is entirely moot.  For some reason, i think we're talking past one another.  Can't we agree that if you are dead, it won't matter whether you used a palm heel, a blade or a floppy fish to defend yourself?  Can't we also agree that knowing how to intelligently defend oneself in a physical altercation is ALWAYS preferable to not knowing how to intelligently defend oneself?


----------



## Gnarlie

Steve said:


> AND if you don't survive a "life threatening" encounter, the above is entirely moot.  For some reason, i think we're talking past one another.  Can't we agree that if you are dead, it won't matter whether you used a palm heel, a blade or a floppy fish to defend yourself?  Can't we also agree that knowing how to intelligently defend oneself in a physical altercation is ALWAYS preferable to not knowing how to intelligently defend oneself?



Yes, I do agree - but I am also saying there is loads before and after to limit damage, or even avoid the situation. No sport or 'do' art really gets into that. So on topic, Shotokan for SD, yes as much as whatever other MA or combat sport, but all of them require supplementary material.


----------



## Steve

Gnarlie said:


> Yes, I do agree - but I am also saying there is loads before and after to limit damage, or even avoid the situation. No sport or 'do' art really gets into that. So on topic, Shotokan for SD, yes as much as whatever other MA or combat sport, but all of them require supplementary material.


Alright!


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> You give credit to Rockhold's preparation then go on and say this, you don't think that if you were matched against him they would also do some prep?


|
How do you prep for higher principles than AKA trains?  The whole concept of traditional karate is a state of "mental clarity," mental discipline that overwhelms the physically powerful, even mindful such as Rockhold.  AKA does not train to the standards of traditional karate.  That's it.
|


Tez3 said:


> They would and they would plan out the best way to beat you so saying you wouldn't lose because you don't fight like Machida is an empty boast.


|
Well if it is an empty boast, it's empty over the internet for sure.  Your thinking presumes that Rockhold's pressure fighting should be of concern to me & it is.  It's also a concern that's addressed by Ippon Kumite, precisely & specifically.
|


Tez3 said:


> Every fighter is different, and this still have nothing to do with Shotokan and self defence. I would dare suggest that if attacked on the street Machida would certainly have fought differently and with more conviction...as we all would. You can't compare Shotokan's self defence techniques with one man's fighting style in one fight on one night.


|
That's the beauty of principles as opposed to the conventional martial art thingking-way of matching specific physical techniques to circumstances.  My thought process is the same logic that bukai represent principles or alternatives, not just the exact motion shown in the kata.  Experts here @ MT have spoken to this concept many a time....
|
So I am talking about a traditoinal martial approach to self defense, not just "Shotokan" or a specific self defense scenario....  Others / experts
can do that latter here better than I can.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Shotokan Answer to Rockhold, Bar-Brawler, etc.




|
TEZ, tell me how Rockhold, or bar-brawler stands up to this?  Here's Shotokan Ippon Kumite dealing with a striking assault just as Machida was knocked down by @ FN15--IN PRINCIPLE.
|
This is the same concept I described in how I defeated the aggressive kickboxer-type I faced at my dojo, who most students can't handle.  The guy was bigger, stronger, more athletic just like Rockhold, yet I used the power of my whole body in a dynamic way he couldn't stop....  couldn't react to with physical technique alone....
|
The irony in the Machida / Rochold fight, was that Rockhold performed the AKA kickboxing versions of _*some*_ IPPON KUMITE principles demonstrated here, while Machida lunged more like a brawler.  Rockhold's boxing form (IMO) in that exchange was good, Machida's sport karate poor.  Good boxing trumps poor karate..... every time.
|
The TRADITIONAL Shotokan strategy for dealing with a physical assault is to engage and disable right away.  That's the traditional Shotokan practical strategy for self defense.  That message is all over the IPPON KUMITE exercise shown above.  You go out and engage the opponent & SMASH 'EM with a disabling blow.  Here, the traditional Shotokan strategy is to accurately & precisely block & counter, as well as a bunch of other fighting stuff that people ridicule & underestimate as simpleton karate.  It's simpleton to that audience, those critics of Shotokan / traditional karate because they can not attain, replicate the mental discipline represented here to pull it off.
|
It's the mental dimension in the exercise that make it work.  Not the outwardly, aggressive, rigid, structured, preset, stiff looking kihon-shotokan physical form regurgitated mindlessly.
|
In terms of adding expert techniques, advancements... the long-time members here can do that.  the Ian A. level stuff....


----------



## ShotoNoob

The total fighting dynamic point made in the IPPON KUMITE vid, is that the traditional karate fighter moves in response to the actions of the attacker.
|
IT IS NOT, _*IN PRINCIPLE,*_  HOW TO BLOCK A STRAIGHT PUNCH DONE SINGLY... WHERE THE OPPONENT STOPS STILL.
|
How many karateka practice Ippon Kumite like it should be practiced?  Very few.  A minority @ my dojo.  I'm probably the best @ Ippon Kumite where I train.
|
EDIT: ALSO, note how the Shotokan defender gives ground.  An alternative that makes sense against a grappler rushing-in, someone lunging at you.  Avoid the grappler getting hands on you, avoid being boweled over.  It's one set of alternative ways to handle aggression.  Don't tackle physical aggression head on.... A practical message embodied in the stated defensive philosophy of Shotokan.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Again youve missed the point.
> 
> The bullet a soldier puts down range on base will be the same as the on in combat.
> 
> That doesnt make target practice a firefight.
> 
> They practice firefighting with electronic adapters to their body and rifles knowing their instructors will tear them a new one if they fail or get killed. They could go through SOI and never get killed in these pressured sims. But that isnt the same as combat.
> 
> Fireman training involves mock burning buildings rigged with saftey devices. Yeah theres fire, but they still arent the same as running into a burning/collapsing building.
> 
> Paramedics, interns, ER nurses, Doctors, all are pressured to keep calm and do things perfectly, be they simple sutures, finding veins, surgery, etc. But some still panic, and people die.
> 
> Your technique may be the same, but the situation simply isnt. You cant recreate that.



So it is perceived risk. A real fight is riskier than training even if the techniques are the same.

Yet can be mechanically the same and even have the same mental effect on the person.

So basically you are focusing on the risk. Which in my opinion is how people freeze up and under perform.


----------



## Tez3

Shotonoob, I can't understand most of what you write and some of it is shouting which is unnecessary. I answer your posts then you say your posts actually mean something else. You keep telling us how you defeat this and that. Every thread you bring up MMA,  Fine. We get the point.


----------



## Tez3

I'm lifting this quite unashamedly from Iain Abernethy's site because I believe wholeheartedly in what he says here.
Self-Protection observation Iain Abernethy


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> I'm lifting this quite unashamedly from Iain Abernethy's site because I believe wholeheartedly in what he says here.
> Self-Protection observation Iain Abernethy


|
I read & agree with the Author's concepts.  The variables encountered in a self-defense environment are / can be more numbered, different &  more complicated than the dojo environment.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> Shotonoob, I can't understand most of what you write and some of it is shouting which is unnecessary. I answer your posts then you say your posts actually mean something else. You keep telling us how you defeat this and that. Every thread you bring up MMA,  Fine. We get the point.


|
Most training traditional karate don't get the point either.  Other posters have talked about too much focus on physical form vs. understanding traditional martial art principles.  How one successfully addresses this issue is of paramount importance.


----------



## Laplace_demon

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Fair enough.  Machida's Shotokan Karate Base is definitely a factor in his success.  ..



But it is not the only factor. He wouldn't have lasted very long going straight from the dojo to MMA. A wrestler however can. Machida is a black belt in BJJ, dabbled in Sumo. This makes his takedown defence worlds apart from traditional Shotokan Karateka. He clearly doesn't win by" one punch one kill principle", which Shotokan supposedly were to instill him with.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Buka said:


> I don't know a lot about Shotokan.


I don't know anything about Shotokan either. But does all MA systems teach you how to "meet your fist on your opponent's face"? If you can't do it, it should be your problem and not your system's problem.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> But it is not the only factor. He wouldn't have lasted very long going straight from the dojo to MMA. A wrestler however can. Machida is a black belt in BJJ, dabbled in Sumo. This makes his takedown defence worlds apart from traditional Shotokan Karateka. He clearly doesn't win by" one punch one kill principle", which Shotokan supposedly were to instill him with.



Well the discussion wasn't about Machidas pure karate being enough for MMA, only for  his striking .(Thai clinch excluded)

But,

No a wrestler really can't.....

In the early days of UFC there was a 300 pound sumo wrestler who cast constantly out struck by TMA guys and kickboxers.

Coming in to MMA lopsided is a death sentence, regardless which side.


After the first couple UFCs when strikers started grappling to, the Gracie's didn't stand out as Much.

In sakuraba vs rorion(?) Rorions striking was poor and at one point rorion was getting kicked and pounded on while he was trying to butt scoot around waiting to try and find a way to get sakuraba down.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> Well the discussion wasn't about Machidas pure karate being enough for MMA, only for  his striking .(Thai clinch excluded)
> 
> But,
> 
> No a wrestler really can't.....
> 
> In the early days of UFC there was a 300 pound sumo wrestler who cast constantly out struck by TMA guys and kickboxers.
> 
> Coming in to MMA lopsided is a death sentence, regardless which side.
> 
> 
> After the first couple UFCs when strikers started grappling to, the Gracie's didn't stand out as Much.
> 
> In sakuraba vs rorion(?) Rorions striking was poor and at one point rorion was getting kicked and pounded on while he was trying to butt scoot around waiting to try and find a way to get sakuraba down.



A  Wrestler will go much much longer in the UFC on wrestling alone than a Karateka or TKDoin. Simply because it's a lottery for the striker to land a kick, or punch to take him out before the clinch, in which the wrestlers strenght is superior. It's not really a lottery for a wrestler to take down a complete amateur.

Pride and UFC is the closest we have to reality and self defence. Pride in particular.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> A  Wrestler will go much much longer in the UFC on wrestling alone than a Karateka or TKDoin. Simply because it's a lottery for the striker to land a kick, or punch to take him out before the clinch, in which the wrestlers strenght is superior. It's not really a lottery for a wrestler to take down a complete amateur.
> 
> Pride and UFC is the closest we have to reality and self defence. Pride in particular.




You REALLY need to just train....and stop living in this martial arts fantasy world.

Its not as easy as you think for your average person to step in and try to muscle their way to a take down when someones swinging punches......

Your average wrestler can't take a punch on the chin any better than your average Joe, all it takes is one decently placed shot.

And  half the time when you a see a video of anyone attacking a boxer they never even get close. Once the fists start flying, they're either dropped or kept away.

An average wrestler isn't just gonna be able to stand there taking shots just for a take down.

Again, that wrestler got KOed a good bit by karate/TKD guys in early UFC, you can find videos of it everywhere in both UFC and pride. He was nearly always twice their size and his size and strength meant nothing.


----------



## Laplace_demon

The Gracies were not wrestlers. If yo don't know the difference between wrestling and BJJ..........


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> The Gracies were not wrestlers. If yo don't know the difference between wrestling and BJJ..........




No but full submission grappling expands my point....

Teils Tuli was a sumo wrestler...he got KOed and TKOed  several times.....by strikers half his size...

Going in with only wrestling to MMA is just as bad s going in with only striking...


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> The Gracies were not wrestlers. If yo don't know the difference between wrestling and BJJ..........



Oh, and emmanual Yarborough.

Ken Shamrock aalso got out done in striking and he was a pretty big wrestler


----------



## Laplace_demon

I am not talking about Sumo wrestlers (face palm...) 



Drose427 said:


> Going in with only wrestling to MMA is just as bad s going in with only striking...



Hardly. It's not optimal, but still preferred.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> A Wrestler will go much much longer in the UFC on wrestling alone than a Karateka or TKDoin. Simply because it's a lottery for the striker to land a kick, or punch to take him out before the clinch, in which the wrestlers strenght is superior. It's not really a lottery for a wrestler to take down a complete amateur.




Oh my days, that is simply one of the most naïve, ignorant and ridiculous statements it's been my pleasure to read. Thank you for that, I will share it with my fighters and we shall be inspired to amazing new heights in our struggle not to die laughing at the things you say.

Really, thank you, only someone with a complete and utter lack of knowledge of any martial arts could come up with that one.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Laplace_demon said:


> it's a lottery for the striker to land a kick, or punch to take him out before the clinch, ...


In UFC, the "take down" successful rate is always higher than the "knock down" successful rate. IMO, the anti-grappling may not exist but the anti-striking does exist. You can give up your striking ability and enhance your grappling ability by using "zombie arms", "rhino guard", "crazy monkey", "double spears", "octopus arms", .... You just can't give up your grappling ability to enhance your striking ability. The moment that you can use your arms to wrap around your opponent's punching arms, the moment that the striking game is over and the grappling game will start. Since you can wrap your arms around your opponent's arms during his 1st punch, 2nd punch, 3rd punch, or ..., the striking game can be over much early than you may expect.

Here is an interested test.

- If you can obtain a clinch within your opponent's first 5 punches, you win that around.
- If your opponent's punch can hit you within the first 5 punches, or if you can't obtain a clinch within his first 5 punches, you lose that round.
- Test this for 15 rounds everyday and record the result.
- Repeat this testing for 3 months and draw your own conclusion.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> I am not talking about Sumo wrestlers (face palm...)
> 
> 
> 
> Hardly. It's not optimal, but still preferred.



There are very few things I learned in wrestling that arent found in sumo and BJJ........

You're splitting hairs and you're still wrong......

You still have no rebuttal for the fact that a wrestlers chin is the average joes.....and hes not getting inside without taking some heavy hits.....

It really is just as bad going in with only striking....

Here's an exercise I do whenever I work with grapplers (many of which I wrestled with in high school, 2 of whom were disctrict qualifiers in in the OH/WV area which is good in terms of wrestling, some who are ranked in ibjff BJJ):

One guy is allowed to swing out, punches, controlled elbows, knees, etc. Whatever they wanna do.
The other is ONLY allowed to grapple. He has to close distance, get takedown, get sub.

I have yet to see a grappler who hasnt trained/competed in MMA/Boxing/etc. do so without getting knocked around. Eventually theyll get used to it and figure it out, but not at first.

Obviously use proper equipment so we arent killing each other but the points still there.

It isnt as easy as the inexperienced think.


----------



## Drose427

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The anti-grappling may not exist but the anti-striking does exist. You can give up your striking ability and enhance your grappling ability by using "zombie arms", "rhino guard", "crazy monkey", "double spears", .... You just can't give up your grappling ability to enhance your striking ability. The moment that you can use your arms to wrap around your opponent's punching arms, the moment that the striking game is over and the grappling game starts. Since you can wrap your arms on your opponent's 1st punch, 2nd punch, 3rd punch, or ..., the striking game can be over early than you may think.



But you can still strike from the clinch.

The only sole grappling fighter that comes to mind in the history of MMA to be successful was Royce Gracie, and many times even he took more poundings than your average wrestler can take to do it.

Shamrock got beat trying to wrestle before, yarborough and tuli were sumo guys and they got Koed quiet a few times going for what youre describing against guys half their size.

Until the fighters go down to the mat, striking is still valid, and many a conditioned grappler/striker have been KOe'd by a punch during standing grappling IF they were even able to get to that point.

You're average joe wrestler cant just magically close the distance, theyre gonna take shots to the face, which you're average grappler isnt used to.

Obviously its the opposite issue if the grappler can get the striker down to the mat, but doing so isnt as simple as people think.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Drose427 said:


> But you can still strike from the clinch.
> 
> The only sole grappling fighter that comes to mind in the history of MMA to be successful was Royce Gracie, and many times even he took more poundings than your average wrestler can take to do it.


This post may have nothing to do with "Shotokan".

Not all punches are effective knock down/out punches. But all take down are effective take downs.

During some valid clinch, the striking won't be effective at that moment.


----------



## Drose427

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This post may have nothing to do with "Shotokan".
> 
> During some valid clinch, the striking won't be effective at that moment.



In UFC, Kieth Hackney did it from positions similar to the top 2 pics

He also struck (I think it was shamrock) in the wasit/groin from a headlock like the bottom picture


Working the body is easy from the second picture, assuming you cant slip out to a better by prying your arm out and pushing away (which is exactly what it looks like the blue singlet is about to do), slipping out of the hand around his neck/head is the easy part.  A better clinch for the other guy would be a collar/elbow grip, the one he has really isnt that good.

the 3rd...Well its wwe....while uncomfortable thats really not a likely position at all against ANY resisting opponent.....forget about one throwing strikes. The guy in the headlock can pretty easily hit the other in the face and groin, and the guy cant even hiptoss because hes so far away and painfully not loaded

But again, none of those guys had to take one on the chin to get there.


----------



## Drose427

Definitely wasnt Shamrock getting Groin Punched...I goofed there....but my point stands

Even Royce was having difficulty grappling here against the onslaught of strikes and ate A LOT of heavy hands to get it. Your average wrestler cant do that

yes, he had some wrestling experience, but in the clips its clear his striking is whats messing up the grapplers momentum.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Drose427 said:


> none of those guys had to take one on the chin to get there.


Everybody will get punched. But a "knock down/out" punch is not that easy to achieve.

To avoid uppercut is not that hard. 








Drose427 said:


> But you can still strike from the clinch.



That's why the moment that you get into a clinch, the moment that you take your opponent down. In sport there is a 3 seconds rule for that.


----------



## Drose427

Kung Fu Wang said:


> That's why the moment that you get into a clinch, the moment that you take your opponent down. In sport there is a 3 second rule for that.



But it isnt as simple as that,

Even without the added annoyance of the other guy hitting you


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> You still have no rebuttal for the fact that a wrestlers chin is the average joes.....and hes not getting inside without taking some heavy hits.....
> 
> It really is just as bad going in with only striking.....



Yes I do have a rebuttal. Any intelligent wrestler will fake (distract) an attack standing and then shoot low... leaving the striker preoccupied with getting himself untangeled instead of being able to strike him. A striker, more often than not, cannot react in time when he's just gotten distracted by fake attack. And in shooting low I can't hit him on the shin. Only possibility is kneeing him, but like I said, the wrestler will not telegraph his takedown.


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> During some valid clinch, the striking won't be effective at that moment.



In those pictures I can see several very good strikes the guy in the headlock can use. 



Kung Fu Wang said:


> But all take down are effective take downs.




Not really, in MMA to be effective ie scoring you have to do something with them, a takedown itself won't score, it's what you do after that counts so no not all takedowns are effective. If you were to takedown your opponent then lay and pray that's not effective nor is it effective if your opponent takes control or gets back up. 
 Once you are on the floor, striking can be very effective even devastating, you have fists, knees and elbows, hammer fists are nasty.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> Yes I do have a rebuttal. Any intelligent wrestler will fake (distract) an attack standing and then shoot low... leaving the striker preoccupied with getting himself untangeled instead of being able to strike him. A striker, more often than not, cannot react in time when he's just gotten distracted by fake attack. And in shooting low I can't hit him on the shin. Only possibility is kneeing him, but like I said, the wrestler will not telegraph his takedown.



You know that doesn't make any sense right? You don't know enough about MMA to be able to tell us what works and what doesn't, you are making it up as you go along.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> Yes I do have a rebuttal. Any intelligent wrestler will fake (distract) an attack standing and then shoot low... leaving the striker preoccupied with getting himself untangeled instead of being able to strike him. A striker, more often than not, cannot react in time when he's just gotten distracted by fake attack. And in shooting low I can't hit him on the shin. Only possibility is kneeing him, but like I said, the wrestler will not telegraph his takedown.



What a riot.

One, 

faking any competent striking isnt going to leave them anywhere near tangled, at most theyll tighten their guard, which wont stop me from punching whatsoever. You're really overestimating how much fakes do to anyone with more than a week of training.

Two

one of the lowest shots you can do wrestling is an low/swing single, to which a striker can

A. Knee you
B. Drop his knee _on_ you (you see this in wrestling if you actually wrestled) and then pound the heck out of you
C. Sprawl/catch (which most strikers have somewhat of a grasp on, varying degrees) before you get full outside and pummel you hammerfists and uppercuts just like Hackney did in that clip.

Until a striker is down on the mat, the grappler has NO advantage. Too many pepole underestimate how difficult it really is to do that because they're never had to.


Tez3 said:


> You know that doesn't make any sense right? You don't know enough about MMA to be able to tell us what works and what doesn't, you are making it up as you go along.



To heck with MMA, I dont think he understands wrestling in general. Which is fine! Lots of people go through life without wrestling, but he should be so uppity about something he doesnt have experience in...


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> What a riot.
> 
> One,
> 
> faking any competent striking isnt going to leave them anywhere near tangled, at most theyll tighten their guard, which wont stop me from punching whatsoever. You're really overestimating how much fakes do to anyone with more than a week of training.
> 
> Two
> 
> one of the lowest shots you can do wrestling is an low/swing single, to which a striker can
> 
> A. Knee you
> B. Drop his knee _on_ you (you see this in wrestling if you actually wrestled) and then pound the heck out of you
> C. Sprawl/catch (which most strikers have somewhat of a grasp on, varying degrees) before you get full outside and pummel you hammerfists and uppercuts just like Hackney did in that clip.
> 
> Until a striker is down on the mat, the grappler has NO advantage. Too many pepole underestimate how difficult it really is to do that because they're never had to.
> 
> 
> To heck with MMA, I dont think he understands wrestling in general. Which is fine! Lots of people go through life without wrestling, but he should be so uppity about something he doesnt have experience in...



Compare the stand up KO rate with the takedown rate in MMA. You are the one who's clueless. A wrestler can do just fine. A striker is a shaky proposition.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> Compare the stand up KO rate with the takedown rate in MMA. You are the one who's clueless. A wrestler can do just fine. A striker is a shaky proposition.



If you watched UFC youd see how many people have been Koe'd over the years in the exact situations I described.........

Not to mention the fact that UFC fighters have conditioned jaws, a trait your average wrestler is lacking....


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> Compare the stand up KO rate with the takedown rate in MMA. You are the one who's clueless. A wrestler can do just fine. A striker is a shaky proposition.




More nonsense. Do you train, coach, judge, ref, corner or in fact have anything to do with MMA even if it's only timekeeping? Please post up your credentials for being able to spout this stuff about MMA.

One of our fighters defeated in seconds a well known Judo specialist with a flying knee. That Judo specialist went on to the UFC, look up Phil 'Billy' Harris' record and you will find he lost to David Smythe. I could give you many more examples but I think I'd be wasting my time.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> Compare the stand up KO rate with the takedown rate in MMA. You are the one who's clueless. A wrestler can do just fine. A striker is a shaky proposition.



Just for kicks.

Heres an article about UFC Finishers:

Fighting by Numbers Finishing Rates and Weight Class - Bloody Elbow

In all but lightweight, the sub(which would imply takedowns were done) had lower percentage than TKO, and in most divisions Dec was higher than sub.

Not completely indicative, but shows taking it down to grapple isnt necessarily the dominant play here


----------



## Drose427

Tez3 said:


> More nonsense. Do you train, coach, judge, ref, corner or in fact have anything to do with MMA even if it's only timekeeping? Please post up your credentials for being able to spout this stuff about MMA.
> 
> One of our fighters defeated in seconds a well known Judo specialist with a flying knee. That Judo specialist went on to the UFC, look up Phil 'Billy' Harris' record and you will find he lost to David Smythe. I could give you many more examples but I think I'd be wasting my time.



In case he wants to cross check.

Phil Harris fighter - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Harris is a Judo BB and without a doubt has wrestling experience competing in MMA


----------



## Tez3

Drose427 said:


> In case he wants to cross check.
> 
> Phil Harris fighter - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> Harris is a Judo BB and without a doubt has wrestling experience competing in MMA



Just to add insult to injury his car broke down on it's way back to London from Catterick with him and his guys in. 

Young David Smythe had a few more fights after but I'm afraid he met a woman a lot older than him who didn't like him fighting, you can guess the rest. He really was talented.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> . He clearly doesn't win by" one punch one kill principle", which Shotokan supposedly were to instill him with.


 
Ri-ight....




The thing to remember is that in Shotokan, "one punch" then run away.....not a contest....




 



 
In fact, I'd say 一撃必殺 , _ichigeki hattatsu_,  "single hit/certain is likely one of the reasons he was successful in MMA, and that 一本技, _ippon waza_, "one hit/one kill," was a  reason that he wasn't more successful in MMA....


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> Just for kicks.
> 
> Heres an article about UFC Finishers:
> 
> Fighting by Numbers Finishing Rates and Weight Class - Bloody Elbow
> 
> In all but lightweight, the sub(which would imply takedowns were done) had lower percentage than TKO, and in most divisions Dec was higher than sub.
> 
> Not completely indicative, but shows taking it down to grapple isnt necessarily the dominant play here



That would include KO from the ground as well. A striker could achieve that (especially if he's trained in MMA). So that stat does not tell the hole story. Wrestlers are ten times stronger than average strikers. I would assume once he gets the striker down, it's practically over. We are to suppose that I (the striker) have zero training in the groundgame.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> That would include KO from the ground as well. A striker could achieve that (especially if he's trained in MMA). So that stat does not tell the hole story. Wrestlers are ten times stronger than average strikers. I would assume once he gets the striker down, it's practically over. We are to suppose that I (the striker) have zero training in the groundgame.



Aside from the painfully incorrect generalization of strength there.........

Yeah, IF the wrestler can even get the takedown.....which isnt as easy to do on someone actually striking you as youre thinking. You've clearly never actually tried or seen someone try to do that.. Heck, watch the Keith Hackney video, he uses little to no wrestling. Just swings away, and every opponent in the clip has a hard time getting to him to grapple.

Its almost painful how certain you are in your inexperience.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> Aside from the painfully incorrect generalization of strength there.........
> 
> Yeah, IF the wrestler can even get the takedown.....which isnt as easy to do on someone actually striking you as youre thinking. You've clearly never actually tried or seen someone try to do that.. Heck, watch the Keith Hackney video, he uses little to no wrestling. Just swings away, and every opponent in the clip has a hard time getting to him to grapple.
> 
> Its almost painful how certain you are in your inexperience.



It's a far easier task than the do or die situation for the striker, who must be 100% precise and KO the bastard. The wrestler won't engage in a kickboxing duel, making it even less likely to KO him.


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> Just for kicks.
> 
> Heres an article about UFC Finishers:
> 
> Fighting by Numbers Finishing Rates and Weight Class - Bloody Elbow
> 
> In all but lightweight, the sub(which would imply takedowns were done) had lower percentage than TKO, and in most divisions Dec was higher than sub.
> 
> Not completely indicative, but shows taking it down to grapple isnt necessarily the dominant play here


This is a red herring guys.  The rules in Mma favor striking and discourage lentpgthy grappling.   Every elite level mmaist is a high level grappler and at least a competent striker.   Has no bearing on self defense.

What is true, I believe, is that a striker who is untrained in grappling is in deep trouble if the bad guy is a grappler.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> It's a far easier task than the do or die situation for the striker, who must be 100% precise and KO the bastard. The wrestler won't engage in a kickboxing duel, making it even less likely to KO him.



I dont have to completely KO you to put a wrench in the system.....or knock you back giving the striker the edge still, or shut down you takedowns,

Seriously, watch the clips we post

Only Royce was tough enough to stick it out, you can find a million clips exactly like it

Better yet,

try to wrestle someone swinging to hurt you



Steve said:


> This is a red herring guys.  The rules in Mma favor striking and discourage lentpgthy grappling.   Every elite level mmaist is a high level grappler and at least a competent striker.   Has no bearing on self defense.


We're speaking in terms of MMA,

going in with no striking experience is equally dangerous as going in with no grappling. WHen you're completely unused to striking (unless youre a gracie cause that family has jaws of steel apparently!) relentless strikers will wail on you whenever you try to grapple. Even Royce Gracie had trouble with Hackney and Hackney wasnt really grappling with Royce at all


----------



## Steve

Just pointing out that, in a thread about shotokan for self defense, machida doesn't really help.   Mma in general, and the ufc as an elite level promotion, has really nothing helpful to add here.   Any conclusions are going to be clouded by a rule set that favors striking over grappling and is geared to be exciting as a spectator sport.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Steve said:


> Just pointing out that, in a thread about shotokan for self defense, machida doesn't really help.   Mma in general, and the ufc as an elite level promotion, has really nothing helpful to add here.   Any conclusions are going to be clouded by a rule set that favors striking over grappling and is geared to be exciting as a spectator sport.



I am not sure were you get the notion that the rules favour the *striker*...


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> I dont have to completely KO you to put a wrench in the system.....or knock you back giving the striker the edge still, or shut down you takedowns,
> 
> Seriously, watch the clips we post
> 
> Only Royce was tough enough to stick it out, you can find a million clips exactly like it
> 
> Better yet,
> 
> try to wrestle someone swinging to hurt you
> 
> 
> We're speaking in terms of MMA,
> 
> going in with no striking experience is equally dangerous as going in with no grappling. WHen you're completely unused to striking (unless youre a gracie cause that family has jaws of steel apparently!) relentless strikers will wail on you whenever you try to grapple. Even Royce Gracie had trouble with Hackney and Hackney wasnt really grappling with Royce at all



It's not about having a jaw of steel, he simply didn't get hit that much. And I not only need to strike a wrestler, I need to take him out. If he get's me to the ground in the process, being ok from the blow, then I am screwed as well.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> It's not about having a jaw of steel, he simply didn't get hit that much. And I not only need to strike a wrestler, I need to take him out. If he get's me to the ground in the process, being ok from the blow, then I am screwed as well.



If you think Royce didnt get hit that much, you very CLEARLY did not watch UFC.....

Again, for your viewing pleasure, Keith Hackney shutting down several people trying to wrestle (royce submits him yes, but gets pummeled in the process)


----------



## Laplace_demon

Hackney employs the right strategy, unlike many of strikers in the Gracie challenge matches, who were far too passive. Note that the commentators did say that Royce has rarely been hit, and that his chin will be tested in the match against Hackney.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> Hackney employs the right strategy, unlike many of strikers in the Gracie challenge matches, who were far too passive. Note that the commentators did say that Royce has rarely been hit, and that his chin will be tested in the match against Hackney.



Nowhere in the video did the commentators say that...just watched it twice for you...but whatever you think buddy


and the video unraveled your point, Even today fighters are getting KOe'd by strikers swinging out while trying to grapple, we see it all the time. 

its not as easy as youre imagining to just wrestle through a striking opponent.

Grab a striker and find out


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> Nowhere in the video did the commentators say that...just watched it twice for you...but whatever you think buddy
> 
> 
> and the video unraveled your point, Even today fighters are getting KOe'd by strikers swinging out while trying to grapple, we see it all the time.
> 
> its not as easy as youre imagining to just wrestle through a striking opponent.
> 
> Grab a striker and find out



1: 34 --http://Keith Hackney Vs Royce Gracie - Video


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Laplace_demon said:


> he simply didn't get hit that much.


The way that he stands, he extends his arms out much further away from his head than his opponent does. This would give him less striking ability but more grappling ability. His hands will be closer to his opponent's body than his opponent's hands close to his body. 







When you extend your arms out, your opponent's arms have to pass your arms to hit you. That will give you more chance to wrap his arms.






If your opponent can use spear to keep you away, it's pretty hard to get to his body. You have to pass his spear first. That's the strategy used by most grapplers.


----------



## Steve

Laplace_demon said:


> I am not sure were you get the notion that the rules favour the *striker*...


From the rules, lol.   Everything from the pacing of the fight, dictated by the ref, to the lack of grips on the uniform to the cage itself.  Grappling is less fun to watch for the lay spectator.  Don't misunderstand.   Grappling is a very important component of MMA, but the rules ensure that striking is rewarded and encouraged.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Steve said:


> From the rules, lol.   Everything from the pacing of the fight, dictated by the ref, to the lack of grips on the uniform to the cage itself.  Grappling is less fun to watch for the lay spectator.  Don't misunderstand.   Grappling is a very important component of MMA, but the rules ensure that striking is rewarded and encouraged.



Plenty of rules which prohibits strikers toolbox too.


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> Nowhere in the video did the commentators say that...just watched it twice for you...but whatever you think buddy
> 
> 
> and the video unraveled your point, Even today fighters are getting KOe'd by strikers swinging out while trying to grapple, we see it all the time.
> 
> its not as easy as youre imagining to just wrestle through a striking opponent.
> 
> Grab a striker and find out


Once again, it's pointless to draw any conclusions about striking vs grappling from the ufc.   Every fighter is both a competent striker and grappler.  I think you're both arguing flawed positions here.


----------



## Steve

Laplace_demon said:


> Plenty of rules which prohibits strikers toolbox too.


not anything systemic.   While there are specific strikes that are illegal, the entire rule set is engineered to make grappling less effective.


----------



## Drose427

Steve said:


> Once again, it's pointless to draw any conclusions about striking vs grappling from the ufc.   Every fighter is both a competent striker and grappler.



Yeah but the guy throwing punches many times is pulling a Keith hackney, not really using any grappling or wrestling concepts or anything. Just swinging away whenever someones within range.

Its far more difficult to grapple like that than Laplace is thinking

I also tried using the example that when you see videos of Boxers or other style defending themselves by doing that. The attackers rarely even get close enough to grab them before getting decked. Folks that dont strike at all have a far harder time getting in if they can at all.



Steve said:


> not anything systemic.   While there are specific strikes that are illegal, the entire rule set is engineered to make grappling less effective.



My grappling is limited mostly to Wrestling with some BJJ, what exaclty about the ruleset makes grappling less effective? 

Off the top of my head I know positional resets do, sometimes grappling takes time the ref wont give them. But I've never really thought about it before


----------



## Steve

> My grappling is limited mostly to Wrestling with some BJJ, what exaclty about the ruleset makes grappling less effective?
> 
> Off the top of my head I know positional resets do, sometimes grappling takes time the ref wont give them. But I've never really thought about it before


First, I want to qualify this by saying that I'm not complianing, and understand completely why this exists.  But this myth that grappling is somehow favored in MMA is just ludicrous.  Grappling is boring for many fans to watch.  Dana White gets pissed when there's too much grappling.  He hates it, particularly if it's the grinding, take down style grappling favored by wrestlers.  Fans often don't understand what they're seeing, and while it's very technical, it doesn't LOOK technical.  

Positional resets is a big one, because grappling is often a grind.  Lay and pray, while very boring to watch, is a way for a superior grappler to smother and prevent an opponent from mounting any kind of offense whatsoever.  

But, fundamentally, the uniform favors strikers over grapplers.  It's a contrived situation unique to competition.  In self defense, unless you're being attacked in a locker room shower, you are unlikely to be grappling in a situation so ill suited for catching a submission.  Many of the chokes and joint locks that are fundamental to sound grappling are functionally impossible to catch due to the slipperiness and lack of grips in MMA.  

Rounds themselves favor strikers.  A grappler can be working for something and when the round ends, they start standing.  

The cage favors strikers in that it is often difficult to work for a submission up against the cage.  The cage is used to protect your back and is a huge help for guys working to regain their feet.  Often, the grappler has to pick up the guy on the bottom to move him away from the cage.

Any more, the only submission typical in an elite level mma match is the RNC.  Otherwise, any submission is just too risky. There's an occasional head/arm choke or even less common now, a triangle from guard.  But for the most part, guys are all competent enough grapplers to avoid these, and can muscle out of most anything if they're sweaty enough.  

These things are systemic.  They exist fundamentally within the ruleset to create a situation that handicaps grappling.  While it's true that there are techniques that are illegal, both for grapplers and strikers.  But overall, strking is like hitting home runs in baseball.  Striking sells tickets, and so over the years, the rules have evolved to ensure that grappling is tightly controlled and heavily restricted.


----------



## jks9199

Folks, 
I'm trying to figure out what the last three pages have to do with Shotokan and self defense.  It's been an informative discussion, and would make a great thread on it's own...


----------



## Tez3

jks9199 said:


> Folks,
> I'm trying to figure out what the last three pages have to do with Shotokan and self defense.  It's been an informative discussion, and would make a great thread on it's own...



The problem comes when people look to MMA to 'prove' something doesn't or can't work. In MMA you know who your opponent is weeks sometimes months ahead and you can spend a lot of time studying your opponent and their style of fighting in order to plan your tactics, a luxury you don't have when you are attacked and need to use techniques to defend yourself which is where karate comes in, being designed in the first place for civilian empty hand self defence....


----------



## RTKDCMB

Laplace_demon said:


> am not talking about Sumo wrestlers (face palm...)



Then you should have been more specific.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Laplace_demon said:


> Pride and UFC is the closest we have to reality and self defence. Pride in particular.


Meanwhile, in the real world...


----------



## RTKDCMB

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This post may have nothing to do with "Shotokan".
> 
> Not all punches are effective knock down/out punches. But all take down are effective take downs.
> 
> During some valid clinch, the striking won't be effective at that moment.


TMA's (including Shotokan) have had defenses for headlocks from the very beginning.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Drose427 said:


> one of the lowest shots you can do wrestling is an low/swing single, to which a striker can
> 
> A. Knee you
> B. Drop his knee _on_ you (you see this in wrestling if you actually wrestled) and then pound the heck out of you
> C. Sprawl/catch (which most strikers have somewhat of a grasp on, varying degrees) before you get full outside and pummel you hammerfists and uppercuts just like Hackney did in that clip.


D. Drop an elbow on your head or back.
E. Bunch of other stuff.


----------



## Tez3

_Laplace_demon said:                 
"Pride and UFC is the closest we have to reality and self defence. Pride in particular."_

And it's this thinking that is taking away from the discussion of Shotokan and self defence.

No, it's not the closest we have. Pride and UFC are companies, businesses not martial arts styles, the aim is to make money by selling entertainment.
I've already outlined why MMA fights are different from self defence. There's no doubt of course training in a full contact style helps self defence training but in now way does MMA represent a self defence situation. MMA fights are quite artificial in many ways, self defence is very real if you have to use it.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Laplace_demon said:


> Plenty of rules which prohibits strikers toolbox too.



And you still think it is the closest, most realistic method to self defense?


----------



## Laplace_demon

RTKDCMB said:


> And you still think it is the closest, most realistic method to self defense?



Does it accurately reflect the likely outcome between different type of fighters in unarmed combat? For sure. The final results IRL would look pretty much the same. Against weapons it' s bad news which ever style you practise.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Laplace_demon said:


> Does it accurately reflect the likely outcome between different type of fighters in unarmed combat?


No it only accurately reflects the outcome between different types of fighters in a combat sporting environment under a specific rule set..


----------



## Laplace_demon

RTKDCMB said:


> No it only accurately reflects the outcome between different types of fighters in a combat sporting environment under a specific rule set..



Original UFC was no holds barred and the same trend was true...


----------



## RTKDCMB

Laplace_demon said:


> Original UFC was no holds barred and the same trend was true...



The first 4 were to some degree, however;

Both fighters knew exactly when the fight would start.
There was a referee to stop the fight when necessary.
A doctor was on hand.
The environment was controlled.
The fighting surface was designed for safety. 

It was one on one with no possibility of interference or weapons involved.
No legal repercussions.
Both fighters were willing.
Both fighters knew exactly who they were fighting. 
They wore appropriate clothes they were able to select beforehand.
Not exactly like real life. A lot closer to reality than what is is now though.


----------



## Tez3

Sparring for the street from one of my favourite people.
How to Spar for the Street Part 1 by Iain Abernethy Iain Abernethy


----------



## ShotoNoob

RTKDCMB said:


> The first 4 were to some degree, however;
> 
> Both fighters knew exactly when the fight would start.
> There was a referee to stop the fight when necessary.
> A doctor was on hand.
> The environment was controlled.
> The fighting surface was designed for safety.
> 
> It was one on one with no possibility of interference or weapons involved.
> No legal repercussions.
> Both fighters were willing.
> Both fighters knew exactly who they were fighting.
> They wore appropriate clothes they were able to select beforehand.
> Not exactly like real life. A lot closer to reality than what is is now though.


|
Still, within that 'controlled environment,' one is facing an actively-resisting full contact-enabled opponent who may have various & different martial style or styles behind technique.
|
An aspect of control you left out is the legitimacy of the Gracie BJJ-supposed superiority.  Contrast the Gracie dominance against how has the MMA wrestler-grappler opponent fared against Machida's Shotokan-based MMA style....
|
There is a heavy element of promotion @ work in MMA, IMO.


----------



## ShotoNoob

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Now again, I want to preface my vid with some specifics, which is often omitted when these are use for illustration....
> The value of the Heian kata (bunkai) vid I quoted from K_MAN is that it builds this:


|
Upon further investigation, I found the traditional karate style presented in this vid to be Shorei ryu karate.  An Okinawan style of traditional karate which is both / similar / either a predecessor / to Goju ryu.  I myself prefer the emphasis on hard / soft mixture of movement exhibited in Shorei ryu to the  JKA version of Hard, hard hard physicality of Shotokan....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The way that he stands, he extends his arms out much further away from his head than his opponent does. This would give him less striking ability but more grappling ability. His hands will be closer to his opponent's body than his opponent's hands close to his body.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *When you extend your arms out, your opponent's arms have to pass your arms to hit you. That will give you more chance to wrap his arms.*


|
Again, this is where sport-fighting conventions, particularly the drift in sport karate away from traditional principles confuses & masks the power of traditional karate.
|
the hands up form of guard by the Gracie opponent is a boxing, kickboxing convention.  The Gracie guard is more akin to a traditional karate guard.  In Shotokan, the hands typically are held much lower than Gracie is doing.
|
PURPOSE OF THE TRADITIONAL KARATE GUARD:
|
1. The Outstretched Hand Advantage. Just as you stated, the out-stretched hand in the traditional karate guard presents an intercepting barrier against movement(s) on the part of the opponent.  Grappling ,striking, whatever.
|
2. The Outstretched Hand constricts Striking Ability.  Your position is based on sport-fighting methods.  Boxing, Muay thai, etc.  Under these methods your statement is true.  By traditional karate, your statement is FALSE.  The outstretched guard hand works in unison with the reverse striking hand assuming a reverse punch.  furthermore, a traditional karate strike can  be launched with the forward hand.
|
Moreover, sport-fighting is more 1-dimensional in the reactive use of upper body to make strikes.  Under traditional karate, the entire body is  more engaged the offensive / defensive, to which the guard hand is a part, a unit, that contributes & supports the action of the whole.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Steve said:


> First, I want to qualify this by saying that I'm not complianing, and understand completely why this exists.  But this myth that grappling is somehow favored in MMA is just ludicrous....


|
Yeah, this is my overall position when so many touted the superiority of Royce Gracie in the early UFC....
|
BTW: Some of your commentary presents valid commentary of "CAGE" physics and MMA politic's like the WC vid proposes why WC doesn't match well for MMA follow the same analogies.
|
I believe these are factors.  Nonetheless, good striking is going to beat good grappling on par.  I believe Machida's Shotokan-based MMA-record is evidence of that....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Laplace_demon said:


> 1: 34 --http://Keith Hackney Vs Royce Gracie - Video


|
Thanks for putting up this MMA vid.  A great illustration of how a striker (Hackney) COULD have killed the  grappler (R. Grace).
|
For one, R. Gracie's striking never posed any material threat to Hackney.  A very similar rendition to the kickboxer contest I had & wrote about.  Yet again, instead of Traditional Kenpo, we have Hackney backpedalLIN, circling over the Octagon.  huh?
|
Moreover, Hackney struck R. Gracie several times successfully upon Gracie's grappling attempts @ both closing the distance & in tie-ups.  R. Gracie continued completely unscathed....  Full contact or full promotion...?  K. Hackney was touted as an 8th degree Kenpo black-belt.  So much for the belt system, TMA critics would say.  I guess it's at 9th degree in Kenpo we finally are strong enough to knock somebody for a loop!!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

ShotoNoob said:


> 1. The Outstretched Hand Advantage. Just as you stated, the out-stretched hand in the traditional karate guard presents an intercepting barrier against movement(s) on the part of the opponent.  Grappling ,striking, whatever.


The out-stretched arms is also used in Chinese wrestling as well. It serves many advantages such as:

- You try to fight in your opponent's territory instead of to fight in your own territory,
- You don't give your opponent enough free space to generate power and speed for his punch.
- Your fist is close to your opponent's face. This will put him in defense mode.
- You are ready to wrap your opponent as an octopus wraps on a fish.
- You can sense your opponent's intention in the early stage
- You are ready to elbow your opponent any moment.
- ...


----------



## ShotoNoob

KEITH HACKNEY VS. TRADITIONAL KENPO.
|
The body & arm techniques work as a complete, integrated synchronized unit.  The TMA guard is a component of that unit.  Not in isolation, like the shell & cover boxing, conventional MMA guard....
Traditional Kenpo Beginner Form.




|
EDIT: BTW--This kenpo artist is training "mental clarity" big time in this form....
|
EDIT 2ND: Now contrast the movement taught in this Kenpo form to the running-all-around by *the nth degree Kenpo black-belt* Keith Hackney in the UFC / R. Gracie vid.  Hackney would fail the Kenpo short-form exam.  Maybe that's why he lost....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The out-stretched arms is also used in Chinese wrestling as well. It serves many advantage....


|
Agreed 100%.


----------



## ShotoNoob

PROGRESSION IN TRADITIONAL KENPO:
|
The Kenpo Short form (shown first) teaches mental clarity?  Now once that is mastered, we transition to this.
AMERICAN KENPO Longer Form:




|
American Kenpo is a style of traditional karate I like.  I think it's complicated, which can be a benefit and / or detriment.
|
Hackney vs. Royce Gracie Fight Point:
|
Contrast the movement supporting execution of technique in this fundamental Kenpo form to Keith Hackney's wild slapping swing way out of position & off balance against Royce Gracie--a total & complete whiffff.......  And i wouldn't call this an 8th degree black-belt form either....


----------



## ShotoNoob

WHEN DOES TANG SOO DO STOP BECOMING TANG SOO DO?
|
not here.  Traditional karate doesn't need to be physically complicated like Kenpo.  It does require presence of mind, mental clarity.
Here is the movement in the Kenpo forms, isolated to concentrate on application.




|
Keith Hackney did actually clock Royce Gracie with an uppercut.  WOW, in applied Tang Soo Do.  Guard hand moves to block ward off Gracie grab, step back to avoid clinch up, and counter to open target.  What else is going on here.  Not the simpleton stuff boxer's, Sport fighters see @ all.


----------



## Laplace_demon

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Thanks for putting up this MMA vid.  A great illustration of how a striker (Hackney) COULD have killed the  grappler (R. Grace).
> |!



Yes. He's a prime example of a natural born fighter.

According to reports, the Muay Thai fighter in this clip did not know BJJ at the time of the fight.






BJJ is easier for strikers than Greco Roman or Submission Wrestling. Wrestlers tend to be bigger, train takedowns far more than grapplers, so getting close is almost impossible.


----------



## Tez3

Pointless replying on here as the subject has got even further away from the OP. We've got posts of every style except Shotokan and we are back to MMA again. Unless we can get back to Shotokan it's a waste of time.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Shotokan is striking, in case you didn't know.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> Shotokan is striking, in case you didn't know.



Actually, it's not just striking, we've been through all this before and the OP is Shotokan for self defence...in case you didn't know.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Tez3 said:


> Actually, it's not just striking, we've been through all this before and the OP is Shotokan for self defence...in case you didn't know.



It's primarily a striking art. That's what people learn it for. If you don't think grappling is common in self defence scenarios, you really have no clue. BJJ has revolutionised the martial arts world. Expect the guy to know BJJ, if you are unfortunate enough to actually face a fellow martial artist.


----------



## Tez3




----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Upon further investigation, I found the traditional karate style presented in this vid to be Shorei ryu karate.  An Okinawan style of traditional karate which is both / similar / either a predecessor / to Goju ryu.  I myself prefer the emphasis on hard / soft mixture of movement exhibited in Shorei ryu to the  JKA version of Hard, hard hard physicality of Shotokan....


I pulled out of this thread long ago but I can't let this go. In another thread a member was talking about history being made up. Well Shorei Ryu would seem to back up this line of thought. It is nothing to do with Goju Ryu and I doubt it has much to do with Okinawa even. As to being hard/soft ... there was no soft in that choreographed representation..


----------



## Tez3

K-man said:


> I pulled out of this thread long ago



I'm off too, I can't be bothered arguing against made up 'facts'. My ailurophilia is kicking in anyway and I need to attend to that.


----------



## K-man

Tez3 said:


> I'm off too, I can't be bothered arguing against made up 'facts'. My ailurophilia is kicking in anyway and I need to attend to that.


Personally, I'm more of a cynophilist.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> I pulled out of this thread long ago but I can't let this go. In another thread a member was talking about history being made up. Well Shorei Ryu would seem to back up this line of thought. It is nothing to do with Goju Ryu and I doubt it has much to do with Okinawa even. As to being hard/soft ... there was no soft in that choreographed representation..


|
Instead of pointing out what I said it isn't, why don't you point out what it is?


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> Pointless replying on here as the subject has got even further away from the OP. We've got posts of every style except Shotokan and we are back to MMA again. Unless we can get back to Shotokan it's a waste of time.


\
The point is traditional karate, Shotokan, is not best viewed in a vacuum.  Tying concepts and traditions in Shotokan to various fighting circumstances is what the whole concept of a blog is about.  IMO.


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Instead of pointing out what I said it isn't, why don't you point out what it is?


How can I point out what it is? As far as I can tell the name comes from a series of mistakes. It isn't a style of Okinawan karate and it has nothing to do with the Okinawan form of karate based on Shori-Te that was practised in Shuri. It definitely has nothing to do with Naha-Te so to call it Goju Ryu is just wrong. 

Looking at the guys who practise a style of karate called Shorei-Ryu reveals a claim to a history that is dubious to say the least. 

The misunderstanding seems to have arisen from the similarity in the words Shorinji-ryu (Shorin [Shaolin] Temple Style) and Shoreiji-ryu (Shorei Temple Style) from China.

I don't want to waste time discussing it further in this thread as this thread is totally off track already.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Sparring for the street from one of my favourite people.
> How to Spar for the Street Part 1 by Iain Abernethy Iain Abernethy



Provided a real fight does not step outside the boundaries of the accepted real fight dogma. Seems just as restrictive as competition without using a true scientific process.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> \
> The point is traditional karate, Shotokan, is not best viewed in a vacuum.  Tying concepts and traditions in Shotokan to various fighting circumstances is what the whole concept of a blog is about.  IMO.



Actually, the subject that is supposed to be under discussion is the Shotokan style of karate, discussing other styles without even mentioning Shotokan is pointless. This is a discussion NOT a blog.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Going back to the original post from the threadmaker - Whoever discards Shotokan as being rubbish, yet promote some other Karate style of the same era, is really making a distinction without a difference. Sure,  Kata differs greatly between styles, but how in the world are Kata nuances related to Self Defence? You either accept these older Karate styles or you don't. At their core, it's all Okinawan/Japanese Karate. Period!


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> Going back to the original post from the threadmaker - Whoever discards Shotokan as being rubbish, yet promote some other Karate style of the same era, is really making a distinction without a difference. Sure,  Kata differs greatly between styles, but how in the world are Kata nuances related to Self Defence? You either accept these older Karate styles or you don't. At their core, it's all Okinawan/Japanese Karate. Period!


 
Nah.


----------



## K-man

Laplace_demon said:


> Going back to the original post from the threadmaker - Whoever discards Shotokan as being rubbish, yet promote some other Karate style of the same era, is really making a distinction without a difference. Sure,  Kata differs greatly between styles, but how in the world are Kata nuances related to Self Defence? You either accept these older Karate styles or you don't. At their core, it's all Okinawan/Japanese Karate. Period!


That would be me  and after nearly 1000 posts you have missed entirely the point of the OP.


----------



## Laplace_demon

K-man said:


> That would be me  and after nearly 1000 posts you have missed entirely the point of the OP.



I have not read these 1000 posts of which you speak! And I made a general point.


----------



## drop bear

Lets focus back on the O.P.

From the article.

"Mary-Beth Macaluso (above) began her shotokan training 17 years ago so she could protect herself and strengthen her muscles. After training for several years, she discovered that the seemingly endless repetitions of punches, kicks and blocks made her more aware of her surroundings. “By training consistently and often, you become increasingly aware,” the second-degree black belt says. “It becomes like an instinct.”

So in regards to awareness I obviously have that as part of my training as well. Because I do seemingly endless combinations.

Which would be fun to claim. But how on earth does anybody make that logical link?


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> Lets focus back on the O.P.
> 
> From the article.
> 
> "Mary-Beth Macaluso (above) began her shotokan training 17 years ago so she could protect herself and strengthen her muscles. After training for several years, she discovered that the seemingly endless repetitions of punches, kicks and blocks made her more aware of her surroundings. “By training consistently and often, you become increasingly aware,” the second-degree black belt says. “It becomes like an instinct.”
> 
> So in regards to awareness I obviously have that as part of my training as well. Because I do seemingly endless combinations.
> 
> Which would be fun to claim. But how on earth does anybody make that logical link?



You cannot recieve training in that which is unavoidable and automatic - perception (awareness). Not that she isn't deluded, she might very well be. It's just that your analogy is not without it flaws.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Lets focus back on the O.P.
> 
> From the article.
> 
> "Mary-Beth Macaluso (above) began her shotokan training 17 years ago so she could protect herself and strengthen her muscles. After training for several years, she discovered that the seemingly endless repetitions of punches, kicks and blocks made her more aware of her surroundings. “By training consistently and often, you become increasingly aware,” the second-degree black belt says. “It becomes like an instinct.”
> 
> So in regards to awareness I obviously have that as part of my training as well. Because I do seemingly endless combinations.
> 
> Which would be fun to claim. But how on earth does anybody make that logical link?


From my point of view it is totally illogical. To me it is more someone claiming a benefit from repetitive training that simply isn't there and the quote is really at odds with the rest of the article which is saying that there is other training in Shotokan beyond the kihon.


----------



## K-man

Laplace_demon said:


> I have not read these 1000 posts of which you speak! And I made a general point.


Then perhaps that might be a good thing to do if you wish to add informed comment to the discussion. 


Laplace_demon said:


> Going back to the original post from the threadmaker - Whoever discards Shotokan as being rubbish, yet promote some other Karate style of the same era, is really making a distinction without a difference. Sure,  Kata differs greatly between styles, but how in the world are Kata nuances related to Self Defence? You either accept these older Karate styles or you don't. At their core, it's all Okinawan/Japanese Karate. Period!


So what is the general point remembering I was the original 'thread maker'?

"Whoever discards Shotokan as being rubbish, yet promote some other Karate style of the same era, is really making a distinction without a difference."

Not at all. Okinawan karate from the same era is totally different. Wado Ryu karate is totally different. For openers, these styles have much more grappling than most Shotokan.

"Sure,  Kata differs greatly between styles, but how in the world are Kata nuances related to Self Defence?"

They aren't. It is the kata bunkai that is related to self defence and that was the point of the OP. 

"You either accept these older Karate styles or you don't."

OK, another point of difference. Shotokan in its present form is a recent style of Karate formed by the JKA in 1949, not an older one. 

"At their core, it's all Okinawan/Japanese Karate. Period!"

Oh boy! That was the purpose of my other thread. You obviously didn't read that one either. Okinawan and Japanese Karate are as different as oranges and bananas.


----------



## K-man

Laplace_demon said:


> You cannot recieve training in that which is unavoidable and automatic - perception (awareness). Not that she isn't deluded, she might very well be. It's just that your analogy is not without it flaws.


The analogy, to my reading, was irony.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Shotokan has always included grappling and throws, it's in the Kata. Many instructors have simply ignored it and soley focused on extracting the punch/kick style that most people associate with Karate. But again, it's part of the techniques in Katas. Most of the Karate styles are a mixture of each other, with great overlaps. The only fundamental difference is in emphasis.

Wado Ryu is an exception being a Jujitsu version of Karate, developed by a jujitsu guy who had been taught Karate (Shotokan) There might be others too.

As for the analogy I commented on: It may have been purposely ironic, but with no justification, since sofisticated punching kicking and blocking is not unavoidable and automatic repeated training. You don't kick and and punch automatically every breathing moment of your life.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> Wado Ryu is an exception being a Jujitsu version of Karate, developed by a jujitsu guy who had been taught Karate (Shotokan) There might be others too.




Okay, why can't you just post what is true instead of twisting things to suit whatever argument you are promoting? Wado Ryu isn't a jujitsu version of karate " developed by a jujitsu guy who had been taught Karate", really must you always disrespect karate masters? A 'guy', really? That's the founder of Wado Ryu you are talking about, an amazing man who studied martial arts ie he was a martial artist who didn't waste his time blathering about things he knew nothing about. When are you actually going to do research before writing these things down, you manage to disrespect so many, you go back on what you said and argue the opposite, really I don't know how you have time for any training which is what you should be doing instead of coming on here spouting your nonsense.


----------



## Laplace_demon

What did I write which isn't true? Please, do tell. Everything I wrote was from a factual perspective true. If you want to go down this path of differentiation, as the threadmaker did, then Wado Ryu is the least similiar style. Cry me a river.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> What did I write which isn't true? Please, do tell. Everything I wrote was from a factual perspective true. If you want to go down this path of differentiation, as the threadmaker did, then Wado Ryu is the least similiar style. Cry me a river.



More unintelligible sentences,  if you can't stay on the subject of the OP why don't you start your own threads? I will make a  positive effort not read them, then post up whatever I think will make me sound intelligent as well as hopefully disrespecting and insulting every other poster.


----------



## Laplace_demon

I am staying on the topic. There is no point to single out Shotokan. There are watered down Goju Ryu schools, with the exact same critical voices against them as against Shotokan. Learning Shotokan or Goju Ryu doesn't really matter for self defence, what matters is the school, and they are in no way different in this regard.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Laplace_demon said:


> Whoever discards Shotokan as being rubbish, yet promote some other Karate style of the same era, is really making a distinction without a difference. Sure, Kata differs greatly between styles, but how in the world are Kata nuances related to Self Defence? You either accept these older Karate styles or you don't. At their core, it's all Okinawan/Japanese Karate. Period!


That might make some sense if all the older Karate styles were the same, but they are not. You would have to accept or deny each style on a case by case basis otherwise you are just making sweeping generalizations.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> *I have not read these 1000 posts* of which you speak! And *I made a general point*.



Enough said.


----------



## Laplace_demon

A case by case investigation will reveal that they are all doing Karate and that the differences are not crucial to SD.  Even Shotokan and Shorin Ryu overlap. Shotokan is of course derrived from it too. Really, it's all Karate.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Furthermore, Goju Ryu (Okinawan style) and Shotokan (Japanese style) fighters are indistinguishable from each other in Point Fighting Kumite. Shotokan Karatekas have been more successful in Championships overall. Some would argue that the Shotokan emphasis lends it self specifically to excelling in Kumite Point Fighting, but not in street fights.


----------



## Tez3




----------



## Hanzou

Laplace_demon said:


> Going back to the original post from the threadmaker - Whoever discards Shotokan as being rubbish, yet promote some other Karate style of the same era, is really making a distinction without a difference. Sure,  Kata differs greatly between styles, but how in the world are Kata nuances related to Self Defence? You either accept these older Karate styles or you don't. At their core, it's all Okinawan/Japanese Karate. Period!



That wasn't really the point of the OP. The point of the OP was attempting to create a laughable argument that sparring and fighting isn't conducive to self defense, yet doing what amounts to dancing in patterns will make you a true karate warrior.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> yet doing what amounts to dancing in patterns


And who dances in patterns exactly?


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> And who dances in patterns exactly?








^^ Dancing in patterns.

It looks pretty, but its not so great for self defense.


----------



## K-man

No one needs me anymore. Good night gents.


----------



## Tez3

RTKDCMB said:


> And who dances in patterns exactly?



Exactly, but this thread has succumbed to trolls, explaining anything now to people who don't want to listen, who won't keep an open mind is pointless. As Mark Twain said, one should never argue with idiots ( or 'know alls') because they will beat you down with their experience every time.


----------



## Hanzou

Sorry, but anyone who says that form training is the path towards competency in self defense is simply blowing smoke up someone's butt. If that someone goes on to say that form training is a *better* tool for self defense training than actually fighting/sparring, that person isn't worth training with.

Get your money back and learn martial arts somewhere else.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> ^^ Dancing in patterns.
> 
> It looks pretty, but its not so great for self defense.


So where is the dancing?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Sorry, but anyone who says that form training is the path towards competency in self defense is simply blowing smoke up someone's butt.



Or someone who does not know the first thing about form training and has made a hasty generalization based on limited experience and a lack of understanding.



Hanzou said:


> If that someone goes on to say that form training is a *better* tool for self defense training than actually fighting/sparring, that person isn't worth training with.Get your money back and learn martial arts somewhere else.



You sound as though you think forms training is used in self defense training INSTEAD of fighting/sparring. It is not.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> Sorry, but anyone who says that form training is the path towards competency in self defense is simply blowing smoke up someone's butt. If that someone goes on to say that form training is a *better* tool for self defense training than actually fighting/sparring, that person isn't worth training with.
> 
> Get your money back and learn martial arts somewhere else.



I don't recall anybody ever saying such a thing. It has been said that forms are ONE path towards competency. That you don't understand that path does not invalidate it.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> You sound as though you think forms training is used in self defense training INSTEAD of fighting/sparring. It is not.



That is the impression I got. I know kyokashin guys who do forms but will also legitimately bang your head off as well.

I can test what they do in alive training. And suggest that at least their method has merit.

But I really assumed we have an element of too deadly to spar or it is not a viable testing method.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> That is the impression I got. I know kyokashin guys who do forms but will also legitimately bang your head off as well.
> 
> I can test what they do in alive training. And suggest that at least their method has merit.
> 
> But I really assumed we have an element of too deadly to spar or it is not a viable testing method.



Kyokushin freestyle Kumite is crippled by not allowing punches to the face. Japanese Karate Association torneys are fought bare fisted and stop after the first blow, attempting to reflect one punch one kill principle, instead of continous sparring, which wouldnt happen IRL.


----------



## Gnarlie

Laplace_demon said:


> Kyokushin freestyle Kumite is crippled by not allowing punches to the face. Japanese Karate Association torneys are fought bare fisted and stop after the first blow, attempting to reflect one punch one kill principle, instead of continous sparring, which wouldnt happen IRL.


That's an ambiguous sentence structure, are you saying one hit or continuous wouldn't happen in real life?


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Kyokushin freestyle Kumite is crippled by not allowing punches to the face. Japanese Karate Association torneys are fought bare fisted and stop after the first blow, attempting to reflect one punch one kill principle, instead of continous sparring, which wouldnt happen IRL.



They face punch and continuously spar when they spar us.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> They face punch and continuously spar when they spar us.



Any style who can chest punch can face punch, and I've never heard of a school whose regular sparring isn't continuous.

The only real issue that _could _arise is the "they can't take Punches to the face!" Argument. But frankly, if you can take a kick to the head you're gonna be able to take punches too


----------



## drop bear

This was something that was mentioned to me. If you want to test under a ruleset that you feel is more believable. Then go do that. 

If you think bare knuckle hard surface to the death is better preparation. Train in that manner but it still has to be contested.

Because that is how you know if an idea works.

 Don't just abandon live training for conjecture.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Any style who can chest punch can face punch, and I've never heard of a school whose regular sparring isn't continuous.
> 
> The only real issue that _could _arise is the "they can't take Punches to the face!" Argument. But frankly, if you can take a kick to the head you're gonna be able to take punches too



Easy way to find out. You don't have to guess.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Gnarlie said:


> That's an ambiguous sentence structure, are you saying one hit or continuous wouldn't happen in real life?


 
I didn't know "*instead of *continious sparring*,*.", was ambigious.... At any event, it will not be continious sparring on the street, and that includes between boxers with no gloves. One will go down and the rest is technical.  There will not be two guys bouncing around on the street either. JKA allows punches and kicks to the head and body.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> A case by case investigation will reveal that they are all doing Karate and that *the differences are not crucial to SD.*  Even Shotokan and Shorin Ryu overlap. Shotokan is of course derrived from it too. Really, it's all Karate.



I gotta admit, I agree with the boldened and enlarged part,,,,,and now I gotta go rinse the throwup out of my mouth...(now I gotta go find an animated barfing smiley-I miss that guy too!)


----------



## Gnarlie

Laplace_demon said:


> I didn't know "*instead of *continious sparring*,*.", was ambigious.... At any event, it will not be continious sparring on the street, and that includes between boxers with no gloves. One will go down and the rest is technical.  There will not be two guys bouncing around on the street either. JKA allows punches and kicks to the head and body.



The 'which' was ambiguous.

Every instance of violence I have personally experienced has gone beyond the first hit. Way beyond.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Or someone who does not know the first thing about form training and has made a hasty generalization based on limited experience and a lack of understanding.



Or someone who has both trained in forms and has consistently seen the sub-par results of form training.



> You sound as though you think forms training is used in self defense training INSTEAD of fighting/sparring. It is not.



That's not what the OP states.


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> I don't recall anybody ever saying such a thing. It has been said that forms are ONE path towards competency. That you don't understand that path does not invalidate it.



The OP very clearly states that it's the main path, at least in Shotokan.

In reality, it's a path to get your face caved in. But hey, to each their own.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Or someone who has both trained in forms and has consistently seen the sub-par results of form training.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not what the OP states.



You really should stop claiming to understand proper forms training when youve consistently had to have proper forms and bunkai training explained to you. That was actually one of your first posts on this forum.

As for sub par training from forms guys....

Do we really need to run through the list of professional fighters who not only do forms but stand by them?

Of the forms guys who have defended themselves?

Anyone who's dances through forms (or thinks thats all we're doing when doing a form) really doesn't have a grasp on what they are and shouldn't claim to.

That like saying shadow practice in Boxing or kick boxing is dancing.


----------



## Steve

drop bear said:


> This was something that was mentioned to me. If you want to test under a ruleset that you feel is more believable. Then go do that.
> 
> If you think bare knuckle hard surface to the death is better preparation. Train in that manner but it still has to be contested.
> 
> Because that is how you know if an idea works.
> 
> Don't just abandon live training for conjecture.


This is a really, really good point and I'm glad you said it, drop bear.  We all have opinions about HOW to test our training.  Rules are there to ensure that you don't, you know, actually kill your training partner. 

But can't we all agree we must test in some way?  

And while our opinions may vary about what can be gained from forms, can we all agree that forms aren't an effective test?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Hanzou said:


> The OP very clearly states that it's the main path, at least in Shotokan.
> 
> In reality, it's a path to get your face caved in. But hey, to each their own.



And yet, I am involved in violent confrontations on a regular basis, and somehow manage to avoid getting my face caved in. 

This, despite training in exactly the way you claim cannot work.

How do you suppose I have managed this?


----------



## Steve

Dirty Dog said:


> And yet, I am involved in violent confrontations on a regular basis, and somehow manage to avoid getting my face caved in.
> 
> This, despite training in exactly the way you claim cannot work.
> 
> How do you suppose I have managed this?


Luck?


----------



## Drose427

Steve said:


> This is a really, really good point and I'm glad you said it, drop bear.  We all have opinions about HOW to test our training.  Rules are there to ensure that you don't, you know, actually kill your training partner.
> 
> But can't we all agree we must test in some way?
> 
> And while our opinions may vary about what can be gained from forms, can we all agree that forms aren't an effective test?



By themselves yeah,

But nobody's said forms alone are

I mean, forms aren't meant to be standalone exercies, they never were.

That's the disconnect here, people thinking ANYONEs claiming they are


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> You really should stop claiming to understand proper forms training when youve consistently had to have proper forms and bunkai training explained to you. That was actually one of your first posts on this forum.
> 
> As for sub par training from forms guys....
> 
> Do we really need to run through the list of professional fighters who not only do forms but stand by them?
> 
> Of the forms guys who have defended themselves?
> 
> Anyone who's dances through forms (or thinks thats all we're doing when doing a form) really doesn't have a grasp on what they are and shouldn't claim to.
> 
> That like saying shadow practice in Boxing or kick boxing is dancing.



Please point out the professional fighters who place kata training OVER sparring/randori.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> Please point out the professional fighters who place kata training OVER sparring/randori.



Please point out the post where ANYONE has put  stand alone Kata as some dominant or mystical method


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Please point out the post where ANYONE has put  stand alone Kata as some dominant or mystical method



You didn't read the article in the OP?


----------



## Hanzou

Dirty Dog said:


> And yet, I am involved in violent confrontations on a regular basis, and somehow manage to avoid getting my face caved in.
> 
> This, despite training in exactly the way you claim cannot work.
> 
> How do you suppose I have managed this?



Anecdotal evidence is the best evidence right?


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> You didn't read the article in the OP?



The article also says they are only one method.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> You didn't read the article in the OP?



And again, OP isn't talking about doing forms as a stand alone drill.


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> By themselves yeah,
> 
> But nobody's said forms alone are
> 
> I mean, forms aren't meant to be standalone exercies, they never were.
> 
> That's the disconnect here, people thinking ANYONEs claiming they are


 I'm just pointing out that we all agree on some things.  There is common ground here.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> By themselves yeah,
> 
> But nobody's said forms alone are
> 
> I mean, forms aren't meant to be standalone exercies, they never were.
> 
> That's the disconnect here, people thinking ANYONEs claiming they are



I think it was the validity of forms is backed up by bunkai.

I haven't really ever seen bunkai trained in alive enough manner to satisfy me. Not in the same way that you could equate sparring to.

Contested,unpredictable,contact. Those sorts of things.

The closest I have seen to the description of an alive contact bunkai would be a kickboxing Dutch drill. Which is of course not bunkai and does not stem from kata. And is still a drill to a certain extent. It plays its part but is not an alive test.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hanzou said:


> Or someone who has both trained in forms and has consistently seen the sub-par results of form training.


I have trained in form all my life and I agree with you. You can only use form training to "polish" your combat skill. You cannot use it to "develop" your combat skill.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> I think it was the validity of forms is backed up by bunkai.
> 
> I haven't really ever seen bunkai trained in alive enough manner to satisfy me. Not in the same way that you could equate sparring to.
> 
> Contested,unpredictable,contact. Those sorts of things.
> 
> The closest I have seen to the description of an alive contact bunkai would be a kickboxing Dutch drill. Which is of course not bunkai and does not stem from kata. And is still a drill to a certain extent. It plays its part but is not an alive test.



It isn't too difficult to find a school practicing bunkai like that, that's how we do it at our school

Beginners do only one step at full speed well within range of getting hurt,
Then as they get used to that they start doing them on an opponent attacking in more of a boxing style, and having their partner come at them with a certain technique.

Bunkai Practice is Drilling, 

Just like the kind you'd do in an MMA gym,

But it isn't sparring


----------



## Drose427

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I have trained in form all my life and I agree with you. You can only use form training to "polish" your combat skill. You cannot use it to "develop" your combat skill.



Which is why forms have to be a part of other exercises and methods

Its just like shadow sparring in boxing


----------



## Laplace_demon

Gnarlie said:


> The 'which' was ambiguous.
> 
> Every instance of violence I have personally experienced has gone beyond the first hit. Way beyond.




 I am talking about World Class Shotokan Karatekas. That's their objective. One strike - maximum explosiveness, minimal effort and movement. You didn't happen to fight one of those, did you?

 Kind of like this:


----------



## Gnarlie

Laplace_demon said:


> I didn't know "*instead of *continious sparring*,*.", was ambigious.... At any event, it will not be continious sparring on the street, and that includes between boxers with no gloves. One will go down and the rest is technical.  There will not be two guys bouncing around on the street either. JKA allows punches and kicks to the head and body.






Laplace_demon said:


> I am talking about World Class Shotokan Karatekas. That's their objective. One strike - maximum explosiveness, minimal effort and movement. You didn't happen to fight one of those, did you?
> 
> Kind of like this:



That is a far cry from how real violence works, and relying on a single hit to end a confrontation would be folly.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> I am talking about World Class Shotokan Karatekas. That's their objective. One strike - maximum explosiveness, minimal effort and movement. You didn't happen to fight one of those, did you?
> 
> Kind of like this:



......did you even watch the video? Most of the guys keep attacking till the guy starts to drop or the ref has them stop....


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> The article also says they are only one method.



The article is titled "For self defense, there's no art better than Shotokan". Then it goes on to say that Shotokan practitioners get the majority of self defense training from forms. People who disagree are simply "beginners".


----------



## Hanzou

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I have trained in form all my life and I agree with you. You can only use form training to "polish" your combat skill. You cannot use it to "develop" your combat skill.



Thanks. I'm glad someone is getting the gist of what i'm saying.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> The article is titled "For self defense, there's no art better than Shotokan". Then it goes on to say that Shotokan practitioners get the majority of self defense training from forms. People who disagree are simply "beginners".



And the Gracie's made up statistics to propagandize their style

And no the article says most students take SD techs from forms. Which they do, and then drill them on a non compliant partner. Which is the point of forms. This is what youve never understood.

And no, the author didn't say anyone who disagreed was a beginner. He said most beginners don't see the connection between practicing forms and then drilling bunkai.

Proper form training is literally the same thing as learning a boxing combination, then mixing shadow boxing as individual practice with sparring with a partner.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> ......did you even watch the video? Most of the guys keep attacking till the guy starts to drop or the ref has them stop....



That's what they strive for. Not everbody can achieve it. Everyhing flashy is concidered waisteful energy. Conservation is key. Interesting philosophy. Hard to master.


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> That's what they strive for. Not everbody can achieve it. Everyhing flashy is concidered waisteful energy. Conservation is key. Interesting philosophy. Hard to master.



And nearly every boxer is aiming to hit the button or common KO spots to end it in the first round.

But they strike until they get it.

As does shotokan,

Acting like trying to end the fight in a move or two is bad because its shotokan, when its also a mindset found in Boxing/Kick boxing/MMA, it just ignorant


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> And nearly every boxer is aiming to hit the button or common KO spots to end it in the first round.
> 
> But they strike until they get it.
> 
> As does shotokan,
> 
> Acting like trying to end the fight in a move or two is bad because its shotokan, when its also a mindset found in Boxing/Kick boxing/MMA, it just ignorant



Punches in bunches seems like a different mindset to one hit one kill.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> And nearly every boxer is aiming to hit the button or common KO spots to end it in the first round.
> 
> But they strike until they get it.
> 
> As does shotokan,
> 
> Acting like trying to end the fight in a move or two is bad because its shotokan, when its also a mindset found in Boxing/Kick boxing/MMA, it just ignorant



Boxers don't hit the same. They use more of their body and telegraph more. I just trained Makiwara with my dad and he achieves 99% of his power by speed and last second increase, also tightening the fist.   He was chocked how explosive I could hit it (I have been out of the martial arts world for many years) after just my second try, and said he had to come watch me train TKD. This is a guy whos' coach in the National Team in JKA was* Ilija Jorga. *I really don't want him there because of the pressure.....


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Punches in bunches seems like a different mindset to one hit one kill.



The one hiy one kill principle is better explained as targeting the Vital Spots.

Liver shots, kidneys, button on chin, nerve in jaw, etc. But the "keep attacking till they're down" is also taught pretty heavily.

Basically, THERE IS NO MERCY IN THIS DOJO.



Laplace_demon said:


> Boxers don't hit the same. They use more of their body and telegraph more. I just trained Makiwara with my dad and he achieves 99% of his power by speed and last second increase, also tightening the fist.   He was chocked how explosive I could hit it (I have been out of the martial arts world for many years) after just my second try, and said he had to come watch me train TKD. This is a guy whos' coach in the National Team in JKA was* Ilija Jorga. *I really don't want him there because of the pressure.....



If your dad is getting 99% of his power from sheer speed instead of using waist and other concepts Funakoshi laid out for Shotokan, that's his fault, not shotokan.

Anyways, I used boxing to nullify your point about I'll kyuk. You can argue differences in technique with yourselves all day if you want. It has nothing to do with the point I made


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> And the Gracie's made up statistics to propagandize their style



They proved the effectiveness of their style to all doubters by having open challenge matches, culminating in the first UFC. That's what propagandized their style, not boasts of being undefeated in X amount of street fights.

I would love to see a traditionally trained karateka like the OP enter a NHB competition and take on all comers. However, we both know that's never going to happen for whatever reason.



> Proper form training is literally the same thing as learning a boxing combination, then mixing shadow boxing as individual practice with sparring with a partner.



The difference between a boxer shadowboxing and a karateka doing forms is that the boxer is using the same techniques you'd see in the ring. Karateka doing a form, and karateka sparring is like night and day. It literally looks like two entirely different martial arts.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> They proved the effectiveness of their style to all doubters by having open challenge matches, culminating in the first UFC. That's what propagandized their style, not boasts of being undefeated in X amount of street fights.
> 
> I would love to see a traditionally trained karateka like the OP enter a NHB competition and take on all comers. However, we both know that's never going to happen for whatever reason.
> 
> 
> 
> The difference between a boxer shadowboxing and a karateka doing forms is that the boxer is using the same techniques you'd see in the ring. Karateka doing a form, and karateka sparring is like night and day. It literally looks like two entirely different martial arts.



Claims are claims

They also stopped competing when people started cross training and when strikers learned to counter BJJ(as no one had seen it before) they weren't nearly as dominate.

Several Traditionally trained Karatekas have been successful in MMA(after having more grappling training yes)

Even more have been majorly successful in kick boxing without much real tweaking to their style.

And because half the techniques in forms are illegal in sparring......elbows, knees, throws in many comps, gouges, etc.

But not in Bunkai Training or SD, where you will see Karateka Fight like in forms.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Hanzou said:


> The difference between a boxer shadowboxing and a karateka doing forms is that the boxer is using the same techniques you'd see in the ring. Karateka doing a form, and karateka sparring is like night and day. It literally looks like two entirely different martial arts.


If you have "partner drills", you will have "solo drills" when partner is not available. If you link your "solo drills" together, you will have "solo training" and it will look just like you are fighting. Unfortunately, most of the forms were not created this way. Why spend time in traditional forms training if you can get much better result from the "solo training" that you have created for yourself?


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> Claims are claims



Yeah, but it wasn't the claims that made the style popular, it was the Gracies stepping up to the plate, putting it all on the line, and choking people out.



> They also stopped competing when people started cross training and when strikers learned to counter BJJ(as no one had seen it before) they weren't nearly as dominate.



Not necessarily. The older Gracies continued to compete long after they stopped competing in the UFC. Rickson, Royce and Renzo fought a lot in Japan and other NHB events. The younger Gracies tend to compete in Bjj-only competitions, and both groups actively train MMA fighters, since MMA fighters still train at Bjj gyms to enhance their grappling.

I don't really see how we ended up talking about the Gracies, but whatever.



> Several Traditionally trained Karatekas have been successful in MMA(after having more grappling training yes)



Which isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about someone like the author of the article in the OP showing us what pure karate can do against another trained fighter. Those MMA fighters have cross-trained heavily in Bjj, Wrestling, Muay Thai, etc. They would laugh at what that article says.



> And because half the techniques in forms are illegal in sparring......elbows, knees, throws in many comps, gouges, etc.



So how come MMA fighters can practice those exact same movements in relative safety?



> But not in Bunkai Training or SD, where you will see Karateka Fight like in forms.



Nice doge. Again, a shadowboxer is doing pretty much exactly the same thing you'd see a boxer do in a ring. A karateka doing a kata looks nothing like a karateka sparring. You made the comparison, now feel free to explain this bizarre discrepancy.


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> Claims are claims
> 
> They also stopped competing when people started cross training and when strikers learned to counter BJJ(as no one had seen it before) they weren't nearly as dominate.
> 
> Several Traditionally trained Karatekas have been successful in MMA(after having more grappling training yes)
> 
> Even more have been majorly successful in kick boxing without much real tweaking to their style.
> 
> And because half the techniques in forms are illegal in sparring......elbows, knees, throws in many comps, gouges, etc.
> 
> But not in Bunkai Training or SD, where you will see Karateka Fight like in forms.


 Would you please stop talking about BJJ as though it was founded by some native tribe deep in the Amazonian jungle who had no contact with the outside world prior to UFC 1? 

BJJ, as a style, has been around longer than Shotokan Karate.  It wasn't unknown before 1993.  And BJJ is "Basically Just Judo."  In the first few UFCs there were high level judoka, shoot fighters and sambo practitioners, all with a firm grounding (no pun intended) in grappling.


----------



## elder999

Steve said:


> Would you please stop talking about BJJ as though it was founded by some native tribe deep in the Amazonian jungle who had no contact with the outside world prior to UFC 1?
> 
> BJJ, as a style, has been around longer than Shotokan Karate.  It wasn't unknown before 1993.  *And BJJ is "Basically Just Judo." * In the first few UFCs there were high level judoka, shoot fighters and sambo practitioners, all with a firm grounding (no pun intended) in grappling.


*QFT*


----------



## elder999

K-man said:


> In an earlier thread a member who claims to be 'highly ranked' in Shotokan was rubbishing it as being pretty much useless for 'real' fighting. My view has been that Shotokan, like most Japanese karate, has moved away from its roots in to a more competition based style of karate but here is an opinion that I came across that gives an alternate opinion.
> 
> We have had numerous discussions on the value of kata, or forms, and again,  our 'highly ranked' Shotokan practitioner is dismissive of any value of the kata.
> 
> The author of this article has a different view ...
> 
> Hmm! Those of you who have been around MT for some time might recall my comments on _advanced beginners_.



Self-defense is not about free sparring. It's also been my experience that you don't necessarily "fight the way you train." How do I know this?

I boxed, but I never kicked anyone in the boxing ring, or punched anyone in the face in kyokushin free-fighting (which is not "sparring")......I competed at judo, but I never threw or arm-barred a boxing opponent......those are all *contests*-a game, basically, and one follows treh rules because one wants to play....I've done all of those things, and more, in "self defense" situations...

Self defense is about mindset, (AGAIN!!) aand mindset is not, and should not be trained by playing a game-though they do have their benefits, even benefits that extend to self-defense..

Kata training, btw, is  excellent for mindset-it also encodes some basic self-defense truths. One example being that ingrains a response to the tunnel-vision effect of being adrenalized-the formulators of some kata (not just Shotokan) knew of this effect, and, though they wouldn't have usedt he same language for it, they did know how to ameliorate it's effects, and mitigate the inherent hazards...this is one of the things kata can do for us.

We now return you to your regular "MMA ground and pound" troll-fest.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> You can argue differences in technique with yourselves all day if you want. It has nothing to do with the point I made



Yes it does. He does not train follow ups. A boxer does.


----------



## Hanzou

elder999 said:


> Self-defense is not about free sparring. It's also been my experience that you don't necessarily "fight the way you train." How do I know this?
> 
> I boxed, but I never kicked anyone in the boxing ring, or punched anyone in the face in kyokushin free-fighting (which is not "sparring")......I competed at judo, but I never threw or arm-barred a boxing opponent......those are all *contests*-a game, basically, and one follows treh rules because one wants to play....I've done all of those things, and more, in "self defense" situations...
> 
> Self defense is about mindset, (AGAIN!!) aand mindset is not, and should not be trained by playing a game-though they do have their benefits, even benefits that extend to self-defense..
> 
> Kata training, btw, is  excellent for mindset-it also encodes some basic self-defense truths. One example being that ingrains a response to the tunnel-vision effect of being adrenalized-the formulators of some kata (not just Shotokan) knew of this effect, and, though they wouldn't have usedt he same language for it, they did know how to ameliorate it's effects, and mitigate the inherent hazards...this is one of the things kata can do for us.
> 
> We now return you to your regular "MMA ground and pound" troll-fest.



So you're saying that kicking and punching air prepares you to get punched or kicked in the face, and to handle a massive adrenaline dump?

You have got to be kidding.

Boxers are pretty good at giving and receiving punishment. Probably because they spend so much time actually punching people and getting punched by people.


----------



## Drose427

Steve said:


> Would you please stop talking about BJJ as though it was founded by some native tribe deep in the Amazonian jungle who had no contact with the outside world prior to UFC 1?
> 
> BJJ, as a style, has been around longer than Shotokan Karate.  It wasn't unknown before 1993.  And BJJ is "Basically Just Judo."  In the first few UFCs there were high level judoka, shoot fighters and sambo practitioners, all with a firm grounding (no pun intended) in grappling.



But it wasnt nearly as known as any of the other martial arts at UFC at the time.

A lot of people had barely heard of it up till that point.



Hanzou said:


> Yeah, but it wasn't the claims that made the style popular, it was the Gracies stepping up to the plate, putting it all on the line, and choking people out.
> 
> 
> 
> Not necessarily. The older Gracies continued to compete long after they stopped competing in the UFC. Rickson, Royce and Renzo fought a lot in Japan and other NHB events. The younger Gracies tend to compete in Bjj-only competitions, and both groups actively train MMA fighters, since MMA fighters still train at Bjj gyms to enhance their grappling.
> 
> I don't really see how we ended up talking about the Gracies, but whatever.
> 
> 
> 
> Which isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about someone like the author of the article in the OP showing us what pure karate can do against another trained fighter. Those MMA fighters have cross-trained heavily in Bjj, Wrestling, Muay Thai, etc. They would laugh at what that article says.
> 
> 
> 
> So how come MMA fighters can practice those exact same movements in relative safety?
> 
> 
> 
> Nice doge. Again, a shadowboxer is doing pretty much exactly the same thing you'd see a boxer do in a ring. A karateka doing a kata looks nothing like a karateka sparring. You made the comparison, now feel free to explain this bizarre discrepancy.



Plenty of Karateka in Kickboxing didnt cross train.

Benny the Jet fought several Muay Thai guys without cross training.
Andy hug, nuff said
Joe Louis
Superfoot was undefeated.

All these guys beat Boxers, and other stylists.


Machida and GSP both still regularly strike how youd see striking at a Karate Tournament (save the grappling which is MT). If MMA didnt also include high level grappling, Shotokan would be more than enough when trained with contact. There were several Successful Karate Guys in the first few UFCS.

Gerard Gordeau took second in the first UFC for example, he had several Karate BB.
Howard Harold, Ko'd a MT guy

After about UFC 4 or 5 is when people started training specifically for MMA

Free Sparring ISNT SD, it was never meant to be. Nor does it have to be if someones properly training.



Hanzou said:


> So you're saying that kicking and punching air prepares you to get punched or kicked in the face, and to handle a massive adrenaline dump?
> 
> You have got to be kidding.
> 
> Boxers are pretty good at giving and receiving punishment. Probably because they spend so much time actually punching people and getting punched by people.



Are you sure you trained Shotokan?

You seem to get this idea that Shotokan is 100% kata and people are treating kata as some be all end all method

instead of the supplementary exercise it is..

its laughable really


----------



## Drose427

Laplace_demon said:


> Yes it does. He does not train follow ups. A boxer does.



So do _most Karateka....
_
Really, get out more....

While speed is a factor, so is _driving through your target_. 

Never seen colored belts not know this....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Laplace_demon said:


> Yes. He's a prime example of a natural born fighter.
> 
> According to reports, the Muay Thai fighter in this clip did not know BJJ at the time of the fight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BJJ is easier for strikers than Greco Roman or Submission Wrestling. Wrestlers tend to be bigger, train takedowns far more than grapplers, so getting close is almost impossible.


|
Other posters are beating up on you so I don't know if I can help.
|
IMO, The Muay Thai stylist makes Hackney's technique look amateurish... .  It shows the folly of assuming once the grappler closes the distance, the strikers (primary) game is nullified.  I also can't help but wonder if the Muay Thai clinching helped the MT competitor tie up the BJJ opponent once they collided.
|
The issue I see, which has been unpopular here among vested posters, is looking @ Shotokan though a single window of opinion, instead of how the founders viewed it on principles.  That's the whole point of the OP quoted article.  Then you have, to continue a thread, posters arguing over semantics to how they way they train trumps the originators of karate.
|
I put up a few posts on kata, and was told my posts didn't apply to self defense.  I get where the MT consensus stands, not in sync with the the article's author, Loren Frank.  Loren Frank's position is more in sync with karate practice historically....TMU


----------



## ShotoNoob

I think Loren Frank, the benefit of his article, is in trying to promote what Shotokan karate can do to prepare you for self defense.  Obviously vested posters have developed self-defense curriculum's that extend beyond the general circumstances for which traditional karate was to meant to be applied.  This doesn't invalidate Shotokan karate in any way.  Shotokan provides a particular base of skill, with self defense applications a part of the overall curriculum...
|
On the subject of kata, the article is proposing that kata is the fundamental backbone of traditional karate training.  This mantra is & has been repeated by many karate and other TMA masters.  So why are they saying this?  We have a consensus [nearly] here that drilling applied skills is what best prepares one for self defense or fighting....  So what is there to resolve....???


----------



## ShotoNoob

Laplace_demon said:


> Yes I do have a rebuttal. Any intelligent wrestler will fake (distract) an attack standing and then shoot low... leaving the striker preoccupied with getting himself untangeled instead of being able to strike him. A striker, more often than not, cannot react in time when he's just gotten distracted by fake attack. And in shooting low I can't hit him on the shin. Only possibility is kneeing him, but like I said, the wrestler will not telegraph his takedown.


|
The author of the OP Article, Loren Frank, is expressly rebutting this position.  YOur statement would  be correct if you said, THE WORKING GOAL OF THE GRAPPLER, then continued on.  He explains in article how Shotokan provides training to overcome such physical tactics.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> I pulled out of this thread long ago but I can't let this go. In another thread a member was talking about history being made up. Well Shorei Ryu would seem to back up this line of thought. It is nothing to do with Goju Ryu and I doubt it has much to do with Okinawa even. As to being hard/soft ... there was no soft in that choreographed representation..


Thanks for pointing out how flawed I am....  Steve Reisman disagrees with you....


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Plenty of Karateka in Kickboxing didnt cross train.
> 
> Benny the Jet fought several Muay Thai guys without cross training.
> Andy hug, nuff said
> Joe Louis
> Superfoot was undefeated.
> 
> All these guys beat Boxers, and other stylists.
> 
> 
> Machida and GSP both still regularly strike how youd see striking at a Karate Tournament (save the grappling which is MT). If MMA didnt also include high level grappling, Shotokan would be more than enough when trained with contact. There were several Successful Karate Guys in the first few UFCS.
> 
> Gerard Gordeau took second in the first UFC for example, he had several Karate BB.
> Howard Harold, Ko'd a MT guy
> 
> After about UFC 4 or 5 is when people started training specifically for MMA
> 
> Free Sparring ISNT SD, it was never meant to be. Nor does it have to be if someones properly training.



They didn't free spar? Or they didn't train self defence in a similar manner to their competition training?

This is the thing about looking at competition. Benny the jet could train with his underwear on his head. And all my logical arguments in the world as to why that is a redundant training method would not be as valid as him jumping in a ring and toweling me up.

Where as my counter argument that my super secret judo chop would kill him in the street. Because I did it once to a drunk guy or that there is extra stress in a life or death fight or the numerous other unfounded stories that are used to justify what could be taken out and tested pretty easily and pretty effectively.

That is the argument that stuffs hanzous argument. That people use kata,advocate it and are quite obviously and probably wrecking machines.

But it also stuffs k mans argument that sparring/competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill.


----------



## drop bear

Provably wrecking machines. Not probably.


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> Thanks for pointing out how flawed I am....  Steve Reisman disagrees with you....


I'm sorry, you flatter yourself. I'm not sure where I was pointing out your flaws or why I would bother. And, secondly, I haven't the faintest idea who Steve Reisman is. There is nothing I can readily find on the internet about him. What he has to do with this thread has passed straight over my head.

But let's look at what you posted ...


ShotoNoob said:


> Upon further investigation, I found the traditional karate style presented in this vid to be Shorei ryu karate.  An Okinawan style of traditional karate which is both / similar / either a predecessor / to Goju ryu.  I myself prefer the emphasis on hard / soft mixture of movement exhibited in Shorei ryu to the  JKA version of Hard, hard hard physicality of Shotokan....


"Upon further investigation ... ". Well I'd like to see your source. It is customary on MT, when someone makes a claim that flies in the face of contemporary understanding, to quote the source. 

Shorei Ryu is not a traditional karate style and it has nothing to do with Goju Ryu.( As to being linked to Uechi Ryu, well I can't find anything to support that either.)

( http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shōrei-ryū )

It is a made up style introduced to the U.S. by a guy called Robert Trias. ( Robert Trias - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia )

Now, please don't take it that I am saying anything against Robert Trias or the karate legacy he left behind. What I am questioning are his links to Okinawa.

It is a coincidence that I was defending karate history in a conversation with *zuti car* then within days he is demonstrated by you to be spot on with his assertion that much karate history is made up for self promotional reasons.

By the way, if you are at all interested in where the mix up of names has occurred, here is that article ...
Okinawa Kata Classification An Historical Overview by Mario McKenna

Part of what it contains ...



> Examining the statements regarding Shorin-ryu versus Shorei-ryu that Funakoshi used throughout his works we can see that they approximate elements of the Chinese martial terminology of nei-chia or internal and wai-chia or external martial arts. According to Henning (1997, p. 11), the earliest reference to internal and external-fighting arts in China occurs in a publication known as _An Epitaph for Wang Zhengnan_ written by Huang Zong Xi in approximately 1669. In it, the following definition is given to distinguish the two schools of quanfa:
> 
> "Shaolin is universally famous for its boxing, but it emphasizes striking a person and a person can also gain the advantage against it. There is the so-called internal school which uses stillness to overcome movement and an aggressor can be toppled upon being engaged." (Henning 1997, p. 11). It would appear that Funakoshi's concept of Shorin-ryu versus Shorei-ryu is loosely based on earlier definitions of the internal and external fighting arts of China. *Unfortunately, despite the similarity of the Shorin-ryu versus Shorei-ryu dichotomy in relation to the internal versus external definitions of Chinese fighting systems, it will be shown that Funakoshi's use of such a means of classification for Okinawa karate-do kata was inaccurate and misleading.* Indeed, noted martial arts historian Hokama Tetsuhiro, has also argued for the inaccuracy and inconsistency of Funakoshi's classification (Hokama 1998, p. 81). Notwithstanding this inconsistency in classification, what is more startling is that this method of classification was accepted at face value for several years.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> They didn't free spar? Or they didn't train self defence in a similar manner to their competition training?
> 
> This is the thing about looking at competition. Benny the jet could train with his underwear on his head. And all my logical arguments in the world as to why that is a redundant training method would not be as valid as him jumping in a ring and toweling me up.
> 
> Where as my counter argument that my super secret judo chop would kill him in the street. Because I did it once to a drunk guy or that there is extra stress in a life or death fight or the numerous other unfounded stories that are used to justify what could be taken out and tested pretty easily and pretty effectively.
> 
> That is the argument that stuffs hanzous argument. That people use kata,advocate it and are quite obviously and probably wrecking machines.
> 
> But it also stuffs k mans argument that sparring/competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill.


???? 
I can't follow this reasoning at all but let me go to what you thought I said.

_"Sparring/competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill."
_
I'm not sure I've ever said that. In fact I have never suggested that anyone training any martial art would not have the ability to defend themselves on the street. It has been others asserting that because many traditional systems don't spar in the way competitive styles spar, or don't compete against trained fighters in the ring, they are not effective, even though most of them test against total resistance in other ways.

Regardless of that, your reference here to 'self defence skill' I am taking in the widest possible way in that you are referring to that part of self defence where your self defence skills have failed and you are physically defending yourself against violence. Within the real meaning of self defence, sparring or competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill at all.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> ????
> I can't follow this reasoning at all but let me go to what you thought I said.
> 
> _"Sparring/competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill."
> _
> I'm not sure I've ever said that. In fact I have never suggested that anyone training any martial art would not have the ability to defend themselves on the street. It has been others asserting that because many traditional systems don't spar in the way competitive styles spar, or don't compete against trained fighters in the ring, they are not effective, even though most of them test against total resistance in other ways.
> 
> Regardless of that, your reference here to 'self defence skill' I am taking in the widest possible way in that you are referring to that part of self defence where your self defence skills have failed and you are physically defending yourself against violence. Within the real meaning of self defence, sparring or competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill at all.



Welcome to drop bears school of self defence.

Don't be an A hole.

Move to a nicer area.

Thank you. That will be$50


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Anecdotal evidence is the best evidence right?


You mean like EVERYTHING you have ever said?


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> You mean like EVERYTHING you have ever said?



The fact that Karate kata looks completely different than Karate sparring is anecdotal evidence?


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> The fact that Karate kata looks completely different than Karate sparring is anecdotal evidence?


As you have been told in great detail since your first day on MT, karate kata is different to karate sparring. Karate kata has nothing to do with karate sparring, yet you continue to spout the same nonsense. Get a life. If you don't understand the difference between karate kata and the kata bunkai go buy a book or something. Obviously nothing we can offer you is getting through.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> The fact that Karate kata looks completely different than Karate sparring is anecdotal evidence?


The fact that Karate kata looks completely different than Karate sparring only shows that they are not the same thing. It is like saying that a gearbox looks different than an engine therefore one of them is useless.


----------



## Steve

Okay.  Just trying to follow along here, guys.  Karate kata and karate sparring have SOMETHING to do with each other.  Right?  Just thinking through what I've learned from you guys, kata contains the universe of techniques.  Bunkai is the exploration of the application of the techniques contained within kata.  So, how does it not follow that sparring is the demonstrated ability to apply the techniques in a less controlled, more random situation.  If Bunkai is the exploration of how techniques can be applied, then sparring is at least the initial demonstration of bunkai in action.  Right?  And you guys do say you spar.

Kata and sparring aren't the same thing, but that doesn't mean they are unrelated or have nothing to do with each other.  And so, while you may understandably assert that sparring doesn't look like kata, it should resemble the bunkai (i.e., the dissection of the kata to explore the practical application of the techniques.)   Shouldn't it?  And so, my question is, does it?  I don't know.  When you break down a kata, can one see the bunkai demonstrated in free sparring?


----------



## Drose427

r


Steve said:


> Okay.  Just trying to follow along here, guys.  K SOMETHING to do with each other.  Right?  Just thinking through what I've learned from you guys, kata contains the universe of techniques.  Bunkai is the exploration of the application of the techniques contained within kata.  So, how does it not follow that sparring is the demonstrated ability to apply the techniques in a less controlled, more random situation.  If Bunkai is the exploration of how techniques can be applied, then sparring is at least the initial demonstration of bunkai in action.  Right?  And you guys do say you spar.
> 
> Data and sparring aren't the same thing, but that doesn't mean they are unrelated or have nothing to do with each other.  And so, while you may understandably assert that sparring doesn't look like kata, it should look resemble the bunkai (i.e., the dissection of the kata to explore the practical application of the techniques.)   Shouldn't it?  And so, my question is, does it?  I don't know.  When you break down a kata, can one see the bunkai demonstrated in free sparring?



While keeping in mind how we've explained we could simply teahc the kihon instead (but you'd be training them the same anyways) and that stances are generally irrelevant outside of a few takedowns

Yes, youll see a move in sparring that correlates to a bunkai, particurly in kickboxing NHB style matches.

One good example that's common is the block to the down into punch from front stance. The Bunkai is blocking or catching the kick, then stepping in to sweep the other leg.

Another would be from our form pinan sadan, the move is a block/ knife hand combo followed by a teep style front kick to the chin(although I suppose some schools may flip instead of push). Gloves make knife hands awkward, but the combo works just as well with a punch. Although this one in particular is a common bunkai among students, its usually figured out before that they get to that form.

My last example be things like  spinning the spinning backfists and elbows. Pinan samdam has a spinning backfist after a spearhand but it correlates to just about forward attack.  Right hand attack into left hand spinning backfist.

But, traditional sparring bans a lot of Bunkai. It wasn't meant to recreate combat, Bunkai practice was meant to be full speed and contact. The only one of the three examples I gave you that are legal in kumite is the kick combo, but it isn't as effective with chest punching unless I'm dead on. Its easier to slip on that front kick through your guard when ive got you covering your face.


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> r
> 
> 
> While keeping in mind how we've explained we could simply teahc the kihon instead (but you'd be training them the same anyways) and that stances are generally irrelevant outside of a few takedowns
> 
> Yes, youll see a move in sparring that correlates to a bunkai, particurly in kickboxing NHB style matches.
> 
> One good example that's common is the block to the down into punch from front stance. The Bunkai is blocking or catching the kick, then stepping in to sweep the other leg.
> 
> Another would be from our form pinan sadan, the move is a block/ knife hand combo followed by a teep style front kick to the chin(although I suppose some schools may flip instead of push). Gloves make knife hands awkward, but the combo works just as well with a punch. Although this one in particular is a common bunkai among students, its usually figured out before that they get to that form.
> 
> My last example be things like  spinning the spinning backfists and elbows. Pinan samdam has a spinning backfist after a spearhand but it correlates to just about forward attack.  Right hand attack into left hand spinning backfist.
> 
> But, traditional sparring bans a lot of Bunkai. It wasn't meant to recreate combat, Bunkai practice was meant to be full speed and contact. The only one of the three examples I gave you that are legal in kumite is the kick combo, but it isn't as effective with chest punching unless I'm dead on. Its easier to slip on that front kick through your guard when ive got you covering your face.


Okay.  That all makes sense to me.  But the question I have then is how do you practice the bunkai?  Where does the trainee move in functional application of the techniques that are demonstrated in kata, explored in bunkai but prohibited in sparring/kumite or competition?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> Karate kata has nothing to do with karate sparring,





Steve said:


> Okay.  Just trying to follow along here, guys.  Karate kata and karate sparring have SOMETHING to do with each other.  Right?  Just thinking through what I've learned from you guys, kata contains the universe of techniques.  Bunkai is the exploration of the application of the techniques contained within kata.  So, how does it not follow that sparring is the demonstrated ability to apply the techniques in a less controlled, more random situation.  If Bunkai is the exploration of how techniques can be applied, then sparring is at least the initial demonstration of bunkai in action.  Right?  And you guys do say you spar.
> 
> Kata and sparring aren't the same thing, but that doesn't mean they are unrelated or have nothing to do with each other.  And so, while you may understandably assert that sparring doesn't look like kata, it should resemble the bunkai (i.e., the dissection of the kata to explore the practical application of the techniques.)   Shouldn't it?  And so, my question is, does it?  I don't know.  When you break down a kata, can one see the bunkai demonstrated in free sparring?



Yeah, here we start getting into what feels like a disconnect to me. Kata and sparring are different forms of training, but they ultimately should both be contributing to the end goal of being able to effectively apply the  techniques of your art in a real fight. How does it contribute to that end goal for these two forms of training to use different body mechanics, footwork, stances, hand positioning, and specifics of techniques? What is it about the immediate purpose of each of those training methods which requires these differences but still allows them both to contribute to the end goal of combat effectiveness?

I've read through the countless threads on the subject with an open mind and I still don't think I get it.


----------



## Drose427

Steve said:


> Okay.  That all makes sense to me.  But the question I have then is how do you practice the bunkai?  Where does the trainee move in functional application of the techniques that are demonstrated in kata, explored in bunkai but prohibited in sparring/kumite or competition?



For us, 
Its the part of class right after forms.

Like in wrestling how the coach demon demondtrtes, had the kids practice, then drill. Then eventually expects to see it in live wrestling.

Our beginners start in step sparring(full speed, well within range of getting hurt if they don't react)

Then as they get better at that, we mix in other drills. I.e. attacker is coming at you more like a boxer, or haymakers, etc.

But, most adults who catch on quick about how it all ties together start drilling it and tinkering on each other before, after, or outside of class.

And obviously for Bunkai that are allowed in sparring, we try to push guys to do it there as well


----------



## Steve

Drose427 said:


> For us,
> Its the part of class right after forms.
> 
> Like in wrestling how the coach demon demondtrtes, had the kids practice, then drill. Then eventually expects to see it in live wrestling.
> 
> Our beginners start in step sparring(full speed, well within range of getting hurt if they don't react)
> 
> Then as they get better at that, we mix in other drills. I.e. attacker is coming at you more like a boxer, or haymakers, etc.
> 
> But, most adults who catch on quick about how it all ties together start drilling it and tinkering on each other before, after, or outside of class.
> 
> And obviously for Bunkai that are allowed in sparring, we try to push guys to do it there as well


Okay.  It sounds like you're painting a clear picture for developing skill:  demonstration, drilling, layering in complexity and varying contexts, sparring.  There's a clear path from knowledge to comprehension to application.

So, where does kata fit in?  Where does bunkai fit in?  I don't get it.  Or once again, if most of bunkai is prohibited from kumite, how do you become proficient in those techniques?


----------



## Drose427

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yeah, here we start getting into what feels like a disconnect to me. Kata and sparring are different forms of training, but they ultimately should both be contributing to the end goal of being able to effectively apply the  techniques of your art in a real fight. How does it contribute to that end goal for these two forms of training to use different body mechanics, footwork, stances, hand positioning, and specifics of techniques? What is it about the immediate purpose of each of those training methods which requires these differences but still allows them both to contribute to the end goal of combat effectiveness?
> 
> I've read through the countless threads on the subject with an open mind and I still don't think I get it.



The big issue is traditional free sparring doesn't allow us to use every bunkai.

If it was more opening in terms of legal moves, there wouldn't really be a a big reason to drill bunkai separately. 

Overall the same concepts apply, few mechanics are different. Stances obviously are but that's a different can of worms, most techs are just enunciated. So while the movement is the same overall, its looks a bit different when someone's giving resistance. The blocks are good example of this. The enunciation get you in the habit driving them like a strike, which helps, but you'll almost never knock an opponents attack as far away as in the movies or have your block extend as far out  as in the form

Then you have to understand what looks like a block isn't always a block. 

That knife hand is many times better though of as stepping just to the side and striking the collarbone or neck.

I bring that up because interpretation affects how one looks at the effectiveness of a tech. 
I'm not a fan of knife hand blocks( or hard blocks in general) but as a strike they can do damage with proper positioning

While one isn't as light In forms, they're still typically learning the same proper position and angles, 

Essentially bunkai specific training just a needless extra drill if one regularly gets to freespar on a NHB environment.


----------



## elder999

Hanzou said:


> So you're saying that kicking and punching air prepares you to get punched or kicked in the face, and to handle a massive adrenaline dump?
> 
> You have got to be kidding.
> .




No, I'm not kidding. 

You know, I'm a teacher-not just martial arts....I've taught all kinds of classes for a great deal of my career.Reactor theory. Thermodynamics. Quantum mechanics. Device neutralization. Emergency management-stuff like that. When I "retire," I plan on working as a H.S. teacher....I like teaching, and I'm pretty good at it.....there's a place where I could use improvement, though-and that's when a person obstinately demonstrates a refusal to attempt to understand what I'm saying, while simultaneously demonstrating a complete lack of any understanding or knowledge....like saying that "there are no strikes in judo," or that "standing armbars are useless," or that "kata training is useless," when, in fact, it's been stated just how and what those things are useful for. So, in the interest of improving myself-*not* some desire to prove myself "right," I'm going to make one more attempt.

For starters, though:


Hanzou said:


> So you're saying that kicking and punching air prepares you to get punched or kicked in the face, and to handle a massive adrenaline dump?
> 
> You have got to be kidding.



That's *not* at all what I said, is it?



elder999 said:


> Kata training, btw, is excellent for mindset-it also encodes some basic self-defense truths. One example being that ingrains a response to the tunnel-vision effect of being adrenalized-the formulators of some kata (not just Shotokan) knew of this effect, and, though they wouldn't have usedt he same language for it, they did know how to ameliorate it's effects, and mitigate the inherent hazards...this is one of the things kata can do for us.



Firstly, if you think "an adrenaline dump"  needs being "punched and kicked in the face" to occur, you've never been involved in an altercation on the street-I've defended myself a couple of times,  often without being punched or kicked at all-and often without having to throw a punch or kick, though that's another story. Fact is though, adrenaline starts flowing during the _monkey dance/interview/woofing_ portion of a confrontation-in the one incident I talk about most often, adrenaline started flowing as soon as I saw my would-be assailants.

How does one control an adrenaline dump? _Breathing_. What does one practice in kata?_Breathing._

That "tunnel-vision" effect I was talking about? In portions of kata where an instructor might say that the practitioner is "momentarily overwhelmed" in the "simulated battle," and the practitioner moves backward-or where the practitioner moves backward _and turns his head_, or, perhaps, simply turns his head,  the practitioner is taking actions to ameliorate anticipated tunnel vision- during a real fight, with multiple assailants (or, more often than not, just friends who decide to jump in when you start "winning") training to maintain awareness of their presence is paramount, and some of the actions we can take to do this are to move back and widen our field of vision, and to maintain our head on a swivel. Kata teaches us to do this-it also was never about "sparring," or, necessarily, fighting another similarly trained assailant-it is about encoding these strategic and tactical tidbits, and being part of an overall health and fitness regimen.

Secondly, of course, and not to belabor the point, if what I've quoted:



Hanzou said:


> So you're saying that kicking and punching air prepares you to get punched or kicked in the face, and to handle a massive adrenaline dump?
> 
> You have got to be kidding.
> .



Is what you got out of *what I actually said*:



elder999 said:


> Kata training, btw, is excellent for mindset-it also encodes some basic self-defense truths. One example being that ingrains a response to the tunnel-vision effect of being adrenalized-the formulators of some kata (not just Shotokan) knew of this effect, and, though they wouldn't have usedt he same language for it, they did know how to ameliorate it's effects, and mitigate the inherent hazards...this is one of the things kata can do for us.



You should have stayed in H.S., son...
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




(guess I still have lots of room for improvement....oh well..)


----------



## Drose427

Steve said:


> Okay.  It sounds like you're painting a clear picture for developing skill:  demonstration, drilling, layering in complexity and varying contexts, sparring.  There's a clear path from knowledge to comprehension to application.
> 
> So, where does kata fit in?  Where does bunkai fit in?  I don't get it.  Or once again, if most of bunkai is prohibited from kumite, how do you become proficient in those techniques?



Kata acts like a textbook of moves, there's the basic movements(I.e. next move is a block to the down) if a student is having trouble, there is a basic level interpretation that's been around since Hwang Kee but  we try to shy away from those because things that could be an effective move(like my collar choke) gets called a "set up move" so when most of us teach we teach the simple movement, then give them a more realistic example or two.

Bunkai is merely the applications one draws from them I.e. the 3 examples I gave.

A student should ideally see something in a form they like, interpret it how they like best(for example, this knife hand works better as a strike, or my favorite the collar choke from odan works better when the guys already on top of you in close proximity), then depending on the move (because of the rules of traditional sparring) they either have to start applying them in free sparring, or grab a partner and have them try to beat them up so to speak. 

Like I told tony just now, ideally we could free spar differently and have no need for full contact partner drilling. How we do it is effective don't properly, but it adds the need for extra drilling.

But at the end of the day, both methods will have someone barreling towards you to break your nose


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Drose427 said:


> The big issue is traditional free sparring doesn't allow us to use every bunkai.
> 
> If it was more opening in terms of legal moves, there wouldn't really be a a big reason to drill bunkai separately.



Yeah, I could certainly understand it if sparring demonstrated just a smaller subset of the techniques used in kata, but that doesn't address the differences I cited.



Drose427 said:


> Overall the same concepts apply, few mechanics are different. Stances obviously are but that's a different can of worms, most techs are just enunciated. So while the movement is the same overall, its looks a bit different when someone's giving resistance.



Once again, I could understand if kata represented an ideal execution of technique while the sparring version ended up being sloppier or more abbreviated. That's not really what I'm seeing though.

I'd post video of karate kata and sparring so that I could point out the specifics of the disconnect I'm seeing (in terms of  body mechanics, footwork, stances, hand positioning, and specifics of techniques), but I'm afraid there would be complaints that the practitioners I selected weren't properly representative. Would you care to pick a kata clip and a sparring clip that you feel demonstrate good performance and then we can discuss what each of us sees in the comparison?



Drose427 said:


> Essentially bunkai specific training just a needless extra drill if one regularly gets to freespar on a NHB environment.



Hmmm ... interesting. Based on past comments I suspect some of the other karate practitioners around here might disagree with that.


----------



## Drose427

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yeah, I could certainly understand it if sparring demonstrated just a smaller subset of the techniques used in kata, but that doesn't address the differences I cited.
> 
> 
> 
> Once again, I could understand if kata represented an ideal execution of technique while the sparring version ended up being sloppier or more abbreviated. That's not really what I'm seeing though.
> 
> I'd post video of karate kata and sparring so that I could point out the specifics of the disconnect I'm seeing (in terms of  body mechanics, footwork, stances, hand positioning, and specifics of techniques), but I'm afraid there would be complaints that the practitioners I selected weren't properly representative. Would you care to pick a kata clip and a sparring clip that you feel demonstrate good performance and then we can discuss what each of us sees in the comparison?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm ... interesting. Based on past comments I suspect some of the other karate practitioners around here might disagree with that.



Ok, so first heres the best rendition of Keecho Il boo (basic form 1 in my style) that I could find. 






Bear in mind stances are usually only that deep for conditioning,

The bunkai for the first two moves (well realy about half the second, the step acts more like a sweep then stepping to punch, or you could rotate and throw that way), is blocking/Trapping a kick, then stepping in to sweep with the right  leg. You can punch if you want I guess but if you sweep hard enough you dont really need to.

Abernathy teaches like this:






And its a fairly common thing to see in Sanda/Kickboxing. Im trying to remember the K! match were a guy did it like 4 times just to spite his opponent, he did both inside like in the form and outside. But heres a sanda coach teaching a version of it.  Difference is going to the outside lets you do sweep kinda to the front, and moving to the inside is more of a back sweep. Like this sweep from the Rossian Tie






Other than enunciated stance in the forms (and different angle of sweeps depending on if youre moving inside or out) the trap/block into the sweep is the movement of the first move and a half of the form. 

At first Dan at my school students can start doing takedowns in sparring, and that trap/inside sweep is one of the first they learn.

A non Sport Example would be the knife hands in the first part of this demo, in forms the stance is off,  but the 45 degree movements correlate to stepping out to avoid the punch and angling yourself properly. The strike, waist, and other mechanics are the same. In styles that dont do deep stances, like okinawan karates, this looks nearly identical in practice as it does in forms.

Finally, Machida.

Now, Im not used to his forms whatsoever, so I can only give the obvious examples without having a partner to tinker with. The nuances and timing are just so different, that youd need a Karate guy to break it down better






At the end of form one, he does the kick, myriad of straight punches combo he does in the cage all the time. 

Also in form one theres a side kick (hand out is probably supposed to check or catch the wrist but not overly necessary) into  moving in while the opponent is hit and off balance to throw the elbow. When practicing this with an opponent, you slide in for the elbow (if thats your preferred striker) immediately, but the main technique would be the same.

As for the second form, the only thing I could see off the top of my head is a high block (which will never go as high on an actual opponent, but the mechanic is the same), into the double palm strike. The high one could either break the nose or aim for the button on the chin.






Just for kicks, heres a Machida highlight vid becuase Karate or not hes awesome to watch strike

You can actually see leg tie takedown similar to how a front stance in forms teaches it mat about 1:40, he goes to step in a similar way you would were you doing it outside of forms.

And here is a clip of that punch/kick combination from kata 1 in sparring. It gets interrupted as his opponent tries to clinch and breakaway, but you can still see the combo.

Essentially these are all things one could learn without forms, but forms can help in this process and can be a good way to getting the hang of these things if youre training the bunkai properly enough.

As for Karate guys disagreeing with, Im sure some would.

I know there are combos Ive taken out of context from forms, i.e. samdan has a spear hand into a spinning backfist. I drilled as bunkai intially with someone out to break my nose, then was able to use it on the MMA guys I work with no issue. 

But, they learned that combo without ever doing a kata.

so (at least from a technique standpoint) i just believe if Free Sparring was different, there would be no need to train bunkai separately. I mean maybe when youre first tinkering with a bunkai, but not to the degree many of us need to now.

But hey, thats just my opinion. As long as you're drilling full speed, proper distance, and good contact they have the same effect


----------



## Drose427

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yeah, I could certainly understand it if sparring demonstrated just a smaller subset of the techniques used in kata, but that doesn't address the differences I cited.
> 
> 
> 
> Once again, I could understand if kata represented an ideal execution of technique while the sparring version ended up being sloppier or more abbreviated. That's not really what I'm seeing though.
> 
> I'd post video of karate kata and sparring so that I could point out the specifics of the disconnect I'm seeing (in terms of  body mechanics, footwork, stances, hand positioning, and specifics of techniques), but I'm afraid there would be complaints that the practitioners I selected weren't properly representative. Would you care to pick a kata clip and a sparring clip that you feel demonstrate good performance and then we can discuss what each of us sees in the comparison?
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm ... interesting. Based on past comments I suspect some of the other karate practitioners around here might disagree with that.







At around 1:08 is the exact kick catch, step inside trip that is the Bunkai from Keecho Il Boo

The only real difference is they use a sparring guard, and dont use deep stances. But the movement, position, etc is the same.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> As you have been told in great detail since your first day on MT, karate kata is different to karate sparring. Karate kata has nothing to do with karate sparring, yet you continue to spout the same nonsense. Get a life. If you don't understand the difference between karate kata and the kata bunkai go buy a book or something. Obviously nothing we can offer you is getting through.



I understand the differences just fine. What I don't understand is why karate kata and karate sparring looks like two completely different martial arts. In fact, Karate sparring resembles striking arts that don't contain kata at all.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Drose427 said:


> Ok, so first heres the best rendition of Keecho Il boo (basic form 1 in my style) that I could find.
> 
> 
> 
> Bear in mind stances are usually only that deep for conditioning,
> 
> The bunkai for the first two moves (well realy about half the second, the step acts more like a sweep then stepping to punch, or you could rotate and throw that way), is blocking/Trapping a kick, then stepping in to sweep with the right leg. You can punch if you want I guess but if you sweep hard enough you dont really need to.



Thanks. I was hoping for some sparring footage from your style so I could compare and contrast the body mechanics in the kata vs sparring, but you've given me something to start with.

To begin with, you say that the first two moves of the form represent trapping a kick and stepping in to sweep. Problems I see:

1) There is no catching/trapping action in the form. The first move might represent a block, but there is no movement of the arm that would catch or trap anything. If the practitioner continued the arm motion to scoop upwards, then he might manage to underhook and catch a kick (although different body angling would work better). However he does not do that. Furthermore, look at the position of his left arm in the second step. If he had underhooked the opponent's kicking leg in the previous step, that arm position would let go of it. (The arm position might be valid if he had *overhooked* the opponent's kicking leg, but there is no way to get from that initial "blocking" action to an overhook on the leg.)

2) There is no sweeping action in the second step, I watched carefully and verified that the practitioner is stepping straight forward - there is no hooking, sweeping, or tripping action with the leg. It is possible to induce someone to fall by catching their kick and taking a single step straight forward with no trip, but it's not very high-percentage.

3) The remainder of the moves in the form are more of the same low-block, lunge punch combination. Hopefully the 3rd & 4th move aren't also intended to portray this same technique. If so there's an obvious problem with distancing. Unless the imaginary attacker was kicking from 7-8 feet away, the practitioner is way, way overstepping. (Abernathy points this out in a another video and offers a very different explanation for the movement.)

I've got some other quibbles, but they would be easier to explain in person than in print. (For example, the timing on the punch/arm extension is all wrong if it's meant to be supporting a takedown.) Anyway, I think we're getting away from the kata vs sparring comparison and into a different issue regarding bunkai, i.e. how helpful is it to actually do one set of movements with your body but imagine that you are performing a different set of movements.



Drose427 said:


> Abernathy teaches like this:



Abernathy's movement is very different from what is shown in that form.

He angles out of the way of the kick. He uses that angle to catch the kick with an overhook. His right hand immediately goes into position to control his opponent and he finishes with rotation to take the kicker down to a weak angle. All of that is important. None of that is present in the form you posted.



Drose427 said:


> Finally, Machida.
> 
> Now, Im not used to his forms whatsoever, so I can only give the obvious examples without having a partner to tinker with. The nuances and timing are just so different, that youd need a Karate guy to break it down better
> 
> 
> 
> At the end of form one, he does the kick, myriad of straight punches combo he does in the cage all the time.
> 
> Also in form one theres a side kick (hand out is probably supposed to check or catch the wrist but not overly necessary) into moving in while the opponent is hit and off balance to throw the elbow. When practicing this with an opponent, you slide in for the elbow (if thats your preferred striker) immediately, but the main technique would be the same.
> 
> As for the second form, the only thing I could see off the top of my head is a high block (which will never go as high on an actual opponent, but the mechanic is the same), into the double palm strike. The high one could either break the nose or aim for the button on the chin.



I see some important differences in the way Machida executes in kata vs sparring, but I'll wait until I can  get feedback from someone who practices that style.



Drose427 said:


> At around 1:08 is the exact kick catch, step inside trip that is the Bunkai from Keecho Il Boo
> 
> The only real difference is they use a sparring guard, and dont use deep stances. But the movement, position, etc is the same.



Looks very different to me with regard to just about every detail that makes the technique work. To mention just a few: overhook grip on the leg, close body clinch, actual hooking/tripping the support leg, and bowing towards the opponent's weak angle to finish the takedown. Exactly none of that is present in the kata you posted.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tony Dismukes said:


> Once again, I could understand if kata represented an ideal execution of technique while the sparring version ended up being sloppier or more abbreviated. That's not really what I'm seeing though.


The "form/Kata/solo training" and "fighting" can be the same. It depends on how the "form/Kata/solo training" was created. Whatever that you will need in your application should be trained in your solo. If you miss anything in your solo training, your solo training is not properly designed.






Here is the "solo training".






Here is the "application".


----------



## Drose427

Tony Dismukes said:


> Thanks. I was hoping for some sparring footage from your style so I could compare and contrast the body mechanics in the kata vs sparring, but you've given me something to start with.
> 
> To begin with, you say that the first two moves of the form represent trapping a kick and stepping in to sweep. Problems I see:
> 
> 1) There is no catching/trapping action in the form. The first move might represent a block, but there is no movement of the arm that would catch or trap anything. If the practitioner continued the arm motion to scoop upwards, then he might manage to underhook and catch a kick (although different body angling would work better). However he does not do that. Furthermore, look at the position of his left arm in the second step. If he had underhooked the opponent's kicking leg in the previous step, that arm position would let go of it. (The arm position might be valid if he had *overhooked* the opponent's kicking leg, but there is no way to get from that initial "blocking" action to an overhook on the leg.)
> 
> 2) There is no sweeping action in the second step, I watched carefully and verified that the practitioner is stepping straight forward - there is no hooking, sweeping, or tripping action with the leg. It is possible to induce someone to fall by catching their kick and taking a single step straight forward with no trip, but it's not very high-percentage.
> 
> 3) The remainder of the moves in the form are more of the same low-block, lunge punch combination. Hopefully the 3rd & 4th move aren't also intended to portray this same technique. If so there's an obvious problem with distancing. Unless the imaginary attacker was kicking from 7-8 feet away, the practitioner is way, way overstepping. (Abernathy points this out in a another video and offers a very different explanation for the movement.)
> 
> I've got some other quibbles, but they would be easier to explain in person than in print. (For example, the timing on the punch/arm extension is all wrong if it's meant to be supporting a takedown.) Anyway, I think we're getting away from the kata vs sparring comparison and into a different issue regarding bunkai, i.e. how helpful is it to actually do one set of movements with your body but imagine that you are performing a different set of movements.
> 
> 
> 
> Abernathy's movement is very different from what is shown in that form.
> 
> He angles out of the way of the kick. He uses that angle to catch the kick with an overhook. His right hand immediately goes into position to control his opponent and he finishes with rotation to take the kicker down to a weak angle. All of that is important. None of that is present in the form you posted.
> 
> 
> 
> I see some important differences in the way Machida executes in kata vs sparring, but I'll wait until I can  get feedback from someone who practices that style.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks very different to me with regard to just about every detail that makes the technique work. To mention just a few: overhook grip on the leg, close body clinch, actual hooking/tripping the support leg, and bowing towards the opponent's weak angle to finish the takedown. Exactly none of that is present in the kata you posted.



For the first takedown, the deep knee could easily be wrapping behind the leg still standing, or it could be a sweeping motion.

As for the hands, this is a time where things aren't exact to the form. 

Assuming you're driving deep enough to be able to step in for the trip, 

You would have to change hand position to one where you could trap.

As I said, if you're deep enough, you could actually neglect the punch, and instead when tripping (whether you opt for the sweep or the leg wrap) use the rechambering motion of the left hand with waist rotation to pull them off balance more making them more likely to go down, like Abernathy did.

As for point number two, our association does more of a crescent when stepping in. Sorta like the middle step in some karate styles but without the actual step. So to be honest, that could contribute to how that makes more sense to me, which is my bad for giving you an inaccurate video. My instructor had a video of him performing a form on here, when I get back to my computer I'll link to it so you get a better idea of what I man by a crescent movement.

For number 3, honestly I didn't watch the full clip as the first two moves are the ones we teach the form from and what I deemed most important. The first 2 were a good representation of how we do it (aside from steeping straight out) without actually having a clip of the form from my school.

As for machida, my main point was the punches/front kick combo that he does, other than stances and specific targets for the forms, the only real difference in execution I saw (for that part of the kata at least) was in sparring he really drives through, whereas in kata he doesn't.

The block/palm strike in kata two had timing issues, but if drilled would still be applicable. Although I'm not a fan of the lower palm strike over a guard with that arm.

Close body would be how one would do the form with a partner, or should at least. Driving in deep enough is one the first things we stress when teaching it as bunkai. We also do more of a crescent step but I'll link you to that video(it is a different form however,)

As for the rest, 

Its a something I think we've talked about before.

While some moves in forms will translate almost perfectly, other need to be interpreted and adapted for sparring. Some folks like it and have no issue seeing exactly what to do to make it work. They can just feel it when working with a resisting opponent and correct it.

Others prefer to be shown directly. 

In another thread me and Steve talked about how we learned the collar choke.

He with direct instruction and drilling

And me by seeing it in pinan odan, and rolling until I got the hang of it(because its far more difficult standing and takes extra movements to get there)


----------



## Drose427

Tony Dismukes said:


> Thanks. I was hoping for some sparring footage from your style so I could compare and contrast the body mechanics in the kata vs sparring, but you've given me something to start with.
> 
> To begin with, you say that the first two moves of the form represent trapping a kick and stepping in to sweep. Problems I see:
> 
> 1) There is no catching/trapping action in the form. The first move might represent a block, but there is no movement of the arm that would catch or trap anything. If the practitioner continued the arm motion to scoop upwards, then he might manage to underhook and catch a kick (although different body angling would work better). However he does not do that. Furthermore, look at the position of his left arm in the second step. If he had underhooked the opponent's kicking leg in the previous step, that arm position would let go of it. (The arm position might be valid if he had *overhooked* the opponent's kicking leg, but there is no way to get from that initial "blocking" action to an overhook on the leg.)
> 
> 2) There is no sweeping action in the second step, I watched carefully and verified that the practitioner is stepping straight forward - there is no hooking, sweeping, or tripping action with the leg. It is possible to induce someone to fall by catching their kick and taking a single step straight forward with no trip, but it's not very high-percentage.
> 
> 3) The remainder of the moves in the form are more of the same low-block, lunge punch combination. Hopefully the 3rd & 4th move aren't also intended to portray this same technique. If so there's an obvious problem with distancing. Unless the imaginary attacker was kicking from 7-8 feet away, the practitioner is way, way overstepping. (Abernathy points this out in a another video and offers a very different explanation for the movement.)
> 
> I've got some other quibbles, but they would be easier to explain in person than in print. (For example, the timing on the punch/arm extension is all wrong if it's meant to be supporting a takedown.) Anyway, I think we're getting away from the kata vs sparring comparison and into a different issue regarding bunkai, i.e. how helpful is it to actually do one set of movements with your body but imagine that you are performing a different set of movements.
> 
> 
> 
> Abernathy's movement is very different from what is shown in that form.
> 
> He angles out of the way of the kick. He uses that angle to catch the kick with an overhook. His right hand immediately goes into position to control his opponent and he finishes with rotation to take the kicker down to a weak angle. All of that is important. None of that is present in the form you posted.
> 
> 
> 
> I see some important differences in the way Machida executes in kata vs sparring, but I'll wait until I can  get feedback from someone who practices that style.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks very different to me with regard to just about every detail that makes the technique work. To mention just a few: overhook grip on the leg, close body clinch, actual hooking/tripping the support leg, and bowing towards the opponent's weak angle to finish the takedown. Exactly none of that is present in the kata you posted.



The form my instructor did for a post here doesnt contain the movement Im talking about but I found a replacement

While this guys overall form isnt how we'd do it, he does the Crescent step I was talking about for getting your leg around


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yeah, here we start getting into what feels like a disconnect to me. Kata and sparring are different forms of training, but they ultimately should both be contributing to the end goal of being able to effectively apply the  techniques of your art in a real fight. How does it contribute to that end goal for these two forms of training to use different body mechanics, footwork, stances, hand positioning, and specifics of techniques? What is it about the immediate purpose of each of those training methods which requires these differences but still allows them both to contribute to the end goal of combat effectiveness?
> 
> I've read through the countless threads on the subject with an open mind and I still don't think I get it.


Tony, I think it is obvious that there are many ways that people understand kata and there are many ways that people apply that understanding to their training. I also believe there are many levels of understanding.

When *Hanzou* first started on MT one of the first things he did was to dismiss kata as irrelevant when it comes to real fighting. I posted many videos at the time showing how kata translates to bunkai and how the bunkai is training for real fighting. He dismissed everything I posted as not representative as he had never seen that type of training. Like *Elder*, I am sick of trying to discuss bunkai with him.

However, for those who genuinely want to understand the application of kata to fighting I will post another video of the guys I have trained with.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> I understand the differences just fine. What I don't understand is why karate kata and karate sparring looks like two completely different martial arts. In fact, Karate sparring resembles striking arts that don't contain kata at all.


Given how many discussions you have hijacked on this very topic, and how many times and in how many different ways it had been explained to you, it is obvious that if you still do not understand it, then you never will.  That's ok.  The well-being of the world does not hinge upon your understanding or your acceptance of the training method.


----------



## Flying Crane

Steve said:


> Okay.  It sounds like you're painting a clear picture for developing skill:  demonstration, drilling, layering in complexity and varying contexts, sparring.  There's a clear path from knowledge to comprehension to application.
> 
> So, where does kata fit in?  Where does bunkai fit in?  I don't get it.  Or once again, if most of bunkai is prohibited from kumite, how do you become proficient in those techniques?


Hi Steve,

Question for you:  have you ever trained in a method that uses kata as part of the methodology?  Do you have any direct experience with it?  Thx.


----------



## Drose427

So something I notice talking to Tony that I hadnt caught on to before,

Our style steps in to a front stance with a crescent step like the gentleman in the tang soo do video I posts.

This lead a bunkai to work for us and make sense for me, as that motion recreates hooking an opponents leg after trapping a kick if you go inside, or sweeping the leg if you go to the outside.

But would would the  Bunkai bee in styles that come straight out?

Do you guys still look at it as a Takedown when doing the form, that just needs altered a it more for bunkai?

Or do you use a different bunkai altogether for the Low Block into another front stance *Insert various attack/block*?


----------



## K-man

Drose427 said:


> So something I notice talking to Tony that I hadnt caught on to before,
> 
> Our style steps in to a front stance with a crescent step like the gentleman in the tang soo do video I posts.
> 
> This lead a bunkai to work for us and make sense for me, as that motion recreates hooking an opponents leg after trapping a kick if you go inside, or sweeping the leg if you go to the outside.
> 
> But would would the  Bunkai bee in styles that come straight out?
> 
> Do you guys still look at it as a Takedown when doing the form, that just needs altered a it more for bunkai?
> 
> Or do you use a different bunkai altogether for the Low Block into another front stance *Insert various attack/block*?


Crescent step is stepping around the leg for a takedown or it can be used for trapping the foot using your toes or heel depending on the situation. As for low 'block', I don't teach any 'blocks' as blocks. Within a kata a block would mean there had to be a strike and as kata works on predictive response and is not choreography, how would you know there was a punch or kick coming? That doesn't stop you taking a piece of kata and applying it that way but it is not the way you use kata as a system of fighting. That is what we call oyo bunkai.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Tony, I think it is obvious that there are many ways that people understand kata and there are many ways that people apply that understanding to their training. I also believe there are many levels of understanding.
> 
> When *Hanzou* first started on MT one of the first things he did was to dismiss kata as irrelevant when it comes to real fighting. I posted many videos at the time showing how kata translates to bunkai and how the bunkai is training for real fighting. He dismissed everything I posted as not representative as he had never seen that type of training. Like *Elder*, I am sick of trying to discuss bunkai with him.
> 
> However, for those who genuinely want to understand the application of kata to fighting I will post another video of the guys I have trained with.



That's a demonstration though.

Here's some Goju sparring, and it looks nothing like that;






Its the standard kickboxing like fighting seen in almost all karate sparring.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> That's a demonstration though.
> 
> Here's some Goju sparring, and it looks nothing like that;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its the standard kickboxing like fighting seen in almost all karate sparring.


What Taira was doing wasn't a demonstration. It is what he had been teaching for years and I also have been teaching since I came across it years ago. What Tom Hill is showing is the type of jiu kumite we used to do. It has nothing to do with kata or bunkai and is typical of schools that engage in competition because that is the type of fighting used in tournaments. As I have said many times, you keep ignoring what I have shown many times so that you can justify your position on kata being useless.


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> That's a demonstration though.
> 
> Here's some Goju sparring, and it looks nothing like that;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its the standard kickboxing like fighting seen in almost all karate sparring.



Learn Kururunfa - Kata for Goju-Ryu Karate - Black Belt Wiki

Here is a random Goju form.

Lets run through the list of techniques/bunkai in the form that are illegal in most Karate Schools Sparring

1. Groin Strikes
2. Leg kicks (not sure about goju, but commonly illegal)
3. Elbows
4. Hammer fist

Thats four repeated movements, that arent allowed in free sparring.

So how is Free Sparring supposed to be representative?

Just for fun, heres harold howard doing 2 out of 4 of those things (That he cant do in his Dojos sparring) in UFC



Embedded media from this media site is no longer available


----------



## Steve

Flying Crane said:


> Hi Steve,
> 
> Question for you:  have you ever trained in a method that uses kata as part of the methodology?  Do you have any direct experience with it?  Thx.


Why, no.  I haven't.  Why do you ask, FC? 


Drose427 said:


> Thats four repeated movements, that arent allowed in free sparring.
> 
> So how is Free Sparring supposed to be representative?


Hey, Drose, here it is again.  Can you explain the path to proficiency here?  How does a student cover the gap from between bunkai to functional proficiency with regards to techniques that cannot be used in sparring?


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> What Taira was doing wasn't a demonstration. It is what he had been teaching for years and I also have been teaching since I came across it years ago. What Tom Hill is showing is the type of jiu kumite we used to do. It has nothing to do with kata or bunkai and is typical of schools that engage in competition because that is the type of fighting used in tournaments. As I have said many times, you keep ignoring what I have shown many times so that you can justify your position on kata being useless.



So demonstrating a technique on a compliant partner isn't a demonstration? What is it then? It certainly isn't sparring or randori. It certainly isn't drilling, because its the head instructor doing it on a compliant student during a seminar. I should also point out that I have yet to see any of this bunkai being utilized against a noncompliant opponent. I've only seen it in seminars and demos. In actual fights karatekas almost universally look like Tom Hill's people.

BTW, I'm not ignoring anything. I'm pointing out that what you're saying doesn't make any logical sense.



Drose427 said:


> Learn Kururunfa - Kata for Goju-Ryu Karate - Black Belt Wiki
> 
> Here is a random Goju form.
> 
> Lets run through the list of techniques/bunkai in the form that are illegal in most Karate Schools Sparring
> 
> 1. Groin Strikes
> 2. Leg kicks (not sure about goju, but commonly illegal)
> 3. Elbows
> 4. Hammer fist
> 
> Thats four repeated movements, that arent allowed in free sparring.
> 
> So how is Free Sparring supposed to be representative?
> 
> Just for fun, heres harold howard doing 2 out of 4 of those things (That he cant do in his Dojos sparring) in UFC
> 
> 
> 
> Embedded media from this media site is no longer available



1. Why would Leg kicks, elbows, and hammer fists be illegal in most Karate schools? They weren't illegal in mine, nor are the illegal in many striking arts like muay thai.

2. That vid you showed doesn't look like any karate kata I've ever seen. It looks like a brawl between two guys. It certainly doesn't resemble the techniques shown in the vid Kman posted, or the vid you posted of Abernethy.


----------



## elder999

Hanzou said:


> BTW, I'm not ignoring anything.



You're ignoring* my post*......



Hanzou said:


> I'm pointing out that what your saying doesn't make any logical sense.



....which made logical sense.......of course, that's just what I've come to expect.


----------



## Drose427

Steve said:


> Why, no.  I haven't.  Why do you ask, FC?
> Hey, Drose, here it is again.  Can you explain the path to proficiency here?  How does a student cover the gap from between bunkai to functional proficiency with regards to techniques that cannot be used in sparring?



Because Bunkai practice is live drilling,

Its still someone coming at you with intent to harm, full speed full contact, and youre expected to retaliate.

Technically you could call if a form of sparring, in the sense that drilling submissions, transitions, and takedowns could be considered part of Newaza,

but it isnt continuous kumite lasting 2-5 minutes at a time,

So the techs that are barred from Kumite, are still practiced on a live opponent, 

just an extra thing


----------



## Drose427

Hanzou said:


> So demonstrating a technique on a compliant partner isn't a demonstration? What is it then? It certainly isn't sparring or randori. It certainly isn't drilling, because its the head instructor doing it on a compliant student during a seminar. I should also point out that I have yet to see any of this bunkai being utilized against a noncompliant opponent. I've only seen it in seminars and demos. In actual fights karatekas almost universally look like Tom Hill's people.
> 
> BTW, I'm not ignoring anything. I'm pointing out that what you're saying doesn't make any logical sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Why would Leg kicks, elbows, and hammer fists be illegal in most Karate schools? They weren't illegal in mine, nor are the illegal in many striking arts like muay thai.
> 
> 2. That vid you showed doesn't look like any karate kata I've ever seen. It looks like a brawl between two guys. It certainly doesn't resemble the techniques shown in the vid Kman posted, or the vid you posted of Abernethy.



There you go again half reading

They arent illegal in the _schools 
_
Theyre illegal in _Kumite
_
Idk why you bring up MT, unless now its a part of Traditional Karate.

And yeah, if you're expecting combat to mimc Kata to a T, you've completely ignored explanations given....


----------



## Flying Crane

Steve said:


> Why, no.  I haven't.  Why do you ask, FC?


I think this is something that can be discussed intellectually only up to a point.  I'm not surprised that it remains unclear after such discussions, if someone has never been thru it.  It is a tremendous help if you have some level of experience with the method, to make sense of it.

I'm the first to agree, many people who practice kata do not understand it well, do not understand what they ought to be getting from it, and how to use it as a training tool.  For those many people, yes it is a waste of time.  Many people who teach kata do not understand it well and do a piss-poor job of teaching it.  Again, it's a waste of time.  Many people are poor students and fail to grasp the teachings.  And for many people, it's simply a poor match for them and they ought to pursue other methods.  Again it's a waste of time. 

But for those who have received good instruction, who have applied themselves to the instruction, and for whom it is a good match, it is very valuable.  But not everyone falls into that collection of categories. 

Discussion will only get you part way there.  Without proper instruction in the methodology, I suspect you will never fully understand it.  That's not a judgement over you, it's just recognizing what it entails.


----------



## Hanzou

Drose427 said:


> There you go again half reading
> 
> They arent illegal in the _schools
> _
> Theyre illegal in _Kumite
> _


_
_
Which is what I mean: It wasn't "illegal" to do those techniques in kumite. 



> Idk why you bring up MT, unless now its a part of Traditional Karate.



I brought up MT as an example of a striking art that utilizes those techniques throughout the sparring process, so it's bizarre that those techs would be frowned upon in karate sparring.

Not that adding elbows or knees would suddenly make karate fighting suddenly resemble the kata.



> And yeah, if you're expecting combat to mimc Kata to a T, you've completely ignored explanations given....



Not resemble it to a T, but some level of resemblance would be refreshing.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> Which is what I mean: It wasn't "illegal" to do those techniques in kumite.
> 
> 
> 
> I brought up MT as an example of a striking art that utilizes those techniques throughout the sparring process, so it's bizarre that those techs would be frowned upon in karate sparring.
> 
> Not that adding elbows or knees would suddenly make karate fighting suddenly resemble the kata.
> 
> 
> 
> Not resemble it to a T, but some level of resemblance would be refreshing.


And where you continue to fail is in thinking that anybody needs to justify anything to you.


----------



## Steve

Flying Crane said:


> I think this is something that can be discussed intellectually only up to a point.  I'm not surprised that it remains unclear after such discussions, if someone has never been thru it.  It is a tremendous help if you have some level of experience with the method, to make sense of it.
> 
> I'm the first to agree, many people who practice kata do not understand it well, do not understand what they ought to be getting from it, and how to use it as a training tool.  For those many people, yes it is a waste of time.  Many people who teach kata do not understand it well and do a piss-poor job of teaching it.  Again, it's a waste of time.  Many people are poor students and fail to grasp the teachings.  And for many people, it's simply a poor match for them and they ought to pursue other methods.  Again it's a waste of time.
> 
> But for those who have received good instruction, who have applied themselves to the instruction, and for whom it is a good match, it is very valuable.  But not everyone falls into that collection of categories.
> 
> Discussion will only get you part way there.  Without proper instruction in the methodology, I suspect you will never fully understand it.  That's not a judgement over you, it's just recognizing what it entails.


I don't know.  I have a lot of experience in training and adult education.   If im an expert in anything, it's how people go from knowing nothing about a thing to being realLy good at it.   What you're suggesting is that the method is ineffable, which frankly borders on mysticism.

People learn how to do things in a very simple way, and if the method can't be articulated on an intellectual level, i think we are on very shaky ground.


----------



## Flying Crane

Steve said:


> I don't know.  I have a lot of experience in training and adult education.   If im an expert in anything, it's how people go from knowing nothing about a thing to being realLy good at it.   What you're suggesting is that the method is ineffable, which frankly borders on mysticism.
> 
> People learn how to do things in a very simple way, and if the method can't be articulated on an intellectual level, i think we are on very shaky ground.


I disagree.  

This discussion has been going on and on in thread after thread,  different people have offered numerous explanations, and yet other people insist that they can't see the value in it, or it doesn't make sense to them.  It's not mystical, there's no mysticism about it.  But it is, apparently, a method in which you have no solid experience.  Your experience is limited to talk, and to looking in at it but never experiencing and embracing the training method.  So I have no recourse but to conclude that without some direct experience, you are just not gonna get it.  Words don't get you there, YouTube doesn't get you there.  If you aren't going to do it, then you will never really understand it.  

I don't know what else to say but, those who understand it are trying to help you understand it.  If you can't, then maybe you are going to need to just accept that it works for some people, but you don't understand it.  That in no way invalidates your own training that does not include kata.  It's just a different approach to training, that's all.  If it's not for you, don't do it.  If you are not interested in trying a method that uses kata, then don't.  If you don't understand it, then you can take it on faith that other people do.  Or not.  

But at some point I kinda gotta ask, why are the same people still having this same debate?  It's just become pointless.  You don't understand it?  Ok then.  No worries. 

I've suggested another factor that might help you understand it: if you had direct experience with the method.  But you apparently don't see that as relevant.  ok then, given the limitations inherent in an online venue, I'm out of ideas.  So I guess you can just be content with your position, that it doesn't make sense to you and pursue the method that works best for you.  Nobody here I looking to make conversions.  In the end it actually does not matter to me if you are, or are not, convinced


----------



## Steve

Flying Crane said:


> I disagree.
> 
> This discussion has been going on and on in thread after thread,  different people have offered numerous explanations, and yet other people insist that they can't see the value in it, or it doesn't make sense to them.  It's not mystical, there's no mysticism about it.  But it is, apparently, a method in which you have no solid experience.  Your experience is limited to talk, and to looking in at it but never experiencing and embracing the training method.  So I have no recourse but to conclude that without some direct experience, you are just not gonna get it.  Words don't get you there, YouTube doesn't get you there.  If you aren't going to do it, then you will never really understand it.
> 
> I don't know what else to say but, those who understand it are trying to help you understand it.  If you can't, then maybe you are going to need to just accept that it works for some people, but you don't understand it.  That in no way invalidates your own training that does not include kata.  It's just a different approach to training, that's all.  If it's not for you, don't do it.  If you are not interested in trying a method that uses kata, then don't.  If you don't understand it, then you can take it on faith that other people do.  Or not.
> 
> But at some point I kinda gotta ask, why are the same people still having this same debate?  It's just become pointless.  You don't understand it?  Ok then.  No worries.
> 
> I've suggested another factor that might help you understand it: if you had direct experience with the method.  But you apparently don't see that as relevant.  ok then, given the limitations inherent in an online venue, I'm out of ideas.  So I guess you can just be content with your position, that it doesn't make sense to you and pursue the method that works best for you.  Nobody here I looking to make conversions.  In the end it actually does not matter to me if you are, or are not, convinced


I don't think I've ever said I see no value in kata.   If you insist it has value, I believe you.  I just don't think anyone has ever done a very good job explaining the path from kata to application. 

I don't know why you're getting defensive with me.  If it doesn't matter to you whether I get it or not, why are you busting my chops about it?   If you can't explain it, just say so.   But I don't believe that, just because you can't articulate it, no one can.   Or, conversely, if it can't be explained, that speaks volumes, in itself.

Edit to add, I'm very open to any kind of training.   While I've never done, I don't think I've ever said I never would.  I don't want anyone to think I'm anti anything.  The reverse is much more accurate.  Given unlimited time and money, I'd probably give everything a try.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Flying Crane said:


> I disagree.
> 
> This discussion has been going on and on in thread after thread,  different people have offered numerous explanations, and yet other people insist that they can't see the value in it, or it doesn't make sense to them.  It's not mystical, there's no mysticism about it.  But it is, apparently, a method in which you have no solid experience.  Your experience is limited to talk, and to looking in at it but never experiencing and embracing the training method.  So I have no recourse but to conclude that without some direct experience, you are just not gonna get it.  Words don't get you there, YouTube doesn't get you there.  If you aren't going to do it, then you will never really understand it.
> 
> I don't know what else to say but, those who understand it are trying to help you understand it.  If you can't, then maybe you are going to need to just accept that it works for some people, but you don't understand it.  That in no way invalidates your own training that does not include kata.  It's just a different approach to training, that's all.  If it's not for you, don't do it.  If you are not interested in trying a method that uses kata, then don't.  If you don't understand it, then you can take it on faith that other people do.  Or not.
> 
> But at some point I kinda gotta ask, why are the same people still having this same debate?  It's just become pointless.  You don't understand it?  Ok then.  No worries.
> 
> I've suggested another factor that might help you understand it: if you had direct experience with the method.  But you apparently don't see that as relevant.  ok then, given the limitations inherent in an online venue, I'm out of ideas.  So I guess you can just be content with your position, that it doesn't make sense to you and pursue the method that works best for you.  Nobody here I looking to make conversions.  In the end it actually does not matter to me if you are, or are not, convinced


|
_*This is exactly where the traditional karate, specifically Shotokan karate here, debate should be heading< IMO.
|*_
The is a gap among posters in the understanding of what kata is as you have mentioned here, and what the traditional karate curriculum is trying to accomplish.
|
The overall challenge of traditional martial arts, as proposed by the masters of all styles, is that traditional martial arts is an intellectual undertaking....  Getting a handle on the human development brought about by proper martial arts training is an enormous task.  Given this starting presumption, then the task becomes one of questioning yourself, instead of constantly questioning others--because your personal model works....
|
What we have instead, is in a competitive world, one develops a model that works for them, then says that's what works universally.  The model of physical training that works for the athlete is then how Shotokan should be practiced (Athletically).  The full contact fighting model that works for the full contact fighter--say the well know Kyokuhsin convention, then says that this is how Shotokan should be practiced--full contact.  The JKA convention of high speed, highly mobile point sparring that works for the JKA organization, is then how Shotokan should be practiced according to the JKA.  The proponent who believes in a lot of repetitive applied drills with pressure testing, then says this is how Shotokan should be practiced--drills under pressure testing.   The Ian A. came along with some really good interpretations & adaptations of bunkai, and then IA followers said this is how Shotokan should be practiced in order to make Shotokan 'work.'
|
From my way of thinking, all of these viewpoints are valid, yet they are all wrong.  It is the principles of  traditional karate training embodied in Shotokan that dicate how all these interpretation & applications of Shotokan should be practiced.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Steve said:


> I don't know.  I have a lot of experience in training and adult education.   If im an expert in anything, it's how people go from knowing nothing about a thing to being realLy good at it.   _*What you're suggesting is that the method is ineffable, which frankly borders on mysticism*_.
> 
> People learn how to do things in a very simple way, and if the method can't be articulated on an intellectual level, i think we are on very shaky ground.


|
You have a model that stresses simplicity.  The concept of simplicity is made clear in the Shotokan karate model.  Is the Shotokan karate model simple the way you interpret & practice simple?  Without a long discourse, in a word NO.
|
When we latch onto words like "mysticism," etc. your argument is valid to me because the intangible human skills of mind & spirit are difficult to comprehend & train compared to the outward physical form, acts we can all see and do instinctively to start.  We can see the effects of physical movements as well.  We can easily register the physical through the senses....
|
Mind, and particularly spirit, no.  All traditional martial arts is founded on three basic human capabilities of body, mind & spirit.  While not *mystical* in the literal sense, growing these in unison, doing so is NOT simple to understand, tap into & develop.
|
Poster-Practitioners trying to grasp and tap into these capabilities all have different views of what they actually are in martial arts and how exactly to tap into them.  It's really up to the individual poster to reassess or re-examine their own position.  Just like the idea of kata training, some are not willing or able to rethink a position, particularly if it's working.  That would make little practical sense in a competitive world.  What one gives up is the potential for progession that comes from open thinking & self questioning.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Drose427 said:


> Ok, so first heres the best rendition of Keecho Il boo (basic form 1 in my style) that I could find.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bear in mind stances are usually only that deep for conditioning,...


|
As a general rule, I could agree, but probably not to the extent you do.
|
The real question, to me, is _conditioning for what?_


Drose427 said:


> _*Essentially these are all things one could learn without forms*_, but forms can help in this process and can be a good way to getting the hang of these things if youre training the bunkai properly enough.


|
Drose427, you went into considerable depth on the technical s.  Fundamental fighting tactics.  As a traditional karate stylist, I would again agree as a general rule--that all these can be learned without forms.  So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all?  Or alternatively, why have virtually all the Master's of Tang Soo Do have all these hyung / kata in the curriculum?  Why is kata / hyung required and stressed in the training?



Drose427 said:


> As for Karate guys disagreeing with, Im sure some would.


  Again, why did the Okinawan karate styles have so much dependence on kata?  Why did Funakoshi and his Japanese karate progeny carry over kata as mandate necessary for the practice of karate in Japan.  Why did the orginators of Tang Soo Do carry on with the clear emphasis of kata or poomse in the evolutoinos of Tae Kwon Do and Tang Soo Do?
|
Specifically, what martial conditioning was being developed by kata/ hyung, etc.?  According to all the Masters of these styles?



Drose427 said:


> But hey, thats just my opinion. *As long as you're drilling full speed, proper distance, and good contact* *they have the same effect*


|
Yet that is not how the Tang Soo Do Master in your own, basic no. 1 hyung vid is practicing......  He is precisely NOT doing what you say is correct & necessary to train effectively for fighting / self defense.  Yet that is how virtually all demonstrations of hyung (kata) I've ever personally witnessed, been taught, seen on YT,  read about, tested for--are practiced--in precisely the manner demonstrated in your Keecho Il Boo YT vid.  Even Mr. Shotokan Karate in MMA, Lyoto Machida is practicing kata in keeping with classical karate practice so described by your TAng Soo Master's YT vid..
|
What is the effect you are talking about?  How does it compare to the effects sought by the practicing Tang Soo Do Master doing a simpleton form (Keecho Il Boo) that another poster lambasted me for saying I believed that the Shotokan version of that hyung was valuable?  It's a solo exercise.  It's not full power or speed.  It' not using a resistive partner or physical resistance training / contact of any kind.  It's only throwing a simple, kihon punch...."Karate's a lot more than kihon," one of my critics here said...Walking around routinely placing ones hand at one's knee is not how you fight, is it?  Why do that at all?  Why do that over & over & over & over & over in the hyung is it's just a technique, that seems impractical, even dangerous--for many fighting situations anyway?  What effect, beside the / some cleverly disguised sweep of a kick (that we need Ian A. to show us karate dummies the true light of what actual adaptation of a simple down block is for), could all the Shotokan, every karate style--Masters be after?


----------



## ShotoNoob

Drose427 said:


> Ok, so first heres the best rendition of Keecho Il boo (basic form 1 in my style) that I could find.


|
Note I didn't raise up in alarm, when you posted a Tang Soo Do YT vid in a Shotokan karate thread.  Or talked about Machida who has been wildly successful in the MMA arena--when I was cautioned more than once for not keeping strictly keeping to "self defense.".  IMO & IMU--No need to fall over dead, because someone wants to bring examples directly from their or another art, or from  experiences they see as applicable to their success....


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> The real question, to me, is _conditioning for what?_


Kata has different relevance to everyone. If some people want to use it to develop their breathing, fine. If some people use it to condition their legs, great. Others may use it as exercise for movement and balance. However if those things are the only reason for doing kata, then I would suggest there may be other ways, at least as good to achieve those objectives as you express in the next para quoted.



ShotoNoob said:


> Drose427, you went into considerable depth on the technical s.  Fundamental fighting tactics.  As a traditional karate stylist, I would again agree as a general rule--that all these can be learned without forms.  *So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all? * Or alternatively, why have virtually all the Master's of Tang Soo Do have all these hyung / kata in the curriculum?  Why is kata / hyung required and stressed in the training?


Now I am a little perplexed at what you are saying here. Sentence construction makes a huge difference.
1. *So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all? *
ie K-man doesn't advocate doing kata ..
or ...
2. *So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all? *
ie K-man advocates doing kata ...

The grammar here is beyond repair, but for the record, K-man advocates doing kata. 



ShotoNoob said:


> Again, why did the Okinawan karate styles have so much dependence on kata?  Why did Funakoshi and his Japanese karate progeny carry over kata as mandate necessary for the practice of karate in Japan.  Why did the orginators of Tang Soo Do carry on with the clear emphasis of kata or poomse in the evolutoinos of Tae Kwon Do and Tang Soo Do?


Answer ... within the kata is the essence of that karate style. It is arguable that without kata you don't have karate.




ShotoNoob said:


> Specifically, what martial conditioning was being developed by kata/ hyung, etc.?  According to all the Masters of these styles?


Martial 'conditioning' is hardly the right word. Martial 'understanding' may be a closer to the truth.



ShotoNoob said:


> Yet that is not how the Tang Soo Do Master in your own, basic no. 1 hyung vid is practicing......  He is precisely NOT doing what you say is correct & necessary to train effectively for fighting / self defense.  Yet that is how virtually all demonstrations of hyung (kata) I've ever personally witnessed, been taught, seen on YT,  read about, tested for--are practiced--in precisely the manner demonstrated in your Keecho Il Boo YT vid.  Even Mr. Shotokan Karate in MMA, Lyoto Machida is practicing kata in keeping with classical karate practice so described by your TAng Soo Master's YT vid..


So they are performing kihon kata. Do they understand the deeper meaning of the kata? Unless they tell us or show us how would we know?



ShotoNoob said:


> "Karate's a lot more than kihon," one of my critics here said...Walking around routinely placing ones hand at one's knee is not how you fight, is it?  Why do that at all?  Why do that over & over & over & over & over in the hyung is it's just a technique, that seems impractical, even dangerous--for many fighting situations anyway?  What effect, beside the / some cleverly disguised sweep of a kick (that we need Ian A. to show us karate dummies the true light of what actual adaptation of a simple down block is for), could all the Shotokan, every karate style--Masters be after?


That critic would probably be me.  If you still don't understand what I was referring to I would suggest it just isn't going to happen, but don't worry. You have a few friends here in the same boat.


ShotoNoob said:


> Note I didn't raise up in alarm, when you posted a Tang Soo Do YT vid in a Shotokan karate thread.  Or talked about Machida who has been wildly successful in the MMA arena--when I was cautioned more than once for not keeping strictly keeping to "self defense.".  IMO & IMU--No need to fall over dead, because someone wants to bring examples directly from their or another art, or from  experiences they see as applicable to their success....


Hmm! I thought it was my OP but there you go. 

I have never objected to interesting and relevant thread drift. I do object strenuously when my threads are hijacked. When someone has no knowledge of bukai and no interest in developing an understanding, I question the value of that person's contribution when we are discussing bunkai.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Drose427 said:


> As for the hands, this is a time where things aren't exact to the form.
> 
> Assuming you're driving deep enough to be able to step in for the trip,
> 
> You would have to change hand position to one where you could trap.





Drose427 said:


> Its a something I think we've talked about before.
> 
> While some moves in forms will translate almost perfectly, other need to be interpreted and adapted for sparring. Some folks like it and have no issue seeing exactly what to do to make it work. They can just feel it when working with a resisting opponent and correct it.
> 
> Others prefer to be shown directly.



My question is, if your bunkai involves completely different body movements from those you are actually making in the kata, then how does it matter what you are doing in the kata? You could just as easily perform a Choi Li Fut form but imagine in your head that you are actually performing Judo techniques.

I have no problem with the idea that techniques in a solo drill might need to be adapted according to the contingencies of the moment in a real fight or sparring situation. This example goes well beyond that. There is nothing in the demonstrated form which matches the necessary arm movements for the proposed application. That leaves just the stepping - and "2 lunging steps forward" could cover a lot of possible applications.

If that particular form for stepping is crucial to your art, then I can certainly see the justification for drilling it on its own. Maybe it's like "shrimping" in BJJ - a fundamental movement pattern that is applied in hundreds of different techniques. Of course, then I start to wonder why I almost never see this style of stepping in Tang Soo Do sparring if it is such a fundamental aspect of movement.



Drose427 said:


> As I said, if you're deep enough, you could actually neglect the punch, and instead when tripping (whether you opt for the sweep or the leg wrap) use the rechambering motion of the left hand with waist rotation to pull them off balance more making them more likely to go down, like Abernathy did.



That pulling action to finish the takedown is based on completely different footwork than what is shown in the form. If you are imagining an application for the form that relies on different footwork *and* different hand movement, then what's left? Can you name any application which could *not* be cited as an interpretation of the form if you were allowed to change around the actual movements that much?



Drose427 said:


> As for point number two, our association does more of a crescent when stepping in. Sorta like the middle step in some karate styles but without the actual step. So to be honest, that could contribute to how that makes more sense to me, which is my bad for giving you an inaccurate video.





Drose427 said:


> While this guys overall form isnt how we'd do it, he does the Crescent step I was talking about for getting your leg around






Drose427 said:


> So something I notice talking to Tony that I hadnt caught on to before,
> 
> Our style steps in to a front stance with a crescent step like the gentleman in the tang soo do video I posts.
> 
> This lead a bunkai to work for us and make sense for me, as that motion recreates hooking an opponents leg after trapping a kick if you go inside, or sweeping the leg if you go to the outside.
> 
> But would would the Bunkai bee in styles that come straight out?



This brings up an interesting point. I can see the crescent step as a rough approximation of an inside trip. However, I've noticed that crescent stepping vs straight stepping seems to be fairly consistent within an art or association. In other words, it's not like an individual executing the form sometimes uses a crescent step when he is thinking about executing a trip and other times uses a straight step when he wants to punch as quickly as possible. He'll typically either always step straight or always crescent step.



K-man said:


> When *Hanzou* first started on MT one of the first things he did was to dismiss kata as irrelevant when it comes to real fighting.



One mistake Hanzou makes, IMHO, is thinking that fighting will or should necessarily look like (a certain kind of) sparring. I understand there are reasons and circumstances why that may not be the case. What I'm trying to figure out is the discrepancy between the fundamental body mechanics and movement principles used in the kata of some systems vs those used in the sparring of those same systems.

It doesn't really answer anything for me to say "well, kata is different from sparring." Presumably both forms of training are intended to help the practitioner become more able to apply the skills of his/her art in a real situation. How does it help the practitioner to reach that goal if the body mechanics are so different?

(Note - I'm *not* claiming that all kata practitioners spar using totally different body mechanics from those they use during kata. I *am* saying that it is extremely common to do so.)



K-man said:


> However, for those who genuinely want to understand the application of kata to fighting I will post another video of the guys I have trained with.



Very cool. I like the teacher's movement. I can see the CMA influence in the art.

Getting back to my original question - can you post some video of a) the kata those applications were taken from and b) some sparring as performed by practitioners of that system? I'll take your word that what Hanzou posted is not representative of how you spar.



Drose427 said:


> Lets run through the list of techniques/bunkai in the form that are illegal in most Karate Schools Sparring
> 
> 1. Groin Strikes
> 2. Leg kicks (not sure about goju, but commonly illegal)
> 3. Elbows
> 4. Hammer fist



As I said before, taking out some specific techniques from your sparring shouldn't change the fundamental body mechanics and movement patterns. If it does, then maybe you should consider allowing those techniques in your sparring.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> Kata has different relevance to everyone. If some people want to use it to develop their breathing, fine. If some people use it to condition their legs, great. Others may use it as exercise for movement and balance. However if those things are the only reason for doing kata, then I would suggest there may be other ways, at least as good to achieve those objectives as you express in the next para quoted.


|
Thanks for answering.
|


K-man said:


> Now I am a little perplexed at what you are saying here. Sentence construction makes a huge difference.
> 1. *So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all? *
> ie K-man doesn't advocate doing kata ..
> or ...
> 2. *So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all? *
> ie K-man advocates doing kata ...
> |
> The grammar here is beyond repair, but for the record, K-man advocates doing kata.


|
My  grammar is off there.  MT posters, many excel over me in this regard....



K-man said:


> Answer ... within the kata is the essence of that karate style. It is arguable that without kata you don't have karate.


|
Trying to be more succinct.  I would agree.  Okay, so what is the essence of a karate style?  What is the essence underlying, behind all these styles of traditional karate (which as I wrote) that all advocated & contain kata training?  Please defined karate's essence.  Flesh it out please....


K-man said:


> Martial 'conditioning' is hardly the right word. Martial 'understanding' may be a closer to the truth.


|
you corrected my grammar.  Here's my correction to your position.  Martial conditioning is actually what the karate training is for.  So what understanding do we need in order to do that conditioning properly, to reap the benefits of kata, kihon training, kumited, etc.?



K-man said:


> So they are performing kihon kata. Do they understand the deeper meaning of the kata? Unless they tell us or show us how would we know?


|
You are just restating the video in words.  What's the why behind the how?  In your opinion...



K-man said:


> That critic would probably be me.  If you still don't understand what I was referring to I would suggest it just isn't going to happen, but don't worry. You have a few friends here in the same boat.
> 
> Hmm! I thought it was my OP but there you go.


|
Yeah, but a lot of that is semantics.  In person demo which has been suggested clear this up as much as possible.  No substitute for such.....



K-man said:


> I have never objected to interesting and relevant thread drift. I do object strenuously when my threads are hijacked. When someone has no knowledge of bukai and no interest in developing an understanding, I question the value of that person's contribution when we are discussing bunkai.


|
Bunkai appears in the Heian kata after one progress from the beginner level Taikyoku kata.  So, from my perspective, I start looking @ bunkai when I start the Heian kata.  However, I was introduced to fighting combinations of kihon technique right away at my first karate school.  That's  the same general concept as bunkai, IMO, TMU.  I was also introduced to Ippon Kumite, 1-steps, right away.  That's similar / concept as bunkai, IMO.  So I don't see any controversy in looking at bunkai, fighting combinations, etc.
|
My guess is that some, perhaps yourself, are very focused on technical applications.  Fine.  Technical applications are a part of traditional karate training.  So is kihon, kihon kata, kata in general, which does not necessarily focus on technical applications.  WHY?


K-man said:


> A. Kata has different relevance to everyone.
> |
> B. If some people want to use it to develop their breathing, fine.
> C. C.If some people use it to condition their legs, great.
> D. Others may use it as exercise for movement and balance.
> E. However if those things are the only reason for doing kata, then I would suggest there may be other ways, at least as good to achieve those objectives as you express in the next para quoted.


|
A. My view is: What was the relevance of the Master's who originated traditional karate see in the training?  What truths, what principles did they discover?  Not start with my opinion, then decide how to make the karate master's program fit my initial opinion. 
|
B. My answer: how & why is breathing trained in traditional karate?  Then that's how and why you train kata, to develop the benefits of proper breathing.
|
C. My answer: How & why do we condition the legs in traditional karate.  Then that's how & why you train kata, to develop the benefits of that training...
|
D. My answer, How & why do we practice for movement & balance in traditional karate,  then that's how we train in kata, to develop movement & balance.
E. Same thinking for kihon, self defense applications-bunkai, kumite skills.  You seem to want to change, substitute, modify your understanding of traditional karate activities as it was presented to you for the better--by your own research & thinking.
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the most important step (and most difficult) is to master the understanding of what the traditional karate model is trying to do.  I think the traditional karate model is very good as presented.  It's in people short-cutting the understanding part and trying to monkey with it to make it better, to jump to practical fighting before the requisite skills are built, that is the greater folly.  That is the very sound point made in the Loren Frank, Black-Belt Mag article, IMO, TMU.
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TYING TO SHOTOKAN FOR SELF DEFENSE: I think if one practically master's the Shotokan base, they will have a self-defense capability above the average non-traditional martial art practitioner.  The fact that I can find faults, find aspects of Shotokan karate that I could change, is secondary in importance, IMO.


----------



## Flying Crane

Steve said:


> I don't think I've ever said I see no value in kata.   If you insist it has value, I believe you.  I just don't think anyone has ever done a very good job explaining the path from kata to application.
> 
> I don't know why you're getting defensive with me.  If it doesn't matter to you whether I get it or not, why are you busting my chops about it?   If you can't explain it, just say so.   But I don't believe that, just because you can't articulate it, no one can.   Or, conversely, if it can't be explained, that speaks volumes, in itself.
> 
> Edit to add, I'm very open to any kind of training.   While I've never done, I don't think I've ever said I never would.  I don't want anyone to think I'm anti anything.  The reverse is much more accurate.  Given unlimited time and money, I'd probably give everything a try.


Well I appreciate if you are open to it, and I definitely understand that time and resources are limited so I do not expect you to just go out and join another school in order to get educated in kata.  It's a lengthy process when done correctly, not something you will understand in a weekend or week or month or year.  It takes embracing the complete process.  

However, you suggested it borders on mysticism because I suggested you might need direct experience to really understand it.  You don't understand why I might find that irritating?  Overall your participation in these discussions tends to be more respectful and reasonable than some of the others and I appreciate that.  That's why I am willing to continue to discuss with you.  You might notice a different kind of response that I make towards certain others.

But in the end, you may never really understand it without some direct xperience of a certain quality.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Flying Crane said:


> Well I appreciate if you are open to it, and I definitely understand that time and resources are limited so I do not expect you to just go out and join another school in order to get educated in kata.  It's a lengthy process when done correctly, not something you will understand in a weekend or week or month or year.  It takes embracing the complete process.
> 
> However, you suggested it borders on mysticism because I suggested you might need direct experience to really understand it.  You don't understand why I might find that irritating?  Overall your participation in these discussions tends to be more respectful and reasonable than some of the others and I appreciate that.  That's why I am willing to continue to discuss with you.  You might notice a different kind of response that I make towards certain others.
> 
> But in the end, you may never really understand it without some direct xperience of a certain quality.


|
I feel that this is exactly the case.
|
I believe this is precisely why the Taikyoku kata were created, to simplify and isolate out basic kata training so one could gain an understanding of what kata is for and does, without out lengthy moves & complexity, involvedbunkai masking or distracting from the fundamentals of traditional karate training....


----------



## Steve

Flying Crane said:


> Well I appreciate if you are open to it, and I definitely understand that time and resources are limited so I do not expect you to just go out and join another school in order to get educated in kata.  It's a lengthy process when done correctly, not something you will understand in a weekend or week or month or year.  It takes embracing the complete process.
> 
> However, you suggested it borders on mysticism because I suggested you might need direct experience to really understand it.  You don't understand why I might find that irritating?  Overall your participation in these discussions tends to be more respectful and reasonable than some of the others and I appreciate that.  That's why I am willing to continue to discuss with you.  You might notice a different kind of response that I make towards certain others.
> 
> But in the end, you may never really understand it without some direct xperience of a certain quality.


Thanks for the chance to explain myself better.  I don't think it's mysticism BECAUSE I believe that it should be explainable.  It's only when you say that it cannot be explained that we start hedging toward this area where I don't believe we should be.

When we talk about how people learn, we are talking about a process that is deliberate.  We accumulate knowledge and experience in a very predictable manner, and while there are a ton of great ways to deliver information and teach skills, the transfer of information shouldn't be a mystery.  If the process is deliberate, it should be predictable and well defined.

In this case, we have kata, which is a step in a process for teaching people skills.  It's not (or shouldn' be) a mystery.  When you suggest that it isn't describable and that it must be experienced, you're getting very close to suggesting that it's a matter of faith.  That's what I meant when I said that we're getting close to suggesting that it's mystical.  Ineffable is the term for something that is too big or too abstract to describe with words.

In contrast to kata, a term I've heard used is "mushin."  THAT I can believe is something that must be experienced to understand.  It's a term that describes a mental state.  That I can believe is something that must be experienced to be understood.  I get it.  Makes sense.  The learning/teaching structure of kata/bunkai, including a predictable and logical path to proficiency, isn't like that.  It should be concrete and articulatable (if that's a word.)

All of that said, we may not be able to get to a point where the above is described in a way that it's clear. But that is not the same as saying, "You can't understand it until you do it."  That last, I don't buy it.  Because, as I said before, if you must experience it to understand it, we're entering into a squishy area where the skills development is a product of mysticism and not part of a concrete and definable learnin structure.

I hope all that makes sense.  I'm killing time here while waiting for my car to get worked on at the dealership, so this isn't a work of art.


----------



## Flying Crane

Steve said:


> Thanks for the chance to explain myself better.  I don't think it's mysticism BECAUSE I believe that it should be explainable.  It's only when you say that it cannot be explained that we start hedging toward this area where I don't believe we should be.
> 
> When we talk about how people learn, we are talking about a process that is deliberate.  We accumulate knowledge and experience in a very predictable manner, and while there are a ton of great ways to deliver information and teach skills, the transfer of information shouldn't be a mystery.  If the process is deliberate, it should be predictable and well defined.
> 
> In this case, we have kata, which is a step in a process for teaching people skills.  It's not (or shouldn' be) a mystery.  When you suggest that it isn't describable and that it must be experienced, you're getting very close to suggesting that it's a matter of faith.  That's what I meant when I said that we're getting close to suggesting that it's mystical.  Ineffable is the term for something that is too big or too abstract to describe with words.
> 
> In contrast to kata, a term I've heard used is "mushin."  THAT I can believe is something that must be experienced to understand.  It's a term that describes a mental state.  That I can believe is something that must be experienced to be understood.  I get it.  Makes sense.  The learning/teaching structure of kata/bunkai, including a predictable and logical path to proficiency, isn't like that.  It should be concrete and articulatable (if that's a word.)
> 
> All of that said, we may not be able to get to a point where the above is described in a way that it's clear. But that is not the same as saying, "You can't understand it until you do it."  That last, I don't buy it.  Because, as I said before, if you must experience it to understand it, we're entering into a squishy area where the skills development is a product of mysticism and not part of a concrete and definable learnin structure.
> 
> I hope all that makes sense.  I'm killing time here while waiting for my car to get worked on at the dealership, so this isn't a work of art.


How do you describe the taste of peanut butter to someone who has never had it, and has never tasted peanuts?  You can talk about it all you want, but until it is tasted, the other guy will not know it.

Kata is describable.  Several people here have been patient enough to do it over and over, explaining the process and the theory and the benefits. But others here dismiss it because it doesn't fit their pre-conceived notion of what a fighting art should look like and should work like.  There is a generation of people here who have been raised on a healthy diet of MMA, and believe that is the definition of what a fighting art should look like and how it ought to be trained.  But that is only one method, and these people can't accept that another method has merit because it's different from their own experiences.

At some point these people need to be able to either accept that something they do not understand might have merit and other people just might know what they are talking about, or simply agree to disagree and then stop hijacking threads over and over.  People like Hanzou don't get it and don't seem to want to get it?  That's fine, he's made his point and now it's time for him to shut the love up.  Honestly I thought he'd been banned, I hadn't seen him around for quite a while, and martial talk is a better place without him.

You seem more willing to discuss without being such an *** about it, so I think some discussion can happen.

But the bottom line is, this is an approach to training that you have not experienced.  It's been described and explained over and over.  If you don't get it, that's fine but you may never get it without some quality experience with it.  And no, that's not mystical even if you think it doesn't fit within your understanding of how people learn.


----------



## Hanzou

Flying Crane said:


> . But others here dismiss it because it doesn't fit their pre-conceived notion of what a fighting art should look like and should work like.  There is a generation of people here who have been raised on a healthy diet of MMA, and believe that is the definition of what a fighting art should look like and how it ought to be trained.  But that is only one method, and these people can't accept that another method has merit because it's different from their own experiences.



It's pretty hard to accept that kata is what fighting is supposed to look like, when even the hardcore practitioners of kata aren't fighting that way.

I await the time when someone will show an example of a karateka fighting a non-compliant opponent with techniques that resemble the kata. Until then, I have to accept that MMA, and other firms of combat sports is what skilled MA fighting looks like.

And we have to accept that skilled karate fighting looks like Tom Hill's Karate.


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> It's pretty hard to accept that kata is what fighting is supposed to look like, when even the hardcore practitioners of kata aren't fighting that way.
> 
> I await the time when someone will show an example of a karateka fighting a non-compliant opponent with techniques that resemble the kata. Until then, I have to accept that MMA, and other firms of combat sports is what skilled MA fighting looks like.
> 
> And we have to accept that skilled karate fighting looks like Tom Hill's Karate.


Keep waiting.  Hold your breath.


----------



## drop bear

Steve said:


> Thanks for the chance to explain myself better.  I don't think it's mysticism BECAUSE I believe that it should be explainable.  It's only when you say that it cannot be explained that we start hedging toward this area where I don't believe we should be.
> 
> When we talk about how people learn, we are talking about a process that is deliberate.  We accumulate knowledge and experience in a very predictable manner, and while there are a ton of great ways to deliver information and teach skills, the transfer of information shouldn't be a mystery.  If the process is deliberate, it should be predictable and well defined.
> 
> In this case, we have kata, which is a step in a process for teaching people skills.  It's not (or shouldn' be) a mystery.  When you suggest that it isn't describable and that it must be experienced, you're getting very close to suggesting that it's a matter of faith.  That's what I meant when I said that we're getting close to suggesting that it's mystical.  Ineffable is the term for something that is too big or too abstract to describe with words.
> 
> In contrast to kata, a term I've heard used is "mushin."  THAT I can believe is something that must be experienced to understand.  It's a term that describes a mental state.  That I can believe is something that must be experienced to be understood.  I get it.  Makes sense.  The learning/teaching structure of kata/bunkai, including a predictable and logical path to proficiency, isn't like that.  It should be concrete and articulatable (if that's a word.)
> 
> All of that said, we may not be able to get to a point where the above is described in a way that it's clear. But that is not the same as saying, "You can't understand it until you do it."  That last, I don't buy it.  Because, as I said before, if you must experience it to understand it, we're entering into a squishy area where the skills development is a product of mysticism and not part of a concrete and definable learnin structure.
> 
> I hope all that makes sense.  I'm killing time here while waiting for my car to get worked on at the dealership, so this isn't a work of art.



Which is why I liked the explanation I got. Because it holds up to that idea.

Kata as sort of yoga if you can move through the deep stances and over emphasised technique. You will be more fluid,stronger and more balanced when fighting.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Until then, I have to accept that MMA, and other firms of combat sports is what skilled MA fighting looks like.


You should try looking at it in slow motion and see how sloppy some of the technique is. I often see strikes with the wrong part of the fist, wild swings, strikes to least vulnerable areas, guards down and other problems.


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> My question is, if your bunkai involves completely different body movements from those you are actually making in the kata, then how does it matter what you are doing in the kata? You could just as easily perform a Choi Li Fut form but imagine in your head that you are actually performing Judo techniques.


I know this wasn't in response to my post but can I say the movement should be substantially the same as the kata but there can be variation depending on the interpretation. Of course what has been largely ignored in these discussions is that all the kata shown had been the kihon kata. I did try to point out some time back is that there are advanced forms of the kata as well. Kata can be 'unpacked' and performed in a straight line which is far more like real fighting and if you watch some of Masaji Taira's videos you will see that being demonstrated.

As to your comment that in your head you could be performing Judo techniques, you are actually spot on. Some forms of kata are either two man kata where the intent is obvious and others were developed in relatively recent times where the originator of the kata actually passed on the meaning of the kata. The older kata, those with Chinese origins, come without the explanation. There are many ways of interpreting the techniques and as long as you follow the simple rules of kata it can mean whatever works for you. If it is a sequence of Judo techniques then to me that is absolutely acceptable. However, those Judo techniques should fundamentally be the same physical movement as shown in the kata.



Tony Dismukes said:


> One mistake Hanzou makes, IMHO, is thinking that fighting will or should necessarily look like (a certain kind of) sparring. I understand there are reasons and circumstances why that may not be the case. What I'm trying to figure out is the discrepancy between the fundamental body mechanics and movement principles used in the kata of some systems vs those used in the sparring of those same systems.


And that is one of many mistakes *Hanzou* is thinking. Worse than thinking, he is actually rejecting even the training that has been posted to show he doesn't understand bunkai, all this from someone who in one of his first posts asked what the difference is between kata and bunkai.

I can only answer from my own experience. When I was training Goju Kai I trained on many occasions with one of the men who developed the Goju Kai bunkai back in around 1985. To be honest, it was very basic bunkai and didn't fulfil the basic requirements of kata bunkai, but it did look like the kata. What we did had absolutely no resemblance to the way we sparred or fought in tournaments. It was pretty much the same as the Tom Hill video. That doesn't show anything more than a video of the sort of sparring that developed through competition. Obviously it is totally different to bunkai which is close quarter fighting at grappling range, exactly what point sparring is not?

When I was introduced to Okinawan karate and it's accompanying bunkai, I changed my training. That is why I get annoyed when someone with no knowledge of bunkai continues to post comments that are so far from the truth. The fact is that he and many others have not seen the bunkai that we now train does not mean it doesn't exist. It just means that it is not widely trained. It is interesting that my original organisation is moving toward the same training now.

So again, I can't speak for other styles but George Dillman was training proper bunkai at least 25 years back. I'm not sure when Iain Abernethy started but that would be at least 12 to 15 years back. I know Taira Sensei had been exploring the bunkai for decades.



Tony Dismukes said:


> It doesn't really answer anything for me to say "well, kata is different from sparring." Presumably both forms of training are intended to help the practitioner become more able to apply the skills of his/her art in a real situation. How does it help the practitioner to reach that goal if the body mechanics are so different?
> 
> (Note - I'm *not* claiming that all kata practitioners spar using totally different body mechanics from those they use during kata. I *am* saying that it is extremely common to do so.)


If you dropped in to my training you won't see any sparring like *Hanzou* is claiming to be 'Goju sparring'. If I was preparing guys to compete in tournaments I would have to use that type of sparring. Our sparring consists of one person attacking another where the person being attacked will respond instinctively to defend. That involves entering and engaging, hopefully in the way that the bunkai is trained, but that is not always possible or even desirable. What the bunkai does give you is the next technique when your first technique fails. From the outside you may not see that it is from bunkai because a fight doesn't happen that way and bunkai is not designed to fight beyond one or two techniques.  I have explained all this before in great detail if anyone is interested and it annoys me greatly when people who have never seen my training say we don't pressure test. (I haven't seen them in person either but if what they say appears true, I am happy to accept what they say.)



Tony Dismukes said:


> Very cool. I like the teacher's movement. I can see the CMA influence in the art.


That is representing the origins of the style, hard and soft. Taira looks as if what is doing is hard but when you feel his hands his technique is amazingly soft. I mentioned in an earlier post a time spent with Dr Tetsuhiro Hokama where he spent a lot of time showing what Goju isn't, and that is exactly what so many think it is.



Tony Dismukes said:


> Getting back to my original question - can you post some video of a) the kata those applications were taken from and b) some sparring as performed by practitioners of that system? I'll take your word that what Hanzou posted is not representative of how you spar.


Strangly enough, Taira actually is demonstrating the kata before showing the bunkai. Of course *Hanzou* again misrepresented what was being shown. It was not a seminar. It was part of the training in Okinawa with most of the world's top Goju guys (Kenkyukai) in attendance. As I have said time after time we don't spar but you will see at one part of the video one of my mates was kicked to the chin.



Tony Dismukes said:


> As I said before, taking out some specific techniques from your sparring shouldn't change the fundamental body mechanics and movement patterns. If it does, then maybe you should consider allowing those techniques in your sparring.


Again, not a comment that was addressed to me. I am not aware of any techniques that were illegal in our sparring although many of them would be illegal in competition. But what it points out yet again, you can't practise these techniques at full power in training unless you are wearing full protective gear, then again, that isn't realistic either.


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> Okay, so what is the essence of a karate style?  What is the essence underlying, behind all these styles of traditional karate (which as I wrote) that all advocated & contain kata training?  Please defined karate's essence.  Flesh it out please....


Wow! There are books written on that and you expect a short answer? 

OK, I'll try. For a start you will have a accept that my answer comes from a different position to yours. With the exception of Wado Ryu, I don't see any Japanese styles as 'traditional'. Despite the fact that they contain kata they all have a major focus on competition, something that never existed in traditional karate. In traditional karate the focus was on kata and, in the styles that I consider traditional, it still is. Now we get to another fundamental difference between what I consider traditional karate and the more modern styles. Traditional karate is close quarter fighting and the kata is designed around that. If that is not the case kata cannot work as intended because fighting is not choreographed. Bunkai works on a predetermined response, ie block with the only arm available or get hit. Unless you have seen bunkai trained this way you probably won't understand what I am saying but both Iain Abernethy and Masaji Tiara use this all the time.

Now I am not going to discuss styles that I am not familiar with so these comments are purely for Goju Ryu. Goju means 'hard' and 'soft'. Until I started training Aikido I did not understand 'soft'. A lot of the guys on MT practising traditional CMAs will know exactly what I am describing. So, to me, one of the parts that fall under 'essence of Goju' is the differentiation between 'hard' and 'soft'. Each traditional style had its own kata. In Goju we have two kata that are especially important to our style. These are Sanchin and Tensho kata. Within these kata you can find almost everything that is Goju. At a higher level Goju has Kyusho and at the highest level Kiko. To a major extent these are non existent in modern karate styles.



ShotoNoob said:


> Here's my correction to your position.  Martial conditioning is actually what the karate training is for.  So what understanding do we need in order to do that conditioning properly, to reap the benefits of kata, kihon training, kumited, etc.?


We'll just have to agree to disagree. In Okinawan dojos there are stacks of training aids for conditioning.



ShotoNoob said:


> You are just restating the video in words.  What's the why behind the how?  In your opinion...


I don't know what video you are talking about. All I said was that what were posted were kihon kata. How would any of us know what those people know about kata beyond what is in the videos?



ShotoNoob said:


> Yeah, but a lot of that is semantics.  In person demo which has been suggested clear this up as much as possible.  No substitute for such.....



Nothing about semantics. From your posts you seem to think kihon is what karate is all about. That is why *Hanzou* is so critical of karate. His arguement is that kihon is not the way you fight and if kihon was the be all and end all I would agree with him. Again, we will just have to disagree because what we train is way beyond kihon. (Of course we still practise kihon.)



ShotoNoob said:


> Bunkai appears in the Heian kata after one progress from the beginner level Taikyoku kata.  So, from my perspective, I start looking @ bunkai when I start the Heian kata.  However, I was introduced to fighting combinations of kihon technique right away at my first karate school.  That's  the same general concept as bunkai, IMO, TMU.  I was also introduced to Ippon Kumite, 1-steps, right away.  That's similar / concept as bunkai, IMO.  So I don't see any controversy in looking at bunkai, fighting combinations, etc.


Without seeing your training I have no idea what you are training but it sounds more like oyo bunkai to me.



ShotoNoob said:


> My guess is that some, perhaps yourself, are very focused on technical applications.  Fine.  Technical applications are a part of traditional karate training.  So is kihon, kihon kata, kata in general, which does not necessarily focus on technical applications.  WHY?


We train technical applications but not within bunkai. If you want to use chokes and locks you have to learn how to perform them properly. That has nothing to do with bunkai. Bunkai is mostly gross motor skill. Unless you have trained to a very high level, fine techniques are likely to fail. Punches, knees, forearms etc are much more likely to be effective and that is what bunkai is about.



ShotoNoob said:


> A. My view is: What was the relevance of the Master's who originated traditional karate see in the training?  What truths, what principles did they discover?  Not start with my opinion, then decide how to make the karate master's program fit my initial opinion.
> |
> B. My answer: how & why is breathing trained in traditional karate?  Then that's how and why you train kata, to develop the benefits of proper breathing.
> |
> C. My answer: How & why do we condition the legs in traditional karate.  Then that's how & why you train kata, to develop the benefits of that training...
> |
> D. My answer, How & why do we practice for movement & balance in traditional karate,  then that's how we train in kata, to develop movement & balance.
> E. Same thinking for kihon, self defense applications-bunkai, kumite skills.  You seem to want to change, substitute, modify your understanding of traditional karate activities as it was presented to you for the better--by your own research & thinking.
> |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I believe the most important step (and most difficult) is to master the understanding of what the traditional karate model is trying to do.  I think the traditional karate model is very good as presented.  It's in people short-cutting the understanding part and trying to monkey with it to make it better, to jump to practical fighting before the requisite skills are built, that is the greater folly.  That is the very sound point made in the Loren Frank, Black-Belt Mag article, IMO, TMU.
> |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That's cool, that is your understanding. My understanding, based on my training, is quite different. Your karate works for you, my karate works for me.



ShotoNoob said:


> TYING TO SHOTOKAN FOR SELF DEFENSE: I think if one practically master's the Shotokan base, they will have a self-defense capability above the average non-traditional martial art practitioner.  The fact that I can find faults, find aspects of Shotokan karate that I could change, is secondary in importance, IMO.


I don't disagree at all. In fact that was my reason for the OP.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> If you dropped in to my training you won't see any sparring like *Hanzou* is claiming to be 'Goju sparring'. If I was preparing guys to compete in tournaments I would have to use that type of sparring. Our sparring consists of one person attacking another where the person being attacked will respond instinctively to defend.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like your sparring is similar in concept to "one-step sparring" or the way most aikidoka approach randori in that there is a clearly defined attacker who comes in with a fully committed attack which the defender must counter. Can you give more details on how exactly you structure this kind of sparring? (If you can find footage of someone from your system doing this type of sparring, that would be great too.)



K-man said:


> Of course what has been largely ignored in these discussions is that all the kata shown had been the kihon kata. I did try to point out some time back is that there are advanced forms of the kata as well.



I've seen you make this point repeatedly, but it gets a little confusing because even the experienced karate practitioners in these threads are using the terminology differently. Could you post a clip of what you would consider kihon kata and another clip of what you would consider advanced kata so I could get a better sense of the difference?


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like your sparring is similar in concept to "one-step sparring" or the way most aikidoka approach randori in that there is a clearly defined attacker who comes in with a fully committed attack which the defender must counter. Can you give more details on how exactly you structure this kind of sparring? (If you can find footage of someone from your system doing this type of sparring, that would be great too.)
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen you make this point repeatedly, but it gets a little confusing because even the experienced karate practitioners in these threads are using the terminology differently. Could you post a clip of what you would consider kihon kata and another clip of what you would consider advanced kata so I could get a better sense of the difference?


Kihon kata is pretty much every video of kata you find on YouTube. Advanced kata is a variation of that with change of emphasis which shows as faster and maybe changes of direction. I have just spent a lot of time trying to find examples of advanced kata. There used to be some snippets of it on Paul Enfield's instructional videos but they seem to have been taken down. I have posted some of them in the past. There is a wealth of material of our type of training if you search 'Taira Bunkai'. I purchased DVDs of advanced bunkai in my early stages and it is available online for members of Taira's Kenkyukai members.

As to the relationship to one step sparring. Not really. That sort of sparring is more of a Japanese type of training that we used to do. The type of training I am describing is like the video I posted earlier. Nothing at all like randori in Aikido.

If I can find a clip of advanced kata I will post it for you.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> As to the relationship to one step sparring. Not really. That sort of sparring is more of a Japanese type of training that we used to do. The type of training I am describing is like the video I posted earlier. Nothing at all like randori in Aikido.



Well, aikido randori and karate one-step sparring are very different from each other. The commonality I was getting at is that one participant is charged with being the attacker and delivering a committed attack which the other participant counters using the appropriate techniques from that system. Is this a feature of your system? I'm still not clear.

If we can leave aside the specific details of body mechanics and techniques for a moment: in any form of sparring the participants have immediate* goals they are trying to achieve and rules which constrain how they may attempt to reach those goals. For example, in boxing sparring the immediate goal is for each participant to punch the other person as much as possible while being hit as little as possible. Rules include: participants must wear boxing gloves, punch above the waist, no kicking, no throwing, yadda, yadda, etc.. What are the goals and rules in your form of sparring? If you have a student who has never sparred before, what instructions do you give them before their first sparring session so they know what they are supposed to be doing?


*(I say_ immediate_ goal, because the ultimate goal is always to learn and improve. We just reach that goal through the experience of trying to accomplish the immediate goals vs resistance.)


----------



## K-man

Tony Dismukes said:


> Well, aikido randori and karate one-step sparring are very different from each other. The commonality I was getting at is that one participant is charged with being the attacker and delivering a committed attack which the other participant counters using the appropriate techniques from that system. Is this a feature of your system? I'm still not clear.


Aikido randori is continuous but in most I have seen, both in person and on video, is telegraphed. I'm not using that as a criticism but in telegraphing the attack you can easily use an appropriate defence. The one step sparring we did was more set up and a predetermined attack with a predetermined response. I don't use the one step approach at all although you could argue that the way we train against a known attack is similar. Bearing in mind that we have been talking about bunkai here and this sort of training really is totally different to training bunkai.

In our training, to use bunkai would be to enter and engage with a preemptive attack as you might find within a kata or from a form of sticky hands that we use for training many of our techniques (It can be used as a follow up to a de-escalation scenario), or from an unscripted random attack where you will just engage instinctively and use the techniques from the bunkai as appropriate. You can't just say, "Here comes a fight, I think I'll use Saifa bunkai this time". You use what you are given and continue accordingly.



Tony Dismukes said:


> If we can leave aside the specific details of body mechanics and techniques for a moment: in any form of sparring the participants have immediate* goals they are trying to achieve and rules which constrain how they may attempt to reach those goals. For example, in boxing sparring the immediate goal is for each participant to punch the other person as much as possible while being hit as little as possible. Rules include: participants must wear boxing gloves, punch above the waist, no kicking, no throwing, yadda, yadda, etc.. What are the goals and rules in your form of sparring? If you have a student who has never sparred before, what instructions do you give them before their first sparring session so they know what they are supposed to be doing?


Good question. Our 'sparring', for want of a better word begins very slowly and builds up. Depending on the skill of the guys the intensity will be be determined by the experience. Rules? None really apart from common sense. No hard strikes to the head, even with head gear, take care of your partner when applying locks and holds, don't injure your partner. We very rarely use protective gear except in gradings. But again, this is nothing to do with training bunkai or the value of bunkai. Unscripted sparring is just that, unscripted. If you get into a position where you can use techniques and sequences from the bunkai, great, that's what the bunkai is for. But none of us a near the level of proficiency of someone like Taira. He is amazing with his speed and agility, bearing in mind he is now in his sixties.

So to the first time student sparring. No instructions at all apart from "don't lose contact with the hands" as it all begins from the sticky hands. This might seem incredibly vague but we have more black belts than kyu grade so the beginner is normally being guided by someone with years of experience.



Tony Dismukes said:


> *(I say_ immediate_ goal, because the ultimate goal is always to learn and improve. We just reach that goal through the experience of trying to accomplish the immediate goals vs resistance.)


Exactly, and the more experienced the guys training the greater the resistance and the greater the intensity.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> I know this wasn't in response to my post but can I say the movement should be substantially the same as the kata but there can be variation depending on the interpretation. Of course what has been largely ignored in these discussions is that all the kata shown had been the kihon kata. I did try to point out some time back is that there are advanced forms of the kata as well. Kata can be 'unpacked' and performed in a straight line which is far more like real fighting and if you watch some of Masaji Taira's videos you will see that being demonstrated.


|
Wow.  You have written some extensive commentary conveyed @ the expert level.  I just want to convey on point of agreement @ this time.
|
Your lead in was in response to Tony D.'s question about movement in karate kumite not resembling kata movement.  I think the shift to sport competition in Shotokan when it evolved in Japan really muddied the water about how traditional karate moves in fighting.  Without getting into a discussion of what you call traditional karate versus what I do (and your detailed  response to me above really helps me understand your position), I generally believe in what you have described above for kata movement versus kumite movement.
|
In looking at kata, critical people typically look at the form and then conclude that you basically regurgitate that in fighting  This is where your points about advanced kata & 'unpacking' kata performance when coming to application--shed light.  My point, in taking a look at kihon kata, is that how you practice the kata build a skill base that then can be enacted with greater speed, power, alternatives to the exact techniques, variations on the angles & transitioning into stances presented  by the forms.
|
The purpose of kata is NOT a fixed mold one cuts & pastes physically onto a fighting or here, self defense application or situation.  The abilities developed in kata are in stark contrast to say repetitively punching a heavy back with a boxing jab / cross with full power that you then expect to go out and automatically impose that athletically on a resisting opponent.  Someone, such as typical boxers, who only believe in the latter, will not / never see the value in kihon kata....


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> Wow! There are books written on that and you expect a short answer?
> 
> OK, I'll try. For a start you will have a accept that my answer comes from a different position to yours. With the exception of Wado Ryu, I don't see any Japanese styles as 'traditional'. Despite the fact that they contain kata they all have a major focus on competition, something that never existed in traditional karate. In traditional karate the focus was on kata and, in the styles that I consider traditional, it still is. Now we get to another fundamental difference between what I consider traditional karate and the more modern styles. Traditional karate is close quarter fighting and the kata is designed around that. If that is not the case kata cannot work as intended because fighting is not choreographed. Bunkai works on a predetermined response, ie block with the only arm available or get hit. Unless you have seen bunkai trained this way you probably won't understand what I am saying but both Iain Abernethy and Masaji Tiara use this all the time.


|
Well, your answer is really in the form of a manual or book, chapters if your will.  Your response contains certain groundwork explanations that are missing  from --what I call--traditional karate manuals.
|
I can also know see clearly how you conclude my version of defining traditional karate is wrong.  From your perspective, I am wrong.  Your perspective, however, presumes and hinges heavily on the form of the training curriculum.  My perspective starts above that.  It starts with the concepts of traditional martial arts training which then the form of the curriculum is built on.
|
For instance.  I believe that you are entirely correct when you state that modern karate, principally  the Japanese and post-Japanese versions had placed greater emphasis on kumite, competitive kumite.  Moreover, certain conventions for kumite then evolved around that.  By your view, kata presented the means for kumite through it's bunkai.  The modern karate version of kumite moved to high mobility, distance fighting relying on basic technique & speed.  The traditional karate model in Okinawa proposed infighting relying on the technicals of bunaki contained in the kata.  The applications evolved for competitive karate turned more to being able to achieve a ruleset, ie., scoring points.  the  applications of your traditional Okinawan karate were centered on self defense purposes, attacking the opponent in a way that disabled him physically.


K-man said:


> ... In Goju we have two kata that are especially important to our style. These are Sanchin and Tensho kata. Within these kata you can find almost everything that is Goju. At a higher level Goju has Kyusho and at the highest level Kiko. To a major extent these are non existent in modern karate styles.


|
So I can agree, using your perspective, that the Japanese karate, and the Korean-karate based arts fail to meet the traditional karate standards as you've defined.  These failures would then include the omission of the specific katas you have mentioned in your entire response.


----------



## ShotoNoob

FOLLOWING ON....
|
Your lengthy book-chapter explanation would also suggest to your wisdom in moving from Japanese Goju Kai to Okinawan Goju Ryu.  For self defense purposes.  I always believed the applied goal of traditional karate was self defense.   Though I have only encountered Goju ryu karate,, I believe it to be a more powerful & more sophisticated karate style than those typically practiced on the Japanese karate platform.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> You should try looking at it in slow motion and see how sloppy some of the technique is. I often see strikes with the wrong part of the fist, wild swings, strikes to least vulnerable areas, guards down and other problems.



What are you basing your interpretation of correct technique on?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> What are you basing your interpretation of correct technique on?


Hitting with the correct part of the fist, not wildly swinging, not striking to areas that have little effect (forehead, stomach etc) having your guard up when striking etc.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Hitting with the correct part of the fist, not wildly swinging, not striking to areas that have little effect (forehead, stomach etc) having your guard up when striking etc.



Are these "incorrect" methods knocking people out in real situations?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Are these "incorrect" methods knocking people out in real situations?


Rarely.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Rarely.



So the whole striking element is basically ineffective?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> So the whole striking element is basically ineffective?


It is if you do it poorly.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> It is if you do it poorly.



Ok. If I was to judge effective striking in a mma bout.(or quite simply any fight) I assume it would be judged by how effectively that striking finished that fight. Vs how effectively it is defended. 

I could look at fights finished with striking and suggest that is what striking should look like.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Rarely.



Can you explain to me why there is more ko,s Than submissions.

MMA Finishes Chart MMA Fight DB


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Rarely.



MMA KO Chart MMA Fight DB

And statistically the type of strikes that finish fights.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Can you explain to me why there is more ko,s Than submissions.
> 
> MMA Finishes Chart MMA Fight DB


So, statistically speaking, most fights have ineffective striking because more fights are decided by decision than KO?


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> So, statistically speaking, most fights have ineffective striking because more fights are decided by decision than KO?



Doesn't matter if 10% of fights finish with striking. You could look at that 10% and find out what effective looks like.

And the decision is based at least partially on who has the more effective striking.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Doesn't matter if 10% of fights finish with striking. You could look at that 10% and find out what effective looks like.
> 
> And the decision is based at least partially on who has the more effective striking.


My comment was facetious.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> My comment was facetious.



Lol I am trying to defend against the idea that striking that ends fights kind of sort of doesn't because reasons. So how can I tell what is just a sideways step away from reality and a joke?


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> Wow! There are books written on that and you expect a short answer?
> 
> OK, I'll try....
> Traditional karate is close quarter fighting and the kata is designed around that. If that is not the case kata cannot work as intended because fighting is not choreographed. Bunkai works on a predetermined response, ie block with the only arm available or get hit. Unless you have seen bunkai trained this way you probably won't understand what I am saying but both Iain Abernethy and Masaji Tiara use this all the time.


|
You covered a massive amount of ground in your response to my query on the _"essence of karate."_  Of course you had to paraphrase to conserve space.  So, I'm still wrestling with your 1st answer-block.
|
I want to explore your statement above about the design of kata.  And more specifically, what you mean by saying, "Bunkai works on a predetermined response...."  Are you talking about bunkai experts such as I.A. demonstrating practical applications grown out of the bunkai form  presented in kata?
|
To me, the concept of bunkai is pretty straightforward.  The applications, then become more complex as the base form shown in kata must be adapted & applied to a particular self defense situation which we can only infer from the kata.
|
In terms of kumite style, my personal style should be defined as "infighting."  I believe I have always used the Okinawan model which you describe "close quarter fighting," which I dub move-in-and-destroy."  This is generalized to include step-back-and-destroy, stand-still-and-destroy.  It's the opponent's actions that contribute to the choice of precise positional strategy....
|
However, contrary to yours & popular opinion, IMO, the "infighting concept," these tactical concepts I've spelled out are presented in the Japanese karates & Korean-karate based styles.   This highlight's one of my lead-in to calling such "traditional karates."


----------



## ShotoNoob

APPLICATION TO SHOTOKAN FOR SELF DEFENSE.
|
Since I have dubbed my kumite style as "move in & destroy,"  In line with what K-Man I think may be talking about predetermined responses, the motion of the assailant will dictate or more accurately play a part in our response on how we move ourselves.
|
However, I favor the "move-in" response because it accomplishes several working objectives.  We establish a presence that the attack will not go unanswered.  This typically startles the aggressively minded who may presume the defender will be put on the defensive & retreat or cover-up, etc..
|
Secondly, it changes the technical dynamic where the spacing has changed therefore the initial sortie on the part of the attacker will likely fail.  The prone to failure will be completed by enacting defensive & offensive tactics made advantages by the move-in.  One of the tactical advantages is that the attacker's vulnerable body parts is now within reach & one or more exposed.  Furthermore, any committed technique by the attacker based on my position before I moved in, that target is now no longer where it was.  Moreover, my movement signals that I now may take any number of actions which the attacker is now faced with figuring out--BAM--too late!!!
|
In discussing kumite, the fighting dynamic, I would replace the word Pre-determined with determine.


----------



## K-man

I think this thread is so disjointed I will start a new thread, bearing in mind we have been through a lot of it before in other bunkai threads.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> MMA KO Chart MMA Fight DB
> 
> And statistically the type of strikes that finish fights.



And is there a statistic for the average number of strikes thrown before the fights are ended on a KO?

There was one MMA fight I saw on TV where there were over 200 strikes thrown by each fighter and the fight still went to the judges for a decision. I saw another where a whole bunch of strikes were thrown but the one that ended it was a punch to the solar plexus, after which Joe Rogan said "He hit him right in the solar plexus, I don't think I've ever seen that before".

Also how many of those KO's were produced because one fighter did not have his hands up or was swinging wildly and not aiming for anything in particular..

One of the reasons we in the traditional arts spend so much time working on our technique in the basics and patterns is to avoid wild unguided strikes and sloppy strikes.. That is not to say that sloppy striking only happens in MMA but to put it up as the standard what all martial arts striking should look like is naive.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> And is there a statistic for the average number of strikes thrown before the fights are ended on a KO?
> 
> There was one MMA fight I saw on TV where there were over 200 strikes thrown by each fighter and the fight still went to the judges for a decision. I saw another where a whole bunch of strikes were thrown but the one that ended it was a punch to the solar plexus, after which Joe Rogan said "He hit him right in the solar plexus, I don't think I've ever seen that before".
> 
> Also how many of those KO's were produced because one fighter did not have his hands up or was swinging wildly and not aiming for anything in particular..
> 
> One of the reasons we in the traditional arts spend so much time working on our technique in the basics and patterns is to avoid wild unguided strikes and sloppy strikes.. That is not to say that sloppy striking only happens in MMA but to put it up as the standard what all martial arts striking should look like is naive.



You are suggesting your method works better than the method that actually works. 

I don't know how else to say this but I am sorry. The reality of a fight does not look like your pre conceived notion of what a fight should look like.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> And is there a statistic for the average number of strikes thrown before the fights are ended on a KO?
> 
> There was one MMA fight I saw on TV where there were over 200 strikes thrown by each fighter and the fight still went to the judges for a decision. I saw another where a whole bunch of strikes were thrown but the one that ended it was a punch to the solar plexus, after which Joe Rogan said "He hit him right in the solar plexus, I don't think I've ever seen that before".
> 
> Also how many of those KO's were produced because one fighter did not have his hands up or was swinging wildly and not aiming for anything in particular..
> 
> One of the reasons we in the traditional arts spend so much time working on our technique in the basics and patterns is to avoid wild unguided strikes and sloppy strikes.. That is not to say that sloppy striking only happens in MMA but to put it up as the standard what all martial arts striking should look like is naive.



Ok of the strikes that do end fights. Do they resemble the sort of striking that you think should end fights?


----------



## Steve

RTKDCMB said:


> And is there a statistic for the average number of strikes thrown before the fights are ended on a KO?
> 
> There was one MMA fight I saw on TV where there were over 200 strikes thrown by each fighter and the fight still went to the judges for a decision. I saw another where a whole bunch of strikes were thrown but the one that ended it was a punch to the solar plexus, after which Joe Rogan said "He hit him right in the solar plexus, I don't think I've ever seen that before".
> 
> Also how many of those KO's were produced because one fighter did not have his hands up or was swinging wildly and not aiming for anything in particular..
> 
> One of the reasons we in the traditional arts spend so much time working on our technique in the basics and patterns is to avoid wild unguided strikes and sloppy strikes.. That is not to say that sloppy striking only happens in MMA but to put it up as the standard what all martial arts striking should look like is naive.


Well, I have to say it made me literally laugh out loud when you suggest that it's the MMA athletes who aren't keeping their hands up... in a thread about Olympic TKD.    I mean, over generalizing is usually a bad idea, but in this case it's also ironic.

Personally, I think you should watch some more MMA, or even better, spend a few months training in a quality MMA gym.  While the athletes who compete are at different stages on the spectrum of expertise, striking in MMA is very technical.   Where they're carrying their hands is usually a function of wise technique, if you're in danger of being taken to the ground, or fatigue, which happens when you fight for a really long time.

If we have the UFC in mind, in any two competitors, we're talking about guys who are at an elite level, who train to hit and avoid taking hits.  And even so, we know that one punch in the right spot can end the fight.  At the high end, you have guys with very, very technical striking in each weight class.  The best example I can think of is Demetrius Johnson.   And even the guys who are still working on counter punching, head movement and ring control can throw solid combinations.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Steve said:


> Well, I have to say it made me literally laugh out loud when you suggest that it's the MMA athletes who aren't keeping their hands up... in a thread about Olympic TKD


One slight flaw in your reasoning - this is the 'Shotokan for self defense' thread.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Steve said:


> Well, I have to say it made me literally laugh out loud when you suggest that it's the MMA athletes who aren't keeping their hands up... in a thread about Olympic TKD.    I mean, over generalizing is usually a bad idea, but in this case it's also ironic.
> 
> Personally, I think you should watch some more MMA, or even better, spend a few months training in a quality MMA gym.  While the athletes who compete are at different stages on the spectrum of expertise, striking in MMA is very technical.   Where they're carrying their hands is usually a function of wise technique, if you're in danger of being taken to the ground, or fatigue, which happens when you fight for a really long time.
> .



It's a well known fact that UFC guys strike very poorly. Take for example Tim Sylvia, never knocked out, and Ray Mercer, an old has been, only needed to strike him once, and Sylvia didn't just go down, he feel asleep.

But MMA guys will always try to convey that they are the toughest guys on the planet, and the number one pound for pound fighter in UFC is also the number one pound for pound fighter inte the world. A silly notion.


----------



## Steve

RTKDCMB said:


> One slight flaw in your reasoning - this is the 'Shotokan for self defense' thread.


Lol. My bad.   Pre coffee.  Hehe.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve

Laplace_demon said:


> It's a well known fact that UFC guys strike very poorly. Take for example Tim Sylvia, never knocked out, and Ray Mercer, an old has been, only needed to strike him once, and Sylvia didn't just go down, he feel asleep.
> 
> But MMA guys will always try to convey that they are the toughest guys on the planet, and the number one pound for pound fighter in UFC is also the number one pound for pound fighter inte the world. A silly notion.


Tim Sylvia??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Laplace_demon

Steve said:


> Tim Sylvia??
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Ray Mercer, a dinosaur, put that guy to sleep. Something nobody had been able to do in the UFC. I am not just talking about stance. They truly punch like crap.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> You are suggesting your method works better than the method that actually works.



I am not suggesting anything of the sort. Are you suggesting my method does not work?



drop bear said:


> I don't know how else to say this but I am sorry. The reality of a fight does not look like your pre conceived notion of what a fight should look like.



I don't have any preconceived notions.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Steve said:


> I mean, over generalizing is usually a bad idea, but in this case it's also ironic.


I was not actually generalizing I was citing specific things I have seen.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Ok of the strikes that do end fights. Do they resemble the sort of striking that you think should end fights?


The solar plexus one was. The one I saw with a downward elbow to the back of the head was another.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Laplace_demon said:


> It's a well known fact that UFC guys strike very poorly. Take for example Tim Sylvia, never knocked out, and Ray Mercer, an old has been, only needed to strike him once, and Sylvia didn't just go down, he feel asleep.
> 
> But MMA guys will always try to convey that they are the toughest guys on the planet, and the number one pound for pound fighter in UFC is also the number one pound for pound fighter inte the world. A silly notion.


Some of them are pretty tough.


----------



## Laplace_demon

RTKDCMB said:


> Some of them are pretty tough.



But they aren't the fighter Dana White would want to make them out to be. Really, they are only the best of the ones who've actually participated. That's all we can say. I don't think the level is mindblowingly high. Their wrestling and grappling is certainly above average, but I can't say the same about the striking.


----------



## Steve

I'm not at a place where I can post links, but Jose Aldo, Frankie Edgar, Demetrius (Mighty Mouse) Johnson... just check out a highlight reel for these guys.  Very technical fighters. 

I can think of a lot of really great boxers, some who have pro records in boxing, as well.  There are a lot of different strikers from a variety of backgrounds, all with a very firm grounding in technical striking.  Whether it's Cung Le and his sanshou, Anderson Silva, Dominic Cruz, Little Nog... going back a little to Jens Pulver.  A lot of very high level, technical, accurate striking.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> I am not suggesting anything of the sort. Are you suggesting my method does not work?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have any preconceived notions.



Doesn't work as well. You do not strike as well as an elite level fighter. Regardless of how it looks to you.

Full contact striking with little gloves has different dynamics and so what methods are successful changes. You are not factoring in that these wild swinging punches are dangerous in the hands of someone who knows when to punch and how to move well.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> The solar plexus one was. The one I saw with a downward elbow to the back of the head was another.



And all the rest you think they are just swinging blind and hoping for the best?

Ok. Even if that was the case. It would still be the method used for winning fights as that is the method used for winning fights.

I mean it isn't. To assume that fighting systems that end in striking knock outs have poor strikers is working a pretty impressive pre conceived idea on what striking entails.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> But they aren't the fighter Dana White would want to make them out to be. Really, they are only the best of the ones who've actually participated. That's all we can say. I don't think the level is mindblowingly high. Their wrestling and grappling is certainly above average, but I can't say the same about the striking.




It's remarkably easy to sit and criticise while you are watching it on your screen but it's another matter to actually put yourself in their place and actually fight. Who are you to sit and say that their strikes aren't good enough for you? Have you ever faced an opponent in a pro rules MMA fight?  Have you any idea how to fight even? No? then forget the 'we' bit.
I doubt any fighter, good bad or indifferent worries about your opinion of them. As for Dana White he's a businessman first and foremost, out to make money. Nothing wrong with that but you have to understand he looks at things differently from a martial artist.
You seem to think your opinion of fighters, boxers and martial artists is actually worth something, you sneer and scoff at people who are actually wiser, more knowledgeable and certainly more talented than yourself. it's as far from having an empty cup as you can get, you are a sprog, a newby, someone whose opinion of himself is bigger than his knowledge of martial arts.
Still, on the bright side thanks to the very patient posters ( I discounted everything you said) on here I've learnt some interesting things about TKD, I love learning new things especially about martial arts.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

There are actually *"great"* strikers in the UFC and MMA in general.  Very technical and very sound in what they do.  Steve gave a very short list but there are literally dozens and dozens of more who strike at a very high level.  There are of course some that are terrible but..... fewer and fewer of those guy's are around as the athletes are simply getting better and better as the years go on.


----------



## Drose427

While you cant usually compare MMA Strikers to other competitive systems striking( I mean they simply cant put the same amount of time into striking, the MMA guys NEEDS to to time elsewhere)

And I will say that I believe brawlers are becoming more and more common in the UFC,

The list of achieved technical Strikers far exceeds the brawlers, and to say the level of technical skill in striking in the UFC isnt that high (when many, many strikers were accomplished strikers in other style competitions ranging from Boxing/Kickboxing to Karate/TKD) really doesnt make sense


----------



## Laplace_demon

Drose427 said:


> While you cant usually compare MMA Strikers to other competitive systems striking( I mean they simply cant put the same amount of time into striking, the MMA guys NEEDS to to time elsewhere)
> 
> And I will say that I believe brawlers are becoming more and more common in the UFC,
> 
> The list of achieved technical Strikers far exceeds the brawlers, and to say the level of technical skill in striking in the UFC isnt that high (when many, many strikers were accomplished strikers in other style competitions ranging from Boxing/Kickboxing to Karate/TKD) really doesnt make sense



Retired Boxers assert they only need to connect once to knock UFC guys out with UFC gloves. Once. Do you know how many times UFC guys punch each other on a daily basis?


----------



## Laplace_demon

That's more than a class difference, It's a different dimension.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Retired Boxers assert they only need to connect once to knock UFC guys out with UFC gloves. Once. Do you know how many times UFC guys punch each other on a daily basis?



Which raises the percentage for success of that heavy swing and short combinations. Also increases the need to move rather than cover.

Making the fight look more brawly.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Doesn't work as well. You do not strike as well as an elite level fighter. Regardless of how it looks to you.



You are making an unfounded assumption based on your preconceived notions and a limited perspective.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> And all the rest you think they are just swinging blind and hoping for the best?.



You are misrepresenting what I am saying. I am not saying all UFC strikers and strikes are just swinging and hoping for the best .



drop bear said:


> Ok. Even if that was the case. It would still be the method used for winning fights as that is the method used for winning fights.



So you are saying that swinging wildly and hoping for the best is how to win fights.



drop bear said:


> I mean it isn't. To assume that fighting systems that end in striking knock outs have poor strikers is working a pretty impressive pre conceived idea on what striking entails.



Nor did I say that The UFC generally has poor strikers. What I sad was;



RTKDCMB said:


> You should try looking at it in slow motion and see how sloppy some of the technique is. I often see strikes with the wrong part of the fist, wild swings, strikes to least vulnerable areas, guards down and other problems.





RTKDCMB said:


> I was not actually generalizing I was citing specific things I have seen.



You seem to imply that MMA striking is superior to all other methods and held it up as the epitome of martial arts striking . There are plenty of high level strikers in the traditional martial arts which you simply ignore.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> You seem to imply that MMA striking is superior to all other methods and held it up as the epitome of martial arts striking . There are plenty of high level strikers in the traditional martial arts which you simply ignore.



Who under similar circumstances tend to strike in that similar over committed manner. 

It is the nature of the full contact small glove and grappling style fight that creates that dynamic.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> You are making an unfounded assumption based on your preconceived notions and a limited perspective.



I am suggesting that is a pretty safe bet. And I have faced top level mma strikers and it is not that simple a prospect to counter. The difference being I cant get my head out of the way as easily so the striking to poor targets goes away and I can't take 200 punches in a round. So that dynamic disappears as well.


----------



## Tez3

Can I make one thing clear here, the UFC is a company which is in the business of making money by putting on fight nights, selling tickets to them, selling associated products including a television series.
UFC is not MMA. To keep saying that the 'UFC' guys can/can't hit is expressing an opinion only on the fighters in one particular promotion, there are many other fight promotions. You cannot judge them all by what you see the fighters in one show do.
They don't fight with 'UFC' gloves, they are MMA gloves for goodness sake. MMA fighters all over the world use them, often with name of their gym or the fight night on them. Do you call all motor cars 'Fords', of course not.
Stop judging MMA by what you see in the UFC, it may be a big show but it's not all that MMA is. What you see is specific to the UFC, the rest of the very big world doesn't do it the same way. UFC was designed for a non martial arts American audience to 'appreciate' the skill of the Gracies. It has been taken further and become a major _entertainment . _
To keep going on about UFC fighters, UFC gloves etc is to show a lack of understanding of MMA and points to being a UFC fanboy.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Can I make one thing clear here, the UFC is a company which is in the business of making money by putting on fight nights, selling tickets to them, selling associated products including a television series.
> UFC is not MMA. To keep saying that the 'UFC' guys can/can't hit is expressing an opinion only on the fighters in one particular promotion, there are many other fight promotions. You cannot judge them all by what you see the fighters in one show do.
> They don't fight with 'UFC' gloves, they are MMA gloves for goodness sake. MMA fighters all over the world use them, often with name of their gym or the fight night on them. Do you call all motor cars 'Fords', of course not.
> Stop judging MMA by what you see in the UFC, it may be a big show but it's not all that MMA is. What you see is specific to the UFC, the rest of the very big world doesn't do it the same way. UFC was designed for a non martial arts American audience to 'appreciate' the skill of the Gracies. It has been taken further and become a major _entertainment . _
> To keep going on about UFC fighters, UFC gloves etc is to show a lack of understanding of MMA and points to being a UFC fanboy.



Being a karate thread we should probably be looking at kudo anyway. Which is more of the domain of karate fighters. 

And the gloves are even smaller. Basically a wrap. 

I wonder if we will see low hands wild swings and missing the target.


----------



## drop bear

These are karate guys and judo guys,sort of, and they are not exactly tight and technical in the sense that some people want them to be.


----------



## drop bear

Shotokan vs judo in a Shotokan match.

I don't really have a point to make here. Just found it on my travels and thought it was interesting.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> These are karate guys and judo guys,sort of, and they are not exactly tight and technical in the sense that some people want them to be.


You mean kudo, not judo?

That said, who on this site has competed in our had experience with Kudo? 

I would be very interested to hear of any experience either in training at the clubs or tournaments.  The rule book on the kudo website was not available so I am trying to find out what the rules are as to being able to submit/sweep/takedown in the strike tournaments, can anyone advise?

I like how they can punch full contact to the head as well as kick, unlike in kyokoshin.  I did judo before switching to goju ryu so looks like a good sport for that kind of base...

I would like to enter one of these tournaments, if I am a dan in goju ryu, does that mean I can come over as a bb for tournaments in Kudo?  It would suck if I you had to start lower for tournaments, as it looks like the lower the grade the less techniques open to use in competition.

Does anyone know if this is done in UK?


----------



## Zero

Drop bear, thanks for posting those kudo vids, I must admit I have been in the dark to this and am not sure how...

Also a link of a brief discussion on kudo by Iain Abernathy:
The future format of competitive karate some thoughts and videos Iain Abernethy


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> You mean kudo, not judo?
> 
> That said, who on this site has competed in our had experience with Kudo?
> 
> I would be very interested to hear of any experience either in training at the clubs or tournaments.  The rule book on the kudo website was not available so I am trying to find out what the rules are as to being able to submit/sweep/takedown in the strike tournaments, can anyone advise?
> 
> I like how they can punch full contact to the head as well as kick, unlike in kyokoshin.  I did judo before switching to goju ryu so looks like a good sport for that kind of base...
> 
> I would like to enter one of these tournaments, if I am a dan in goju ryu, does that mean I can come over as a bb for tournaments in Kudo?  It would suck if I you had to start lower for tournaments, as it looks like the lower the grade the less techniques open to use in competition.
> 
> Does anyone know if this is done in UK?



My coach competed in it. I have sparred using most of the rules I remember. 

It does get a bit complicated. Full contact mma point sparring.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Can I make one thing clear here, the UFC is a company which is in the business of making money by putting on fight nights, selling tickets to them, selling associated products including a television series.
> UFC is not MMA. To keep saying that the 'UFC' guys can/can't hit is expressing an opinion only on the fighters in one particular promotion, there are many other fight promotions. You cannot judge them all by what you see the fighters in one show do.
> They don't fight with 'UFC' gloves, they are MMA gloves for goodness sake. MMA fighters all over the world use them, often with name of their gym or the fight night on them. Do you call all motor cars 'Fords', of course not.
> Stop judging MMA by what you see in the UFC, it may be a big show but it's not all that MMA is. What you see is specific to the UFC, the rest of the very big world doesn't do it the same way. UFC was designed for a non martial arts American audience to 'appreciate' the skill of the Gracies. It has been taken further and become a major _entertainment . _
> To keep going on about UFC fighters, UFC gloves etc is to show a lack of understanding of MMA and points to being a UFC fanboy.


You make a very good point.  I don't think anything is intended by the use of the term UFC.  But, many use the term UFC as a generic term for MMA.  You're absolutely correct that we don't call all cars 'Fords.'   But, at least in America, and often at the chagrin of the trademark holder, we will use a brand name to refer to a generic product.  We call all adhesive gauze strips "Band Aids" even when they're actually Curads.  We make copies of documents on Xerox machines, regardless of their brand.  And there are still parts of the country where Sodas or Soda Pops are all called "Cokes." 

Point is, it's not unheard of, and I don't think anyone means anything by it.  I don't think using the term in a generic sense necessarily indicates that the poster is judging all MMA by the UFC standard.  Using the term doesn't make the poster a "fanboy" and I think it's pretty clear in context when it's used whether it's referring to MMA in general or the UFC promotion in particular.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> Which raises the percentage for success of that heavy swing and short combinations. Also increases the need to move rather than cover.
> 
> Making the fight look more brawly.



It doesn't because those fighters, unlike trained boxers, can't knockout with one punch wearing those gloves. At least not the majority. They need 100-200 punches of flurry to accomplish what a boxer only needs one hit for, with those gloves. That's how inferior they are.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> It doesn't because those fighters, unlike trained boxers, can't knockout with one punch wearing those gloves. At least not the majority. They need 100-200 punches of flurry to accomplish what a boxer only needs one hit for, with those gloves. That's how inferior they are.



Really? How you do work that out, I have watched by now thousands of fights live and I can tell you that I have seen a good many of what you call 'one punch' KOs. I think you lack the experience to be able to judge what can and can't be done either in boxing, MMA, karate or TKD.


----------



## Flying Crane

Laplace_demon said:


> It doesn't because those fighters, unlike trained boxers, can't knockout with one punch wearing those gloves. At least not the majority. They need 100-200 punches of flurry to accomplish what a boxer only needs one hit for, with those gloves. That's how inferior they are.


This is all a very faulty way of looking at it.

Under pressure, any strike or punch will deteriorate and not be optimal.  That's what happens when someone is trying to land a strike while simultaneously avoid being hit himself, or just the effects of nerves and adrenaline from being in danger.  However, a less than perfect punch, or sloppy technique can still knock someone on his ***, all by itself, without a flurry of 200 additional or cumulative strikes.  My god, if you need a flurry like that, or you need that many cumulative strikes to take the bad guy down, then what you really need is better instruction and better training.  But Likewise, a perfect technique can fail to land decisively and be ineffectual.

So practice to the highest quality that you can, because under pressure it will break down.

Also, when reasonably equally trained people agree to face off in a contest of combat, there tends to be a sense of caution exhibited by both parties, as well as some ability to block, evade, and counter their opponent's attacks.  This is because both parties know the attacks are coming and are hyper-alert.  So, even the "best" quality strikes might have a difficult time landing decisively.

Honestly, I'm appalled that I need to point these things out to people.  Look at the whole damn picture and stop selectively cherry-picking facts to support your favorite side of the argument.

Striking works well.  Except for when it doesn't.  People need to be honest with themselves.


----------



## Tez3

MMA fighters need hundreds of punches....well no. I can't tell you the amount of times I've seen this..... it's not at all rare.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Flying Crane said:


> This is all a very faulty way of looking at it.
> 
> Under pressure, any strike or punch will deteriorate and not be optimal.  That's what happens when someone is trying to land a strike while simultaneously avoid being hit himself, or just the effects of nerves and adrenaline from being in danger.  However, a less than perfect punch, or sloppy technique can still knock someone on his ***, all by itself, without a flurry of 200 additional or cumulative strikes.  My god, if you need a flurry like that, or you need that many cumulative strikes to take the bad guy down, then what you really need is better instruction and better training.  But Likewise, a perfect technique can fail to land decisively and be ineffectual.
> 
> So practice to the highest quality that you can, because under pressure it will break down.
> 
> Also, when reasonably equally trained people agree to face off in a contest of combat, there tends to be a sense of caution exhibited by both parties, as well as some ability to block, evade, and counter their opponent's attacks.  This is because both parties know the attacks are coming and are hyper-alert.  So, even the "best" quality strikes might have a difficult time landing decisively.
> 
> Honestly, I'm appalled that I need to point these things out to people.  Look at the whole damn picture and stop selectively cherry-picking facts to support your favorite side of the argument.
> 
> Striking works well.  Except for when it doesn't.  People need to be honest with themselves.



Are seriously proposing that a strike which puts someone on his *** is as effective as a knockout?


----------



## Flying Crane

Laplace_demon said:


> Are seriously proposing that a strike which puts someone on his *** is as effective as a knockout?


That was just an expression of speech.  It could put him on his *** or knock him out or kill him.  Seriously, do I need to explain this to you?


----------



## Laplace_demon

Flying Crane said:


> That was just an expression of speech.  It could put him on his *** or knock him out or kill him.  Seriously, do I need to explain this to you?



I have watched high level MMA fighters and they don't knock each other out within the first blow. It has happened but not nearly as often as you would have thought, given what retired boxers claim they need with those thin gloves.


----------



## Flying Crane

Laplace_demon said:


> I have watched high level MMA fighters and they don't knock each other out within the first blow. It has happened but not nearly as often as you would have thought, given what retired boxers claim they need with those thin gloves.


Go back and re-read my post, #1171, the part about when two reasonably equally trained people agree to enter into a contest of combat.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Flying Crane said:


> Go back and re-read my post, #1171, the part about when two reasonably equally trained people agree to enter into a contest of combat.



They have failed in all manner of positions to not KO the other with the first strike. Nowhere does those boxers say it has to only be in a specific set of circumstances for their punch to KO.


----------



## Flying Crane

Laplace_demon said:


> They have failed in all manner of positions to not KO the other with the first strike. Nowhere does those boxers say it has to only be in a specific set of circumstances for their punch to KO.


Jeezuz man, what is your malfunction???


----------



## Tez3

OK, UOTE="Laplace_demon, post: 1705072, member: 32979"]I have watched high level MMA fighters and they don't knock each other out within the first blow. It has happened but not nearly as often as you would have thought, given what retired boxers claim they need with those thin gloves.[/QUOTE]

What on earth are you on about? Seriously, you have no idea what you are talking about.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> I have watched high level MMA fighters and they don't knock each other out within the first blow. It has happened but not nearly as often as you would have thought, given what retired boxers claim they need with those thin gloves.



And so with these super fight ending skills of retired boxers they are not prevented from doing mma knocking guys out and taking some easy money. Just like everyone else who has super fight ending skills.

By the way mark hunt who is a k1 kickboxing champion comes to mind here. Who is doing precisely that. Just without the easy one punch ko,s.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> And so with these super fight ending skills of retired boxers they are not prevented from doing mma knocking guys out and taking some easy money. Just like everyone else who has super fight ending skills.
> 
> By the way mark hunt who is a k1 kickboxing champion comes to mind here. Who is doing precisely that. Just without the easy one punch ko,s.



Mark Hunt was and is a crazy Samoan Legend!!  Loved that fight a while back with Fedor, had the nerve to try (and almost succeed) to take out Fedor with kimura!! Awesome.  And the way he rolled out of Fedor's kimura, 2 or 3 times was intense!! 

When Hunt is average, he is average but when he is on the game, he is deadly to anyone - and fun to watch.


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> My coach competed in it. I have sparred using most of the rules I remember.
> 
> It does get a bit complicated. Full contact mma point sparring.



Oh, I am not that much of a fan of sport/point fighting, that's why I got out of TKD years back.  When you say full contact, that does mean full contact kicks and punches are allowed?  And that you can use submissions and takedowns?

So you can win on points or KO (just like MMA or boxing, etc)?

Or does it mean you are also being awarded ippon etc for no contact strikes that do nothing?  Then it would become complicated, as you say, as it's a choice to try to work a KO or get in sneaky "clicker/sport" shots with no damaging effect but that add up the tally...


----------



## drop bear

Zero said:


> Oh, I am not that much of a fan of sport/point fighting, that's why I got out of TKD years back.  When you say full contact, that does mean full contact kicks and punches are allowed?  And that you can use submissions and takedowns?
> 
> So you can win on points or KO (just like MMA or boxing, etc)?
> 
> Or does it mean you are also being awarded ippon etc for no contact strikes that do nothing?  Then it would become complicated, as you say, as it's a choice to try to work a KO or get in sneaky "clicker/sport" shots with no damaging effect but that add up the tally...



Yes and no. There are some weird things like feigned puches to the he


----------



## drop bear

Sorry punches to the head that score


----------



## Zero

drop bear said:


> Sorry punches to the head that score



Understood, thanks for the Intel!  Seems like something to at least check out, will see if it is in London, UK... I have been mainly back to stand up fighting recently (which I love in any event) as am waiting on a damaged/strained shoulder to rehab. Can't really go back into mma or focused grappling for now, the shoulder and that arm is a bit vulnerable at the moment so not the best for grappling and ground work but maybe something with a lesser focus with some judo throws/sweeps and submissions allowed I could probably handle until recovered...


----------



## RafaChan

Hello,

I've joined the forum specially coz of that particular thread. Have read it tru all those 60 pages of
clashes, clarifications, confusions, explanations, repetitions and some misunderstandings. I have trained/train
also studied/studying some TMA tru my life and i keep shotokan always with a high respect and regard in my heart,
so i have to raise the flag. I'll do my best trying to be friendly and contribute to all you guys in the best way.
I hope that i can help those who had the interest for the art in the past and now are confused even at its basics
and aplications.

For the others who have knowledge im sorry to repeat things that perhaps you already knows.
Note that english it's not my native language, so feel free to correct me. Also, feel free
to contradict me and/or add in stuff. 

Topic wise, shotokan for self defense. Yes, completely. Really dunno why some people wanna disagree
with that in some manner. But i feel that before justify the WHY of my assertive, i wanna try to tell
a long story in a very fast way...

The essence of shotokan karate is shorin ryu. Kara-te, was known as shaolin hands techniques, karate jutsu
it was a kind of kobudo practiced originally by the bushi class in the okinawa islands a long time ago. A martial art style developed and
evolved tru a weapon ban decree context for the mainly purpose of self defense, resist, survive and war.
An art that also have born via cross training of old arts (okinawate=tode=kamaia sut-su and shaolin chuan fa styles).

You see now how pointless is to criticize or made amendments about what MA is cross training MMA or not? The idea of
MMA was always implied in most TMA around the world and thats how they happens to sometimes modify or evolve.

Shotokan was made of a cross training of chinese-japanese striker arts, how do you see that?
Note that im talking about MMA not the combative sport context of what we see today. Combative sports contexts are always
restrictive about what one can do or perform within the completion of your practiced MA system, the gloves and rules
can limit you a lot when we talk about SD real fight situations, so i find that pointless to trow it here.
I always told my friends in the past, vale tudo doesnt vale tudo, thats not this thing of no rules.

Master Funakoshi base foundation for shotokan was shorin ryu of grand master Matsumura, karate was known as shurite, a style developed in the
middle 1800s responsible to the big body mechanical changes of the chinese influences on the style. In the book Shotokan Secrets you
can find a more technical explanation for that:

"The new art, called shurite, was fundamentally different from traditional chuan fa. Compared to chinese fighting,
the new art was shockingly ruthless. The new style made no attempt to subdue the opponent through painful nerve
strikes or immobilizing joint locks. Instead, every element of the new art emphasized destroying the opponent
completely in one or two seconds."

The one hit KO mentality in karate its true. Thats ikken hissatsu / ippon kowashi. It doesnt mean all the fights
have to end with just one blow but thats something all karate-ka wants to achieve. I mean, karate-ka have to fight
moved by this intention, thats spirit. This is not the same as ippon-sanbon Kumites fashioned concept like one point/kill
but its the same principle that have remained within the art tru its sportive ways. Thats really a true tradition,
thats the true karate jutsu spirit. In japanese kuden, oral tradition tells that we have to train strenght,
technique and spirit, thats karate-do. Technique can win strenght but spirit can wins technique. In
a clash of both skilled and strenght opponents, chances are that the one with the right intention and spirit
will win. Thats when someone achieve mushin having complete awareness, sense of space-range, timing and an empty
relaxed mind able to create the right momentum via attack or counter attack.

Im posting a very illustrative video for those who wish to comprehend the ideas exclusively by those means, and coz thats
a very nice video that ive found:






Thats just to illustrate the spirit. Objective here its the look about shotokan in a SD situation and not sports after all.
One can say that one-KO Gyaku Zuki on the video was unreal and not aplicable on a SD situation but i just dont know how, ill not the one
to put my face in there to see if its real, will you?

Shotokan, shito ryu, wado ryu and many others TMA can give you all the tools you need for a SD situation, im pretty sure of that.
You dont need to train MMA sports or be a BJJ expert to deal with that and neglect the other arts. As a lot of people really told
here and knows, ground techniques are not prefered at SD situations when you have to be very quick and maybe run, or have to face
more than one assailant. For that matter and as a brazilian that still practice BJJ somtimes i can tell you BJJ will non practical.
Of course in most 1x1 situations BJJ can really shines against the regular guy on the street or against the trained stand up striker, but
if the striker have some knowledge about to aplly joint lock counters and defend against grappling thats another story and
you will have to sweat or even admit defeat! Thats another story, i wanna remain on topic. Ill post another vid, specially for those who need
to believe in things just if it have being video recorded: 






Bad SD scenario, 2 pro MMA fighters against 3 guys. Intense training, hours of free spar and ground techniques. Despite that they being completely
being ++holes with the girls they even had a chance of apply their JJ expertise. Too much 1x1 fighting conditioning, too
much tunnel vision for me. Im not saying spar its useless for SD, i spar! I free spar also in karate sometimes with protective
gear. Its very good to work on timing, space-range notions, evasive manuevers, blocks,counter attacks, combo attacks, etc...
Really a lot of good things that you can use in  SD situations. But remember, forget about gloves, the intense usage of gloves to defend your
face too much like hiding behind the gloves and such.

In a SD worst case scenario against multiple assailants you will need to rely preferable on a stand up striker art,
something around these lines:







Theres another vids with some IRL SD scenarios interesting to watch:











Gotta go for now, i really wanna keep posting and say more about some specific techniques and methods in shotokan
that are really for use in SD scenarios. And most important, got some serious stuff to say about kata. 
Really, people that dont understand kata tend to talk bad about those i was one of them.
To be continued...Cya.


----------



## K-man

RafaChan said:


> Hello,
> 
> I've joined the forum specially coz of that particular thread. Have read it tru all those 60 pages of
> clashes, clarifications, confusions, explanations, repetitions and some misunderstandings. I have trained/train
> also studied/studying some TMA tru my life and i keep shotokan always with a high respect and regard in my heart,
> so i have to raise the flag. I'll do my best trying to be friendly and contribute to all you guys in the best way.
> I hope that i can help those who had the interest for the art in the past and now are confused even at its basics
> and aplications.
> 
> For the others who have knowledge im sorry to repeat things that perhaps you already knows.
> Note that english it's not my native language, so feel free to correct me. Also, feel free
> to contradict me and/or add in stuff.
> 
> Topic wise, shotokan for self defense. Yes, completely. Really dunno why some people wanna disagree
> with that in some manner. But i feel that before justify the WHY of my assertive, i wanna try to tell
> a long story in a very fast way...
> 
> The essence of shotokan karate is shorin ryu. Kara-te, was known as shaolin hands techniques, karate jutsu
> it was a kind of kobudo practiced originally by the bushi class in the okinawa islands a long time ago. A martial art style developed and
> evolved tru a weapon ban decree context for the mainly purpose of self defense, resist, survive and war.
> An art that also have born via cross training of old arts (okinawate=tode=kamaia sut-su and shaolin chuan fa styles).
> 
> You see now how pointless is to criticize or made amendments about what MA is cross training MMA or not? The idea of
> MMA was always implied in most TMA around the world and thats how they happens to sometimes modify or evolve.
> 
> Shotokan was made of a cross training of chinese-japanese striker arts, how do you see that?
> Note that im talking about MMA not the combative sport context of what we see today. Combative sports contexts are always
> restrictive about what one can do or perform within the completion of your practiced MA system, the gloves and rules
> can limit you a lot when we talk about SD real fight situations, so i find that pointless to trow it here.
> I always told my friends in the past, vale tudo doesnt vale tudo, thats not this thing of no rules.
> 
> Master Funakoshi base foundation for shotokan was shorin ryu of grand master Matsumura, karate was known as shurite, a style developed in the
> middle 1800s responsible to the big body mechanical changes of the chinese influences on the style. In the book Shotokan Secrets you
> can find a more technical explanation for that:
> 
> "The new art, called shurite, was fundamentally different from traditional chuan fa. Compared to chinese fighting,
> the new art was shockingly ruthless. The new style made no attempt to subdue the opponent through painful nerve
> strikes or immobilizing joint locks. Instead, every element of the new art emphasized destroying the opponent
> completely in one or two seconds."
> 
> The one hit KO mentality in karate its true. Thats ikken hissatsu / ippon kowashi. It doesnt mean all the fights
> have to end with just one blow but thats something all karate-ka wants to achieve. I mean, karate-ka have to fight
> moved by this intention, thats spirit. This is not the same as ippon-sanbon Kumites fashioned concept like one point/kill
> but its the same principle that have remained within the art tru its sportive ways. Thats really a true tradition,
> thats the true karate jutsu spirit. In japanese kuden, oral tradition tells that we have to train strenght,
> technique and spirit, thats karate-do. Technique can win strenght but spirit can wins technique. In
> a clash of both skilled and strenght opponents, chances are that the one with the right intention and spirit
> will win. Thats when someone achieve mushin having complete awareness, sense of space-range, timing and an empty
> relaxed mind able to create the right momentum via attack or counter attack.
> 
> Im posting a very illustrative video for those who wish to comprehend the ideas exclusively by those means, and coz thats
> a very nice video that ive found:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats just to illustrate the spirit. Objective here its the look about shotokan in a SD situation and not sports after all.
> One can say that one-KO Gyaku Zuki on the video was unreal and not aplicable on a SD situation but i just dont know how, ill not the one
> to put my face in there to see if its real, will you?
> 
> Shotokan, shito ryu, wado ryu and many others TMA can give you all the tools you need for a SD situation, im pretty sure of that.
> You dont need to train MMA sports or be a BJJ expert to deal with that and neglect the other arts. As a lot of people really told
> here and knows, ground techniques are not prefered at SD situations when you have to be very quick and maybe run, or have to face
> more than one assailant. For that matter and as a brazilian that still practice BJJ somtimes i can tell you BJJ will non practical.
> Of course in most 1x1 situations BJJ can really shines against the regular guy on the street or against the trained stand up striker, but
> if the striker have some knowledge about to aplly joint lock counters and defend against grappling thats another story and
> you will have to sweat or even admit defeat! Thats another story, i wanna remain on topic. Ill post another vid, specially for those who need
> to believe in things just if it have being video recorded:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bad SD scenario, 2 pro MMA fighters against 3 guys. Intense training, hours of free spar and ground techniques. Despite that they being completely
> being ++holes with the girls they even had a chance of apply their JJ expertise. Too much 1x1 fighting conditioning, too
> much tunnel vision for me. Im not saying spar its useless for SD, i spar! I free spar also in karate sometimes with protective
> gear. Its very good to work on timing, space-range notions, evasive manuevers, blocks,counter attacks, combo attacks, etc...
> Really a lot of good things that you can use in  SD situations. But remember, forget about gloves, the intense usage of gloves to defend your
> face too much like hiding behind the gloves and such.
> 
> In a SD worst case scenario against multiple assailants you will need to rely preferable on a stand up striker art,
> something around these lines:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theres another vids with some IRL SD scenarios interesting to watch:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gotta go for now, i really wanna keep posting and say more about some specific techniques and methods in shotokan
> that are really for use in SD scenarios. And most important, got some serious stuff to say about kata.
> Really, people that dont understand kata tend to talk bad about those i was one of them.
> To be continued...Cya.


Welcome to MT and thank you for contributing to this thread. By reading the 60 odd pages, a fine effort on anyone's part, you have certainly put in the hard yards and you will be aware, some members have a less than favourable opinion of Karate, or many other styles also. 

Might I suggest that you start a new thread to discuss your SD scenarios and kata. I'll look forward to reading your posts.


----------



## RafaChan

Thank you mate for the idea and advice. I'll make this so people can keep discussing in a more focused way about that without skip off topic.
Also, i'll review my text trying to be the clearest and cleanest i can to express ideas better and to avoid generate confusion about karate.
I hope we can share knowledge in the best way! Cya...


----------



## Hanzou

RafaChan said:


> You dont need to train MMA sports or be a BJJ expert to deal with that and neglect the other arts. As a lot of people really told
> here and knows,



No one is "neglecting" other arts. People are simply tired of the nonsense associated with other arts like Karate, and prefer something a bit more straight forward.



> ground techniques are not prefered at SD situations when you have to be very quick and maybe run, or have to face
> more than one assailant. For that matter and as a brazilian that still practice BJJ somtimes i can tell you BJJ will non practical.
> Of course in most 1x1 situations BJJ can really shines against the regular guy on the street or against the trained stand up striker, but
> if the striker have some knowledge about to aplly joint lock counters and defend against grappling thats another story and
> you will have to sweat or even admit defeat! Thats another story, i wanna remain on topic.



This is quite an amusing stereotype. Bjj is essentially Judo with the training wheels taken off. You're going to learn throws, takedowns, strikes, standing chokes, standing locks, tumbling, and plenty of other things that will help you in a street fight, not just ground fighting.

Example;
 Don t Be A Statistic - SHAPE CHANGESHAPE CHANGE

Ground fighting is an (great) option, but it isn't all that we do.


----------



## RafaChan

No one is "neglecting" other arts. People are simply tired of the nonsense associated with other arts like Karate

I think you mean about non sense some bunkai people have showned here rite?

If you tell me someone is exaggerating or maybe getting a move out from another art and its using that in bunkai telling that move its from a karate kata i can maybe agree with you.

But like it or not, straight forward or not, bunkai its real and thats some rare moments in MA that when a technique can gain a bit more depht and the practitioners are open to be creative by their own.

If you really dont believe in bunkai at all and call it non sense so yes you are negleting a big part of an art and i strongly recommend you to visit a competent dojo to see for yourself.

This is quite an amusing stereotype. Bjj is essentially Judo

Master Helio Gracie created BJJ with all Judo techniques in essence thats true, but in reality giving a lot more emphasys to develop the ground techniques coz he was small and thin to compete against taller and bigger judokas. Stereotype or not, that alone cant invalidate what ive told about BJJ not being practical in a SD scenario with more than one assailant. You know a lot of stereotypes are based uppon factible statistics rite?

You show me a video thats telling me most street fights goes to the ground and thats why people have to look for a gracie academy. Thats ironic but you have just confirmed what you accused being stereotyped. Besides that, the SD action against 2 assailants on the video being coreographed when at same time tru this entire thread you have been a hard critic against any kind of coreographed or artificial move against non resistant opponents.

That statistic with any factible stereotyped idea included will be more like:  When most unskilled and untrained people street fight that fight tend to turns to a ground fight. So then, ok, now i can agree...

Peace!


----------



## Steve

Helio Gracie created BJJ?  Huh.  That I did not know.  I thought it was his older brother, Carlos, who learned from Mitsuyo Maeda.


----------



## RafaChan

Master Maeda taught master Carlos the Judo of  grandmaster Jigoro Kano. Helio learnt Judo from Carlos  and his main focus was the study, practice, development tru complete immersion on ne waza ground techniques. Helio is the father of BJJ. Judo with great ne waza emphasys. I think 90% ne waza if not more.

Master Jigoro Kano also taught Judo to master Funakoshi and he brought to his karate some nage waza techniques with takedowns, trows and even some standed joint locks.

Besides that master Funakoshi already knews a lot of gotende techniques thats the shuri okinawan ju jutsu.


----------



## Hanzou

RafaChan said:


> I think you mean about non sense some bunkai people have showned here rite?
> 
> If you tell me someone is exaggerating or maybe getting a move out from another art and its using that in bunkai telling that move its from a karate kata i can maybe agree with you.
> 
> But like it or not, straight forward or not, bunkai its real and thats some rare moments in MA that when a technique can gain a bit more depht and the practitioners are open to be creative by their own.
> 
> If you really dont believe in bunkai at all and call it non sense so yes you are negleting a big part of an art and i strongly recommend you to visit a competent dojo to see for yourself.



"Real" in what sense?

It's certainly "real" in the sense that there's this thing called bunkai that karatekas claim is the key to, and the purpose behind training their katas. The lack of straightforwardness occurs when someone points out that karatekas don't fight like their katas, or utilize techniques from their katas in competition, sparring, and more than likely fighting itself.

I personally view kata as an obsolete exercise. A relic from a bygone era that lacked printing, instant communication, organized MA associations, etc. There's plenty of MAs today that are perfectly competent and effective that teach no kata/forms whatsoever.




> Master Helio Gracie created BJJ with all Judo techniques in essence thats true, but in reality giving a lot more emphasys to develop the ground techniques coz he was small and thin to compete against taller and bigger judokas. Stereotype or not, that alone cant invalidate what ive told about BJJ not being practical in a SD scenario with more than one assailant. You know a lot of stereotypes are based uppon factible statistics rite?



And you have verifiable statistics regarding Bjj street fighting in multiple assailant situations? 
Please share. 

Either way, that wasn't the point. The point is that Bjj isn't all about ground fighting, and any competent Bjj academy will teach you how to fight from your feet, from your knees, from your back, from your side, etc.



> You show me a video thats telling me most street fights goes to the ground and thats why people have to look for a gracie academy. Thats ironic but you have just confirmed what you accused being stereotyped. Besides that, the SD action against 2 assailants on the video being coreographed when at same time tru this entire thread you have been a hard critic against any kind of coreographed or artificial move against non resistant opponents.



I was merely showing a version of how a Bjj student COULD use techniques learned in Bjj in a multiple assailant situation. Multiple assailant situations are fairly rare, and a skilled martial artist caught in a multiple assailant situation on video is even more rare.



> That statistic with any factible stereotyped idea included will be more like:  When most unskilled and untrained people street fight that fight tend to turns to a ground fight. So then, ok, now i can agree...
> 
> Peace!



It isn't just the unskilled and untrained...

Two skilled practitioners end up on the ground;


----------



## Steve

RafaChan said:


> Master Maeda taught master Carlos the Judo of  grandmaster Jigoro Kano. Helio learnt Judo from Carlos  and his main focus was the study, practice, development tru complete immersion on ne waza ground techniques.* Helio is the father of BJJ.* Judo with great ne waza emphasys. I think 90% ne waza if not more.
> 
> Master Jigoro Kano also taught Judo to master Funakoshi and he brought to his karate some nage waza techniques with takedowns, trows and even some standed joint locks.
> 
> Besides that master Funakoshi already knews a lot of gotende techniques thats the shuri okinawan ju jutsu.


 I would say that there are a lot of people out there who were there who would disagree.  Most of them probably train with descendants of Carlos Gracie Sr., including the massive number of elite black belts who traing with Carlinhos, Carlos Gracie Jr, the president of the IBJJF and the largest BJJ organization by far, Gracie Barra.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> That critic would probably be me.  If you still don't understand what I was referring to I would suggest it just isn't going to happen, but don't worry. You have a few friends here in the same boat.
> Hmm! I thought it was my OP but there you go.
> 
> I have never objected to interesting and relevant thread drift. I do object strenuously when my threads are hijacked. When someone has no knowledge of bukai and no interest in developing an understanding, I question the value of that person's contribution when we are discussing bunkai.


|
Steve, I wasn't directing that KATA comment to you personally.  It's just been my experience sometimes here@MT when trying to bring examples of principles from TMA styles or karate-related styles that may shed light on the issue of some, maybe to you....
|
There's very large number of TMA practitioners in my area who look askance at kata, how it relates to fighting.
\
There are explanations beside mine (others) out there, if you research traditional karate.
|
However, I can agree that there are many generalizations and summarizing or descriptions of kata that do not answer the question of fighting with clarity & specificity, where the theory is amply explained.  This is especially true in many karate manuals, to use Tang Soo Do, IMO, where I had picked up a text on hyung.
|
Kata is typically presented as a conundrum left to the practitioner to figure out.  Then again, you have a karate school like K-Man where kata is integrated into drilling bunkai & kata applications


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Master Maeda taught master Carlos the Judo of  grandmaster Jigoro Kano. Helio learnt Judo from Carlos  and his main focus was the study, practice, development tru complete immersion on ne waza ground techniques. Helio is the father of BJJ. Judo with great ne waza emphasys. I think 90% ne waza if not more....


|
I went to what appears to be the official Gracie BJJ site.  Both you & Steve have the lineage correct (according to that site), it's how BJJ was born that you have pointed to.
|
According to the site, Helio was frail physically and found some of the techniques which his older brothers taught (headed by Carlos) too difficult to execute.  The older brothers were teaching the Jiu-Jitsu (Judo?) they had learned from Maeda[?] who had emigrated to Brazil.
|
Helio, on his own & at the Gracie dojo, studied & developed the now popular BJJ.  The site claims that Helio essentially took over the lead in training because the students found his adaptation of technique & version of Jiu-Jitsu more favorable.  The site reports that Helio proved the efficacy of his BJJ against a wide range of competitors, including physically much larger ones....
|
Because of Helio's success & acceptance, the Helio-version of BJJ became popularized & later formalized as BJJ.
|
This is paraphrased from the Gracie Jiu-Jitsu Academy website....


----------



## RafaChan

I would say that there are a lot of people out there who were there who would disagree

So ive gotta  say  that  theres a lot of people out there, even practitioners, assuming misleadings and misconceptions as truth. Check this out: 






07:40 if the people you know out there its claiming that the carlos created BJJ, so gracie family members are telling lies about theirselves.

You know that carlos its helio oldest brother rite? And that Carlos was judo-ju jutsu pioneer, the first brazilian to learn JJJ. But BJJ came with helio. Thats pretty clear to all BJJ community here.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Hey, I fight "goobers" and win....  So, let me just paraphrase the RafaChan 'Shotokan karate manual-thesis' above....


Hanzou said:


> It isn't just the unskilled and untrained...


Any body can end up on the ground.


Hanzou said:


> Two skilled practitioners end up on the ground;


|
The thrust of the RafaChan SHOTOKAN KUMITE technique video's put up in the manual ARE:




...That one opponent goes to the ground, and rather quickly & expeditiously.
|
BTW: in honor of K-Man, we see some grappling/ bunkai-like maneuver on the part of the victorious competitor.  Shotokan practitioners are not limited to the convention Machida uses so often of numerous reverse punches (the last of which whoosed right by Rockhold a miss.).
|
The conventions of popular Shotokan kumite point fighting for sport do not define the Shotokan curriculum or the it's kumite style proper....


----------



## ShotoNoob

ON Above, note that the victorious competitor didn't fall apart just because the competition moved to infighting range.  Again, those who practice Shotokan kumite like it is some reactively speed-dart-in & out robotic model are practicing some popularized conventions & when learning such..... NOT the Shotokan curriculum proper......


----------



## ShotoNoob

So Shotokan Karate re Ground Fighting, the primary thrust of Ground Fighting in Shotokan is that you are so good at the art described in the RafaChan Piece, that the opponent ends up on the ground disabled and you are still standing.  That's it.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> You know that carlos its helio oldest brother rite? And that Carlos was judo-ju jutsu pioneer, the first brazilian to learn JJJ. But BJJ came with helio. Thats pretty clear to all BJJ community here.


|
What I read at the site I cited says pretty much that.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

BIG WEAKNESS OF SHOTOKAN AT CONVENTIONALLY PRACTICED.
|
Note the vanquished opponent, true to awful sport fighting convention, is too interested in leading a lead punch WITHOUT the transition into a strong stance.  The victorious opponent exploits this fatal flaw in sport karate convention perfectly by attacking his opponent's lead leg.
|
This is where the BJJ / grappler's point out the vulnerability weakness of striking arts against the assault of grapple-rs.
\
However, the losing Shotokan opponent made a glaring error by traditional karate principle of putting the landing of the punch ahead of a solid foundation and preparation for whole body strength.  Result, the sweep / trip produced the predetermined response, as K-MAN would say, that lead to the end of the contest.


----------



## Steve

T


RafaChan said:


> I would say that there are a lot of people out there who were there who would disagree
> 
> So ive gotta  say  that  theres a lot of people out there, even practitioners, assuming misleadings and misconceptions as truth. Check this out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 07:40 if the people you know out there its claiming that the carlos created BJJ, so gracie family members are telling lies about theirselves.
> 
> You know that carlos its helio oldest brother rite? And that Carlos was judo-ju jutsu pioneer, the first brazilian to learn JJJ. But BJJ came with helio. Thats pretty clear to all BJJ community here.


the Gracie family does indeed disagree depending upon whom you are asking.   It's a big family, and there are many different, official Gracie websites.   Not as cut and dry as yiu seem to think.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Hanzou said:


> No one is "neglecting" other arts. People are simply tired of the nonsense associated with other arts like Karate, and prefer something a bit more straight forward.


|
I can acede to some 'baggage' in Shotokan karate.
|
Straightforward is a huge reason for the proven success of BJJ.  I think & can agree you've captured that.
|
However, straightforward = / = better.  The RafaChan Shotokan karate-thesis piece kinda proves that.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Steve said:


> T
> 
> the Gracie family does indeed disagree depending upon whom you are asking.   It's a big family, and there are many different, official Gracie websites.   Not as cut and dry as yiu seem to think.


|
I'm certainly a goober when it comes to detailed history lessons, I'll switch over to a Matt Bryers-posture here.
|
The point of RafaChan's piece (TMU) is the working objective for me is I'll smash either Carlos or Helio on their way in.  That's the goalpost.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Hello,...
> The one hit KO mentality in karate its true. Thats ikken hissatsu / ippon kowashi. It doesnt mean all the fights
> have to end with just one blow but thats something all karate-ka wants to achieve. I mean, karate-ka have to fight
> moved by this intention, thats spirit. This is not the same as ippon-sanbon Kumites fashioned concept like one point/kill
> but its the same principle that have remained within the art tru its sportive ways.


|
And to drive the point home, since the 1-strike kill may not be enough to make the point.  These Shotokan kumite exchanges don't last long compared to BJJ encounters.  Mere seconds.



|
Notice as the losing opponent tries to do that magical "close-the-distance," the victor moves much like an Ippon Kumite pattern & fires back twice.  The victor also shows the versatility of using more than a reverse punch ad-nauseous.  And not all that springing up & down some many conventional karate sport competitors assume has some magical power....
|
BTW: OMG, there's a little of that karate guard-blocking action in there too.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

The dynamic of why the grappler closing the distance with fast reactions is vulnerable itself is made plain the 1st part of the exchange.
\
Also notice that the victor strikes and is immediately repositioned to strike again / strikes again .  In a highly accurate, disciplined way.  Until the opponent is disabled, fight over.  All in seconds....
|
The proper mental discipline for Shotokan kumite may call for the objective of ikken hissatsu, the competent Shotokan traditionalist is prepared (mentally disciplined) to instantly fire multiple / follow-on strikes necessary to fell the opponent.
|
The infamous Machida (UFC or MMA dare I say?) spring-ahead / whiffs of a single reverse straight punch with nothing else fails the RafaChan Shotokan Karate manual.....on several fronts....
|
Getting to this level of mental discipline calls for looking beyond 'baggage,' and learning to separate the wheat-from-the-chaff.
\
What some call 'baggage' is focus on precision technique that ultimately leads to the mental discipline alluded to in the RafaChan Shotokan Karate Synopsis.
|
Why Helio or Carlos No. 1,? who cares.....


----------



## Hanzou

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> I can acede to some 'baggage' in Shotokan karate.
> |
> Straightforward is a huge reason for the proven success of BJJ.  I think & can agree you've captured that.
> |
> However, straightforward = / = better.  The RafaChan Shotokan karate-thesis piece kinda proves that.....



Yeah, straight-forward does equal better. Straight-forward doesn't obscure the art in favor of mysticism and fantasies. Imagine if instead of forcing students to dig through the Bunkai to find the "hidden techniques", kata were simply removed and students were taught the techniques? Utilize the time you would have spent doing katas on doing drills that actually pertain to your fighting practice.

In the end, I think you would produce a better student and karateka.

Let me give you an example;

In Judo, leglocks and wrist locks are illegal in competition, and thus tend to not be practiced in live practice (randori). They're now only found in the kata. In Bjj, leg locks and wrist locks are still legal in competition, so are openly practiced in class and live practice (rolling). There is no kata in Bjj.

Guess who's better at leg locks and wrist locks. Guess where people go to learn leg locks and wrist locks. It ain't the Judo dojo.


----------



## RafaChan

RafaChan said:


> The one hit KO mentality in karate its true. Thats ikken hissatsu / ippon kowashi. *It doesnt mean all the fights
> have to end with just one blow* but thats something all karate-ka wants to achieve. I mean, karate-ka have to fight
> moved by this intention, thats spirit. *This is not the same as ippon-sanbon Kumites fashioned concept* like one point/kill
> *but its the same principle that have remained within the art tru its sportive ways*.



Kumite with the ippon (1 hit), sanbon (3 hits) KO its a shadow of a principle very present in many MA traditions that teachs: the less effort with the maximum efficiency.
Im not defending Kumite and what it may bring as flaws by its intensive practice conditioning, im really in to defend a principle and really dont wanna discuss karate here tru the sportsmanship view. There's a lot of bad conditioning involved and when we face another skilled opponent that came with some strategy its more likely that we will for sure trow more than one punch in to connect other strikes, have to work more on evasion, blocks and etc...

You guys keep bringing on MMA examples to measure things in this topic and thats produces a distortion on the art concepts. With gloves on, you cant use your hands seiken properly so the energy of the punches are way lost and splashed around the glove area. I will not even talk about rules restriction, that alone will prohibit the most  dangerous hand strikes from karate.

Karate have being a lot massified tru sports and associations, and have lost a lot by that. Im trying here to spread some words trying to clarify some stuff and recover what people is calling myths. If you really wanna know the essence of the art and practice it next to its roots you have to go deeper and seek for a better karate school or sensei. And not only that, start immersion on the techniques and practice/study, also try to learn from another masters from another karate schools from another country, etc... 

Ill paraphrase 2 of the 20 principles of Master Funakoshi here that i find will bring more depth to the discussion :

#17 Learn various stances as a beginner but then rely on a natural posture.          (regular stances practice will make your natural posture way more balanced)     

#18 The kata must always be practiced correctly: real combat is another matter.      (yes, coz kata its like a pyctograph, an imprint in time of a group of techniques)

Look that he doesnt mean kata techniques are not applicable. They really are. I can go deeper about that but ill give a fast example:

You dont like kata, you like only to spar. Ok, im ok with that, i once taught like that. But go ahead, ill give you a basic kata drill/form. Find a friend and imagine that you guys are at a SD scenario and the guy in front of you will rob you getting a gun out of his jacket. Trow a shihon nukite at him from your natural stance, left or right hand it doesnt matter. Aim for his solar plexus if you want him unconscious or the base of the throat if you want him dead... SIMPLE like that and STRAIGHT FORWARD like that ! And all the drill performed within 1-2 seconds. So... If you wanna get the correct body axis and alignement to launch that strike and the stance to maximize its effect you can do a kihon or a kata, your choice.

That technique along with others was banned from kumite competitions given the potential lethality it can result, you can learn it from a very basic level kata heian nidan. In before people have died in kumite. I know that Kumite competitions here in brazil were forbidden by law in the 60's coz two practitioners have died in a short period of time, dont know how manny around the world but you guess. So i repeat, bring in any sports context to a SD discussion about what a specific TMA can do its quite silly and naive. In reality thats unreal !

To keep on topic the videos that i've posted about SD scenarios the fights dont last more than 30 seconds. A lot was decided in the first 5 seconds. 

I really hoped that discussion will start to head in to the right direction like manny people tried in before but i was to much of an optimistic.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Hanzou / Thanks for following up!


Hanzou said:


> Yeah, straight-forward does equal better.


|
Your position is NOT what the traditional karate masters say.  So you say over them.


Hanzou said:


> Straight-forward doesn't obscure the art in favor of mysticism and fantasies.


|
Again, so you say.  Matt Thorton has 35+ SBG's which prove your thesis. According to Matt Thorton, that is.....


Hanzou said:


> Imagine if instead of forcing students to dig through the Bunkai to find the "hidden techniques", kata were simply removed and students were taught the techniques? Utilize the time you would have spent doing katas on doing drills that actually pertain to your fighting practice.


|
Again, so you say.  In addition to the Matt Thorton school, there's even MMA schools right in my area who think as you.


Hanzou said:


> In the end, I think you would produce a better student and karateka.


|
The traditional karate model says different.  One adopted across all kinds of karate styles.  The bottom line is few have the mental discipline to do karate as I do.  Even K-MAN struggles with it, and he's an expert....


Hanzou said:


> Let me give you an example;
> 
> In Judo, leglocks and wrist locks are illegal in competition, and thus tend to not be practiced in live practice (randori). They're now only found in the kata. In Bjj, leg locks and wrist locks are still legal in competition, so are openly practiced in class and live practice (rolling). There is no kata in Bjj.
> 
> Guess who's better at leg locks and wrist locks. Guess where people go to learn leg locks and wrist locks. It ain't the Judo dojo.


|
I have broached the same issue (posted numerous times @MT) when examining the flaws & drawbacks present in traditional karates, particularly a more basic style such as I practice.
|
RE the Judo example, I and others @MT here have stipulated to your point several times.  It's a simple decision tree-like mental exercise to broach the issue productively.  Your 'branch' of that decision tree re the Judo example, is to choose or go to a BJJ school.
|
There's other alternatives.


----------



## ShotoNoob

I see K=MAN has a 2nd cousin....


RafaChan said:


> Ill paraphrase 2 of the 20 principles of Master Funakoshi here that i find will bring more depth to the discussion :
> 
> #17 Learn various stances as a beginner but then rely on a natural posture.          (regular stances practice will make your natural posture way more balanced)
> 
> #18 The kata must always be practiced correctly: real combat is another matter.      (yes, coz kata its like a pyctograph, an imprint in time of a group of techniques)


|
Gichin Funakoshi was a Karate Master, not a God.  All of his teachings can be qualified like any one else.
|
#17. This is what everyone pretty much does, either for the right or wrong reasons.... Okinawan karate bias against low stances such as in Goju Ryu is still subject to the principles of stances overall.  There's a wider interpretation of traditional karate stances than K=MAN's.
|
#18. I believe this is a true statement, yet very vague and unqualified.  Kata is so deep & intricate, what exactly is it important to emphasize, what are we really supposed to be focusing on?  Funakoshi's #18 is just a rule that say do kata right rather than sloppy or wrong in some way.  Not helpful, really.
|
"Combat is another matter?"  Zero definition of what he is talking about.  Again, Funakoshi is merely laying out some very broad distinction between kata & combat.  Like obviously.
|
As I said about traditional karate, here Shotokan, huge blanks left to be filled by the practitioner...  Said that....


----------



## ShotoNoob

K=MAN applies kata progressively using bunaki drills with escalating pressure testing.  Sort of ala Matt Thorton's "I" Method.
|
K=MAN claims, as an expert karateka, that this builds instinctive skill within a physical form that is effective in SD.  I look @ kata through a much broader window.
|
I doubt whether other than a small percentage will have the mental discipline to seriously engage in either approach to traditional karate.  Hence, the source of failure to successfully apply Shotokan karate for self defense....  So Shotokan detractors, rubbish away.


----------



## drop bear

RafaChan said:


> You guys keep bringing on MMA examples to measure things in this topic and thats produces a distortion on the art concepts. With gloves on, you cant use your hands seiken properly so the energy of the punches are way lost and splashed around the glove area. I will not even talk about rules restriction, that alone will prohibit the most dangerous hand strikes from karate.



We can use Rio heros or nhb if it is easier. Neither use gloves.


----------



## drop bear

ShotoNoob said:


> K=MAN applies kata progressively using bunaki drills with escalating pressure testing.  Sort of ala Matt Thorton's "I" Method.
> |
> K=MAN claims, as an expert karateka, that this builds instinctive skill within a physical form that is effective in SD.  I look @ kata through a much broader window.
> |
> I doubt whether other than a small percentage will have the mental discipline to seriously engage in either approach to traditional karate.  Hence, the source of failure to successfully apply Shotokan karate for self defense....  So Shotokan detractors, rubbish away.



Why wouldn't shotokan fighters have mental discipline?

How much do you think is actually required?

I mean I know guys who fight and they are 6 to 7 days a week training on top of full time jobs through illness and injury with strict control of food generally zero alcohol and very little free time. And they do this for years.

It is different training but it is definitely a commitment to discipline for those that want results.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Why wouldn't shotokan fighters have mental discipline?
> 
> How much do you think is actually required?
> 
> I mean I know guys who fight and they are 6 to 7 days a week training on top of full time jobs through illness and injury with strict control of food generally zero alcohol and very little free time. And they do this for years.
> 
> It is different training but it is definitely a commitment to discipline for those that want results.



It should be noted that its a simple task to find people from most styles (no idea how the Yellow bamboo guys regard their bodies overall health)  with the "fighters disicpline"

Im with you that its hardly a different different kind of commitment or discipline just because the style or purpose is different.

no idea why Shoto thinks Mental and Physical discipline is different because one is karate and one isnt



drop bear said:


> We can use Rio heros or nhb if it is easier. Neither use gloves.




Well, in NHB and early UFC,s etc. we did see a lot more TMA hand techs,

Palm strikes, kinds of ridge hands, forearm strikes, etc.

and while we havent seen them since gloves, and that many times fighters hands arent aligned properly(connecting with first 2 knuckles in line with forearm), there would be some energy lost just by not being as focused.

That said, I think Rafa is overplaying how how much is lost a bit. Even then, getting into the habit of aligning the hand/wrist is an easy fix.


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> #17. This is what everyone pretty much does, either for the right or wrong reasons.... Okinawan karate bias against low stances such as in Goju Ryu is still subject to the principles of stances overall.  There's a wider interpretation of traditional karate stances than K=MAN's.


Not sure what this has to do with me. Goju had a fighting stance called Moto dachi. As to all the other stances, they have their place in grappling. They don't get forgotten or ignored.


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> Why wouldn't shotokan fighters have mental discipline?


|
To quote the MT Administrator-JKS, are you just remembering kata steps, or are you directed at using those kata steps towards some purpose?  64 dollars question, is your purpose in line with traditional martial art principles or are you off course?  It's a circular question of always being challenged to understand the principles behind what one is doing....
|
to jump to your hardcore audience below, just stressing the body and putting pressure on the mind to very heavy loads with all that training you describe.... is that true to TMA principles, is that toward a beneficial building of martial strengths.... If not, then one is actually comprising the development of SD skills, not increasing them...

How much do you think is actually required?
|
In a word, it's alot.  Much more than that, it's how you approach the art and it;'s training...



drop bear said:


> Why wouldn't shotokan fighters have mental discipline?I mean I know guys who fight and they are 6 to 7 days a week training on top of full time jobs through illness and injury with strict control of food generally zero alcohol and very little free time. And they do this for years.


|
Wow, you know some hardcore.  Yet one of the most accomplished & recognized Shotokan Masters who moved from the JKA to his own organization here in the US (Worldwide reach) warned strictly of the dangers of over training....


drop bear said:


> Why wouldn't shotokan fighters have mental discipline?It is different training but it is definitely a commitment to discipline for those that want results.


|
Right.  I see we have a semantically question here, and I was general my use of mental discipline.
|
1. The discipline to train intensively, that is what I believe you are speaking too....  this is present in conventional athletic training...
|
2. The discipline to look @ the study & practice of Shotokan karate as a mental activity, understanding what that is and changing or evolving from the physically-based training (alluded to in your interpretation above) to training karate where the mental capabilities are developed and made the dominant focus of training.
|
3. Employing the capability developed & cultivated in #2 into & as your foundational martial skill, here Shotokan.  Being the mentally disciplined fighter.  This doesn't mean just being some tough, aggressive-mined guy who can take a punch without crying....
|
It means mind & body unity where the mental process controls, not mere reactions or even instincts.
|
So to summarize as 3 interpretations of discipinle (described above)  can establish & aid one's practice of Shotokan for self defense.
|
It's the approach stated in #2 & #3 that make Shotokan come 'alive' the way the Master's intended, IMHO.  This is where the Matt Thorton program then fails against the traditional Shotokan karate curriculum, even with all the latter's unattractive qualities...
|
Good luck with all this...


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> Not sure what this has to do with me. Goju had a fighting stance called Moto dachi. As to all the other stances, they have their place in grappling. They don't get forgotten or ignored.


|
I thought the information you gave me indicated more emphasis on higher, more natural stances, that's all.


----------



## ShotoNoob

DYNAMIC SHOTOKAN


Drose427 said:


> That said, I think Rafa is overplaying how how much is lost a bit. Even then, getting into the habit of aligning the hand/wrist is an easy fix.


|
One theme of RAFA's article that I agree 100% with is how much has been lost, especially when talking about the average practice of Shotokan, including compared to it's early history.  Quite a bit is lost.  That greatly comprised the application by the average Shotokan karate practitioner for SD.  We then see the Hanzou move or preference for something simpler, workable....
|
I put some YT vids up of how Shotokan kumite can be dynamic & effective from a foundational perspective.  The techniques are certainly Kihon level, nothing advanced.  Strong, explosive, precise, on target striking, tactics that change & adapt to the actions &
7 response of the opponent.
|
It's doable (not mystical) , takes a much different road than athletic-type training , Matt Thornton "Straight Blast" "Aliveness" mentality....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Matt Thorton's system is good.  Matt Bryers combat BJJ is better for SD.  Moving to Shotokan, it's not about training yourself under harsh conditions.  It's not about repetitive drills that one regurgitates re-actively.   It's not about just getting comfortable with resistance or pressure
|
It's about moving to a mentally-driven process.  It's about developing a mental foundation, then the M&B unity.  Takes a while to get there.... quite awhile....
|
Shotokan does not provide the greater SD expertise that MT experts here have discussed, the whole concept or science of SD.  Shotokan provides a skill base which starts with physical conditioning, physical learning (remembering and repeating steps in kata, whatever); then moves to mental discipline over all aspects of those exercises.
|
Good luck with all that....


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> Gichin Funakoshi was a Karate Master, not a God.



My intention in reproduce some words of wisdom are not to qualify those words by the absolute truth idea scope for everyone here, was more like to serve as a guidance. I think people have to dive in and find their personal truths. There are a lot of patches to follow and we can freely catch from them what will better fit for us to create our own truth. I think the quest is personal yet we can meet a lot in common ground perspectives while sharing.  Not an easy job for the closed mindeds, read heavy traditionalists or modern blindeds. 



ShotoNoob said:


> All of his teachings can be qualified like any one else.



Yes, i do agree in part, and they were no doubt. I think one of the persons who did that in a way that have affected shotokan so much was his own son, master Yoshitaka. Of manny things he have questioned and changed the most notable was to brake the old method of 3 years per kata. (thanks master Giko)

Personally, of all of that said... If someone choose a particular method to follow like do 3 years each kata before go to another or if they worship a cow and view it as a god and they feel good about that and things are working nice and smooth that way for them, i do think for that particular cases those views and methods are valid.

Not valid for everyone ofc, nor even for the majority of the people but your opinion alone about what you think its truth or what is it should be or not the truth doesnt invalidate other people ways and experiences.

Ok, now about kata, forms, stances... Ill really try to save you from another boring history class or thesis...


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> I thought the information you gave me indicated more emphasis on higher, more natural stances, that's all.


Moto dachi *is* a totally natural stance, much the same as a boxer's stance. Sanchin dachi takes your leg around and behind your opponent's leg when you are grappling. Lower stances, for example Zenkutsu dachi, come into play if you are in a lower position such as having your arms around your opponent's torso and you move past and use the back leg to break his structure. Shiko dachi, or a transition of zenkutsu into shiko, facilitates a take down where your arm is around your opponent's neck or even chest. All the stances have their uses and not always in the way you see them taught.


----------



## RafaChan

RafaChan said:


> Ill paraphrase 2 of the 20 principles of Master Funakoshi here that i find will bring more depth to the discussion :
> 
> #17 Learn various stances as a beginner but then rely on a natural posture. (regular stances practice will make your natural posture way more balanced)





ShotoNoob said:


> #17. This is what everyone pretty much does, either for the right or wrong reasons.... Okinawan karate bias against low stances such as in Goju Ryu is still subject to the principles of stances overall. There's a wider interpretation of traditional karate stances than K=MAN's.



Sensei Yoshitaka have brought shotokan stances deeper, despite he being a small guy, and he was a competent fighter with that. So i think we can assume that a deeper and lower stance was his natural posture ? Some say in before heian shodan was not peformed with zenkutsu dachi low stance it was with moto dachi middle height, a more "natural" one. Moto dachi for me its the typical thai/boxer stance wich everyone adopt for the most part in SD stuff or sports, but that doesnt invalidate lower stances. 

Stances are real and some of them have being recorded at video.

Typical "porradeiro", where going to fight on the ground can put you in disadvantage. This video has a lot of moto dachi imo (mainstream stance ?), can see some zenkutsu also:






To keep on topic, karate stances in SD can be and are real or even "natural":






I like how he make the transition while stepping out of the guy in a 45º swep. Ill keep saying shotokan can give SD usefull tools or in the worst case scenario a place to start.

In the vid bellow Machida's brother, you can look from 00:30, 01:32 he's in zenkutsu, more deeper than the thai guy (him more like with moto dachi). 01:36 the ghost of ikken hissatsu kumite still haunting us... Very fast, precise, heavy kata adept btw. I know theres at least 4 zenkutsu variations that have changed between masters. I think hes using the modern one of master Hidetaka. A karate kata stance in MMA and recorded so it must be real.






Kokutsu stance in kumite, A defensive, counter attack stance. Master Lyoto stances very deep, a true shotokan. Look how he transition to kokutsu-zenkutsu with such speed and brilliance, and then ashi barai the other guy. Lyoto did must be real ^^






Theres a reason behind all of that. A fact that make it truth for everyone despite your personal beliefs, and shotokan exploit that wich is:

The lower the stance lower will be the center of gravity and higher will be the power and the balance achieved.

But master Funakoshi in the past insisted: "High stances are for the advanced practitioners, low stances for the begginer."

From my personal view and experience i think the lower stances can be quite devastating. Capoeira fighters trow their kicks coming from very very low stances while applying a lot of momentum spinning head, torso, hips and legs like a pendulum. For an example regard that:


----------



## ShotoNoob

Overall-IMHO-your commentary has been very well constructed, not the least bit boring, IMO.  It may be boring for the impatient, or Matt  Thorton followers who want gym coach-speak.  Those kinds of MA practitioners will have trouble with the depth demanded by traditional karate training... particularly Shotokan karate....


RafaChan said:


> ...Personally, of all of that said... If someone choose a particular method to follow like do 3 years each kata before go to another or if they worship a cow and view it as a god and they feel good about that and things are working nice and smooth that way for them, i do think for that particular cases those views and methods are valid.


|
Ah, everyone has their own style, their own attributes & limitations.  Yet the message of Gichin Funakosi is that there are certain principles of developing the human potential & applying that to self defense.  The traditions represent and point the way to those principles, and understanding.  These same traditions, the conventions of actual karate practice can also mask, divert, or impede the originally sought-after principles of TMA training.  Depends on the interpretations inherent to the style, to the instructor, to the person....
|
So, in terms of traditional Shotokan principles, it's a big trap, a big mistake to say what's working for you in your particular environment is what defines the principles.



RafaChan said:


> Not valid for everyone ofc, nor even for the majority of the people but your opinion alone about what you think its truth or what is it should be or not the truth doesnt invalidate other people ways and experiences.


|
Well, I have a pretty good handle on the mental acuity skills to effect karate in practice.  I'm in the minority, however, I ascribe a lot of that to the lack of personal discipline required in practitioners to train mentally or to try to understand the mental dimension of TMA, as intangible as it is to observe easily.  It is the specification of the mental qualities in the Shotokan curriculum that sets Shotokan superior to the sport-based methods.  The mind & body union, with key mental capabilities directing one's action.
|
Way too many traditional karate practitioners are looking for a testosterone expression, recreation, or serving some emotional need to compete, etc.  None of these is mental discipline in action.



RafaChan said:


> Ok, now about kata, forms, stances... Ill really try to save you from another boring history class or thesis...


|
Well, K-Man is taking the discussion back to technical s, where he has high-level expertise.  I doubt if the majority of karate practitioners will have have the patience to read your Shotokan-manual-thesis, and the quality of the majority of Shotokan practitioners karate will suffer accordingly.
\
I trained old-school Funakoshi & spent several, several years on the taikyoku kata (also Heian during that time).  That's a major. major driver of how I got the level of mental ability I possess.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> Moto dachi *is* a totally natural stance, much the same as a boxer's stance. Sanchin dachi takes your leg around and behind your opponent's leg when you are grappling. Lower stances, for example Zenkutsu dachi, come into play if you are in a lower position such as having your arms around your opponent's torso and you move past and use the back leg to break his structure. Shiko dachi, or a transition of zenkutsu into shiko, facilitates a take down where your arm is around your opponent's neck or even chest. All the stances have their uses and not always in the way you see them taught.


|
For those who want to get into the technicals, you're the authority.... I find the message in the Shotokan curriculum is there is a very wide range of stances for one to apply as one sees' fit in actual action.  The stereotype of Shotokan fighting in training stances, I can accept the conventions here, yet the curriculum specifically addresses variation in stances, including the generality between high & low stances.
|
Moreover, stances involve the development of mental discipline in terms of mind body union.  And more.... which leads to more dynamic kumite tactics.
|
This is in direct contrast to those in MMA, sport fighting who claim that traditional karate stances are rigid, fixed, immobile.  Shotokan in particular, has made many physical adaptions to stance practice to make same more practical in application.
|
However, it is the mental acuity skill behind traditional karate, including fighting from stances, that launches dynamic action far superior to boxer footwork, the typical kickboxer mobility.  Not for the reactive, though....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...
> But master Funakoshi in the past insisted: "High stances are for the advanced practitioners, low stances for the begginer."


|
It's hard to find fault with your illustrations.  Particularly in that you relates Shotokan stances to SD / fighting confrontations.
|
What I would put out on Funakoshi, how I look at his precepts, is that the man came up with a list of standards to define what Shotokan is doing.  It's an academic list, like something I would personally put together in a karate training manual.  lt's far short, far short of a system of training  the components & interactions thereof of a live human being.
|
Funakoshi's Shotokan precepts represent guideposts, goal posts to take us in the right direction according to the principles underlying traditional karate.
|
On the high/ low stance.  Funakoshi, by low stances,  sought to develop strength, flexiblity, etc. AND the mental discipline component which would evolve into mind / body unity.  Low stances also provide a tactical advantage to certain individuals as well as a tactical alternative to the more natural stances. <<  IS THE MATT THORTON "SBG" USER GETTING THE PURPORT OF THE COMPLEXITY & WISDOM built into the  traditional karate model? >>  Funakoshi recognized from the Okinawan's that strength and so on could also be gained from training high stances,. yet same were much more effective for the most in actual application for various reasons I'll leave to K=MAN.
|
Everybody I've trained with in traditional karate, particularly the kung fu stylists seems to have an understanding of the principle of stances.  The move to boxing-like stances without thought of the karate counterpart, or that kickboxing mobility of dancing all around, is really to me, a mental discipline issue both in training & an inability to impart mind / body unity.
|
Funakoshi's single sentence on stances H/L is a summary principle he came up with based on the principles of the Okinawan karate masters he trained under.  Train low for physical benefit & mental discipline, fight high for physical application applied with mental discipline.  We need a whole chapter when Funakoshi gave us an outline....


----------



## drop bear

I still think mental acuity skill as you describe it iis made up.

It seems to spring from nowhere and achieve nothing.

How do you tell from looking if someone has developed this skill?


----------



## drop bear

Mma stance can be a bit deeper and a bit more 50 50 to defend takedowns better.

No secret method. No hidden agenda.


----------



## RafaChan

RafaChan said:


> #18 The kata must always be practiced correctly: real combat is another matter. (yes, coz kata its like a pyctograph, an imprint in time of a group of techniques)





ShotoNoob said:


> #18.* I believe this is a true statement, yet very vague and unqualified.* *Kata is so deep & intricate, what exactly is it important to emphasize, what are we really supposed to be focusing on?* Funakoshi's #18 is just a rule that say do kata right rather than sloppy or wrong in some way. Not helpful, really.
> |
> "*Combat is another matter?" Zero definition of what he is talking about*. Again, Funakoshi is merely laying out some very broad distinction between kata & combat. Like obviously.



Yes i do agree its vague, not so sure if unqualified. I think when he says ''must always be practiced correctly'' it's other way to say that people have to pass the kata the exact same way they learnt it. Despite this close the doors for the most creative ones, maybe theres a reason if we look closely to one of kata pursposes wich is transmit and preserve a body of techniques that were succesfull in IRL battles and SD, but more than that.

It preserves techniques of great masters in a time and place were writing were scarce and not so secure to keep techniques safe from being destroyed they even tell stories about warriors. Yes they are like a relique of a by gone era yet we still beholding them. Any guarantee that we suddenly cant lost all of our technoloy and did came back to the rocky age again? 

It's so deep and intricate that's really true. Not for everyone i would say, but yet we see most dojos training it mechanically with the kids without any SD or other practical purpose other than physical conditioning. I told in other post that even in the heian nidan kata basics we can find a technic potentially lethal thats not even "sparrable". But thats the rite focus to give to the kids? Ofc not. So the kata focus is variable. What is important to emphasize ? It depends. We can take much more from it for sure.

IMO kata its like a potentially good wine. The older (practicing them), the better, under the right conditions (understandment). Theres so much we can take. Imo kata will make good for your body balance, alignement, conditioning thats true. But for the mind and spirit also. Mind will benefit a lot also coz when performing the techniques you will add a lot more in term of movement sinapsys. In the karatejesse.com site he says kata its a "biological data storage system". And finally spirit... thats the part a lot of people hate and doesnt comprehend. But all kata its intertwined with so called "mysticism" by a concept. Not some cheap mysticism but more like a concept from a religion and its budhism.

Kata apply the happo no kuzushi 8 direction form principle. Schools teachs it saying its the way to brake the opponents balance but its much more than that. Note that in kata you can go to the 4 directions and sometimes you turn 45º and keep advancing. Thats it. 8 directions, coordinates. That will prove a point about everyone its kinda wrong. That kata its linear, static. No way. You can go practice kata movement by going forward, backward and moving in a 360º angle. 45º x 8 = 360º. Kata it's a sphere, so multi dimensional. Kata its to set you free and not to limitate you. According to a karateka shugenja monk kata embodies and represents the dharmachakra = wheel of dharma = wheel of law. 

Its very difficult to get away with that if you just think about why a kata was ever created long millenia ago. A sensei told me once that okinawate didnt have kata untill the chinese bring it to them. By these chinese influence okinawate evolved to tode than shurite, nahate and tomarite. MA that time was also considered a way to enlightnement so i think i can comprehend why they passed the traditions that way. It served a purpose.

If you wanna pass all this up and do your straight forward training its understandable. Cant say about Judo but in Karate some techniques are not applicable by the straight forward aproach. Atemi waza its high level bunkai that came with kyusho-jutsu and its shared by manny japanese MA.

*#18 The kata must always be practiced correctly: real combat is another matter*

Real combat is another matter? Yes no definition, its a principle not a thesis ^^ . But i think hes saying he dont fight in the same way like he would do a kata. Hes saying you can use the techniques inside as independant pieces/parts and even perform a combo with pieces of different katas. Like that tobi mae gueri machida used on randy couture its from chinto kata. Its all wide open not like that linearity as we know. And people taught was something new and never saw that before they said wow, thats karate kid, and guess why.

Just for the gags, this guy took kata linear static form and deep stances so serious hes rooted and barely can move, he didnt know that combat is another matter yet he won:






This other vid, a shaolin monk fighter imo a guy who have a complete sense of body balance as you can see in 05:23 and also a heavy kata practitioner, fun to watch:


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> I still think mental acuity skill as you describe it iis made up.
> 
> It seems to spring from nowhere and achieve nothing.
> 
> How do you tell from looking if someone has developed this skill?


|
Just raising negative assertions, give Matt Thorton people a call.  You'd make a great, guest lecturer....  spend an hour or 2 on why the karate master's were / are "goobers".....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Yes i do agree its vague, not so sure if unqualified. I think when he says ''must always be practiced correctly'' it's other way to say that people have to pass the kata the exact same way they learnt it. Despite this close the doors for the most creative ones, maybe theres a reason if we look closely to one of kata pursposes wich is transmit and preserve a body of techniques that were succesfull in IRL battles and SD, but more than that.


|
You've got to be K=MAN's cousin... laying out a whole karate training manual.
|
I won't do justice to your whole post right know--it's good.  Yet the real challenge is the people who need your training perspective most, will they have the initial personal discipline to read & study same?  What make traditional karate come "alive" to trump Matt Thorton's athletic "alive"--starts with in-depth study along with the original physical conditioning & kihon practice.
|
Let me just add, and i had posted the same example--less warmly received (i'm not related to K=MAN), of Chinzo Machida's MMA bout against the Professional kickboxer.
|
That kickboxer, a professional fighter, had virtually no answer to Chinzo's Shotokan competiton kumite reverse punch counter launched from a traditional back stance.
|
To the karate naysayers, this to me is startling evidence of how well even that awful Shotokan kihon can work in a conflict.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Going to stop here.  Let me just add that a major problem Lyoto Machida has is relying on straightforward (to borrow a RAFA phrase) Shotokan competition-kumite convention too much.
|
Machida has little karate answer for aggressive infighting on the MMA opponent's part, which K=MAN is expertly qualified to address...  It's also a KIME issue, if you can buy that....


----------



## RafaChan

drop bear said:


> I still think mental acuity skill as you describe it iis made up.
> 
> It seems to spring from nowhere and achieve nothing.
> 
> How do you tell from looking if someone has developed this skill?



You can take a look at Chinzo Machida attitude at that MMA fight from the video above. A lot focused but more than that, his mind was sharp enough to be the faster and precise when he needed. That alone was enough to concentrate his strategy on devastating counter attacks much alike his brother kumite vid. Speed, precision, timing, with the right skill and strategy.

IMHO minds get along with speed of reflexes-reaction, fast coordination of strategy with skills and emotional control. Mind should controls the blade/hand that should control the hearth. I can go deeper and say spirit its intention. While you can move your intention to a said attack giving more emphasis/power to it you can achieve a point in feeling the others intention. Looks like im talking about spider sense, something unreal but believe it or not that thing its even theme of academical researchs.




drop bear said:


> Mma stance can be a bit deeper and a bit more 50 50 to defend takedowns better.
> 
> No secret method. No hidden agenda.



Not much its left hidden today, its a different era. It depends of your point of view. Its all wide open, its all within the basics in a sraight forward shortcut, or it could be miles and miles far away and all hidden. One should know how to search and where to search. Mind can serve a lot by insights, creating the links of the parts in to the whole. For better understandment sometimes we need to be holistic and for better practice we need to be cartesian or both.

About MMA you told earlier about rio heroes, the way they fight bare knuckled coz i said the gloves contribute to a energy loss of the punch in SD scenario. Ill show you a video of rio heroes and will share a nice story after.






07:36 the guy enter in a frenezy bad for SD. Thats when tunnel vision starts to bugging. But thats not the point. Thats not even sport for me, too much in to the deglational thing for me. I prefer to think like ill fight the fights that are worth to fight. And for the SD perspective still not practical. Too much of an energy loss. It still have detrimental strike rules just like vale tudo, yet they brag about being no rules. Of the detrimental rules the most important for me in a SD perspective will be the strike at the testicles and neck. Im not counting bites, eyes, hair pull coz thats not so desirable in SD. Testicles and neck will stop the fight same moment you hit them for sure. You need very little power on a strike to brake trachea or adam pomme and testicles you already know.

Also, that doesnt mean when the bad guy aready got a gun in your head that will be good to trow a hand strike in the neck or kick testicles, not good for all SD scenarios ofc. In that case its preferable doing such drills:






The story as follows just states how karates applicable in a very very straight forward aproach like 1 month. That was in WWII the source its Master Funakoshi s KARATE by Graham Noble

The part that interest us: (its kinda long, good reading)

"Taiji Kase, who trained at the Shotokan in the last year or so of the war, remembered that emphasis was placed on strong basics and intense practice of kumite (especially jiyu-ippon) with much physical contact. Kase, a person not given to exaggeration, described it as "very hard". Tatsuo Suzuki told me that the well rounded pre-war training gave way to practice on "fighting", and he stressed "fighting" rather than sparring (jiyu-kumlte). I had heard stories (without details) of Yoshitaka Funakoshi and Shigeru Egami teaching special troops during the war. I asked Harada sensei about this and he told me what he had heard.

The institution concerned was the Nakano School, a training school for military espionage analogous to our MI5. Trainees were on a one year course covering undercover work, guerrilla warfare and so on. Unarmed combat was also included and the original teacher for this was Morihei Uyeshiba (of Aikido). Uyeshiba himself was good but when the students tried to apply the techniques they couldn't make them work under real conditions. In a way, Aikido had too much "technique" for the limited one year of training. The military leaders decided to look at karate as an alternative, and they observed the different styles, such as Goju, Wado, and Shotokan.

Goju-ryu, with its heavy stress on sanchin training, did not seem to have the practical application necessary, at least in its initial stages, and Wado-ryu technique seemed too "light". However, the Shotokan style as demonstrated by Yoshitaka looked impressive, and he was asked to teach at the Nakano School. Unfortunately, he was too ill and it was Shigeru Egami who did the actual teaching. Egami concentrated on two techniques: choku-zuki (straight punch) and mae-geri (front kick), and when he began teaching a class he would pick out participants and tell them to attack him as hard as they could. In this way he was able to prove the validity of his technique. Injuries were frequent. Kicks were often delivered to the shins - and this was while wearing boots.

After the war Harada sensei met someone who had trained in these classes under Egami. He recalled one time when he had hardly been able to walk for a week because of such shin kicks. But injuries were no excuse for missing training. If someone was wearing bandages, they had to be removed. If a bad injury occurred, then no doctors could be called for during training. A hard rule, but no doctors would be present on the battle front. All in all, however, this "Nakano-ryu" was successful in achieving its objectives. The military was pleased with the results and Yoshitaka and Egami gained prestige from it. Something similar was recounted by Wado-ryu karateka Takatoshi Nishizono in a chapter he contributed to the 1977 "Karate-do". (Sozo Co. Translation courtesy Ian McLaren and N. Karasawa). Nishizono began karate training when he entered Tokyo University in 1941. He became so wrapped up in karate that in fact he neglected his studies and his academic performance was poor. But after graduation he managed to get a job with the North China Transportation Company in Peking; a boring, routine job as he recalled.

In early 1945 however, he was summoned by head office and asked to take on a role as karate instructor to a Special Army Squadron in Taigen. Nishizono felt he was not really up to this but after he was told it was his duty he agreed:

"When I arrived at the special squadron I was introduced to the young Commanding Officer and the other officers. I was made aware of the aim and organization of the squadron but was ordered to keep it secret for security reasons.

"Taigen was the HQ of the 1st Army Group, North China, but our squadron consisted of only 250 volunteers, all of whom had distinguished themselves in battle. We usually wore normal military uniform with the Cherry Blossom badge, but when we began operations we changed into normal Chinese wear and we acted like ninja, carrying no weapons. We were an intelligence and guerrilla unit named "Sakura Squadron" We trained in horse riding, martial arts disguise technique and physical exercise. We never trained with swords or guns; it was required that the Sakura Squadron be able to defeat the opponent with bare hands, and this was why karate was selected.

"I began instruction immediately, on the first day. I was led to a building to be used as the dojo and found the whole squadron lined up, all stripped to the waist. They had superb physiques and sharp eyes. The commanding officer gave a briefing which included the words: "Our training must be real, just like a battle! So it may be that some of you will be killed!"

"That briefing was very effective in impressing the soldiers. Even though they were brave men, some said afterwards that it had made them feel uneasy.

"You cannot teach 200 men sufficient karate to defeat an enemy in one month if you rely on the normal methods of training. I made an instant decision and, selecting two soldiers who looked strong, ordered them to attack me using any technique they wished. They had no experience of karate so I was able to beat them easily; my kicking technique was enough. But they were very brave and continued to attack. But despite the briefing by the commanding officer I did not have the heart to attack the kintekki (testicles). I refrained from using that technique and using only sokuto I knocked them to the floor. After this the soldiers respected my ability and it was much easier for me to teach them.

"My method of training was a simple one. For punching (tsuki) I demanded that they strike to the enemy's face, and for kicking, that they attack the kintekki. For defense we used jodan-uke and gedan-barai. I trained them every day repeating these basic techniques many times. As training progressed the soldiers' stances became stronger. Then we moved on to hon-kumite--serious kumite.

"There was no stopping in our kumite and naturally some arguments arose during this practice. Also, as I could not easily oversee over 200 men I learned that when I was near they would go full force, but when my back was turned they took it easy. I knew that they were tired after their battlefield experiences and at first I pretended not to notice. However, my task was to train them to combat readiness in a month, so eventually I had to be hard with them. If I found anyone being idle I pulled them out and and fought them till they could no longer stand.

"They had all practiced judo, kendo and tsuken-jutsu (bayonet fighting) and were able to pick up karate technique quickly. After training we would take a bath. Some of the soldiers had powerful physiques and I was somewhat ashamed of my own small body.

"That month passed so quickly. All the soldiers trained hard and performed well. On the final day we said our farewells, the officers expressed their gratitude to me, and we had a party. Then I left Taigen and returned to Peking where life continued in the same way as before.

"I never found out what happened to the Sakura Squadron. I heard stories that they had been sent south on a mission and that all had been killed. The men who wore that Cherry Blossom badge were all from Northern Japan; they were so naive and kind. Now it all seems like a dream."

Peace!


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ....the one hit KO mentality in karate its true. Thats ikken hissatsu / ippon kowashi. It doesnt mean all the fightst have to end with just one blow but thats something all karate-ka wants to achieve. I mean, karate-ka have to fight moved by this intention, thats spirit. This is not the same as ippon-sanbon Kumites fashioned concept like one point/kill but its the same principle that have remained within the art tru its sportive ways. Thats really a true tradition,
> thats the true karate jutsu spirit. In japanese kuden, oral tradition tells that we have to train strenght,
> technique and spirit, thats karate-do. Technique can win strenght but spirit can wins technique. In
> a clash of both skilled and strenght opponents, chances are that the one with the right intention and spirit
> will win. Thats when someone achieve mushin having complete awareness, sense of space-range, timing and an empty
> relaxed mind able to create the right momentum via attack or counter attack.


|
Just copied a core part of your initial dissertation.
|
Discussing or evaluating the efficacy of Shotokan karate absent the context of the entirety of the art is great for keeping threads going on & on & round & round.  So you have provided the benefit of capturing a lion share of the entire picture of the art, it's essence.
\
The moral is that those viewing or practicing Shotokan without that totality are coming at Shotokan incompetently.  they are not training the traditional karate mode,  they're doing something that resembles Shotokan proper in appearance or in physical shape, activity.  However, true Shotokan it is not.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...Goju-ryu, with its heavy stress on sanchin training, did not seem to have the practical application necessary, at least in its initial stages, and Wado-ryu technique seemed too "light". However, the Shotokan style as demonstrated by Yoshitaka looked impressive, and he was asked to teach at the Nakano School. Unfortunately, he was too ill and it was Shigeru Egami who did the actual teaching. Egami concentrated on two techniques: choku-zuki (straight punch) and mae-geri (front kick), and when he began teaching a class he would pick out participants and tell them to attack him as hard as they could. In this way he was able to prove the validity of his technique. Injuries were frequent. Kicks were often delivered to the shins - and this was while wearing boots.


|
This is why I call Shotokan and the Japanese karates, the KISS karates.  The founders sought to make karate more applicable to the everyday, and pragmatic usages.  The more sophisticated karate(s) take much longer to develop a functional base, though ultimately superior in application.  IMO....

|
Shotokan's emphasis on physicality makes it more practicable when relying on physical strength & conditioning compared to the type of evolving skills by the Okinawan karates, IMO.  The reliance on this heavy physicality and aggression, though can become a trap that stalls & frustrates higher level of skill development re mind / body union...as well as more efficient use of technique.
|
The progenitors of modern Shotokan sought to make it appealing as rigorous physical training wiht relatively simple technique to which they tied in a high dose of mental discipline.  In terms of popularity & acceptance, _BRILLIANT_.


----------



## ShotoNoob

BLACK-BELT ARTICLE ON SHOTOKAN FOR SELF DEFENSE
|
Not to be confused with what the SD experts here @ MT afford.  The vid instructor is presenting some basic self defense concepts to give you a basic foundation in a very rudimentary situation.
|




|
Where I depart from the instructor, is that he tends to say the process of facing an attack is simple, when there's a lot more than the physical picture presented.  Secondly, I always hate it when the instructor's practice subject is physically smaller / weaker.  That just bugs me.
|
To stay on the structure of the physical dynamic for a moment, many kumite instructors or SD proponents could or woulds say the instructor's opening tactic is dangerous in two ways:
1. He is pretty much facing his opponent head on, which he just counseled not to.
2. His face protection is 100% dependent on the parry being on-target.  A foul up there could lead to the end of the fight, in the opponent's favor.
|
However, Shotokan proper does call for such a maneuver, and there are strategic advantages for doing so.  Just in the structure of the response, there are several simultaneous dynamics going on....
|
(1) Notice that the instructor, as the defender, just doesn't stand still (although that is an alternative).  He moves in. (2) He blocks the offensive strike, neutralizing it [for the moment]; (3) although it is a 1-2 move, he then instantly free-hand counter-strikes straight through the opening in the opponent's defense; (4) he doesn't stop there--is instantly prepared to move again, effect a follow-on tactic, again moving in.
|
He gives a Heian Shodan bunkai related example of the tactic, which could also be attributed to the Taikyouky kata.  For those who love bunkai interpretations.  Rather than critique same, I believe the more valuable lesson is the PRINCIPLE, of thinking how the whole body strength can be projected through techniques as per different alternatives.  Think of principles of movement which can have martial application from the structure of the exercise.  Think of transitions from 1 technical-tactic into an advantageous next.  Just don't bounce around, dance around & assume your opponent will wilt from a stiff jab.


----------



## ShotoNoob

TYING TO THE SHOTOKAN CURRICULUM
|
What I really applaud this instructor for is breaking out in plain descriptions 2 of the tactical concepts in the Shotokan vocabulary.  there's actually another 1 or 2 (I can immediately think of) he didn't mention, yet he's getting you on your way to broaching these principles.
|
I also think he portrays good KIME in his counter-tactic against the assault.  Can one carry over that mental discipline into real-time conflict--the $64 dollar question?
|
Compared to the boxer, kickboxer moving around with 'footwork,' and tricky head movement & feints, etc. ,etc. the instructor deliberately moves to where he wants to be under KIME and employs technique(s) with same.  The boxer/kickboxer style can work; that's why it's used all the time--KIME powered technique under KIME powered tactics is superior....  That's the Shotokan / traditional karate model....if you have built-up sufficient mental discipline to act in such a manner[1].
|
Good luck with that....
|
[1] HINT: it doesn't come from hitting the heavy bag....


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> BLACK-BELT ARTICLE ON SHOTOKAN FOR SELF DEFENSE
> |
> Not to be confused with what the SD experts here @ MT afford.  The vid instructor is presenting some basic self defense concepts to give you a basic foundation in a very rudimentary situation.
> |
> 
> 
> 
> 
> |
> Where I depart from the instructor, is that he tends to say the process of facing an attack is simple, when there's a lot more than the physical picture presented.  Secondly, I always hate it when the instructor's practice subject is physically smaller / weaker.  That just bugs me.
> |
> To stay on the structure of the physical dynamic for a moment, many kumite instructors or SD proponents could or woulds say the instructor's opening tactic is dangerous in two ways:
> 1. He is pretty much facing his opponent head on, which he just counseled not to.
> 2. His face protection is 100% dependent on the parry being on-target.  A foul up there could lead to the end of the fight, in the opponent's favor.
> |
> However, Shotokan proper does call for such a maneuver, and there are strategic advantages for doing so.  Just in the structure of the response, there are several simultaneous dynamics going on....
> |
> (1) Notice that the instructor, as the defender, just doesn't stand still (although that is an alternative).  He moves in. (2) He blocks the offensive strike, neutralizing it [for the moment]; (3) although it is a 1-2 move, he then instantly free-hand counter-strikes straight through the opening in the opponent's defense; (4) he doesn't stop there--is instantly prepared to move again, effect a follow-on tactic, again moving in.
> |
> He gives a Heian Shodan bunkai related example of the tactic, which could also be attributed to the Taikyouky kata.  For those who love bunkai interpretations.  Rather than critique same, I believe the more valuable lesson is the PRINCIPLE, of thinking how the whole body strength can be projected through techniques as per different alternatives.  Think of principles of movement which can have martial application from the structure of the exercise.  Think of transitions from 1 technical-tactic into an advantageous next.  Just don't bounce around, dance around & assume your opponent will wilt from a stiff jab.


Loved it. Proper karate! Ok, I had to get past the hand being left out to dry but I can live with that for the sake of the demonstration.

Where we disagree is that I believe he is right to be front on. In terms of sabaki, if you are in what I would call a typical Shotokan stance you can't move easily and you couldn't step in to do those takedowns which are the bread and butter of my training. 

The other thing I didn't see was the block to which you referred. To me there was a deflection which didn't stop the attack. That is what all the 'ukes' are. They are receiving the attack and responding, just what Joe Mirza did here. Actually, I had to look him up because I really didn't think what he was doing came from Shotokan. Boy, was I glad to be mistaken. You have boosted my appreciation of Shotokan by posting this video.


----------



## Hanzou

ShotoNoob said:


> Hanzou / Thanks for following up!
> 
> |
> Your position is NOT what the traditional karate masters say.  So you say over them.
> 
> |
> Again, so you say.  Matt Thorton has 35+ SBG's which prove your thesis. According to Matt Thorton, that is.....
> 
> |
> Again, so you say.  In addition to the Matt Thorton school, there's even MMA schools right in my area who think as you.



I have no idea what my quote has to do with Matt Thorton, but whatever.



> The traditional karate model says different.  One adopted across all kinds of karate styles.  The bottom line is few have the mental discipline to do karate as I do.  Even K-MAN struggles with it, and he's an expert....



If Karate is such a difficult discipline, yet more simple disciplines such as Muay Thai or Boxing are its equal (and in some cases even its superior), what does that say about the ineffectiveness of Karate training?



> RE the Judo example, I and others @MT here have stipulated to your point several times.  It's a simple decision tree-like mental exercise to broach the issue productively.  Your 'branch' of that decision tree re the Judo example, is to choose or go to a BJJ school.



That was a nice deflection, but you still didn't answer the question; If kata is such an effective training tool, why are Bjj and Sambo practitioners so much more effective at wrist locks and leg locks than Judoka who only practice those techniques within kata?



> There's other alternatives.



Such as?


----------



## Hanzou

RafaChan said:


> You dont like kata, you like only to spar. Ok, im ok with that, i once taught like that. But go ahead, ill give you a basic kata drill/form. Find a friend and imagine that you guys are at a SD scenario and the guy in front of you will rob you getting a gun out of his jacket. Trow a shihon nukite at him from your natural stance, left or right hand it doesnt matter. Aim for his solar plexus if you want him unconscious or the base of the throat if you want him dead... SIMPLE like that and STRAIGHT FORWARD like that ! And all the drill performed within 1-2 seconds. So... If you wanna get the correct body axis and alignement to launch that strike and the stance to maximize its effect you can do a kihon or a kata, your choice.
> 
> That technique along with others was banned from kumite competitions given the potential lethality it can result, you can learn it from a very basic level kata heian nidan. In before people have died in kumite. I know that Kumite competitions here in brazil were forbidden by law in the 60's coz two practitioners have died in a short period of time, dont know how manny around the world but you guess. So i repeat, bring in any sports context to a SD discussion about what a specific TMA can do its quite silly and naive. In reality thats unreal !




None of those techniques were banned in the early UFCs. Did anyone die or get knocked out by those techniques?

Nope. And there were quite a few karate blackbelts in those early UFCs.

BTW, Shihon Nukite is a great way to break your fingers.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> Loved it. Proper karate! Ok, I had to get past the hand being left out to dry but I can live with that for the sake of the demonstration.


|
Well, that is done for the purposes of instilling the mental discipline I'm talking about.  A curriculum such as yours takes care of that (standard, simplified structure) as one advances to more uncooperative & resistive situations.
\
I'm not against resisting partners @ all.  It's the time & place in the progressive development of mental discipline that I have zeroed in on....
|
Athletic trainer's such as Matt Thortong are right to stress the subject of resisting partners / training.  I differ in the emphasis and how resistance is employed to build mental discipline....



K-man said:


> Where we disagree is that I believe he is right to be front on.


|
No, actually we agree.  My starting point for the illustration of Shotokan's value for self defense was to take the viewpoint of the visiting Shotokan master[?] instructor.  IOW, he gave a great overview of the strategic SD importance of protecting the body's centerline / vital organs.
|
Then, he turns around and head basically straight-in, not exactly.  It shows in the tactical weakness of if his parry is off, he risks getting clocked in the head.  The worst happening that can take place is to get struck in the brain-container.....


K-man said:


> In terms of sabaki, if you are in what I would call a typical Shotokan stance you can't move easily and you couldn't step in to do those takedowns which are the bread and butter of my training.


|
Following on our 'agreement,' the full import of what I said was, despite violating his centerline-protection maxim, there are advantages to doing the type of in-move he demonstrates.  I wasn't thinking so much of takedown's which you would execute, yet he goes on to illustrate just that in Shotokan.  The 1st move in positions for a complimentary follow-on.  This is a tactical principle made plain in Ippon kumite, if practitioners would bother to take a step back and study the Shotokan handbook, use their 'nogin a bit.


K-man said:


> The other thing I didn't see was the block to which you referred. To me there was a deflection which didn't stop the attack. That is what all the 'ukes' are.


|
Ah, here we are at semantics, you being an expert in defining these close-quarter's exchanges.  A block to me doesn't necessarily 'stop' the attack.  The block diffuses the intended strike so that strike is [temporarily] neutralized.  A hard block or softer parry then both qualify.  The hard block is where more power or strength is required to neutralize the strike, the softer parry is where we only need to adjust the trajectory when it doesn't take much force, as shown here....  Of course, gradations in between.


K-man said:


> They are receiving the attack and responding, just what Joe Mirza did here. Actually, I had to look him up because I really didn't think what he was doing came from Shotokan. Boy, was I glad to be mistaken. You have boosted my appreciation of Shotokan by posting this video.


|
I'd say you're definitely using a grappling even aikido perspective here...  The overall point I am making for Shotokan for SD is the quality of the training.  The first part of that is too look past what Joe Blow is doing in kumite competition, in class, look past the McDojo pander to the commercialism, and get a hold of a couple of Shotokan karate manuals and read them.
|
Also some of the books offered up in this T should later be of immense value.  The first learning step is to understand the curriculum,and I would certainly start digging into the teachings of Funakoshi, then later Shotokan progenerators....  then tie that back to the experience in your dojo, changing if necessary....
|
To become proficient at Shotokan, you have to go into depth.  You can not just go with the flow around you & assume the conventions practiced around you will rub off into solid traditional karate....  No greater point made  than that by the Shotokan instructor in my Tai Sabaki YT vid, even though he claims it's "simple....."


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> ...The other thing I didn't see was the block to which you referred. To me there was a deflection which didn't stop the attack.


|
Yes, the proper description would be 'deflection.'  The Shotokan instructor makes that move @ about 1:02. The tactical objective I'm driving at is that the straight punch is changed from it;s course so that it misses the instructor's head.  The threat is temporarily removed.
|
On the attacker's hand hanging out there, he could well under proper boxing form, especially if it was a jab, snap that hand back.  However, that does not change the outcome that the threat of impact was at the instant of his strike, removed.  So, in a kumite combo form, really Ippon Kumite form, we are after acquiring tactical principles, not physical structure alone.  this is one of the huge mistakes made in mis-judging Shotokan's karate certainly rigid, physically exaggerated, 1-2 form.
|
Notice a watershed point here made by instructor, is his 'footwork' response to the attack.  Unlike all that bouncing all over, particularly the overly-used and largely unproductive back peddling we see in competition sport kumite (and of course MMA, boxing, etc.), the Shotokan instructor meets the attack.  He doesn't 'run away.'
|
The Shotokan and other Japanese / similar karate styles we see in sport kumite competiton, kickboxing, etc. have the heavy, heavy reliance on moving back, back peddling ,circling away from any attack.  This, as shown by the Shotokan instructor, is NOT the traditional tai sabaki implementation.  The same is NOT what is described in the traditional Shotokan curriculum.
|
Tai Sabaki, to meet traditional karate standards, it's implicit that it serve some tactical objective. Back peddling, running away, exaggerated mobility are a either a product of monkey-see-money-do OR a failure of mental discipline in executing the traditional Shotokan techniques & tactics.  IOW, that worked for Joe Blow in his match a moment ago, OR I'm too scared to stand & fight / can't block properly, etc.


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> On the attacker's hand hanging out there, he could well under proper boxing form, especially if it was a jab, snap that hand back.  However, that does not change the outcome that the threat of impact was at the instant of his strike, removed.  So, in a kumite combo form, really Ippon Kumite form, we are after acquiring tactical principles, not physical structure alone.  this is one of the huge mistakes made in mis-judging Shotokan's karate certainly rigid, physically exaggerated, 1-2 form.


you know what? I don't think we are too far apart in what we do.


----------



## ShotoNoob

@K=MAN
|
Just take your strategic import  re the grappling, I want to stress how the Shotokan instructor's tai sabaki movement in the YT vid, provides the Shotokan practitioner with the close-the-distance skill to entertain grappling tactics, whether such come from deeper study of Shotokan practices, cross-training observations from the Okinawan karates styles akin to your traditional karate definitions, or from Judo or the Gracie BJJ cross training, even Matt Bryers combative BJJ program.
|
The Shotokan curriculum is much broader & comprehensive in foundational principles than the majority realize, certainly far more than karate critics realize.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> you know what? I don't think we are too far apart in what we do.


|
I applaud your move from the Japanese karate style(s) to the Okinawan traditional karate.  Yet for so, so many, Shotokan with all its limitations, done well, studied seriously with an eye to the principles of Funakoshi, the earlier Okinawan masters, and the later progenitors of Shotokan, is very effective for SD.
|
Another convention about Shotokan that is often overlooked, is the transition to a faster, more relaxed, natural poised art at the post-Shodan levels.  Along the lines of your definition of KIME you made awhile ago.  The way 'modern' Shotokan karate is practiced in Japan, which is then copied worldwide, tends to become fixated on the Shodan-level curriculum.  Again, the Shodan-level curriculum does not define advanced Shotokan proper....


----------



## ShotoNoob

BOXING / MMA's ANSWER TO SHOTOKAN KARATE  KUMITE
|
Now in MMA or SD defense, the opponent may not just step forward and hang-a-straight-punch-out-there.  Boxer's religiously train combos.  In a SD fight, the opponent may well fling all sorts of rapid punches at you, intelligently or not.
|
I stumbled across this MMA-promo vid for a strong boxing combo based on the hook punch.  Hook punches, to me, are harder to defend since they arc in and are typically thrown without stepping from the striker's current position.  Very often employed in combinations.




|
I really like the presentation because as a non-boxer, I can readily grasp the dynamic.
|
I quickly recognized, that the hook combo presented here, came across as the perfect antidode to Joe Mirza's Shotokan move-in parry & counter strike kumite combo.  Here are my reasons:
|
1. Jay Glazier is fighting Southpaw, which boxers claim is more problematic for conventional strikers.  In a sense that is true here, because as Joe Mirza steps in, Jay's forward hand is ideally postitioned for the hook by-pivoting-only as he does in his combo....
|
2. Jay's first left jab, really a feint, is retracted.  That left hand is then cocked & ready to fire (as well as defending the face).
|
3. Jay then immediately shifts & throws a straight right, which is facilitated by his more natural boxer stance.  He gets some extra reach into your face that way.
|
4. Result @ strike #2, if you are not faked out by the left feint, you have a strong straight right coming directly into your face.
|
5. Finally, the deal-closer strong left hook comes arcing off the lead foot pivot and crashing into the side of your face / head.
|
TYING BACK TO THE JOE MIRZA KUMITE COMBO,
|
1. Assume The Shotokan instructor is not fooled by Jay G's left feint, and steps in to diffuse the hard straight follow-on right.
|
2. Major problem is Shotokan Instructor's left hand is low guard / chamber to counter strike.  Low guard has Shotokan instructor's head exposed on the left, the Shotokan Instructor's right hand is committed to the parry of Jay G's straight right.
|
3. Likely Outcome.  The Shotokan practitioner would get KO'd by Jay G.'s left hook perfectly positioned to strike the left side of the head.
|
It's really [in a sense] a contest of who can execute faster, but here not against the uke's outstretched punch, but against a 3-strike combo of retracting hands thrown from solid boxing stances well positioned for infighting.  Sort of a striker-equivalent of the Gracie BJJ grappling threat.
|
I'll leave the answer to other MT posters.
|
To me, the answer (in a word) is KIME.  Also refer to the Shotokan karate traditional curriculum (IN IT'S ENTIRETY).
|
Good Luck With That....
|
EDIT: Also notice, that MMA proponent Jay G. stresses to keep your eyes focused dead on your opponent.  Keep your attention on your opponent.  A boxer version of KIME.


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> Another convention about Shotokan that is often overlooked, is the transition to a faster, more relaxed, natural poised art at the post-Shodan levels.  Along the lines of your definition of KIME you made awhile ago.  The way 'modern' Shotokan karate is practiced in Japan, which is then copied worldwide, tends to become fixated on the Shodan-level curriculum.  Again, the Shodan-level curriculum does not define advanced Shotokan proper....


Ah! And herein lies what I tried for many weeks to point out to *Hanzou*. What he had learned was kihon and he, like many before him, never moved to the next level. But what was worse, based on his lack of understanding, he has become a detractor of the art, not the promoter that someone who truly understood what Shotokan is about, would be.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> Ah! And herein lies what I tried for many weeks to point out to *Hanzou*. What he had learned was kihon and he, like many before him, never moved to the next level. But what was worse, based on his lack of understanding, he has become a detractor of the art, not the promoter that someone who truly understood what Shotokan is about, would be.


|
Our difference remains in that kihon Shotokan with strong KIME is very effective in it's own right.  Mental discipline is the main driver striving for mind / body union.  I would venture part of that came across in the Japanese Military story.
|
Advanced Shotokan, which unfortunately is relatively rare IMO, takes on certain character of say for argument sake, Goju karate.  Or what I would call Kenpo.  Advanced Shotokan is still Shotokan but the character really evolves into more of a continuous moving process in the technique, as opposed to separate, rigid, blocky, heavy-physically tense movements...  Some of the excessive hardness softens....


----------



## ShotoNoob

ON A HUMOROUS NOTE:
|
In the Jay Glazier MMA Hook Combo Vid:
|
See the guy standing to the left (to Jay's right)?
|
He's a dead ringer for the senior-belt kickboxer student I defeated in my kumite illustration.  That guy even has the same demeanor....
|
He (my opponent)  got schooled, in KIME....


----------



## K-man

In Chris Parker's terminology, _"grab a coffee, this may take some time"._ 


ShotoNoob said:


> Now in MMA or SD defense, the opponent may not just step forward and hang-a-straight-punch-out-there.  Boxer's religiously train combos.  In a SD fight, the opponent may well fling all sorts of rapid punches at you, intelligently or not.


I would go one step further and say no one will just step forward and punch like that. Even an unskilled person will tend to throw wild combinations.



ShotoNoob said:


> I stumbled across this MMA-promo vid for a strong boxing combo based on the hook punch.  Hook punches, to me, are harder to defend since they arc in and are typically thrown without stepping from the striker's current position.  Very often employed in combinations.


I agree that these are harder to defend ... *if you are moving back*. I'll get to that more later. The MMA video is training for competition. In the case of boxing people train to move back out of the way, we train to move in and tie the guy up.



ShotoNoob said:


> I really like the presentation because as a non-boxer, I can readily grasp the dynamic.


As an ex-boxer, albeit many, many years back, so can I.



ShotoNoob said:


> I quickly recognized, that the hook combo presented here, came across as the perfect antidode to Joe Mirza's Shotokan move-in parry & counter strike kumite combo.  Here are my reasons:


 I think you need to look at the context of Joe Mirza's video. He was training against a punch that he knew was coming. That makes it a drill, perfectly valid, but not something that can work like that in real life. In real life you will react instinctively and do whatever you will do. If you actually did that defence, great, but even then it doesn't mean the hook will be effective.



ShotoNoob said:


> 1. Jay Glazier is fighting Southpaw, which boxers claim is more problematic for conventional strikers.  In a sense that is true here, because as Joe Mirza steps in, Jay's forward hand is ideally postitioned for the hook by-pivoting-only as he does in his combo....


That shouldn't be an issue for a karateka. We fight both ways so you can easily change kamai if that was of concern.



ShotoNoob said:


> 2. Jay's first left jab, really a feint, is retracted.  That left hand is then cocked & ready to fire (as well as defending the face).


Which is the way I start most of my training scenarios. If you are lucky the attacker will come in with a wild haymaker. If he is more skilled you might get a jab/straight combo. It doesn't matter, unless you are training for that exact attack. Training for that exact attack is fine in theory but won't work in practice because our reaction time is slower than the time it takes for the punch to arrive, so we have to rely on what we train instinctively. I will instinctively move to the side but I do not know ahead of time which side that will be. I don't choose the side I move to, my reflexes choose it for me.



ShotoNoob said:


> 3. Jay then immediately shifts & throws a straight right, which is facilitated by his more natural boxer stance.  He gets some extra reach into your face that way.


The square on approach that we train also gives that ability. That and the correct movement on the body to give added penetration.



ShotoNoob said:


> 4. Result @ strike #2, if you are not faked out by the left feint, you have a strong straight right coming directly into your face.


Trained to react to that first movement you won't be there for the right hand.



ShotoNoob said:


> 5. Finally, the deal-closer strong left hook comes arcing off the lead foot pivot and crashing into the side of your face / head.


Way too late. But even then, Krav's helmet defence which is very similar to the defensive move in Goju should protect against that type of tight hook.



ShotoNoob said:


> 1. Assume The Shotokan instructor is not fooled by Jay G's left feint, and steps in to diffuse the hard straight follow-on right.


Unless you step back you will not have time to assess whether the attack is real or a feint. In our training we assume it is real and take it from there. Either way it is really the same. Either it is a feint and the straight follows or it is a jab with intent and the straight follows. In each case I will be off the line and moving to tie him up to hopefully get his back.



ShotoNoob said:


> 2. Major problem is Shotokan Instructor's left hand is low guard / chamber to counter strike.  Low guard has Shotokan instructor's head exposed on the left, the Shotokan Instructor's right hand is committed to the parry of Jay G's straight right.


Only if he is standing there waiting. OK for a hypothetical but he shouldn't be there in real life.



ShotoNoob said:


> 3. Likely Outcome.  The Shotokan practitioner would get KO'd by Jay G.'s left hook perfectly positioned to strike the left side of the head.


I can't put that down as a definite.  You are saying here that a skilled puncher (Jay) is a better fighter than a skilled karateka (Joe) based on a hypothetical position.



ShotoNoob said:


> It's really a contest of who can execute faster, but here not against the uke's outstretched punch, but against a 3-strike combo of retracting hands thrown from solid boxing stances well positioned for infighting.  Sort of a striker-equivalent of the Gracie BJJ grappling threat.
> 
> I'll leave the answer to other MT posters.


Yes, but again you are assuming that someone is going to just stand in front and exchange blows.



ShotoNoob said:


> To me, the answer (in a word) is KIME.  Also refer to the Shotokan karate traditional curriculum (IN IT'S ENTIRETY).
> 
> Good Luck With That....


I'll leave kime out of it at this stage because my kime would have me somewhere else.



ShotoNoob said:


> EDIT: Also notice, that MMA proponent Jay G. stresses to keep your eyes focused dead on your opponent.  Keep your attention on your opponent.  A boxer version of KIME.


Now here is a major difference of approach. I teach NOT to be focussed on your opponent. That is a sport concept. Every other situation requires the use of peripheral vision. I suspect that the 'focussed' that you are talking of here, ties in with your concept of kime. On that we'll have to agree to disagree.

Time for that second coffee.


----------



## drop bear

ShotoNoob said:


> The Shotokan and other Japanese / similar karate styles we see in sport kumite competiton, kickboxing, etc. have the heavy, heavy reliance on moving back, back peddling ,circling away from any attack. This, as shown by the Shotokan instructor, is NOT the traditional tai sabaki implementation. The same is NOT what is described in the traditional Shotokan curriculum.



And if you are getting overwhelmed and cannot counter punch in the same time as they can put on a flurry. You don't have the footwork to create space and time advantages.

Of course all solved by mental acuity right?


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> That shouldn't be an issue for a karateka. We fight both ways so you can easily change kamai if that was of concern.



Front leg to front leg has a few tricks and traps that can catch you out if you don't understand the differences.

If you have to switch when they switch then they are controlling you.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Thanks for your well-considered and sensei level reply.  Frankly your teachings are missing from about 95% (for argument sake) from the the knowledge of those critical of karate.


K-man said:


> In Chris Parker's terminology, _"grab a coffee, this may take some time"._ I would go one step further and say no one will just step forward and punch like that. Even an unskilled person will tend to throw wild combinations.


|
I don' quite agree.  However from your standpoint of a self-defense expert; I can agree wholly in principle...No Problem.



K-man said:


> I agree that these are harder to defend ... *if you are moving back*. I'll get to that more later. The MMA video is training for competition. In the case of boxing people train to move back out of the way, we train to move in and tie the guy up.


|
I see the general tactical advantage of your approach, having read & re-read your material & postings.  However, under my principles including KIME as a mental process, I'm not so limited.  I think the challenge of a hook is physically harder to stop than a straight, coming from the side, arcing, in combination as set forth in the Jay G. demo.  His demo is kind of the opposite end-of-the-spectrum to the the step-&-straight-punch-only scenario.  An escalation in complexity, if you will.



K-man said:


> As an ex-boxer, albeit many, many years back, so can I.


.  I never boxed.



K-man said:


> I think you need to look at the context of Joe Mirza's video. He was training against a punch that he knew was coming. That makes it a drill, perfectly valid, but not something that can work like that in real life.


|
See my complexity comment just above.  The context for the Joe Mirza exercise, to me, is a mental one, KIME centric.  The concept of mental KIME, of mental discipline in traditional karate is universal, the Joe Mirza kumite combo is, in principle, directly applicable to real life.


K-man said:


> In real life you will react instinctively and do whatever you will do. If you actually did that defence, great, but even then it doesn't mean the hook will be effective.


|
On the hook judged as automatically effective, I took the antagonist view for a moment.  My supposition is that if  you took the average, conventional  Shotokan kumite competitor and put up against Jay G.'s hook / combo, the Shotokan kumite competitor would lose.
|
On instinct, I am moving ahead of instinct in my fighting.  I can see your position that in certain SD situations, instinct is all the mental capability one may have.



K-man said:


> That shouldn't be an issue for a karateka. We fight both ways so you can easily change kamai if that was of concern.


|
I'll qualify: Someone of your capability; someone who has trained traditional karate diligently & intelligently...No Problem.



K-man said:


> Which is the way I start most of my training scenarios. If you are lucky the attacker will come in with a wild haymaker. If he is more skilled you might get a jab/straight combo. It doesn't matter, unless you are training for that exact attack. Training for that exact attack is fine in theory but won't work in practice because our reaction time is slower than the time it takes for the punch to arrive, so we have to rely on what we train instinctively. I will instinctively move to the side but I do not know ahead of time which side that will be. I don't choose the side I move to, my reflexes choose it for me.


|
Under strong mental awareness, my reaction time is not slower than the incoming strike.  That's the key.  The Shotokan karate manual lays out the terms for these mental abilities, defines them. Still, they are general concepts & principles,,,, leaving an emormous amount to be filled in by the practitioners own trainig.
|
Good luck with that....


K-man said:


> The square on approach that we train also gives that ability. That and the correct movement on the body to give added penetration.


|
With your expertise, I'm sure it works; I can 100% agree on that as an ALTERNATIVE.



K-man said:


> Trained to react to that first movement you won't be there for the right hand


|
Again, Tai Sabaki, tactically intelligent movement.



K-man said:


> Way too late. But even then, Krav's helmet defence which is very similar to the defensive move in Goju should protect against that type of tight hook.


|
NOW, NOW, we're in a Shotokan T.  However from an overall SD perspective, I say do anything to win the conflict.  So bully for you....re KRAV.



K-man said:


> Unless you step back you will not have time to assess whether the attack is real or a feint.


|
I have, other than starting out in training, been able to distinquish a feint from a real strike.  The key is KIME. see below. The Key is all the mental disicpline qualities outlined in Shotokan.
|
2. Chung Shin Tong Il - Concentration (Clean, Clear / God / Govern / One) [Someone else with have to qualify the () meanings].
|
Borrowed this from the "8 Key Concepts" Thread.  Strictly speaking it's TSD.  Yet another pillar pointing to or verifying the critical importance of mental KIME.  We have Tang Soo Do explicity in agreement with Shotokan...


K-man said:


> In our training we assume it is real and take it from there. Either way it is really the same. Either it is a feint and the straight follows or it is a jab with intent and the straight follows. In each case I will be off the line and moving to tie him up to hopefully get his back.


|
By your definition of KIME, I would agree wholeheartedly....  Strictly speaking tactically, it is not the same; under your assumptions it is the same....



K-man said:


> Only if he is standing there waiting. OK for a hypothetical but he shouldn't be there in real life.


|
Under your expertise, or the way your dojo is training, probably not (he shouldn't be there).  So I would agree.  The conventional Shotokan stylist had better bone up, IMO.


K-man said:


> I can't put that down as a definite.  You are saying here that a skilled puncher (Jay) is a better fighter than a skilled karateka (Joe) based on a hypothetical position.


|
Right. see above, on qualification.  I was trying to illustrate the conventional Shotokan reliance on specific combos which would have to be adapted against more challenging opponent.  Your change in karate style training has taken care of all that.


K-man said:


> Yes, but again you are assuming that someone is going to just stand in front and exchange blows.
> 
> I'll leave kime out of it at this stage because my kime would have me somewhere else.


|
You have a tactical reponse to be somewhere else.  I have a tactical response to move in like you, and END the exchange by blocks & blows.  I'll also wait, like Shotokan precepts, and allow he opponent to move first.  This is easier.  However, I can act simultaneously or per-emptively--all three under KIME.



K-man said:


> Now here is a major difference of approach. I teach NOT to be focussed on your opponent. That is a sport concept. Every other situation requires the use of peripheral vision. On that we'll have to agree to disagree.


|
Ah, I would agree completely with your position.  I was complimenting Jay G. for stressing KIME, here on the opponent, as opposed to no real KIME.  The specific KIME Jay G. was at least lauding too is spoken of in both Shotokan and Tang Soo Do.  Jay's context is in an MMA match (sport).  So bravo in my book for him.
|
In the broader context of self defense, martial conflict in general, your perspective is imperative.
|


K-man said:


> Time for that second coffee.


|
I missed a point.  See below.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> In Chris Parker's terminology, _"grab a coffee, this may take some time"._ I would go one step further and say no one will just step forward and punch like that. Even an unskilled person will tend to throw wild combinations....
> ...*Training for that exact attack is fine in theory but won't work in practice because our reaction time is slower than the time it takes for the punch to arrive, so we have to rely on what we train instinctively.* I will instinctively move to the side but I do not know ahead of time which side that will be. I don't choose the side I move to, my reflexes choose it for me.


|
You mean you haven't learned from the practice of traditional karate how to think into action faster than your opponent can move.


----------



## RafaChan

Hanzou said:


> BTW, Shihon Nukite is a great way to break your fingers.


 
I have found this statement interesting coz i know people that have used this technique and their fingers didnt brake like u said. I have two answers for you. Conditioning and soft. If you are talking about chances, yes, it can happen. Mostly if you doesnt aim for a soft part of the body (such as throat or solar plexus like i was illustrating) i advise to forget about nukites. All of the nukites techniques preferable aim soft parts and pierce tru them no matter how strong is the opponent.

If you doesnt have any type of conditioning and training like that: 



 i can say to you a punch its a great way to open your fist, broke your wrist or bone hand if you doesnt know what you are doing.

From my personal experience hit a soft part still more important than the conditioning part. IMO conditioning its complementary in that way and can make nukite techniques even hit hard stuff. Something like that: 



 01:28 you can see where sensei hits.

Nukites techniques goes along with other names in manny SD classes tru the most diverse backgrounds. Tru the military and police training to SD classes oriented for womens. Heres an example of that: Self Defense the chisel fist described here its ippon ken.

Shihon Nukite in the solar plexus if properly aimed can pierce in between the upper abdominal muscles to hit the diaphragm almost directly and make it wildely contract forcing a complete exhalation and make people lose breath for seconds while they can do nothing at all.




Hanzou said:


> None of those techniques were banned in the early UFCs. Did anyone die or get knocked out by those techniques?
> 
> Nope. And there were quite a few karate blackbelts in those early UFCs.


 
Your UFC logic again. It doesnt exist in the UFC it doesnt exist IRL. Its very common sense that any strong blow to the front of the neck could be stunning or could cause choking, and these kind of strike its prohibited in manny sport competitions. Sometimes in its explicit rules sometimes in its implicit conventions when most striker arts such karate or kung-fu was reduced to only kicks and punchs. And thats since the pride championship era or even the war of worlds old gracie event, the tru ancestor of today UFCs.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> None of those techniques were banned in the early UFCs. Did anyone die or get knocked out by those techniques?
> 
> Nope. And there were quite a few karate blackbelts in those early UFCs.
> 
> BTW, Shihon Nukite is a great way to break your fingers.


And how many spear finger thrusts were used by those fighters in the UFC? If no one used them then of course no one could die or get knocked out by them.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> And how many spear finger thrusts were used by those fighters in the UFC? If no one used them then of course no one could die or get knocked out by them.



The better question is why were none thrown in the first place? If its such a high percentage move, we would have seen it being used in such fights to devastating effect.

The simple reality is that its pretty hard to finger strike someone in the throat or in a "soft spot" if they're punching you in the face. Especially when you've never actually trained yourself to use it in that situation.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> The better question is why were none thrown in the first place?



You would have to ask the fighters.



Hanzou said:


> If its such a high percentage move, we would have seen it being used in such fights to devastating effect.



Who said it was high percentage?



Hanzou said:


> The simple reality is that its pretty hard to finger strike someone in the throat or in a "soft spot" if they're punching you in the face. Especially when you've never actually trained yourself to use it in that situation.



It is not really a sparring technique against a rapidly moving target. It is more of a self defense technique against a stationary target such as when someone is getting in your face and grabs you..


----------



## Tez3

Spitting in someone's eye, raking their face with your nails, biting, scratching and nipping are all 'not used in MMA' but shouldn't be discounted for self defence. Houses for courses.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> You would have to ask the fighters.



There's no need to. If a technique is all but abandoned, then its clearly ineffective.



> Who said it was high percentage?



The poster I was responding to.



> It is not really a sparring technique against a rapidly moving target. It is more of a self defense technique against a stationary target such as when someone is getting in your face and grabs you..



I can see the application in that scenario. However, that's not how it was used in the karate vids above. In the karate vids above, it was used as a counter to a person entering and punching.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Spitting in someone's eye, raking their face with your nails, biting, scratching and nipping are all 'not used in MMA' but shouldn't be discounted for self defence. Houses for courses.



Have you seen many recorded street fights or street beatings? All that stuff you mentioned above is never used either. Why? Because its kind of hard to spit in someone's face when their fist is connecting with your jaw, and its pretty hard to bite someone when your head and body is colliding with the planet after they throw you to the ground.


----------



## RafaChan

Hanzou said:


> The simple reality is that its pretty hard to finger strike someone in the throat or in a "soft spot" if they're punching you in the face. Especially when you've never actually trained yourself to use it in that situation.



You are rite when you say that for most to deliver nukite blows could be hard and tricky, add very hard to a target in motion. Indeed for most persons they would never trade a chance to deliver a regular punch to deliver a finger poke instead. And like you said, it has also to do with another mentality and aproach in your way of fighting and strategies and thats not a thing that happens tru night from day ofc (conditioning). But remember by no means that doesnt invalidate the uselfuness of those techniques. 

Shihon nukite in the solar plexus really its not that hard coz most people doesnt defend belly/abdomen lower region of the body like they would apply to defend their face and the neck. Besides that, shihon nukite can gives you more range than a single punch: 3 to 4 inches more generally, and usually thats enough to catch a fleeing face/neck or torso in a place that the regular punch will just miss.

Add to that: the head alone can go back to retreat and evade a strike in a more wide angle that the neck or the torso can without moving your stance. So the neck and plexus will be in range for hits more often than you think. 

In most cases ofc, i believe, IMHO, its a strike better suited for when the opponent are not very fast and mobile so you actually can hit in with more safety what you have aimed for. Preferably you will make a devastating effect to apply that (in the neck-throat or plexus) even before the fight begun, if you have that chance, and that i can say to you with 100% sure. Ofc one have to make decisions. Its truly a dangerous technique, i would recommend others to use it in a life or death situation but not in a school fight with your coleague coz you looked so much to his gf.




Hanzou said:


> The better question is why were none thrown in the first place? If its such a high percentage move, we would have seen it being used in such fights to devastating effect.



No event promoter wants to justice govern, public opinion ending their show coz people are getting killed. They will always make conventions and rules to prevent that. You talked about UFC's. All i can say its no body was permitted to hit the neck with such strikes even when it was pride or war of worlds and no matter how much they claimed about being a no rules fight event. Rules always were there you can be sure of that. 

The times those techniques were delivered in old kumites in my country, the effects were bad, those still banned from the sport. I can try to research about that when i have the time coz i found this an interesting subject. I know that at least 2 athletes got dead but really dunno if they were by nukite strikes. The only case i know from a nukite blow it was a person that have experienced next to death when his upper trachea collapsed in regional kumite event, and if it was not for a doctor putting a tube on his lower part of the throat for him to breath the guy would just passed away. The doc said that generally only 5 pounds of force could brake the thyroid cartilage an the larynx.

Again, MA aiming for SD and MA for sports can not be measured by the same definition and strategies. Sure they have a lot of techniques and even strategies in common but still its a lot of difference regarding training and conditioning mentality.

I can give you a practice example of that. The time you realize that some of the things you are doing exaustively at the dojo will not serve for you in SD situations maybe you can review some of your points and try to aproach shotokan in a different manner. Not that commercialized manner that doesnt have any focus in SD but only for sports.

I used to practiced some strategies with a BB BJJ work coleague , always with SD in focus not sports. In a particular training session i convinced him to use cervical colar, torso protection gear and protective googles in the training coz i would aim to hit a lot his neck. I was using mostly shihon, tate, omote and ippon nukite at him when i was standed up. And i have managed to hit his neck and eyes with effectiveness more than one time.

When he dropped me to the ground (most of the times mounted on me) i used ippon ken at his neck coz its a short range strike and i have hitted manny times his neck. He is a competent jiu-jitsu fighter he knew that he had to defend his neck but his training conditioning was almost to defend from arm bents and locks he wouldnt expect several ippon ken and hiraken hits at his neck while i forced my way out to a ground and pound. His neck were way too open to attacks when he was trying to grab and lock my arms and hands. Punches from the ground when we are being mounted are not effective coz we cant turn our hips properly to give the punch any expressive power. Its completely uselles to punch when you are not up there mounting and punching with gravity force added. From down there and with such short range and small space you only rely on your fingers and fore knuckle blows on the soft spots when you think of strikes. I watch MMA sports and when i see someone punching while on the ground my mind its already focused on another strategy.


----------



## Hanzou

RafaChan said:


> I can give you a practice example of that. The time you realize that some of the things you are doing exaustively at the dojo will not serve for you in SD situations maybe you can review some of your points and try to aproach shotokan in a different manner. Not that commercialized manner that doesnt have any focus in SD but only for sports.
> 
> I used to practiced some strategies with a BB BJJ work coleague , always with SD in focus not sports. In a particular training session i convinced him to use cervical colar, torso protection gear and protective googles in the training coz i would aim to hit a lot his neck. I was using mostly shihon, tate, omote and ippon nukite at him when i was standed up. And i have managed to hit his neck and eyes with effectiveness more than one time.
> 
> When he dropped me to the ground (most of the times mounted on me) i used ippon ken at his neck coz its a short range strike and i have hitted manny times his neck. He is a competent jiu-jitsu fighter he knew that he had to defend his neck but his training conditioning was almost to defend from arm bents and locks he wouldnt expect several ippon ken and hiraken hits at his neck while i forced my way out to a ground and pound. His neck were way too open to attacks when he was trying to grab and lock my arms and hands. Punches from the ground when we are being mounted are not effective coz we cant turn our hips properly to give the punch any expressive power. Its completely uselles to punch when you are not up there mounting and punching with gravity force added. From down there and with such short range and small space you only rely on your fingers and fore knuckle blows on the soft spots when you think of strikes. I watch MMA sports and when i see someone punching while on the ground my mind its already focused on another strategy.



And now we've entered the land of pure martial arts fantasy.....

So, you were able to reach his neck while a competent Bjj black belt had you mounted? 

Hmmmm.......

So basically what you're saying is that the entire art of grappling can be countered with neck strikes?


----------



## RafaChan

Hanzou said:


> And now we've entered the land of pure martial arts fantasy.....
> 
> So, you were able to reach his neck while a competent Bjj black belt had you mounted?


 
I have some notion at wrist locks enough that could create fast momentum to release a hand and hit his throat. Maybe next time a video footage to make you believe. But im starting to doubt about that or even a IRL footage of someone having the neck crushed will not be enough coz for me it seems you are in state of permanent denial. Really the shotokan dojo that you have attended didnt gave you enough perspective about what tools the style can offer you in a SD situation thats why you keep mocking the style and disbelief what most ppl tells. Maybe i should tell that you have to go and see for yourself and start do this drilling.



Hanzou said:


> So basically what you're saying is that the entire art of grappling can be countered with neck strikes?


 
There are other conditions involved like if you already have being grabbed or if you are grabbed while standed or if you are on the ground. But given the opportunity if a proper strike to the throat neck could connect yes, the grappler game its pretty over. Maybe not directly countering but enough to finish what will originate of that grappling. It doesnt matter the means just the end. Ofc knowing to counter a grab to freeing an arm/hand its mandatory for that so i would not say purely a strike to the neck alone will counter the whole world of ju-jutsu as i will use a small part of the art to counter that same said art.

In old japan the bushi classes that practiced empty hands combat generally would specialize in striker or grappling arts. Altought they knew an ammount of each world will vary. Its known that some ju jutsu masters of schools from the past gave special attention about fingers strikes and they have developed techniques to broke fingers and wrists so they would neutralize the risk of these kind of attacks. This is a good subject for a big research. The rest you know.

Sorry to burst your big bubble but guess why direct neck/throat/eye strikes rather than locks or arm bents was always prohibited since the first UFC era and war of worlds. They know and always knew the risks. Its not me living in fantasy world.


----------



## Hanzou

RafaChan said:


> I have some notion at wrist locks enough that could create fast momentum to release a hand and hit his throat. Maybe next time a video footage to make you believe. But im starting to doubt about that or even a IRL footage of someone having the neck crushed will not be enough coz for me it seems you are in state of permanent denial. Really the shotokan dojo that you have attended didnt gave you enough perspective about what tools the style can offer you in a SD situation thats why you keep mocking the style and disbelief what most ppl tells. Maybe i should tell that you have to go and see for yourself and start do this drilling.



I think it would help matters if you could show exactly what type of "mount" you were in.

Were you in something like this;







or this;






But yes, some video footage would be most helpful. Frankly if you pulled this off, you're wasting your time on this forum. You should be out there selling your videos to people, because you would literally be making millions of dollars.

Which btw is why I don't believe you.




> There are other conditions involved like if you already have being grabbed or if you are grabbed while standed or if you are in the ground. But given the opportunity if a proper strike to the throat neck could connect yes. Maybe not directly countering but enough to finish what will originate of that grappling. It doesnt matter the ways just the end.



Now its "could" connect? I thought you pulled this off against a Bjj blackbelt to get out of his mount and then ground and pound him. Which is it?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> There's no need to. If a technique is all but abandoned, then its clearly ineffective.



That is an assumption, one which you do not have any evidence of being true, And who has abandoned it?

It is more likely that the fighters in the early UFC did not use certain techniques because they were used to competing in sporting competitions where those techniques are illegal. Or perhaps they were there to compete and not maim and kill each other.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> That is an assumption, one which you do not have any evidence of being true, And who has abandoned it?



No evidence of being true? Do we have any examples of a fighter winning a match with a finger or knuckle jab to the throat? 



> t is more likely that the fighters in the early UFC did not use certain techniques because they were used to competing in sporting competitions where those techniques are illegal. Or perhaps they were there to compete and not maim and kill each other.



Well its not just the UFC. That technique is pretty absent in no rules competitions throughout the decades.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Do we have any examples of a fighter winning a match with a finger or knuckle jab to the throat?



Do we have any example of a fighter using a finger or knuckle jab to the throat?



Hanzou said:


> Well its not just the UFC. That technique is pretty absent in no rules competitions throughout the decades.



Not just that technique. And again they are there to compete not maim and kill each other.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Do we have any example of a fighter using a finger or knuckle jab to the throat?



Yeah, that too.



> Not just that technique. And again they are there to compete not maim and kill each other.



No, they're there to win. If jabbing someone in the throat was a reliable way to beat someone, you would see it more often. Throat jabbing isn't just absent in NHB fights, but it's rare/nonexistent in street fights as well. Your entire argument just reeks of the "if we could only use technique X we would be unbeatable" line of thinking.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> That is an assumption, one which you do not have any evidence of being true, And who has abandoned it?
> 
> It is more likely that the fighters in the early UFC did not use certain techniques because they were used to competing in sporting competitions where those techniques are illegal. Or perhaps they were there to compete and not maim and kill each other.



Ok in an environment where you can knock a guy out standing and still choose to jump on them and rein elbows untill you are pulled off. You are suggesting there is some sort of element of holding back?


----------



## drop bear

Ok. As far as eyegouges,neck chops an other weapons of death. If your basic striking isn't there then you will have limited success.

You can't eat punches in some sort of hope an opportunity to judo chop someone comes along.

Most people are just not equipped to fight like that.

So the issue is not with the technique itself but how it is delivered.


----------



## DaveB

Hello.

As I have a Shotokan background I thought I'd give my two cents.  I hope I'm not too far out of sync from the discussion.

Basically what determines effectiveness in any environment is the quality and appropriateness of your training for that environment. Most people seem to accept this well enough. Where I think people get a bit confused is in linking training to specific styles. 

Training is *independent of fighting style. 
*
Think about it. Is there a style that owns press-ups? How about jogging? Want to be more specific to MA, then what about sparring? Pad work? 

When I tried Muay Thai classes I found that there was not one training exercise they did that I had not done in karate first.

So why aren't there hundreds of karateka on video winning UFC? Because the vast majority are simply not interested. People who are interested in full contact competition fighting go to MMA gyms.

Of the minority subset of karateka who are interested in fighting in those kinds of environs, most aren't particularly interested in videoing themselves. Remember this selfie obsession that has people documenting every meal on Facebook is a modern trend and not everyone who can fight is under 30. 

Basically if you train it right you can make just about any style work so for those who do Shotokan who want self defense skill, research self defense and see if your training matches your goal. 

Usually it doesn't and that means it is up to you to find what is missing and correct it.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, that too.



That's not an answer.



Hanzou said:


> No, they're there to win. If jabbing someone in the throat was a reliable way to beat someone, you would see it more often. Throat jabbing isn't just absent in NHB fights, but it's rare/nonexistent in street fights as well. Your entire argument just reeks of the "if we could only use technique X we would be unbeatable" line of thinking.



Your entire argument reeks of 'if it's not in MMA than it is useless. You said if something is not used in competitions like the UFC then it is because it is ineffective, well if somethings are ineffective then there would be no need to ban them. Also why the emphasis on throat jabbing? Why jabbing (which would suggest it is just a poke.? There are many techniques that are not used in NHB competitions that can be used for self defense..


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Ok. As far as eyegouges,neck chops an other weapons of death. If your basic striking isn't there then you will have limited success



A neck chop is a basic striking technique, it is part of our white belt requirements for every students first promotion.



drop bear said:


> You can't eat punches in some sort of hope an opportunity to judo chop someone comes along.



Who said anything about eating punches? Eating punches whilst you are hoping to get in a specific technique would be a pretty silly way to do things.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Ok in an environment where you can knock a guy out standing and still choose to jump on them and rein elbows untill you are pulled off. You are suggesting there is some sort of element of holding back?



Yup. They are not stomping on the guys head or groin or  stomping on his leg to break it or smashing his head into the floor. They may not be holding back on the force used in those elbows but they are not trying to maim or kill him either.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> A neck chop is a basic striking technique, it is part of our white belt requirements for every students first promotion.
> 
> 
> 
> Who said anything about eating punches? Eating punches whilst you are hoping to get in a specific technique would be a pretty silly way to do things.



It is quite simple.before you can rely on a neck chop you have to be able to actually hit the guy with anything.

That is not a stationary target. But a real person hitting back.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Yup. They are not stomping on the guys head or groin or  stomping on his leg to break it or smashing his head into the floor. They may not be holding back on the force used in those elbows but they are not trying to maim or kill him either.



They do if the rules allow. There are codes that allow head stomps.


----------



## RafaChan

Hanzou said:


> I think it would help matters if you could show exactly what type of "mount" you were in.



If i have the opportunity to make a video footage of this same kind of training session i described you and got permission of my training partner ill share here on this very forum for everyone. That way maybe proving that i can hit the neck/eyes/face/throat with the techniques i told in those mounts and a few others will drag this from mysticism to reality and ill be glad.




Hanzou said:


> But yes, some video footage would be most helpful. Frankly if you pulled this off, you're wasting your time on this forum. You should be out there selling your videos to people, because you would literally be making millions of dollars.
> 
> Which btw is why I don't believe you.



I laughed about my millions but its not even funny, and i could not care less. This is where all the discussion tends to walks in circles and leads to nowhere. Ill give you some examples of people that have to follow your advice coz i already have wrote a book called ''How to counter the entire art of grappling with your fingers'' .

How to neutralize a grappler and makes him thinks twice when he attempts to grab you with a single knee strike:






(its on MMA so might be the supreme truth)

We can go on with another example now of grappler vs grappler, from your view that guy now must be rich when he trashed all the grappling art with his sole move:






But nope, no fame or easy money, he got bashed by all the BJJ community this was in my city and the other boy just lost all of his legs and arms movement. Bad way to make a profit i would say.

Done about all of this nonsense and now BT. Really, i doesnt have nothing personal against you but its your use of twisted logic that irritated a lot of the people in this thread. Something like this:



Hanzou said:


> There's no need to. If a technique is all but abandoned, then its clearly ineffective.



First of all, lets clear things, banned doesnt mean the same of abandoned in the context of this very debate. Why in the world they would ban a technique from a competition if this said technique represents no threat for the athletes integrity??? Non sense. Lets keep going...



RTKDCMB said:


> Do we have any example of a fighter using a finger or knuckle jab to the throat?








Thats enough rite Hanzou? Hard to believe? Maybe valid for you only if it was in MMA?  Unreal or is you that are just unable to perform this IRL? Have you ever tried at least hitting the plexus in SD? Coz i did. The boy was lucky coz it was not near a punch with full force, it were just for the matter of obtaining ippon. Those gloves of kumite doesnt allow the fingers to make shihon nukite in pefect alignement but if he reached the opponent throat with that punch what will holding him to reach this same throat with his fingers wich will offer a little more range bare handed? Just nothing...



Hanzou said:


> No, they're there to win. If jabbing someone in the throat was a reliable way to beat someone, you would see it more often. Throat jabbing isn't just absent in NHB fights, *but it's rare/nonexistent in street fights as well*. Your entire argument just reeks of the "if we could only use technique X we would be unbeatable" line of thinking.



Your twisted logic again. Here you putted rare on the same level of non existant. Back to reality with the correct logic: If something is qualified as rare it doesnt mean that thing doesnt exist in reality. Thats pretty basic. Need more video proofs?






Hes fighting with all the basic spear hand and knife hand shuto attacks and defense. We doesnt see this more often coz like you most people just doesnt believe nor havent seen in MMA.



Hanzou said:


> Well its not just the UFC. That technique is pretty absent in no rules competitions throughout the decades.



I wanna make other thing really clear here in hope that discussion could be fruitfull and lead to somewhere really next to the real SD. I watched those said ''no rules'' competitions since two decades when i still was a teen. I was born in Rio the BJJ and vale tudo mecca and i followed these kind of competitions since it started with war of worlds from vale tudo to pride ufc and manny others and have watched some underground vale tudos and in all of those ''no rules'' competitions the infamous and ''absent'' punches and finger strikes to throat/eyes were always prohibited. Thats why.

My 2 million plz!


----------



## RafaChan

RTKDCMB said:


> A neck chop is a basic striking technique, it is part of our white belt requirements for every students first promotion.





drop bear said:


> It is quite simple.before you can rely on a neck chop you have to be able to actually hit the guy with anything.



Shutoken, the knife hands, its a basic tech like rtkdcmb told. We first learn in karate as shuto uke, a defensive strike in heian shodan. All shotokan ukes/blocks are also strikes like shotonoob have stated here in before. In my view its a kind of active/agressive block instead of the more passive/defensive boxer blocks.

From my experience, the shutos neck chops you guys are saying are used more as a counter-attack. Like dropbear said i agree that those cant be just trow out of the window. These technique have to be a response to something, could be an attempt of grappling or a direct attack. I like those vids:

Against grappler:






Against strike:


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> It is quite simple.before you can rely on a neck chop you have to be able to actually hit the guy with anything.
> 
> That is not a stationary target. But a real person hitting back.


Which is why sparring is important to many arts.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...How to neutralize a grappler and makes him thinks twice when he attempts to grab you with a single knee strike:
> 
> youtube #1
> (its on MMA so might be the supreme truth)
> 
> We can go on with another example now of grappler vs grappler, from your view that guy now must be rich when he trashed all the grappling art with his sole move:
> 
> youtube#2
> 
> But nope, no fame or easy money, he got bashed by all the BJJ community this was in my city and the other boy just lost all of his legs and arms movement. Bad way to make a profit i would say.
> 
> youtube#3
> 
> Thats enough rite Hanzou? Hard to believe? Maybe valid for you only if it was in MMA?  Unreal or is you that are just unable to perform this IRL? Have you ever tried at least hitting the plexus in SD? Coz i did. The boy was lucky coz it was not near a punch with full force, it were just for the matter of obtaining ippon. Those gloves of kumite doesnt allow the fingers to make shihon nukite in pefect alignement but if he reached the opponent throat with that punch what will holding him to reach this same throat with his fingers wich will offer a little more range bare handed? Just nothing....


|
Youtube #1 & #3, the traditional karate means of dealing with an assault.  The business about strikers not being prepared for grapplers omits the traditional karate approach to grappler attacks demonstrated in _BOTH_ of these YT vids.
|
I know grappling is popular here; nonetheless, the conventional striking training adopted by many here @ MT is susceptible to grapple-rs while those training traditional karate principles taught starting in kihon tehcnique inc. taikyoku kata, will be prepared for grapplers _IN PRINCIPLE_,  as demonstrated in the 2 YT vids I cited....
\
As for YT vid #2, why traditional karate never wants to go to the ground.  Although a grappling defense was put forth that stymied the winning opponent for some time, the defeated/injured grapple r wasted time & kept himself at risk which proved fatal.  Why I don't train BJJ.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Shutoken, the knife hands, its a basic tech like rtkdcmb told. We first learn in karate as shuto uke, a defensive strike in heian shodan. All shotokan ukes/blocks are also strikes like shotonoob have stated here in before. In my view its a kind of active/agressive block instead of the more passive/defensive boxer blocks.


|
Nice job on the vid / narrated post(s).  Note, I personally, really don't use blocks as strikes.  Obviously bunkai authorities do advocate the blocks as strikes, or alternatively, the kihon form of a block is really a striking tactic in disguise or in actual use or application.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

ShotoNoob said:


> ...I know grappling is popular here; nonetheless, the conventional striking training adopted by many here @ MT is susceptible to grapple-rs while those training traditional karate principles taught starting in kihon tehcnique inc. taikyoku kata, will be prepared for grapplers _IN PRINCIPLE_,  as demonstrated in the 2 YT vids I cited....


|
Adding to my reply, about traditional karate principles.  Such include targeting vulnerable parts of the human anatomy via trauma (recognized by the Matt Thorton proponents), OR, pressure points which have some metabolic disruptive effect upon contact (not recognized by the Matt Thorton's).
|
The YT vids cited demonstrate the potential for both of the effects which I stated above in principle.
|
Traditional karate naysayers, good luck with that.....


----------



## Hanzou

RafaChan said:


> If i have the opportunity to make a video footage of this same kind of training session i described you and got permission of my training partner ill share here on this very forum for everyone. That way maybe proving that i can hit the neck/eyes/face/throat with the techniques i told in those mounts and a few others will drag this from mysticism to reality and ill be glad.



Please do. I don't know why you posted vids of MMA fights, Bjj competitions, or you punching someone in the solar plexus during practice when the subject in question is your ludicrous belief that you can stop grappling from an inferior position with neck jabs.


----------



## DaveB

Hanzou said:


> Please do. I don't know why you posted vids of MMA fights, Bjj competitions, or you punching someone in the solar plexus during practice when the subject in question is your ludicrous belief that you can stop grappling from an inferior position with neck jabs.



Hello Hanzou,

I don't think it would be easy,  but I'm pretty certain that a crushed wind pipe will stop most fights whether grappling or standing. After all, that is what the chokes are attempting. 

Is your objection based on the position or the strike it's self? I can see it being hard to achieve the necessary power from an inferior position and realistically you'd need to know some grappling to be able to avoid being choked or submitted before you got the chance to try. Still I think it's probably possible.


----------



## Hanzou

DaveB said:


> Hello Hanzou,
> 
> I don't think it would be easy,  but I'm pretty certain that a crushed wind pipe will stop most fights whether grappling or standing. After all, that is what the chokes are attempting.
> 
> Is your objection based on the position or the strike it's self? I can see it being hard to achieve the necessary power from an inferior position and realistically you'd need to know some grappling to be able to avoid being choked or submitted before you got the chance to try. Still I think it's probably possible.



Yes, my objection is based on him being able to strike someone in the neck while they're sitting on top of him. He also stated that he performed this on a competent Bjj black belt.


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> ...As I have a Shotokan background I thought I'd give my two cents.  I hope I'm not too far out of sync from the discussion.


|
Why would you say that...?



DaveB said:


> Basically what determines effectiveness in any environment is the quality and appropriateness of your training for that environment. Most people seem to accept this well enough. Where I think people get a bit confused is in linking training to specific styles.


|
Ah, I'd say you have an advanced self-defense teaching agenda.



DaveB said:


> Training is *independent of fighting style.*


*\*
This is way too general.  I'm sure your opinion is appealing to the vast majority of visitors to MT.  To me, it reflects a lack of understanding of the traditional martial arts, Shotokan karate in particular....


DaveB said:


> Think about it. Is there a style that owns press-ups? How about jogging? Want to be more specific to MA, then what about sparring? Pad work?


|
You sound like the Matt Thorton camp, every thing in Martial arts is an athletic exercise.


DaveB said:


> When I tried Muay Thai classes I found that there was not one training exercise they did that I had not done in karate first.


|
By technique, I was never taught low kicks in any traditional karate school.  By form, i was never taught the extreme MT carry through of putting body momentum & rotation into kicks.
|
The rest of your post, I can attest to.
|
Traditional martial arts, here Shotokan, affords a caliber of training MT, BJJ do not.  HOwever unpopular this belief among martial art convention, that's the way it is.


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> ...When I tried Muay Thai classes I found that there was not one training exercise they did that I had not done in karate first.


\
Well of course there's disagreement.  It shows when there is not 1 conceptual response to my commentary on Rafa's YT vid posts.
|
All the surrounding commentary is on general qualities of self defense training, comparison of PHYSICAL technique.  Which is relevant & OK.


DaveB said:


> Usually it doesn't and that means it is up to you to find what is missing and correct it.


|
But the above doesn't begin to define SHOTOKAN KARATE.  how prophetic your final statement!  Good luck with that, karate-wise.


----------



## DaveB

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> *\*
> This is way too general.  I'm sure your opinion is appealing to the vast majority of visitors to MT.  To me, it reflects a lack of understanding of the traditional martial arts, Shotokan karate in particular....



That’s a pretty bold statement, please explain what it is that I don't understand about traditional martial arts?



> You sound like the Matt Thorton camp, every thing in Martial arts is an athletic exercise.



Most things are. Certainly the vast majority of training is. Your next paragraph states you weren't taught various Thai techniques, but my post was about training i.e. skill development methods. Technique is a definite style dependent component of MA.



> Traditional martial arts, here Shotokan, affords a caliber of training MT, BJJ do not.  HOwever unpopular this belief among martial art convention, that's the way it is.



And I was being too general?

Training is dependent on the knowledge, experience and teaching ability of the instructor not to mention the goal of the student.

Unless that whole postvwas a joke and I've just misread your tone. If so,  good one!

BTW I hit disagree by accident, but I think I'll leave it unless otherwise enlightened.


----------



## RafaChan

Hanzou said:


> Please do. I don't know why you posted vids of MMA fights, Bjj competitions, or you punching someone in the solar plexus during practice when the subject in question is your ludicrous belief that you can stop grappling from an inferior position with neck jabs.



Dont get me wrong. When earlier you said to me this:



Hanzou said:


> So basically what you're saying is that the entire art of grappling can be countered with neck strikes?



The purpose of those first videos was to show you that is possible to neutralize/counter a competent grappler with sole and quite simple yet devastating moves. Is counter grappling techs here some sort of taboo?

Later you told:



Hanzou said:


> Do we have any examples of a fighter winning a match with a finger or knuckle jab to the throat?



And i have posted a vid from a kumite karate KO showing you that possibilitie (with standed fighters) despite your desbielefs. Again, rare doesnt mean unexistant.

Now lets move to the inferior position possibilitie that i claimed itspossible to stop a grappler and also said that was part of a specific training session that i had not so long ago.
I raised the possibilitie, i made the claim so i agree thats up to me to prove it being possible. Like you in your place, the doubt its valid. You need the proof i know that i have zero credibility here and i also know thats hard to prove something that involves a lot more dynamic that i can put in words here. 

Im entering in enemy territory, im not saying thats easy just possible/achieavable. Will be easier for me to neutralize a grappler from a standed position as a striker. Chances will drastically reduce if im mounted coz depending of the mounts im i will pretty much have most movements of my art neutralized from the position but still, not completely out of options as i described earlier. Can use some tools. When in enemy territory (ground-mounted) better not only know yourself but to also know your enemy. Thats why i said:



RafaChan said:


> Ofc knowing to counter a grab to freeing an arm/hand its mandatory for that so i would not say purely a strike to the neck alone will counter the whole world of ju-jutsu as i will use a small part of the art to counter that same said art.



Now lets clarify the tools i used atm when you say "...the subject in question is your ludicrous belief that you can stop grappling from an inferior position with *neck jabs*."

Neck jabs or any sort of punches when being mounted will loose a lot of potential when you are down there while your hips cant turn properly to strike so lets see what i have did/told:



RafaChan said:


> Punches from the ground when we are being mounted are not effective coz we cant turn our hips properly to give the punch any expressive power. Its completely uselles to punch when you are not up there mounting and punching with gravity force added. *From down there and with such short range and small space you only rely on your fingers and fore knuckle blows on the soft spots when you think of strikes.*



Ok. Now we have set whats ''neck jabs'' in the context of this drilling wich was with a non compliant opponent btw. Ofc karate can give me a nice array of strikes to delivery while in the short range mounted position with my fingers and fore knuckes in attempt to crush a throat. Add to that: moving these open hand strikes in various angles to better pierce tru defenses according to the techs such as shihon, tate and omote nukite for example. For the fore knucke ones while mounted that i have used more in the drilling we could go with hiraken and ipponken.

So what will be the conditions that we have to met for a quality and trustable material ? The ones accordingly to what i described such as use of at least cervical colar as protective gear so we can start. Will not be me to make a MA video footage of someone having their throat crushed and expecting to sell/prove that to some demandfull audience. If i manage to hit the cervical colar in the soft spot throat position will have to be considered ippon.

If we have those terms as agreement while achieving all other conditions ill try to reproduce that what i said and put on video exactly like i claimed including the competent opponent part:



RafaChan said:


> When he dropped me to the ground (most of the times mounted on me) i used ippon ken at his neck coz its a short range strike and i have hitted manny times his neck. He is a *competent jiu-jitsu fighter* he knew that he had to defend his neck but his training conditioning was almost to defend from arm bents and locks he wouldnt expect several ippon ken and hiraken hits at his neck while i forced my way out to a ground and pound.



The particular coleague that i told. A competent BJJ BB one for sure. The guy who defeated almost 20 BJJ practitioners of my former platoon in sucession one before the other following BJJ competition rules and later was the winner of our batallion BJJ contest. I cant talk now about what he achieved as recognition tru sport as i didnt know those details but he have qualitie. All that info that i told can be verified accordingly to the forum rules. That said feat was not recorded as we have detrimental rules about video taping inside headquarter formation course, but it can be verified as this guy its actually the main BJJ instructor/reference of the corps in my state and with everyone of the platoon that saw it.

But does not expect a rush. We both live/work now in different cities and lost big part of contact since we left formation course and got to duty so ill have to schedule a meeting in the near future, besides i have a big list of priorities in the moment. But i can assure you that ill be looking for that, no problem.

So its challenge accepted from my part. Just wanna know if you can make millions of dollars with that like you said. Give me half of a million and ill be happy. But i doubt you by that btw.



Hanzou said:


> But yes, some video footage would be most helpful. Frankly if you pulled this off, you're wasting your time on this forum. You should be out there selling your videos to people, because you would literally be making millions of dollars.


----------



## RafaChan

Shoto, lets recall this:



RafaChan said:


> All shotokan ukes/blocks are also strikes like shotonoob have stated here in before. In my view its a kind of active/agressive block instead of the more passive/defensive boxer blocks.





ShotoNoob said:


> Note, I personally, really don't use blocks as strikes. Obviously bunkai authorities do advocate the blocks as strikes, or alternatively, the kihon form of a block is really a striking tactic in disguise or in actual use or application.....



While i think that its not for everyone to use for example guedan barai (a hard block), to defend/strike a kick, coz most could get their hands or arms kinda injured depending of whos defending and whos kicking (not saying thats your case). I personally prefer and do use in conjunction some hard blocks after a soft (defensive) block for counter attacks in particular cases. Not just the hard block by itself. If you have the timing and distance control always let the soft block first connect (like you said changing/avoiding an attack route) and then punish with a direct attack or a hard block.

A very solid uke hard and soft combo that worked for me a lot in kumite, SD and free spar its the use of a soft (be like water concept) block like osae uke in conjunction-followed by a hard (disguised as attack) block, in that case shuto uke. A good defensive strategie when you have to use/adopt a solid counter attack position/response (again it depends of who your are facing). Use that against agressive attackers with caution being able to switch to a more agressive response/stance when needed (kokutsu to zenkutsu/moto).

To make justice of my earlier illustration about that matter ill use that authoritie video ive found to illustrate that movement/strategie in a more karateka way (more next of the stuff i do):






My criticism/observation about him on that video its the almost absence of kime when he performs shuto uke on the demo. Something ideal for me IMHO regarding best way to achieve strong kime will be something like this:






The fast hip rotation, hands positioning along strong hikite that i havent seen Ian's doing. Maybe he was relaxed coz it was just a demo but for me even for a demo the right way should be in pursue of the right kime. Not only skill, strenght and breathing but hitting/rotating with intention and mechanically transfering a big part of the entire body movement to the shuto strike.

The whole point of that post of mine its if you, as a true traditional karate seeker/practiotioner that i have noted, havent developed yet at least till now a one single strategie to apply a hard block/strike after you applied your soft block you, are just missing one of a big and tastefull cherry above our true karate cake.

Peace !


----------



## Hanzou

RafaChan said:


> Dont get me wrong. When earlier you said to me this:
> 
> 
> 
> The purpose of those first videos was to show you that is possible to neutralize/counter a competent grappler with sole and quite simple yet devastating moves. Is counter grappling techs here some sort of taboo?
> 
> Later you told:
> 
> 
> 
> And i have posted a vid from a kumite karate KO showing you that possibilitie (with standed fighters) despite your desbielefs. Again, rare doesnt mean unexistant.
> 
> Now lets move to the inferior position possibilitie that i claimed itspossible to stop a grappler and also said that was part of a specific training session that i had not so long ago.
> I raised the possibilitie, i made the claim so i agree thats up to me to prove it being possible. Like you in your place, the doubt its valid. You need the proof i know that i have zero credibility here and i also know thats hard to prove something that involves a lot more dynamic that i can put in words here.
> 
> Im entering in enemy territory, im not saying thats easy just possible/achieavable. Will be easier for me to neutralize a grappler from a standed position as a striker. Chances will drastically reduce if im mounted coz depending of the mounts im i will pretty much have most movements of my art neutralized from the position but still, not completely out of options as i described earlier. Can use some tools. When in enemy territory (ground-mounted) better not only know yourself but to also know your enemy. Thats why i said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now lets clarify the tools i used atm when you say "...the subject in question is your ludicrous belief that you can stop grappling from an inferior position with *neck jabs*."
> 
> Neck jabs or any sort of punches when being mounted will loose a lot of potential when you are down there while your hips cant turn properly to strike so lets see what i have did/told:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok. Now we have set whats ''neck jabs'' in the context of this drilling wich was with a non compliant opponent btw. Ofc karate can give me a nice array of strikes to delivery while in the short range mounted position with my fingers and fore knuckes in attempt to crush a throat. Add to that: moving these open hand strikes in various angles to better pierce tru defenses according to the techs such as shihon, tate and omote nukite for example. For the fore knucke ones while mounted that i have used more in the drilling we could go with hiraken and ipponken.
> 
> So what will be the conditions that we have to met for a quality and trustable material ? The ones accordingly to what i described such as use of at least cervical colar as protective gear so we can start. Will not be me to make a MA video footage of someone having their throat crushed and expecting to sell/prove that to some demandfull audience. If i manage to hit the cervical colar in the soft spot throat position will have to be considered ippon.
> 
> If we have those terms as agreement while achieving all other conditions ill try to reproduce that what i said and put on video exactly like i claimed including the competent opponent part:
> 
> 
> 
> The particular coleague that i told. A competent BJJ BB one for sure. The guy who defeated almost 20 BJJ practitioners of my former platoon in sucession one before the other following BJJ competition rules and later was the winner of our batallion BJJ contest. I cant talk now about what he achieved as recognition tru sport as i didnt know those details but he have qualitie. All that info that i told can be verified accordingly to the forum rules. That said feat was not recorded as we have detrimental rules about video taping inside headquarter formation course, but it can be verified as this guy its actually the main BJJ instructor/reference of the corps in my state and with everyone of the platoon that saw it.
> 
> But does not expect a rush. We both live/work now in different cities and lost big part of contact since we left formation course and got to duty so ill have to schedule a meeting in the near future, besides i have a big list of priorities in the moment. But i can assure you that ill be looking for that, no problem.
> 
> So its challenge accepted from my part. Just wanna know if you can make millions of dollars with that like you said. Give me half of a million and ill be happy. But i doubt you by that btw.



All you need to do is neutralize a competent Bjj black belt with neck jabs, and you'll be golden.

I would recommend issuing a challenge to Bjj black belts saying you can do this. You should get plenty of volunteers to come down and try it out for themselves. If you can pull this off, you'll not only put shotokan on the map, but you'll also make bucketloads of money.


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> That’s a pretty bold statement, please explain what it is that I don't understand about traditional martial arts?


Please see my reply below for two examples....


ShotoNoob said:


> |
> By technique, I was never taught low kicks in any traditional karate school.  By form, i was never taught the extreme MT carry through of putting body momentum & rotation into kicks.


|
There's a technique example.  There's a body mechanic example, also implied KIME.


DaveB said:


> Most things are. Certainly the vast majority of training is. Your next paragraph states you weren't taught various Thai techniques, but my post was about training i.e. skill development methods. Technique is a definite style dependent component of MA.


|
On the physicality, you have come to a conclusion that is contrary to the express foundation of all the traditional karate's.  And what's more, you have lots of company.
|
IMO, on of the great aspects of Shotokan's appeal to many is it's heavy physicality.  Too many, however, become fixated on the physical dimension of Shotokan karate practice which later translates into failure @ traditional karate....


DaveB said:


> And I was being too general?
> |
> Training is dependent on the knowledge, experience and teaching ability of the instructor not to mention the goal of the student.


|
I would define these attributes as part of the educational process, rather than martial arts per se.  All sound of course.  So agree would be the 'right button' here for me too.


DaveB said:


> Unless that whole postvwas a joke and I've just misread your tone. If so,  good one!
> 
> BTW I hit disagree by accident, but I think I'll leave it unless otherwise enlightened.


|
I written oodles here about the mental dimension of traditional martial arts / karate.  Been buzzed a few times for it.  But that's where I live....
|
EDIT: Concur with you on the general descriptive learning process you summarized....  How traditional karate vs. Muay Thai train the person internally, I see vast difference....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Shoto, lets recall this:
> |
> While i think that its not for everyone to use for example guedan barai (a hard block), to defend/strike a kick, coz most could get their hands or arms kinda injured depending of whos defending and whos kicking (not saying thats your case). I personally prefer and do use in conjunction some hard blocks after a soft (defensive) block for counter attacks in particular cases. Not just the hard block by itself. If you have the timing and distance control always let the soft block first connect (like you said changing/avoiding an attack route) and then punish with a direct attack or a hard block.
> |
> Peace !


|
I cut down your extensive quote.  Something like that takes a lot of study.  As one moves to what I call advanced karate, your post presents well how dynamic bunkai can be.
|
To me, a block is defensive, along the lines of kihon theory.  My extension of kihon theory in the case of your bunkai posts is then that the knifehand is no longer a block; it's in reality a strike.
|
In the black-belt level programs, knifehands are typically taught as blocks.  However, in the 1-steps and self defense applications presented, knifehands are employed in striking as well.
|
In summary, the traditional karate curriculum in its entirety is very broad & detailed, offering lots of techniques & alternative tactics.  Again, why KIME developmet is so important over the conventional boxing mantra of 'fast jab, strong right cross.'  The reliance of Shotokan kumite competitors on the sport model of having a single or two athletic tactic is traditional karate failure....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Shoto, lets recall this:
> 
> My criticism/observation about him on that video its the almost absence of kime when he performs shuto uke on the demo. Something ideal for me IMHO regarding best way to achieve strong kime will be something like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fast hip rotation, hands positioning along strong hikite that i havent seen Ian's doing. Maybe he was relaxed coz it was just a demo but for me even for a demo the right way should be in pursue of the right kime. Not only skill, strenght and breathing but hitting/rotating with intention and mechanically transfering a big part of the entire body movement to the shuto strike....
> |
> Peace !


|
I returned to comment on the critical issue you've highlighted.  The reason I don't dwell on bunkai is the very reason in your criticism.  The body mechanics / your kime presented in the 2nd YT vid is now where we should be going.
|
I don't buy all of the Shotokan body mechanics.  Yet here is what I love about Shotokan.  the instructor makes plain in this vid that the body works as a coordinated unit which then extends strength into the technique for power.  He talkes about how the power comes from the 'core,' not isolated or emphasized in the extremities....
|
How KIME or what dynamic of KIME that is powering his move is the most fundamental & essential question.
|
If those wishing to use karate successfully would only take a step back from the overt physicality and delve into traditional Shotokan as demonstrated by this instructor, we'd see traditional karate fighters wiping out conventional MMA.
|
Good luck with that....


----------



## ShotoNoob

The vid above excels at demonstrating how traditional kihon karate develops strength internally & externally in a mentally disciplined way.  Excessive body mobility, motion, over-extension, etc. are avoided....  The defensive blocking technique prepares & blends seamlessly into the counter strike.
|
This is not boxing body mechanics.  This is an internally generated process... a mental discipline....
|
EDIT: Mobility is accomplished by transitioning between stances....  For the anti=grappling aficionados this has wide sweeping ramifications if you understand karate principles....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Also notice the traditional form of the knife hand block ends strongly with the arms and body positioned in a tactically advantageous guard. The arms are well prepared to act into kihon blocks if need be, against most zones of attack.  Of course this requires KIME of the kind we rarely see in karate competition kumite.  Yet same is expressly taught, in principle, by traditional kihon technique from Day 1.
|
Best of luck with that....


----------



## DaveB

ShotoNoob said:


> On the physicality, you have come to a conclusion that is contrary to the express foundation of all the traditional karate's.  And what's more, you have lots of company.
> |
> IMO, on of the great aspects of Shotokan's appeal to many is it's heavy physicality.  Too many, however, become fixated on the physical dimension of Shotokan karate practice which later translates into failure @ traditional karate....
> 
> I written oodles here about the mental dimension of traditional martial arts / karate.



I only spotted the one "example" above, of my apparent lack of understanding. I would love to hear more about this mental dimension to traditional karate that I am missing? Just saying it's there doesn't really give any weight to your assertion.

Also if example two is forthcoming perhaps a little elaboration might make it easier to understand.


----------



## DaveB

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> EDIT: Mobility is accomplished by transitioning between stances....  For the anti=grappling aficionados this has wide sweeping ramifications if you understand karate principles....



Shoto, "principles" is a very common term for karateka. What do you understand by the term and what principles are you referring to for help with anti-grappling?


----------



## chris66

IMO - All forms of martial arts can be good for self defense, if the teacher is good and he or she keeps it real.


----------



## RafaChan

Hanzou said:


> All you need to do is neutralize a competent Bjj black belt with neck jabs, and you'll be golden.



Im ok with that and in time i will look to collect some material for us while ill prove my claim/point. Again i must reiterate the concept of what you would interpret as neck jabs about what i did in reality. Not only the boxe or karate sole punch. In my drill i prefered and used a wide array of fingers and fore knucle strikes such as ippon ken, hira ken and my nukites at the throat when i got mounted.

Those are some of the karate very usefull cantrips (wich other MAs styles lacks or denies) that can serve even the beginners and neophytes in a more realistic SD scenario and that most people simple deny coz are not being presented on the mainstream and not presented usually in most karate classes and in most of their core training. Thats the whole point of my said "claim". Not the purpose of being a millionaire ofc and to bash a specific grappling art wich btw i respect. I wasnt thinking of that when i joined here to participate on this very thread. And also im not creating nothing out of the dust. Those moves were always there. Hidden / Forgotten - maybe coz they represent in part warfare ways of being authentic ''no rules'' and its the kind of stuff not much marketable nowadays. You cant put that in a show. Think of that.

I was studying some material about that subject when i entered on that forum to check what was going on with shotokan as SD around the world. And as i was reading this extensive thread during the weeks ive found that would be of a great help (for me and for others) to spread some words of what i find thats ideal and applicacle in real SD scenarios concerning what i have did and seen using some shotokan techs and also to share with others experiences aswell. Wich IMO im founding to be an ok discussion and sharing. Specialy if it have potential to help others and to bring more light uppon the said subject.

Shotokan and other forms of karate for SD its highly underestimated and IMO theres no one to blame by that. If the majority of students, instructors and most associations aim for the sports and physicalty conditioning i would just let them alone, and if i train with them sometimes i keep only whats good for me, the rest of what doesnt interest me i wont be focusing on my own training. Like i told in before the quest must be personnal. The ideal training that few people are searching doesnt end in the dojo. Theres really a LOT of gap that we have to fill by yourselves if we wanna apply what we developed IRL scenarios. Ofc competent instructors always help but theres a limit for that help extent, some of the times we must have to go deeper and seek in other directions by ourselves applying the lot of things we are seeing for our own particular world and limits.

Sorry for the walls of text. Im really trying to be more objective to express myself but i think most people are missing a lot of things. Common sense and mainstream can bug people out sometimes. Im not special and not above anyone, just wanna share and spread some words and maybe others can use as shortcuts in their personal quests. Always take only wich will serve your own reality. There are a lot of MA styles with their masters and paths out there but the end/objective of being effective in SD will be the same for most. Follow the path or paths that will serve you better, we already as human beings have solids foundations regarding SD and MAs. Keep practicing and adapting for yourself and in time you start to walk your own path about what to be the ideal.

Im replying Hanzou here but for the first moment i dont wanna expect nothing of him, i even doesnt know him, his limits or what will be ideal for his own reality. But here are my words so everyone can see and take their own conclusions about what will be ideal on their particular cases. Like shotonoob already stated also, there are really a lot of gap for us to fill with about what those foundational masters are telling us to do. Those sometimes tend to be very generic in some of their principles (recap M Funakoshi). For me thats implied that we just have to figure out by ourselves coz they know everyone as individuals are commonly different worlds. Thats why some principles seems so vague in general. Sometimes its intrincate sometimes seems to be unachievable but its very simple and right behind our noses.


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> To me, a block is defensive, along the lines of kihon theory. My extension of kihon theory in the case of your bunkai posts is then that the knifehand is no longer a block; it's in reality a strike.
> |
> In the black-belt level programs, knifehands are typically taught as blocks. However, in the 1-steps and self defense applications presented, knifehands are employed in striking as well.



Indeed. Its when shuto uke cross the line of a block and turns an attack disguised or not (i aim to the neck, side of jaw or floating ribs mostly), wich i said to be a hard block coz in a lot of bunkais you can see ppl using shuto uke only as a hard block for attacks wich i personally find a poor applicantion and dont use it. They miss the part of the strike of that said "block".

The way i use shuto uke a lot its in conjunction with osae uke for counter attacking. And theres good reasons for that. I can use osae uke also followed by a more direct straight attack like a punch (oi-kizami-gyaku zuki, it depends of the enemy movimentation) or a direct shihon nukite strike for example (like the technique is presented in nidan and sandan forms always after the osae).

What i have found ideal coz of immense sinergy too its the usage of osae uke then shuto uke. Osae uke its a very good block coz allow the blocker to defend very fast and change the direction of the attacker punch, while at the same time it gaves the possibilitie to even mess with the attacker balance when you sweep his arm/hand.

But most important, osae uke as a circular kind of technique can create a lot of momentum to add more power to the kime of the shuto attack, as while you arc your hand-arm for the block and twist your torso-hips a little for the move the shuto hand its already going next your head to perform the turn and strike.

Ofc you have to train that while going forward or backward coz as a counter attack oriented move you will be responding of what your opponent its doing. For example, if he punches and kept distance you block and go forward to attack with shuto or if he punch and came in closing distance, ideally block then move back performing your counter. Even all that body movement transitioning tru kokutsu stances will count in add more kime as you already knows.

I used that mostly to give a solid response tactic that control enemy jabs if hes studying me too much while you force him to stance switch and being controlled coz ideally you have to keep your front foot same side with his (coz i want his flank) while that way we create more distance from his attacks specially his reverse. The idea its to force him let his flank kinda open when he comes in to jab while you keep protected moving his jab arm to his center neutralizing both of his arms for a moment while you hit.



ShotoNoob said:


> In summary, the traditional karate curriculum in its entirety is very broad & detailed, offering lots of techniques & alternative tactics. Again, why KIME developmet is so important over the conventional boxing mantra of 'fast jab, strong right cross.' The reliance of Shotokan kumite competitors on the sport model of having a single or two athletic tactic is traditional karate failure....



We have to start from somewhere. The said tactic i presented with pretty basic strikes served me being usefull to add a lot more and create more opportunities to my whole strategie. I agree with you when you say that those limited and highly conditioned by the kumite-fencing dynamics will be out of responses if the fight lasts more than that those one-two-three moves. Despite you already knows i heavily pursue ikken hissatsu (from the karate thesis ^^) i dont limit my strategie and training conditioning by that mentality.


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> I only spotted the one "example" above, of my apparent lack of understanding.


|
Dave, thanks for replying.  Over the internet, it's always going to be hard to make a direct connection using printed media.


DaveB said:


> I would love to hear more about this mental dimension to traditional karate that I am missing? Just saying it's there doesn't really give any weight to your assertion.


|
From a serious practitioner standpoint, the correct way to assert your position is for you to define the mental dimension.  The Master's have clearly addressed this component.  It's typically presented in general descriptive manner.  Yet same is made plain.  That's if you're truly interested...



DaveB said:


> Also if example two is forthcoming perhaps a little elaboration might make it easier to understand.


|
I'll work on that.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...
> The way i use shuto uke a lot its in conjunction with osae uke for counter attacking. And theres good reasons for that. I can use osae uke also followed by a more direct straight attack like a punch (oi-kizami-gyaku zuki, it depends of the enemy movimentation) or a direct shihon nukite strike for example (like the technique is presented in nidan and sandan forms always after the osae).
> 
> What i have found ideal coz of immense sinergy too its the usage of osae uke then shuto uke. Osae uke its a very good block coz allow the blocker to defend very fast and change the direction of the attacker punch, while at the same time it gaves the possibilitie to even mess with the attacker balance when you sweep his arm/hand.
> 
> But most important, osae uke as a circular kind of technique can create a lot of momentum to add more power to the kime of the shuto attack, as while you arc your hand-arm for the block and twist your torso-hips a little for the move the shuto hand its already going next your head to perform the turn and strike.


|
When is your & K-Man's traditional karate manual coming out?
|
Bigger question, how many will put down their focus mitts and train karate traditionally?
|
On the dynamic of the osae-uke to shuto-uke, yes that is a very effective combination.  KIME is the key & the driver.  At least for argument sake.  Good luck with getting that across.....
|
Movements like you've describe harken back to the Chinese kempo's, IMO.  Again, there's no one stopping the truly dedicated from digging into the Shotokan curriculum....  great illustration on your part....  good luck with getting that across....
|
EDIT: I have seen this technique presented in the black-belt curriculum described as a self defense application.  Never in free sparring....


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> ...I would love to hear more about this mental dimension to traditional karate that I am missing? Just saying it's there doesn't really give any weight to your assertion.


|
OK, I'll venture forth.  Here's a YT vid of a TKD / TSD poomse / hyung I posted somewhere some time ago.  I queried the audience as to what was wrong about this kata from a traditional karate standpoint.  No one could hazard a guess.
|
I choose a simple beginner kata, 'cause these panned as for children, ya know not real adult karate.  Nothing could be farther from what the Master's intended.  Furthermore, these simple kata isolate out the concepts of what we traditional karateka are trying to accomplish.  Shotokan refers to these as FIRST CAUSE.  the foundational concepts of traditional karate training....
|


DaveB said:


> Shoto, "principles" is a very common term for karateka. What do you understand by the term and what principles are you referring to for help with anti-grappling?


|
Here's the kata: There is a huge omission in a required physical form-technique / step in the kata.




|
The significance of the error / omission in FORM is in the absence of an element of the mental dimension of traditional karate training.  It's left out.  The omission of any physical technique is probably minor.  The impact on the mental dimension, particularly when we are talking about self defense, is possibly catastrophic.
|
EDIT: OH, and good luck with that....


----------



## Username Redacted

Hanzou said:


> Have you seen many recorded street fights or street beatings? All that stuff you mentioned above is never used either. Why? Because its kind of hard to spit in someone's face when their fist is connecting with your jaw, and its pretty hard to bite someone when your head and body is colliding with the planet after they throw you to the ground.



I have to agree with this, I'm afraid. There's a great forum on the site reddit that is pretty good for getting some idea of what street fights can look like. It's reddit.com/r/amateurfights. Despite the fact that biting, gouging, and clawing are fairly natural motions, I don't think I've ever seen an example of someone successfully using those in the videos on that forum.

That isn't to say I agree with the general sentiment of _grappling über alles, _but I'm profoundly skeptical of the idea of overcoming fantastic grappling skills by hitting the grappler in the throat or gouging his eye out.


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> Shoto, "principles" is a very common term for karateka. What do you understand by the term and what principles are you referring to for help with anti-grappling?


|
When we talk about traditional karate SERIOUSLY, we must look @ principles first.  Not physical moves, techniques, etc.
|
Hence the global anti--grappling principle is that we traditional karateka are NOT presenting a striking or grappling defense, we are presenting a MENTAL defense.  My mind is going to outdo your physical grappling stuff.  My mental state is going to be superior to your Jose Aldo physical ability.
|
Such concepts such as KIME are taught & reinforced in the Taikyoku kata, as they are in every component of traditional karate training, here Shotokan.  Here is an excellent example of mental discipline over Jose Aldo type stuff (or Royce Gracie type stuff).




|
*this is perfect Shotokan karate, IMHO.*  What that means PRINCIPE-WISE, is that this practitioner has developed the foundational mental discipline to clean Royce Gracie's clock, and hopefully Matt Hughes too...
|
EDIT: good luck with that.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

SENSEIBILL'S TANG SOO DO BASIC HYUNG NO. 1.
|
This form is also done well according to the principle of mental capability, mental discipline.  Nothing is omitted mentally.




Note the Tang Soo Do hyung is hard & physical, but softer and less rigid than The Shotokan version.  I feel this is a benefit in training.  both methods are acceptable and have their strong points....IMO.
|
At time = .38, SenseiBill states that the only 2 'moves' are low block & middle punch.  He's right when speaking to TECHNIQUES.  There are, however, a multitude of physical moves going on in this form.  Moreover, there are multiple tactical principles layered on that & so illustrated.
|
To state that this hyung is teaching only 2 techniques is only at the very lowest level of understanding the traditional karate exercise of kata.
|
BTW: these tactical concepts are applicable to anti-grappling.  But it's the internal mental principles that make such karate 'come alive.'


----------



## ShotoNoob

^^^ DaveB & Co., Good luck with that....


----------



## ShotoNoob

dup


----------



## Username Redacted

ShotoNoob said:


> Hence the global anti--grappling principle is that we traditional karateka are NOT presenting a striking or grappling defense, _we are presenting a MENTAL defense_.  _My mind is going to outdo your physical grappling stuff.  My mental state is going to be superior to your Jose Aldo physical ability._
> |
> Such concepts such as KIME are taught & reinforced in the Taikyoku kata, as they are in every component of traditional karate training, here Shotokan.  _Here is an excellent example of mental discipline over Jose Aldo type stuff (or Royce Gracie type stuff)._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> |
> *this is perfect Shotokan karate, IMHO.*  What that means PRINCIPE-WISE, is that _this practitioner has developed the foundational mental discipline to clean Royce Gracie's clock, and hopefully Matt Hughes too..._
> |


I've italicized a few of your statements that I have a problem with. Personally, I don't like grappling at all, and I absolutely despise groundfighting. I'm predisposed to agree with you, is what I'm trying to say. But this post of yours just doesn't make sense. How on earth is your "mental state" going to overcome strong grappling techniques? Are you saying that you have psychic powers?

 That "physical grappling stuff" is remarkably successful in MMA -- if all that were required to overcome grappling was being exceptionally disciplined, then I would expect to _never _see grappling in the UFC, because one of the essential qualities of world-class athletes is discipline.


----------



## drop bear

Username Redacted said:


> I have to agree with this, I'm afraid. There's a great forum on the site reddit that is pretty good for getting some idea of what street fights can look like. It's reddit.com/r/amateurfights. Despite the fact that biting, gouging, and clawing are fairly natural motions, I don't think I've ever seen an example of someone successfully using those in the videos on that forum.
> 
> That isn't to say I agree with the general sentiment of _grappling über alles, _but I'm profoundly skeptical of the idea of overcoming fantastic grappling skills by hitting the grappler in the throat or gouging his eye out.



The issue is that punching is pretty effective in the street. And your uber strike has to compete in time and effectiveness. So if I have blocked a punch and thrown a shuto strike it is completely different to fending off a flurry of punches and being able to get that same shuto off.

Like knife defence. It all works untill someone does that sewing machine style attack. And then it all comes apart.

Fighters in my experience who are any good do not focus on the award winning finish. They focus on being in a position to throw strikes that limits their chance of limiting strikes.

So my fisty punches may not be fight ending super weapons but I can get them on target against guys who have pretty competent hands.

And that is the trick.


----------



## RTKDCMB

ShotoNoob said:


> Bigger question, how many will put down their focus mitts and train karate traditionally?


Does traditional Karate training not use focus mitts?


----------



## DaveB

ShotoNoob, I understand where you're coming from and you do touch upon an important point. Many in the practical combative karate crowd do overlook many of the mental/psychological aspects of "Traditional" karate. They do so because either they are following the dogma that they have heard about what is effective or they have researched Shotokan's history and discovered that these elements were bolted on in the 1940s and 50s as a means of culturally hijacking an Okinawan fighting art with Chinese roots. Some few will have researched further and found that the ideas of bushido and zen philosophies like mushin and zanshin were themselves artificially bolted on to the Samurai practices as a means of giving purpose and a lofty standard to a warrior caste in an age of peace. When samurai actually fought wars regularly such codes and philosophies were unheard of as skill in arms was the necessity. 

I myself don't dismiss this side of things because I realise that one of the purposes of some of those concepts was as a strategy to cope with one of the big realities of combat, adrenaline. 

If your mind is truly clear then fear cannot cloud your actions. Anticipation can't give you tunnel vision or make you freeze if you are universally aware and distanced from the self and fully accepting of death. 

However, just because these methods are old doesn't make them better than modern training techniques to combat adrenaline dump. Nor can they be seen as superior to the mental dimension of modern athletic training. (Unless the person comparing is an Olympic athlete and a zen master).

Furthermore, mindset has been much discussed by the self defense focused karateka, as a determining factor in the outcome of a violent confrontation. Despite this not many seem to place an emphasis on the use of kata for visualisation and mental exercise, though most mention other methods. 

But we part ways at your belief that the mental dimension of traditional karate will win your battles for you.


----------



## RafaChan

Username Redacted said:


> Are you saying that you have psychic powers?



 Liked your conclusion !

Regarding the advanced mental dimension of the training Shoto was venturing in ill try to help and bring some light accordingly to my experience...

Ill start using his own words that i have found very coherent and met what i have experienced tru my years of practice (not only in karate):



ShotoNoob said:


> I don't buy all of the Shotokan body mechanics. Yet here is what I love about Shotokan.* the instructor makes plain in this vid that the body works as a coordinated unit which then extends strength into the technique for power. He talkes about how the power comes from the 'core,' not isolated or emphasized in the extremities....*
> |
> How KIME or what dynamic of KIME that is powering his move is the most fundamental & essential question.
> |
> If those wishing to use karate successfully would only take a step back from the overt physicality and delve into traditional Shotokan as demonstrated by this instructor, we'd see traditional karate fighters wiping out conventional MMA.



IMO i think when Shoto stated this hes pretty much saying that when (using your mind) you makes your body ''*works as a coordinated unit which then extends strength into the technique for power'', *that way you are achieving a big part of that said mental dimension and mental discipline.

That is the type of conditioning that makes you surpass and win a bigger enemy that doesnt posses any conditioning on that dimension and have worked only on the physical aspect of the conditioning.

In other words its the smaller guy hitting the bigger guy with much more power and defending from him way more effective.

Personally i have seen manny people that compete in the MA scene that gives prioritie only to the physical aspect of the conditioning discipline. Im not saying that physical conditioning for me its trash. IMO its also complementary of the mental side aspect and have the same importance.

If you doesnt dedicate a part of your training on that you are missing a big part of an art... thats why shoto said that shotokan practitioners limited by that detrimental will result in failure...

The mental discipline involves a lot of other aspects for me not only KIME, like right breathing, self control, fast responses, right usage of skills and strategies just to name a few... Unfortunelly thats really cant be passed in a more straight forward notion (unless the person its really gifted) and requires some years of dedicated training, conditioning and understandment of what you (and your body) are doing.

''Good luck with all that...''


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> I don't buy all of the Shotokan body mechanics.



Out of my curiosity could you be more specific on that please?


Other curiosity... I see you showed taikyoku shodan in one of your vids. I know superficially that kata was a more easier reading of heian shodan developed by master Gichin. Here the shotokan white belts learn only heian/pinan shodan. Personally i dont like taikyoku and i wanna know your opinion on that. TIA.


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> Movements like you've describe harken back to the Chinese kempo's, IMO. Again, there's no one stopping the truly dedicated from digging into the Shotokan curriculum.... great illustration on your part.... good luck with getting that across....
> |
> EDIT: I have seen this technique presented in the black-belt curriculum described as a self defense application. Never in free sparring....



Manny traditional karate authorities advocate that the circular techniques like those osae and shuto uke have chinese roots so for me you are probably right on that.
I have seen something close to this move/combo on a free-sparring but was something more like a side punch. If you have the opportunitie to do you will see most people will be got by surprise coz you will hit from an unexpected angle.


----------



## RafaChan

drop bear said:


> The issue is that punching is pretty effective in the street. And your uber strike has to compete in time and effectiveness. So if I have blocked a punch and thrown a shuto strike it is completely different to fending off a flurry of punches and being able to get that same shuto off.
> 
> Like knife defence. It all works untill someone does that sewing machine style attack. And then it all comes apart.
> 
> Fighters in my experience who are any good do not focus on the award winning finish. They focus on being in a position to throw strikes that limits their chance of limiting strikes.
> 
> So my fisty punches may not be fight ending super weapons but I can get them on target against guys who have pretty competent hands.
> 
> And that is the trick.



Ofc the said tactic i exposed works as a counter attack move/intention and being very specific and by that it have to obey certain conditions to be effective and aplicable. I personally rarely trow that in free-spar but im always in position to apply that most times as part of my whole strategie (most times in free-spar and kumite i assume a counter attack position/attitude at the first moment so i can see whats my opponent using and capitalize on that later).

I know that can sounds ironic how in the world you keep that in mind if you rarely use. But from that what i call my ''fake stance'' i can develop most of my other tactics (karate develops a lot of switch stances). First condition basically is that you have to keep your front foot aligned with the front foot of the opponent (much like when you are facing a guy whos left handed - my case but in that case i fake im right handed), so you work on his jabs using the osae (hand sweep block). If you manage to be fast enough you will be able to attack in reponse while you enter or retreat with shuto. Lets say, depending of the guy, in 1 min of fight or less i can perform a move like that different than reverse and jabs fakes or not that i will be trowing regularly.

From the SD perspective its pretty usefull if you manage to hit the floating ribs (be without air for some secs), side of neck or side of jaw behind the ear...

I can see where you came from. I have practiced thai box for 2 years with some of the best around me. FromK-1 nd MMA pro level to the regular fantastic anonymous guys and also the bigger ineffective ones...I know the feeling of being inside a ring and i can tell you what i have seen/did being usefull (for me and others) on that regard and how my karate trainging have helped.

In the case of a straight flurry of attacks like you told i must admit that most karate training nowadays doesnt give responses to that coz they are so focused on the one hit ko kumite conditioning attitude. That doesnt mean that there are none schools that teach those responses in the perfect karateka way.

One of the thing that i have seen and later did (as a striker) with someone that came in with that kind of flurry of attacks and that lets them very frustraded its when you simply doesnt have to be stopped blocking or ''eating the punches'' while you pray for an open for yours attacks to connect. In a flurry of attacks the guy its very likely the guy its coming forward you in a nonstop motion, that way you simply go backwards retreating while instead of blocks you attack him back keeping your distance always (most time your head distance). In karate kumite can helps with that in the way of keep a wise distancing and timing.

If the guy its coming and never finding you he will start to get pissed and loose a lot of energy. Simply retreat (step or steps back) and attack. Shoto may be disagreeing with the backpeddaling but thats when i perform my kata (forms) backwards. All i can say thats for me its effective and i have seen being effective for others also.

Sorry for the walls of text !


----------



## ShotoNoob

Username Redacted said:


> I've italicized a few of your statements that I have a problem with. Personally, I don't like grappling at all, and I absolutely despise groundfighting. I'm predisposed to agree with you, is what I'm trying to say. But this post of yours just doesn't make sense. How on earth is your "mental state" going to overcome strong grappling techniques? Are you saying that you have psychic powers?


|
Refer to MT T on "Mental Clarity" for a start.  Otherwise, it's just T propogation....


Username Redacted said:


> That "physical grappling stuff" is remarkably successful in MMA -- if all that were required to overcome grappling was being exceptionally disciplined, then I would expect to _never _see grappling in the UFC, because one of the essential qualities of world-class athletes is discipline.


|
Your thinking is just how NOT to approach Shotokan karate for self defense.  You are just looking at MMA and coming to a "glittering generality" conclusion.
\
Specific > Take a look @ the recent Joanna Jedrzejczyk defeat of Jessica Penne.  also take a look at the anti-grappling utilized by the victor, Joanna Jedrzejczyk....
\
Instead of arguing, try to develop my thesis.  Otherwise, I'll put "Little Debbie" doing Shotokan karate up....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Username Redacted said:


> ...That "physical grappling stuff" is remarkably successful in MMA -- _*if all that were required to overcome grappling was being exceptionally disciplined, then I would expect to never see grappling in the UFC, because one of the essential qualities of world-class athletes is discipline.*_


|
The mental discipline as defined by traditional shotokan karate is extremely lacking in MMA....
|
Again, you sound like Matt Thorton spouting off some generality that 'world class athlete's'  have the essential quality of discipline...
|
I'm not talking about the gumption to roll huge tractor tires all over the gym....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RTKDCMB said:


> Does traditional Karate training not use focus mitts?


|
Not in ancient Okinawa.  So why use them now?  I absolutely hate focus mitts. Hate them, Hate them, Hate them.  They are designed for athletic training.  Traditional karate is designed for mental training.  Chuck the focus mitts.....
|
People use this stuff  instead of thinking.  That's the problem....  focus mitts are 'smart' for boxers, 'dumb' for karate.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RTKDCMB said:


> Does traditional Karate training not use focus mitts?


HEADNOTE: HERE'S LITTLE DEBBIE, I WARNED YA! 
|
SOMEONE POST THE JAPANESE KARATE WORD FOR BOARDBREAKING:
|
The following post is Shotokan karate form[IMO], you know the Japanese karate so many complain about as "impractical."




|
So the lesson is presented in the traditional karate curriculum.  Can the karate practitioner take the concept and study & learn & apply that lesson?  For all it's crummy characteristics, you can't say Shotokan karate, the most widespread karate style out there, doesn't present the lesson & working objective to developing the capability to disable your opponent decisively....
|
My august contribution to the ant-grappling T....
|
BTW: the purpose of the warmup and dry runs when Debbie does the front kick break, is to develop that little-talked about traditional karate mental discipline called KIME.
|
Take that Matt Thorton &Co.  _*Take that, focus mitt user....*_
|
EDIT: Debbie's head on the punch break is proper form....


----------



## RafaChan

drop bear said:


> Fighters in my experience who are any good do not focus on the award winning finish. They focus on being in a position to throw strikes that limits their chance of limiting strikes.
> 
> So my fisty punches may not be fight ending super weapons but I can get them on target against guys who have pretty competent hands.
> 
> And that is the trick.



IMHO too much of a boxer oriented/condiotioned view, specially when we are talking about what you can do and happen at your SD in those street fights.

A deceptive and direct front kick - mae geri with the right kime and tech performation its pretty much what will be neutralizing a guy coming to attack you with his flurry of strikes in a motion that will serve even the most fragile lady (edit:even little debbie). Ive posted a vídeo and a story earlier that can confirms the said kick being ''the award winning fish'' or the ''fight ending super weapon''. And im not even talking about what i have seen for myself IRL.

Trust too much only on your fists and your boxing skills and you might get caught by surprise by someone that can use some ''finisher'' cantrips that you might didnt expect coz of your hard boxing conditioning.

Edit: Shoto, this kind of training of breaking stuffs that was core in all traditionl karate its tameshiwari. And pretty much is what certifies me that im able to crush someones throat (without having to do it ofc) when i see what my shihon nukite did with that coconut surface.

Thats the part when the student ask the máster what he will do with the technique and the máster replies: What the technique will do with you?

Really. I think most people doesnt deserve to know or are not mentally prepared to learn some things regarding tradicional karate. Most times i feel some stuff its better served hided inside some cheap mysticism.


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> ShotoNoob, I understand where you're coming from and you do touch upon an important point. Many in the practical combative karate crowd do overlook many of the mental/psychological aspects of "Traditional" karate. They do so because either they are following the dogma that they have heard about what is effective or they have researched Shotokan's history and discovered that these elements were bolted on in the 1940s and 50s as a means of culturally hijacking an Okinawan fighting art with Chinese roots.


|
GOOD REPLY.  But you & K-Man are too hard on faulting the Japanese Karates.  Modern Shotokan, practiced to traditional standards is very good.  Okinawan karate is more sophisticated.  It's that simple.



DaveB said:


> But we part ways at your belief that the mental dimension of traditional karate will win your battles for you.


|
Yeah, and then you neither practicing Shotokan or any Okinawan karate to traditional standards.
|
Good luck with that.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> ...
> However, just because these methods are old doesn't make them better than modern training techniques to combat adrenaline dump. Nor can they be seen as superior to the mental dimension of modern athletic training. (Unless the person comparing is an Olympic athlete and a zen master).


|
YOu are right, older-alone doesn't make them better.  What makes them better was the fact the Master's (put in the intelligent time & study) understood the human potential and how best to tap into same, with martial application....
|
Physical science of sports has advanced.  No question.  Yet sports science is centered on physiological processes...  Moreover, doing basic conditioning exercises like push ups, sit ups, squat thrusts, running in place, with some chinese yoga exercises mixed will take you very, very far.  Want to make a study of that or just grind them out?  Got me in superlative shape without any $69.99 CDs.



DaveB said:


> Furthermore, mindset has been much discussed by the self defense focused karateka, as a determining factor in the outcome of a violent confrontation. Despite this not many seem to place an emphasis on the use of kata for visualisation and mental exercise, though most mention other methods.


|
the thrust of kata is not visualization.  the thrust of kata is internal mental development that then powers a heightened sense when one needs to visualize  Kata is the under appreciated marital exercise.  Kata is a mental exercise, not a physical one....  The physical form you observe is the expression of a mental discipline process....



DaveB said:


> But we part ways at your belief that the mental dimension of traditional karate will win your battles for you.


|
Good luck with that....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...IMO i think when Shoto stated this hes pretty much saying that when (using your mind) you makes your body ''*works as a coordinated unit which then extends strength into the technique for power'', *that way you are achieving a big part of that said mental dimension and mental discipline.
> 
> That is the type of conditioning that makes you surpass and win a bigger enemy that doesnt posses any conditioning on that dimension and have worked only on the physical aspect of the conditioning.


|
NOW we are seeing why Shotokan karate, with all its faults, drawbacks, over-emphasis on aggression, physicality, is so very effective compared to Matt Thorton /athletics.  the Mind is drawing & channeling the internal & external strength of the whole body and projecting same into the technique.  This is a conscious process, though hidden & internal....
|
Go Little Debbie, GO!


----------



## ShotoNoob

strong kime


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> IMHO too much of a boxer oriented/condiotioned view, specially when we are talking about what you can do and happen at your SD in those street fights.


|
The boxer method of athletics is workable & very good in it's own right.  It's faster & easier to learn.  The boxer does not carry the mental discipline to do the precise exacting, totally controlled technique of true traditional karate.  Because karate, it's from the mind....
|
Postnote: the reactions and instincts learning by athletics are valuable SD skills.  They can not stand against the mental discipline of traditional Shotokan.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...If you doesnt dedicate a part of your training on that you are missing a big part of an art... thats why shoto said that shotokan practitioners limited by that detrimental will result in failure....


|
And yes, because of the physical form of Shotokan as a training karate, as opposed to a more jutsu karate, as well as other attributes such as over-tense, rigid, aggressive, full range of motion, simplified & large physical movements, regurgitating these attributes physically alone makes [physical] Shotokan very vulnerable in actual practice.
|
Yet without the mental component, what I just described is not Shotokan karate proper....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RTKDCMB said:


> Does traditional Karate training not use focus mitts?


|
The better question is identify the deficiency in the TKD / TSD poomse/ hyung as performed by "Tiger KIM Academy."


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...Shotokan and other forms of karate for SD its highly underestimated and IMO theres no one to blame by that. If the majority of students, instructors and most associations aim for the sports and physicalty conditioning i would just let them alone, and if i train with them sometimes i keep only whats good for me, the rest of what doesnt interest me i wont be focusing on my own training. Like i told in before the quest must be personnal. The ideal training that few people are searching doesnt end in the dojo. Theres really a LOT of gap that we have to fill by yourselves if we wanna apply what we developed IRL scenarios. Ofc competent instructors always help but theres a limit for that help extent, some of the times we must have to go deeper and seek in other directions by ourselves applying the lot of things we are seeing for our own particular world and limits.


|
Agreed.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Out of my curiosity could you be more specific on that please?


|
You have two questions here.
|
On the Shotokan body mechanics.  Shotokan tends to train large body rotation (around the waist & torso) in striking technique.  Shotokan also tend to emphasize exaggerated mobility in closing the distance over large spaces.  I prefer to rely more on internal body contractions for power.  I  prefer to position deliberately rather than leap or spring forward, in & out.


RafaChan said:


> Other curiosity... I see you showed taikyoku shodan in one of your vids. I know superficially that kata was a more easier reading of heian shodan developed by master Gichin. Here the shotokan white belts learn only heian/pinan shodan. Personally i dont like taikyoku and i wanna know your opinion on that. TIA.


|
Yeah, the K-Man crowd dumps on Taikyoku.  That's why I put up Little Debbie breaking the boards with Taikyoku kata technique.  Get it?


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Out of my curiosity could you be more specific on that please?
> 
> 
> Other curiosity... I see you showed taikyoku shodan in one of your vids. I know superficially that kata was a more easier reading of heian shodan developed by master Gichin. Here the shotokan white belts learn only heian/pinan shodan. Personally i dont like taikyoku and i wanna know your opinion on that. TIA.


|
My kumite style tends to be very IPPON KUMITE'Y, very TAIKYOKU KATA'Y.  but of course there is mind/body unity behind that...


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...Other curiosity... I see you showed taikyoku shodan in one of your vids. I know superficially that kata was a more easier reading of heian shodan developed by master Gichin. Here the shotokan white belts learn only heian/pinan shodan. Personally i dont like taikyoku and i wanna know your opinion on that. TIA.


|
Some Okinawan Karate Master said (TMU), that mastering the Pinan (Heian) kata would provide all the martial capability one would need.  In principle I agree with that.
|
Isolating the Taikyoku kata out affords a better foundation.... along the lines of mental discipline....
|
Good luck with that (with focus mitts--really?????)


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Out of my curiosity could you be more specific on that please?
> |
> Other curiosity... I see you showed taikyoku shodan in one of your vids. I know superficially that kata was a more easier reading of heian shodan developed by master Gichin. Here the shotokan white belts learn only heian/pinan shodan. Personally i dont like taikyoku and i wanna know your opinion on that. TIA.


Here's Ronda Rousey, a Top MMA competitor doing the conventional boxing MMA striking:




|
Traditional karate conditioning does the same situps, etc.  Hard to improve on calisthenics, IMO.
\
the traditional karate key to beating a Ronda Rousey (type fighter) is Taikyoku kata.  With Mind / body unity powered by KIME, very, very strong KIME, I'm going to do what?
|
Punch (straight punch) right through that hands up guard right into her face knocking out all her teeth, blood dribbling out of her mouth and down all over the floor.  Uggelly.... traditional karate uglellly....
|
EDIT: not only is she going to look silly, the marital effect with be, upon my 1st strike, a combination of mental shock & physical trauma / pain.  Perfectly vulnerable to follow on strike(s), compromised in her mental ability to mount a defense.
|
MMA competitors, good luck with that....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Under KIME law, as soon as she flys that left jab out there, she's traditional karate DONE.
|
And you guys laughed @ my little debbie YT vid.  Shame Shame...


----------



## DaveB

ShotoNoob, I'm glad that you are happy with your art and your training and the strange world you inhabit . 

I look forward to seeing some of these non-physically trained karateka thinking (dreaming?) their way to victory against the many inferior combat sports fighters and their obviously flawed tested and proven training methods. 

Good luck with that! )


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> ShotoNoob, I'm glad that you are happy with your art and your training and the strange world you inhabit .


|
It's traditional karate.  done right.



RafaChan said:


> I look forward to seeing some of these non-physically trained karateka thinking (dreaming?) their way to victory against the many inferior combat sports fighters and their obviously flawed tested and proven training methods.


|
you mean you want these guys coming to your school to train commercially....



RafaChan said:


> Good luck with that! )


|
Good luck with paying the bills with that....


----------



## Buka

What color is the sky in your world?


----------



## tshadowchaser

It has been a few years since I last faced a Shotokan master but if my memory serves me right the only mental attitude they had was punch someone in the face as hard as they could or kick someone in the chest as hard as they could. They did not dwell on the metal side of things other than hard training and learning to beat arms ( not all but many beat arms). They did not study inner strength through meditation but by getting in the class and beating they hell out of each other every night. 
Where they better of worse than the guy on the street in a street fight? Some where some failed miserably but at least they had some idea how to defend against a punch or kick and knew how to return the same


----------



## RafaChan

Regarding Shotokan and some of his másters and the (most forgotten) mental aspect of training to get inner strenght... What you guys think of those (legendary?) modern shotokan grandmásters?
















Heavy dedicated at karate-jutsu. Pretty much more than just hard kicks and punches.

Edit: Shoto, your post # 1338  have some kind of quote bug. Those are not my words.


----------



## DaveB

RafaChan said:


> Pretty much more than just hard kicks and punches.



Actually no, not more. You showed videos of a man explaining and demonstrating physical techniques. He got good at those techniques through physical training. There is always a mental component to any physical activity and because we are controlled by our brains, all movement is led by the mind. 

The mental component of karate is a by-product of the physical training. Discipline, determination and focus; these are forged by pushing through hard training with endless repetitions. Mushin and Zanshin come through taking that exhaustion into battle. It is not magic and many other arts have or develop similar concepts.

When you look at a video of someone performing a physical technique, everything you think is happening on a mental level is in your head; you are imagining it. You are not psychic.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Edit: Shoto, your post # 1338  have some kind of quote bug. Those are not my words.


|
Corrected RAFA....


DaveB said:


> ShotoNoob, I'm glad that you are happy with your art and your training and the strange world you inhabit


|
THE STRANGE WORLD OF THE TRADITIONAL SHOTOKAN CURRICULUM.
|
Good luck with that....


DaveB said:


> I look forward to seeing some of these non-physically trained karateka thinking (dreaming?) their way to victory against the many inferior combat sports fighters and their obviously flawed tested and proven training methods.


Pandering to the sport fighting crowd. you mean.  I never said anything about the physical dimension being omitted.  Again, commercialism & hubris vs. traditional Shotokan karate.
|
Good luck with the commercial success with that....  The UFC / Matt Thorton's of the world, etc. have been incredibly successful financially with such PROMOTIONAL talk.  Go for It...


DaveB said:


> Good luck with that! )


|
Commercialism over principles.  Nothing new there...


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Regarding Shotokan and some of his másters and the (most forgotten) mental aspect of training to get inner strenght... What you guys think of those (legendary?) modern shotokan grandmásters?


|
First Master very impressive.  I didn't see him using any focus mitts....
|
Nice post on taking a SERIOUS LOOK @ SHOTOKAN....


RafaChan said:


> Edit: Shoto, your post # 1338  have some kind of quote bug. Those are not my words.


|
REPOSTED FIX IN POST #1343....


----------



## ShotoNoob

There's a lot of potential in traditional karates, the 'modern' Japanese karates such as Shotokan karate, TKD, TSD, etc.
|
Throwing up the popular conventions on sport fighting will not get you there in traditional karate.... Period.
|
Good luck with that....


----------



## Username Redacted

RafaChan said:


> Liked your conclusion !
> 
> Regarding the advanced mental dimension of the training Shoto was venturing in ill try to help and bring some light accordingly to my experience...
> 
> IMO i think when Shoto stated this hes pretty much saying that when (using your mind) you makes your body ''*works as a coordinated unit which then extends strength into the technique for power'', *that way you are achieving a big part of that said mental dimension and mental discipline.
> 
> That is the type of conditioning that makes you surpass and win a bigger enemy that doesnt posses any conditioning on that dimension and have worked only on the physical aspect of the conditioning.
> 
> In other words its the smaller guy hitting the bigger guy with much more power and defending from him way more effective.


Thank you, that does help a good bit. It makes a bit more sense to me exactly what was meant by the emphasis on mental discipline in ShotoNoob's posts. I'm still not entirely sure I think it's plausible, though, at least not how ShotoNoob has defined the term. I've yet to see anyone demonstrate that Shotokan training results in more force behind a punch than, for instance, boxing training.



ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Refer to MT T on "Mental Clarity" for a start.  Otherwise, it's just T propogation....


I'm sorry, but I'm really not clear on what you mean by this. I've googled "Mt T mental clarity" and found nothing.



> Your thinking is just how NOT to approach Shotokan karate for self defense.  You are just looking at MMA and coming to a "glittering generality" conclusion.
> \
> Specific > Take a look @ the recent Joanna Jedrzejczyk defeat of Jessica Penne.  also take a look at the anti-grappling utilized by the victor, Joanna Jedrzejczyk....
> \
> Instead of arguing, try to develop my thesis.  Otherwise, I'll put "Little Debbie" doing Shotokan karate up....


I don't believe I've created a "glittering generality" at all. Do you dispute that there are many athletes in MMA who are predominately grapplers and are very successful? If you do not dispute this, do you dispute that the general response _by a striker _to being grappled is to use his own grappling skills to break free? Your counterexample doesn't really do anything to my general argument.


ShotoNoob said:


> |
> The mental discipline as defined by traditional shotokan karate is extremely lacking in MMA....
> |
> Again, you sound like Matt Thorton spouting off some generality that 'world class athlete's'  have the essential quality of discipline...
> |
> I'm not talking about the gumption to roll huge tractor tires all over the gym....


How do you define "discipline," then? Because discipline is generally defined as the dominance of higher-level goals over basic desires. In the example of the modern athlete, the higher-level goal would be something like "win the match" and the basic desires are something along the lines of "ow this hurts make it stop." If you're defining "discipline" in a non-standard way, you should be more clear.

By the way, there is a multi-quote feature on this forum and any other forum based on Xenforo software. I don't mean to be rude, but I just looked at a page with at least ten consecutive posts by the same author. Perhaps you would consider using the multiquote feature in the future?


----------



## Oldbear343

Classical karate training (Shotokan, Goju-Ryu,  etc) was originated with practical fighting skill in mind, but with the further aim of training the spirit/character.  Kata is a means to both - bunkaI + visualisation during kata foster a growing repertoire of practical moves and sharp reaction, while also developing spiritual endurance through tension and repetition.  Bear in mind that kumite is practised alongside kihon and kata - the 3 K's. ...
The modern development of sport-oriented martial arts is, in my humble opinion, merely a sign of the times.  I have nothing against those who choose that path, but I believe many will, as they age (I am nearly 60), come full-circle to more traditional training....
FWIW I also see parallel changes in the Taekwondo world....
Respect to all ☺


----------



## DaveB

ShotoNoob said:


> THE STRANGE WORLD OF THE TRADITIONAL SHOTOKAN CURRICULUM.
> |
> Good luck with that....
> 
> Pandering to the sport fighting crowd. you mean.  I never said anything about the physical dimension being omitted.  Again, commercialism & hubris vs. traditional Shotokan karate.
> |
> Good luck with the commercial success with that....  The UFC / Matt Thorton's of the world, etc. have been incredibly successful financially with such PROMOTIONAL talk.  Go for It...
> 
> |
> Commercialism over principles.  Nothing new there...



You know I've never heard of Matt Thorton, but whatever he did to you its time to let go so that the healing can begin. 

Incidentally I've only trained consistently in traditional martial arts, including Shotokan and I don't teach so I'm not sure where you get commercialism from.

I don't mind though. You see, people who automatically resort to slanderous claims the moment someone disagrees with them, usually build their arguments on sand. That is why they need such robust defense.    They don’t stand up on their own.


----------



## Tez3

DaveB said:


> You know I've never heard of Matt Thorton,



I've no idea why Shotonoob keeps name dropping Matt Thornton into his 'interesting' posts because it really isn't relevant to a discussion on Shotokan for self defence. I don't know him but do know a couple of SBG's instructors. Here's Matt Thornton's blog if you want to see who and what he does. Aliveness 101



We've had loads of posts about the 'discipline' of karate, how it makes everything magical ( I think, I don't actually understand the majority of what Shotonoob posts, his sentences, phrases and expressions are odd) I don't see how MMA comes into it other than some always like to drop it into a discussion because it's either 'marvellous, best thing since sliced bread' or it's the 'worst thing ever'. A plain straightforward discussion on Shotokan karate for self defence would be very nice without pseudo mysticism, inflated claims or denigrating karate and it's kata.
We've got sensible posts from Dave B, Username Redacted and Oldbear so I have hope we may have a good discussion starting.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Username Redacted said:


> ... I'm still not entirely sure I think it's plausible, though, at least not how ShotoNoob has defined the term. I've yet to see anyone demonstrate that Shotokan training results in more force behind a punch than, for instance, boxing training.


|
Sounds like a topic for another T.


Username Redacted said:


> I'm sorry, but I'm really not clear on what you mean by this. I've googled "Mt T mental clarity" and found nothing.


|
My reference was vague.  The Martial Talk Forum Thread on, "State of Mind when Fighting."  Hope the clears up the confusion I've caused.


Username Redacted said:


> I don't believe I've created a "glittering generality" at all. Do you dispute that there are many athletes in MMA who are predominately grapplers and are very successful? If you do not dispute this, do you dispute that the general response _by a striker _to being grappled is to use his own grappling skills to break free? Your counterexample doesn't really do anything to my general argument.


|
That's because it's way too glitteringly general to respond to....  Sorry we're at loggerheads here.



Username Redacted said:


> How do you define "discipline," then? Because discipline is generally defined as the dominance of higher-level goals over basic desires. In the example of the modern athlete, the higher-level goal would be something like "win the match" and the basic desires are something along the lines of "ow this hurts make it stop." If you're defining "discipline" in a non-standard way, you should be more clear.


|
Ah, you must be a M.T. heavy to say what I should do....  I've written oodles on the mental dimension of tradtional karate.  I got this in return.
|
View attachment 19340
To which I reply as in the movie, "On Deadly Ground," "Time to buck up for the sudzs...."



Username Redacted said:


> By the way, there is a multi-quote feature on this forum and any other forum based on Xenforo software. I don't mean to be rude, but I just looked at a page with at least ten consecutive posts by the same author. Perhaps you would consider using the multiquote feature in the future?


|
Yeah, I'm still @ the kihon level re multi-quote.  Fouled up recently when using as K-Man's cousin pointed out....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> I've no idea why Shotonoob keeps name dropping Matt Thornton into his 'interesting' posts because it really isn't relevant to a discussion on Shotokan for self defence. I don't know him but do know a couple of SBG's instructors. Here's Matt Thornton's blog if you want to see who and what he does. Aliveness 101


|
If you're talking about understanding traditional karate, then the Matt Thorton model is relevant so in not confusing what Shotokan karate is versus is not.  If that's too much for you, then you have a lot of company....  Thanks for posting the "aliveness" link.  Matt Thorton's "aliveness" is popular and has quite a following.  His SBG chain is reputed to be very successful.  Matt Thorton does not believe in the traditional martial arts model, including Shotokan.
|
Point being if you adopt Matt Thorton's aliveness, which is apparent among MT posters here, then your Shotokan karate form (if the Matt Thorton concept is how you are training Shotokan), will fail to attain the effectiveness of Shotokan trained to the principles of the originating & current traditional Masters.  That's the relevance and since I have to restate this, let's just agree to disagree.


Tez3 said:


> We've had loads of posts about the 'discipline' of karate, how it makes everything magical ( I think, I don't actually understand the majority of what Shotonoob posts, his sentences, phrases and expressions are odd) I don't see how MMA comes into it other than some always like to drop it into a discussion because it's either 'marvellous, best thing since sliced bread' or it's the 'worst thing ever'. A plain straightforward discussion on Shotokan karate for self defence would be very nice without pseudo mysticism, inflated claims or denigrating karate and it's kata.


|
No need to insult something you don't understand or believe in.  Only a minority really digs into traditional karate.


Tez3 said:


> We've got sensible posts from Dave B, Username Redacted and Oldbear so I have hope we may have a good discussion starting.


|
So promote what you believe in.  It's a  forum.  Frankly, some of the responses to me indicate lack of knowledge of the Shotokan karate curriculum.  So how Shotokan for Self Defense revolves around the self-described sensible members.....
|
Good Luck with That....
|
P.S. "Magical" is a _'glittering generality.'_


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> ...We've had loads of posts about the 'discipline' of karate, how it makes everything magical ( I think, I don't actually understand the majority of what Shotonoob posts, his sentences, phrases and expressions are odd) I don't see how MMA comes into it other than some always like to drop it into a discussion because it's either 'marvellous, best thing since sliced bread' or it's the 'worst thing ever'. A plain straightforward discussion on Shotokan karate for self defence would be very nice without pseudo mysticism, inflated claims or denigrating karate and it's kata.


|
Your Glittering generalities aside, MMA relates to SD in terms of physical confrontation.  Lyoto Machida (Karate + MMA base vs. Yoel Romero (kickboxing + wrestling base) is up this weekend, June 27.  Romero, while not ranked among the UFC elite, is reputed to have sound wrestling skills, and to have developed some aggressive power-striking resulting in a record of KO's.
|
Will be interesting to see, as K=Man & Rafa would say, Machida's _*modern*_ Shotokan karate base will stand up to both a grappling & aggressive power striking.  We are to witness the striking (Machida) vs. the grappler (Romero), plus Romero's aggressive +
power striking vs. Machida's karate-based evasive mobility.
|
Feel free to talk about 3 guys jumping one in a dark ally.  I hope to find lesson's @ FN 70.


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> You know I've never heard of Matt Thorton, but whatever he did to you its time to let go so that the healing can begin


\
I've heard this line before.  You say below you don't teach, yet you grant yourself the right to condescend.  Sounds like you wanna-be an instructor....



DaveB said:


> Incidentally I've only trained consistently in traditional martial arts, including Shotokan and I don't teach so I'm not sure where you get commercialism from.


|
It how you come across.  Including putting words in my mouth which I never stated.  I can only reply to how you come across.



DaveB said:


> I don't mind though. You see, people who automatically resort to slanderous claims the moment someone disagrees with them, usually build their arguments on sand. That is why they need such robust defense.    They don’t stand up on their own.


|
No need to go TWITTER / FACEBOOK.  It's a back-and-forth on a martial art forum.  geesh....


----------



## Tez3

Shotonoob, I'm sorry, it's not an insult but you ramble. Your sentences are staccato, jumbled and often it's not possible to understand what you are saying. I'm sorry too that you don't seem to understand what other people are saying and it's Matt *Thornton* btw.
An example... this means what? "_Time to buck up for the sudzs...."_ Nonsense. and this


ShotoNoob said:


> So how Shotokan for Self Defense revolves around the self-described sensible members.....


 this means?

You have your own, unique view of Shotokan karate, that's fine but it doesn't mean everyone has the same view and you are the only one that is correct. You keep bringing up MMA and MMA fighters who are fighting in competitions, the subject under discussion is self defence. Now I will be the first person to say that MMA can be easily turned towards self defence when needed the truth is that MMA fighters can't be compared to people who train MMA for just the enjoyment of training let alone karateka who train for self defence. Oh and I do know what I'm talking about by the way, I'm a traditional karateka, have been for many, many years as well as having a great deal to do with MMA for the past 16 years including training, coaching, judging reffing, cornering etc etc etc. I've also had considerable experience in the job I did before retiring of street fights, muggings and such like before that I was in the military and have seen my fair share of fights.


ShotoNoob said:


> Romero, while not ranked among the UFC elite, is reputed to have sound wrestling skills, and to have developed some aggressive power-striking resulting in a record of KO's


 This has absolutely nothing to do with the subject, I think perhaps you should ask the UFC for advertising fees.



ShotoNoob said:


> I've heard this line before. You say below you don't teach, yet you grant yourself the right to condescend. Sounds like you wanna-be an instructor....



He wasn't condescending, he was being reasonable however you were being insulting. You can't do that to people. If you are going to comment on how long you've been here as opposed to new people I'd remind you I've been here longer than you and I can say that posting endless posts one after the other is not the best way to go so. 



ShotoNoob said:


> Feel free to talk about 3 guys jumping one in a dark ally. I hope to find lesson's @ FN 70



No idea what you are on about here, I suspect you are having the conversation in your head where it sounds good but when it reaches us it's nonsense because we have no context and it's apropos nothing at all then you add '@FN70' that may mean a lot to you but nothing to me. Your conversations here seem to be with someone other than the posters here, I'm not insulting you here just explaining how your posts come across, it's like being in a three way conversation when you can only hear one other person.


----------



## Username Redacted

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Sounds like a topic for another T.



I don't think it is, actually. The question of whether the mental discipline so important to shotokan has effects like increasing punching power (as its adherents predict) is important to the question of whether that same mental discipline will overcome grappling ability.


> My reference was vague.  The Martial Talk Forum Thread on, "State of Mind when Fighting."  Hope the clears up the confusion I've caused.


 I'll take a look, then.


> |
> That's because it's way too glitteringly general to respond to....  Sorry we're at loggerheads here.


 If you think so, then alright. But I want to make clear that I wasn't saying that grappling is always, or even usually, superior to striking. What I want to point out instead is that we have lots of examples of strikers being taken to the ground when they didn't want to be on the ground. Can you point out some examples of strikers with no grappling ability managing to get up from the ground, so that I could take a look at them? I'm just very skeptical of the idea that mental discipline can simply overcome physical ability -- I mean, that idea is obviously false in the case of striking. A punch to the face is a punch to the face, no matter how disciplined you are. Why would mental discipline be such a game-changer for grappling?



> Ah, you must be a M.T. heavy to say what I should do....  I've written oodles on the mental dimension of tradtional karate.  I got this in return.
> |
> View attachment 19340
> To which I reply as in the movie, "On Deadly Ground," "Time to buck up for the sudzs...."


 Well, let me be more clear, then. You don't have to do anything that you don't want to, but _if _you're interested in making your position a bit more clear to a new guy who doesn't entirely understand what's going on here (me), then it would really help if you would define mental discipline as you understand it.

Incidentally, I'm sure you've written about your history with shotokan elsewhere, but I was wondering if you'd be willing to explain how you got into shotokan, how you normally practice or train, and (most importantly) how you became convinced that shotokan was effective for self-defense.

The reason I'm a bit dubious of all of this is that I was a TKD practitioner for a very long while, and I really bought into the stances, the exaggerated punches, the focus, the poomse, etc. And then my best friend and I decided to spar and I got my clock cleaned. So I quit TKD, started studying with him, and I'm much happier now.




Tez3 said:


> You have your own, unique view of Shotokan karate, that's fine but it doesn't mean everyone has the same view and you are the only one that is correct. You keep bringing up MMA and MMA fighters who are fighting in competitions, the subject under discussion is self defence. Now I will be the first person to say that MMA can be easily turned towards self defence when needed the truth is that MMA fighters can't be compared to people who train MMA for just the enjoyment of training let alone karateka who train for self defence. Oh and I do know what I'm talking about by the way, I'm a traditional karateka, have been for many, many years as well as having a great deal to do with MMA for the past 16 years including training, coaching, judging reffing, cornering etc etc etc. I've also had considerable experience in the job I did before retiring of street fights, muggings and such like before that I was in the military and have seen my fair share of fights.



I think I may be at fault here, actually, for bringing up MMA and the UFC. My reasoning was simply that although the conditions in UFC don't give us a great opportunity to test styles under self-defense conditions, they do allow us to test general propositions like "mental discipline will overcome grappling ability," a proposition that I think is false.


----------



## Tez3

Username Redacted said:


> I think I may be at fault here, actually, for bringing up MMA and the UFC. My reasoning was simply that although the conditions in UFC don't give us a great opportunity to test styles under self-defense conditions, they do allow us to test general propositions like "mental discipline will overcome grappling ability," a proposition that I think is false.



It's not your fault at all, Shotonoob has done it on every thread (on many posts in fact) he's posted on so far, he was at it long before you joined so please don't worry about it.  
Your post is a nice one, I look forward to reading the answers but I'm not holding my breath, Shotonoob has been asked before about his background in Shotokan but we've never had an answer.


----------



## RafaChan

DaveB said:


> Actually no, not more. You showed videos of a man explaining and demonstrating physical techniques. He got good at those techniques through physical training. There is always a mental component to any physical activity and because we are controlled by our brains, all movement is led by the mind.



I can agree with you in some extent when im pretty sure its a physical technique, but in concept its much more. Its physicality is refined at the max by his own work and lecture in the mental aspect of the technic. And thats whats diferentiating him of a lot out of his contemporaries that applied the same effort on the physical training and havent achieved same result.

Im not talking only about that brain synapsis to the body tru endless repetitions that you are saying. If thats the way required to master said technique in perfection, we would see more often more people that have dedicated the same ammount of hard training performing exactly the same way. And in reality its not that way.

The mental aspect/dimension/conditioning that most denied in those vids and are ''hided'' in just hard kickes and punches:



RafaChan said:


> The mental discipline involves a lot of other aspects for me not only KIME, like right breathing, self control, fast responses, right usage of skills and strategies just to name a few... Unfortunelly thats really cant be passed in a more straight forward notion (unless the person its really gifted) and requires some years of dedicated training, conditioning and understandment of what you (and your body) are doing.



That aspect IMO with all of his branches are not objective. They are more on the subjective and thats why maybe we are not being able to met on a common position. The time applied to get good on those are not always directly related by the time you have applied to get good on your physical conditioning.



DaveB said:


> *The mental component of karate is a by-product of the physical training*. Discipline, determination and focus; these are forged by pushing through hard training with endless repetitions. Mushin and Zanshin come through taking that exhaustion into battle.



And if we change the order of the factors would that change the final result of that equation? *The *(perfection/development of the)* physical component of karate is a by-product of the mental training *(and comprehension)*. *Well, i hope not. And mushin can ideally also be achieved even before battle exhaustion.



DaveB said:


> It is not magic and many other arts have or develop similar concepts.





RafaChan said:


> Follow the path or paths that will serve you better, we already as human beings have solids foundations regarding SD and MAs



I believe that others are applying those concepts with no ''karate labels'' to very good results. People from other MA that can apply kime without never heard of that before.

If we are labeling those concepts with ''mystical'' like karate - japanese names and you think that is some kind of sorcery/magic its entirely up to your conclusion.

Its a karate shotokan SD related thread afterall and not a MA wizards one. So people that are bothered by those karate concepts and labels and are not able to even respect, get or comprehend/research some of them, at least keep some respect on the discussion.


----------



## RafaChan

Posting an article and other link for the ones interested on being introduced and start to check inside one of the manny branches of the ''magical'' aspects of karate:

''What is Ibuki – The Art of Breathing, how can I use Ibuki and more. The application in your martial arts journey and how you can use it in your life outside of the dojo.

What Is Ibuki? Put simply Ibuki is breathing to a certain pattern or rhythm that changes depending on what you are trying to achieve. In all Karate is the concept of Kime, the use of spirit or body energy, and Kime includes breathing, posture, muscular tension, body movement, and mental focus. *Ibuki could be considered purely the breathing aspect of Kime*, and the techniques used to develop the breathing aspect of Kime.''... Follow on : Ibuki - The Art of Breathing - Ma-Seirei-Kai

Breathing is the backbone for all meditative processes. All about the mental aspect of training. That was interpreted purely as magic in the medieval age...

While fighting or performing using strong kime all the time can be very consuming ofc will lead you to the best results. Thats why the physical aspect have so much value when acting backing up all this process giving more endurance and resistance to keep high levels of kime.

More here:

''Here’s a thought experiment for you: Think of your brain as a music player. Now think of your muscles as speakers. Where do you think the amplifier is?

_In your stomach._

Special _“baroreceptors”_ in your body measure the intra-abdominal pressure and act as the volume control knob. When the IAP bottoms out, the tension in all your muscles drops off. So use your breathing to heighten the internal pressure, making your nervous system more excited. This will make the nerve cells (of your muscles) become_“superconductors”_ of the commands from your brain. So by cranking up the IAP volume knob you automatically get noticeably stronger, in every muscle of your body_ –_in any exercise!

That’s the power of breathing.''

Follow on: Sanchin The 4 Secrets of The Skill of Strength KARATE by Jesse

Love to see how they are high kime-ing... In every move you can hear a little and natural kiai...Thats golden !






''Good luck with all of that''

P.S 1: I must say take it easy with Shoto. Manny times i agree hes vague when explaining but i think some terms of pure ''mysticism'' he have being dropping in here its in conclusion that everyone in a shotokan trhead is already or proly already familiar with them. (first time i saw kime here its he discussing with k-man but no further explanations were given).

P.S 2: He dropped Matt Thorton's dead body to me either ^^. I even doesnt know him and never heard of him before but in the context of the discussion i implied that was some kind of coach/instructor that were relying too much on the physical aspect of conditioning.

Peace to all !


----------



## ShotoNoob

Username Redacted said:


> I don't think it is, actually. The question of whether the mental discipline so important to shotokan has effects like increasing punching power (as its adherents predict) is important to the question of whether that same mental discipline will overcome grappling ability.


|
I think it's a topic for another T.  You want to discuss same here.  So weigh in....


Username Redacted said:


> I'll take a look, then.


|
I believe strong karate , strong martial arts comes from incorporating the material from across the spectrum of principles....  Glad to provide the specific reference, resource for you here @ M.T.


Username Redacted said:


> If you think so, then alright. But I want to make clear that I wasn't saying that grappling is always, or even usually, superior to striking. What I want to point out instead is that we have lots of examples of strikers being taken to the ground when they didn't want to be on the ground.


|
Absolutely this is a real danger & I've said so here many times.  I politely request that those responding to mys posts recognize my acknowledgement of such facts & the positions they have that are similar to what I post....  Can you do that....?


Username Redacted said:


> Can you point out some examples of strikers with no grappling ability managing to get up from the ground, so that I could take a look at them? I'm just very skeptical of the idea that mental discipline can simply overcome physical ability -- I mean, that idea is obviously false in the case of striking. A punch to the face is a punch to the face, no matter how disciplined you are. Why would mental discipline be such a game-changer for grappling?


|
Again, this 1st sentence suggests that I have some unrealistic view of grappling.  Using absolutes like strikers with NO grappling experience managing to get up....  The real challenge is to examine what I have proposed.  If you are willing or unable to do so, then don't....
|
Again, we are talking about the sophistication that makes Shotokan effective for SD, fighting, etc.  Making statements like, "a punch is a punch;" is silly in insulting to the intelligence of the topic.  I written extensive posts & have attempted to inject a little levity into same, on addressing key topic points...



Username Redacted said:


> Well, let me be more clear, then. You don't have to do anything that you don't want to, but _if _you're interested in making your position a bit more clear to a new guy who doesn't entirely understand what's going on here (me), then it would really help if you would define mental discipline as you understand it.


|
I would rather you review my extensive writings & paraphrase same.  I have also made references which could be tapped.  Or compare against other posters who have tracked my views and try to pull something cohesive together....



Username Redacted said:


> Incidentally, I'm sure you've written about your history with shotokan elsewhere, but I was wondering if you'd be willing to explain how you got into shotokan, how you normally practice or train, and (most importantly) how you became convinced that shotokan was effective for self-defense.


|
No problem.  Actually I do not train Shotokan.  I train a style of traditional karate which is based largely off of Shotokan.  It's a style which is common in my area.  Shotokan is not.  Moreover, I personally do not care for Shotokan as a karate style.  I feel though, that Shotokan has a number of attributes that make it a good style to learn about traditional karate.  Other prominent karate bloggers out there had come to the same conclusion, and have adapted or changed or cross-trained in other styles of traditional karate....  Shotokan is very popular and many like Shotokan because it's attributes...
|
On training regimen, short version.  I believe in the  traditional karate model of kihon, kata, kumite.  I trained all the traditional karate components, including the exercises such as basic physical conditioning, basic traditional techniques, kata, originally the Taikyoku-like kata, now revisiting & focusing largely on the heian (pinon re Okinawan versions) kata, and ippon kumite & self defense applications.  I avoid free sparring as a general rule.
|
Shotokan, as any traditional karate, is effective for self defense because it promotes mind over body.  Mental discipline powers the techniques & tactics, although physical force is used in same.  Tang Soo Do IMO, reading here @ MT, gives a good, general account of what human capability is and how that translates into traditional karate....



Username Redacted said:


> The reason I'm a bit dubious of all of this is that I was a TKD practitioner for a very long while, and I really bought into the stances, the exaggerated punches, the focus, the poomse, etc.


Yeah, TKD gets the most criticism that I've experienced.  Trained to the traditional karate standards I've talked about, which are inherent in TKD--TKD is very good for self defense.... even having some advantages over Shotokan karate, IMO....  Again, I think the failure's people talk about for TKD are due to inadequate instruction, and inadequate effort on the part of the student.  I endorse the style of TKD as a traditional martial art.  i would never train TKD myself.  That's a personal choice.


Username Redacted said:


> And then my best friend and I decided to spar and I got my clock cleaned. So I quit TKD, started studying with him, and I'm much happier now.


OK, you made a choice that worked better for you.  The whole Matt Thornton (Tez gave me a spelling lesson btw) crowd agrees with you.  You've got tons & tons of company.
|
I found that the traditional karate (in your case TKD) exercises confer mental discipline which then translates into mind/body unity.  I've said this here @ martial talk probably a dozen times (or more)...  So at some point IMO, posters need to stop typing in replies to me like, "a punch is a punch," and do some research & some independent  verification.  Same are  free so reject my approach and go the Matt Thornton route, the conventional MMA route, the Matt Bryers path, etc.  I can not add to the efforts of same....
|
For grappling, combat jujitsu, I reviewed the Matt Bryers program as he presented here @ MT and it sounds to me like there is a good fit there for you in terms of training philosophy & applications.  So go for it....[smiley's not working].


Username Redacted said:


> ...I think I may be at fault here, actually, for bringing up MMA and the UFC. My reasoning was simply that although the conditions in UFC don't give us a great opportunity to test styles under self-defense conditions, they do allow us to test general propositions like "mental discipline will overcome grappling ability," a proposition that I think is false.


|
Oh but UFC does present SD situations.  Just not to the degree the professional big-boys here @ M.T. incorporate, like BVC & Co., etc...  That's my view.
|
On the mental discipline over grappling, we will see what happens on Machida vs. Romero @ FN 70 this Saturday....  Since the mental dimension of traditional karate I have proposed has no value to you, I suggest you abandon the idea altogether.  Little Debbie in my board-breakinjg post gets it....
|
Best of luck with that....


----------



## RafaChan

Username Redacted said:


> Thank you, that does help a good bit. It makes a bit more sense to me exactly what was meant by the emphasis on mental discipline in ShotoNoob's posts. I'm still not entirely sure I think it's plausible, though, at least not how ShotoNoob has defined the term. I've yet to see anyone demonstrate that Shotokan training results in more force behind a punch than, for instance, boxing training.



No problem. I hope my earlier posts have helped even more on that matter. Regarding at ''Shotokan training results in more force behind a punch than, for instance, boxing training'' i dont know if you have read this entire thread till here coz we talked a little about that earlier. But all i can say its karate punches kinda abuse of seiken, the first two knuckles of our hand... Despite the hips body weight rotation its very similar mechanicaly and in concept by the boxer training, karate have more particularities to add:






In the past when karate did not have any focus in sports and kumite the core of the physical training for techniques power were kata, tameshiwari and makiwara.

Seiken doesnt works with focus mitts or gloves on...


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> Shotonoob, I'm sorry, it's not an insult but you ramble. Your sentences are staccato, jumbled and often it's not possible to understand what you are saying. I'm sorry too that you don't seem to understand what other people are saying and it's Matt *Thornton* btw.
> An example... this means what? "_Time to buck up for the sudzs...."_ Nonsense. and this
> this means?


|
No, perfect answer to the post I replied to... which was just as you described for my answer....



Tez3 said:


> You have your own, unique view of Shotokan karate, that's fine but it doesn't mean everyone has the same view and you are the only one that is correct.


|
Quite the contrary, there are certain pillars underlying traditional karte, traditional martial arts and  either you have those right or you have those wrong....  that's it.


Tez3 said:


> You keep bringing up MMA and MMA fighters who are fighting in competitions, the subject under discussion is self defence. Now I will be the first person to say that MMA can be easily turned towards self defence when needed the truth is that MMA fighters can't be compared to people who train MMA for just the enjoyment of training let alone karateka who train for self defence.


|
I think MMA makes a great laboratory for reality testing TMA.  I have said MMA is not on par with the full blown self defense programs such as those advocated here by professionals on  MT.  Please try to respond to my posts accurately...  Others here at MT are using SIMILAR mma comparisons to mine; their post should be referenced as well.


Tez3 said:


> Oh and I do know what I'm talking about by the way, I'm a traditional karateka, have been for many, many years as well as having a great deal to do with MMA for the past 16 years including training, coaching, judging reffing, cornering etc etc etc. I've also had considerable experience in the job I did before retiring of street fights, muggings and such like before that I was in the military and have seen my fair share of fights.


|
Ok?


Tez3 said:


> This has absolutely nothing to do with the subject, I think perhaps you should ask the UFC for advertising fees.


|
You sound like your are my instructor.  You are not.


Tez3 said:


> He wasn't condescending, he was being reasonable however you were being insulting. You can't do that to people. If you are going to comment on how long you've been here as opposed to new people I'd remind you I've been here longer than you and I can say that posting endless posts one after the other is not the best way to go so.


|
yeah,,,,, I'm contrary to your position and what you believe in....


Tez3 said:


> No idea what you are on about here, I suspect you are having the conversation in your head where it sounds good but when it reaches us it's nonsense because we have no context and it's apropos nothing at all then you add '@FN70' that may mean a lot to you but nothing to me. Your conversations here seem to be with someone other than the posters here, I'm not insulting you here just explaining how your posts come across, it's like being in a three way conversation when you can only hear one other person.


|
I posted an interesting case study @ FN 70, to me.  If same has no value to you... there's no need to respond... right...?  I've been told fighting me is like handling 2 opponents, btw... funny you should hit on that....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Posting an article and other link for the ones interested on being introduced and start to check inside one of the manny branches of the ''magical'' aspects of karate:'
> 
> ''What is Ibuki – The Art of Breathing, how can I use Ibuki and more. The application in your martial arts journey and how you can use it in your life outside of the dojo.



|
Go Rafa, GO!


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...Love to see how they are high kime-ing... In every move you can hear a little and natural kiai...Thats golden !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ''Good luck with all of that''


|
Oh my Garsh Rafa, pre-programmed movements, rigid straight punches, exaggerated stances.....  karate performance art .....   What would the JACK SLACK worshipers say now???



RafaChan said:


> P.S 1: I must say take it easy with Shoto. Manny times i agree hes vague when explaining but i think some terms of pure ''mysticism'' he have being dropping in here its in conclusion that everyone in a shotokan trhead is already or proly already familiar with them. (first time i saw kime here its he discussing with k-man but no further explanations were given).


|
Well, KIME is key....  Rafa, I forced to say you must share DNA with K-Man....



RafaChan said:


> P.S 2: He dropped Matt Thorton's dead body to me either ^^. I even doesnt know him and never heard of him before but in the context of the discussion i implied that was some kind of coach/instructor that were relying too much on the physical aspect of conditioning.


|
Yep, dropped him right on YA.  And you're going stronger than ever....



RafaChan said:


> Peace to all !


|
Go RaFA, gOOOOO... FOR MORE....


----------



## Oldbear343

My dad was a semi pro boxer - his punches were as sharp as any black belt I have trained with (several at 5th dan level)!  There are many paths up the mountain, but only one moon to see from the top....


----------



## DaveB

RafaChan said:


> I can agree with you in some extent when im pretty sure its a physical technique, but in concept its much more. Its physicality is refined at the max by his own work and lecture in the mental aspect of the technic. And thats whats diferentiating him of a lot out of his contemporaries that applied the same effort on the physical training and havent achieved same result.
> 
> Im not talking only about that brain synapsis to the body tru endless repetitions that you are saying. If thats the way required to master said technique in perfection, we would see more often more people that have dedicated the same ammount of hard training performing exactly the same way. And in reality its not that way.
> 
> The mental aspect/dimension/conditioning that most denied in those vids and are ''hided'' in just hard kickes and punches:
> 
> 
> 
> That aspect IMO with all of his branches are not objective. They are more on the subjective and thats why maybe we are not being able to met on a common position. The time applied to get good on those are not always directly related by the time you have applied to get good on your physical conditioning.
> 
> 
> 
> And if we change the order of the factors would that change the final result of that equation? *The *(perfection/development of the)* physical component of karate is a by-product of the mental training *(and comprehension)*. *Well, i hope not. And mushin can ideally also be achieved even before battle exhaustion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe that others are applying those concepts with no ''karate labels'' to very good results. People from other MA that can apply kime without never heard of that before.
> 
> If we are labeling those concepts with ''mystical'' like karate - japanese names and you think that is some kind of sorcery/magic its entirely up to your conclusion.
> 
> Its a karate shotokan SD related thread afterall and not a MA wizards one. So people that are bothered by those karate concepts and labels and are not able to even respect, get or comprehend/research some of them, at least keep some respect on the discussion.



I said those aspects are not magic, meaning that there is nothing particularly special about them. 

Having looked at the articles you posted I can see that our disagreement is about what we each class as mental. Breathing is not a mental skill, it is physical. Mental things happen in your mind. And being able to pick appropriate strategies is pretty standard to all martial arts.

ShotoNoob has written post after post, all very hard to make sense of,  but finally he stated clearly his position and I largely agree with it. All I would add is that mental discipline won't help if your training is inappropriate to the challenge. 

For future reference, starting with nonsense like "mental training is what will beat a grappled" and following up with baseless derogatory accusations like calling people commercial, does not help get your point across.  And if you have written at length on a topic, at least point people to where. Just saying so is not helpful


----------



## ShotoNoob

Oldbear343 said:


> My dad was a semi pro boxer - his punches were as sharp as any black belt I have trained with (several at 5th dan level)!  There are many paths up the mountain, but only one moon to see from the top....


|
Boxers are challenge for karateka, and often boxer's prove out over conventional karate practice.
|
My goal is to have the boxer seeing the moon in his unconscious dreams....  the way for me to do that is not to outbox the boxer, it's to out-think him...
|
EDIT: Is RAFA's Female Kata Team demo the path???  HMMMMM....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Speaking of nonsense, thanx Rafa for putting up some modern-day women showcasing accomplishment other than the constant barrage of Kendall Jenner photo ops...


----------



## RafaChan

Oldbear343 said:


> My dad was a semi pro boxer - his punches were as sharp as any black belt I have trained with (several at 5th dan level)!



I do believe in you. I have met few people from the ordinary that were really special regarding MA and SD, street fights, but could not have the same gasp and mentally/phisically disciplined good  to have the best results in the sports pro scene or did have other life implications to go top.



Oldbear343 said:


> There are many paths up the mountain, but only one moon to see from the top....



I agree and will add: Some times we may have to climb along other paths so we could know/understand the mountain better and our own path limits.




DaveB said:


> I said those aspects are not magic, meaning that there is nothing particularly special about them.



Question: How often do you see really special people regarding MA in your area amongst all of the mob that is focusing/executing the same aproach on hard physical conditioning training?

Ill play Shoto here assuming that my position its already clear. So you guess that what is missing its something more and is what lays in mental as i pointed.



DaveB said:


> Having looked at the articles you posted I can see that our disagreement is about what we each class as mental. *Breathing is not a mental skill, it is physical. Mental things happen in your mind. And being able to pick appropriate strategies is pretty standard to all martial arts*.



Thanks to have looked. I think a lot of people other than me can agree that when we get conscious when breathing and start to be in control of it, that thing its not only physical any more. Not mechanical invonluntary anymore, its being intentional and alterating a lot of your phisyologics and mental states itself. Plim! Now its mental either and have its big share of importance in add power to the physicalty of the said technique ''Good luck with that''...

And IMO strategies are not that in the standards in MAs. At least not those that could be the best ones for a pesky and deceptive SD situation. All of that whats said in this whole thread since its begining its attesting on that...



DaveB said:


> ShotoNoob has written post after post, all very hard to make sense of, but finally he stated clearly his position and I largely agree with it. *All I would add is that mental discipline won't help if your training is inappropriate to the challenge.*



Will always... Can even change the tide of said challenge if applied correctly... Hope you can agree even more.



DaveB said:


> For future reference, starting with nonsense like "mental training is what will beat a grappled" and following up with baseless derogatory accusations like calling people commercial, does not help get your point across. And if you have written at length on a topic, at least point people to where. Just saying so is not helpful



Im not the one to blame for what you have being accused. Those were not my words and aproach. And im not here talking or giving lessons of how to be a psychic or mystic neither. Thats your only conclusion. And i cant agree.

The (mental) skills required for anti-grappling including the right strategies/moves to use and when to use those packed with good physical conditioning also... IMO either all of that counts heavy. Buf if the right mental attitude could (can) also serve the striker to over come a grappler on a high ammount either ? Who is to say not that will also can play a good part ?

Shoto MMA study cases (i had put some also chinzo anti-grappling flying knee can attest to that)... Valid to check in specific (tactical-mental-physical) parts. Big lab i can agree, but not the best or complete for SD study like manny people point. Not for the whole strategie one can use in SD definitely but lets see...

Illustration for a big role of mental attitude and one more free knee as bonus against very good sticky ones:






Bonus:


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> EDIT: Is RAFA's Female Kata Team demo the path??? HMMMMM....



Kendall Jenner pics making you hit harder ? Than why not ? 



ShotoNoob said:


> Oh my Garsh Rafa, pre-programmed movements, rigid straight punches, exaggerated stances..... karate performance art ..... What would the JACK SLACK worshipers say now???



As a form traditionalist like you say so i can understand your critics. I myself can transition tru middle to deep stances getting a lot of good results by that. I pay the price to add more power in speed manny times and cover more distance when need the cat/catch leap.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Rafa, textbook now approaching karate treatise....  to take 1 colossal point you've addressed....


RafaChan said:


> ...Thanks to have looked. I think a lot of people other than me can agree that when we get conscious when breathing and start to be in control of it, that thing its not only physical any more. Not mechanical invonluntary anymore, its being intentional and alterating a lot of your phisyologics and mental states itself. Plim! Now its mental either and have its big share of importance in add power to the physicalty of the said technique ''Good luck with that''...


|
The role of proper breathing is so little talked about when so many are comparing traditional karate or Shotokan against the sport-fighting approaches.  Same is typically overlooked or even left without sufficient emphasis in the modern karate training halls.  I'm less well versed on the subject myself than I would like.  Breathing is an essential part of kihon practice.  Breathing is a large reason why traditional karate kihon is practiced, drilled solo in group classes & without contact.
|
Shotokan karate practitioners, the traditionalists are not punching air.; they are breathing air properly through conscious, concerted thought....  This has an effect.... we are building energy & strength internally, rather than expending energy and stressing the body externally.  Perhaps now some can understand how I shatter boards without all that excess body momentum or rotation or movement.
|
The effects of proper breathing by traditional karate standards are far reaching.  When we nourish the body & calm the mind, the mental dimension we have can strengthen.  As that focus strengthens, KIME becomes strong.  It's all metaphysical which makes same problematic to discuss or appreciate.  But we can experience it.  The other mental capabilities described by Shotokan karate develop....  we are on our way to traditional karate as a mental discipline, not a physical exercise alone.
|
People can practice Shotokan as a Recreational exercise... they will benefit.  People can practice Shotokan as a Physical fighting endeavor, as a sport, they will benefit.  Practicing Shotokan karate as a mental discipline, however, will make it come alive so that Matt Thornton's SBG's guys will bite the dust in the face of solid Shotokan....
|
Those criticizing the traditional karate kihon practice of "punching air," have left the martial breathing approach completely out of the  equation when making such criticism.  It is a very shallow & short-sighted approach if you claim to appreciate or to understand karate....
|
Bit of a ramble, but your focus on breathing is of huge import.  In terms of developing the true foundational skills of traditional karate...
|
rock 'em sock 'em tough guys, good luck with that.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Kendall Jenner pics making you hit harder ? Than why not ?


|
Kendall's gorgeous we all agree.  Yet over-rated like Matt Thornton & Co., IMO.  Too much of a good thing...


RafaChan said:


> As a form traditionalist like you say so i can understand your critics. I myself can transition tru middle to deep stances getting a lot of good results by that. I pay the price to add more power in speed manny times and cover more distance when need the cat/catch leap.


|
The Serbian Female Karate Kata Team, demonstrate how women in plain gi's can also be a thing of beauty.... no?  There's loads of [mental] sophistication packed in their performance.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> I posted an interesting case study @ FN 70, to me. If same has no value to you... there's no need to respond... right...? I've been told fighting me is like handling 2 opponents, btw... funny you should hit on that



How do I know I'm interested if I don't know what @FN 70 is?

No, it's not like fighting two opponents it's like talking to primary school children when they all talk at once.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> How do I know I'm interested if I don't know what @FN 70 is?


|
UFC fight Night 70.  Move mouse, google, right click....



Tez3 said:


> No, it's not like fighting two opponents it's like talking to primary school children when they all talk at once.


|
Mouth makes right.... 
|
EDIT: Good luck with THAT....


----------



## drop bear

RafaChan said:


> Question: How often do you see really special people regarding MA in your area amongst all of the mob that is focusing/executing the same aproach on hard physical conditioning training?
> 
> Ill play Shoto here assuming that my position its already clear. So you guess that what is missing its something more and is what lays in mental as i pointed.



Hard tasks done diligently is mental training. Of course it is also physical training. To be good at one you are training in the other.

The hardest training mentality by consensus is the sauna to cut weight by the way.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> UFC fight Night 70. Move mouse, google, right click....



then use the commonly understood UFC70 so everyone can understand you or carry on being misunderstood.



ShotoNoob said:


> Mouth makes right....




And that means.............?


----------



## RTKDCMB

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> UFC fight Night 70. Move mouse, google, right click....
> 
> |
> Mouth makes right....
> |
> EDIT: Good luck with THAT....


Are you feeling alright?


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> Boxers are challenge for karateka, and often boxer's prove out over conventional karate practice.



_You_ may think so but most of us find boxers fairly easy. How many times have you sparred boxers? We do regularly as we have regimental boxing teams sent to us for sparring practice because they find us hard to spar, teaches them how to deal with, what is to them, unconventional fighters.


----------



## DaveB

ShotoNoob said:


> The role of proper breathing is so little talked about when so many are comparing traditional karate or Shotokan against the sport-fighting approaches.  Same is typically overlooked or even left without sufficient emphasis in the modern karate training halls.  I'm less well versed on the subject myself than I would like.  Breathing is an essential part of kihon practice.  Breathing is a large reason why traditional karate kihon is practiced, drilled solo in group classes & without contact.



This is like saying we eat food to develop cutlery skills.



RafaChan said:


> Question: How often do you see really special people regarding MA in your area amongst all of the mob that is focusing/executing the same aproach on hard physical conditioning training?
> 
> Ill play Shoto here assuming that my position its already clear. So you guess that what is missing its something more and is what lays in mental as i pointed.



1. I don't make superficial judgements of other martial artists. 
2. I don't make leaps of logic until all other options are ruled out. 

You can't make judgements by look at someone you don't know, whose background and training and whose teachers methodology are unknown and start prescribing training fixes. 

You can't rely only on faith in what works for you when dealing with someone different. Doing so misses all the other elements that make a person reach their current place in their MA journey. Doing so moves us from martial art to religion. 

My biggest trouble with Shoto's posts are that they are all faith and judgement, and like every good religious extremist they are based on taking a small part of the "faith" out of context and blowing it's importance way out of proportion. This then becomes the one true path and even others of the same group (in this case traditional karate) are just misguided fools for not following the one true way....



> Thanks to have looked. I think a lot of people other than me can agree that when we get conscious when breathing and start to be in control of it, that thing its not only physical any more. Not mechanical invonluntary anymore, its being intentional and alterating a lot of your phisyologics and mental states itself. Plim! Now its mental either and have its big share of importance in add power to the physicalty of the said technique ''Good luck with that''...



The articles you posted do not support you. They are descriptions of physical exercises for physical results. Your description sounds like meditation, at best. As I've said, the mind and the body are tied, you can't work on one without the other. 

1. That doesn't make a physical practice mental. 
2. This is in no way unique to Shotokan or karate in general. 



> And IMO strategies are not that in the standards in MAs. At least not those that could be the best ones for a pesky and deceptive SD situation.



Traditional Shotokan as it is commonly taught is quite limited on strategy, largely because of the faith issue above. If you have absolute belief in your one hit knockout and your indomitable spirit, you have no room for curiosity about how to escape from multiple assailants or how to get off the ground when being kicked. Every SD situation gets reduced to, "make some distance then Gyaku Zuki to the face".

But this is an issue of culture, not style and is easily fixed by adopting appropriate training methods, including those that highlight the need for other approaches like scenario training. 



> Will always... Can even change the tide of said challenge if applied correctly... Hope you can agree even more.



Another article of faith. Mindset is important but it is one part of a bigger picture. .



> The (mental) skills required for anti-grappling including the right strategies/moves to use and when to use those packed with good physical conditioning also..



I agree, but Shotokan as it is traditionally taught, does not include much if any grappling let alone realistic counter measures. How can you pick the best strategy for self defense if your learning hasn't even touched on the techniques and tactics of real violence?

Though the culture may be lacking,  the fighting style of Shotokan is not, in that the strategies,  mechanics and tactics are all sound. What is needed to make traditional Shotokan viable for self defense is:
1. An understanding of self defense I.e. Realities of violence, law, risk assessment and likely considerations, desirable outcomes etc.
2. Understanding of appropriate training aims to match the areas above.
3. Working out how to adapt existing combat knowledge to the SD environment. 
4. Work out how to convert commonly trained movements into techniques to cover tactical weaknesses eg looking to kata for hold escapes etc.

Mental training is present in all 4 stages. It plays a big role, but it is nothing if not grounded in physical reality.


----------



## Buka

Tez3 said:


> _You_ may think so but most of us find boxers fairly easy. How many times have you sparred boxers? We do regularly as we have regimental boxing teams sent to us for sparring practice because they find us hard to spar, teaches them how to deal with, what is to them, unconventional fighters.



I'm with you, Tez. The first year I spent in a boxing gym was a pain in the face. But all the while I was thinking "I sure wish I could sweep or kick these guys". As some of my boxing trainers became my trainers in all Martial ring competitions I was allowed to pratice Martial skills against boxers in the boxing gym. We were all friends at that point and most of the boxers were extremely helpful. And they had never in their life experienced getting swept or kicked low in a combination.

The reverse of that is also true. When decent boxers started training in our gym, once they got the hang of Martial fighting, their hand work shined against any of our guys who hadn't boxed.

Ain't training a grand thing?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Tez3 said:


> _You_ may think so but most of us find boxers fairly easy. How many times have you sparred boxers? We do regularly as we have regimental boxing teams sent to us for sparring practice because they find us hard to spar, teaches them how to deal with, what is to them, unconventional fighters.



There is a local boxing club that used to come to our dojang, until the Y put a stop to it for liability reasons.
If our students boxed theirs, they got smacked around. As soon as kicking is introduced, their students got smacked around. This should not be a real shocker to most people.


----------



## Tez3

Full contact karate sparring isn't so different from boxing that the boxers will always win, it's about equal if you leave out those on either side who are very talented fighters.


----------



## RafaChan

DaveB said:


> You can't rely only on faith in what works for you when dealing with someone different. Doing so misses all the other elements that make a person reach their current place in their MA journey. Doing so moves us from martial art to religion.



In MAs theres a lot of paths out there and each of them constantly carved out of these faiths with their own bibles. It was always working that way, one faith will serve your reality better while other dont or you just simply can take the best part of manny and be more creative.

The student/searcher constantly will have to fill in the gaps a lot (ive said that before), he will have to adequate and even modificate accordingly to his own limits and realities (said that too). Its not that always you will happens to find a master or instructor that will be that sensible and that comprehensible to change his current faith of what hes teaching coz of one particular student...



DaveB said:


> My biggest trouble with Shoto's posts are that they are all faith and judgement, and like every good religious extremist they are based on taking a small part of the "faith" out of context and blowing it's importance way out of proportion. This then becomes the one true path and even others of the same group (in this case traditional karate) are just misguided fools for not following the one true way....



When he told about some fundamentals and raised the aspect of kime and mental resolution with his particular aproaches and how they could make the difference he pointed kinda exagerated i can agree, but that alone doesnt invalidate those. Unfortunelly not all aspects from the fundamentals can be in interchangeable so its really a matter of ''verifiable/workable faith'' regarding karate.



DaveB said:


> The articles you posted do not support you. They are descriptions of physical exercises for physical results. Your description sounds like meditation, at best. As I've said, the mind and the body are tied, you can't work on one without the other.
> 
> 1. That doesn't make a physical practice mental.
> 2. This is in no way unique to Shotokan or karate in general.



The article totally supports me when it states that we have to be in control of our breath so we can affect our whole body and mind. Now on this sentence you say that mind and body are tied (wich i have made no objections) but earlier you still insisted that the act of breathing is only physical. While i have said in the post totally accordingly to the article that conscious breathing its either physical and mental.

If you have heard or even practiced any way of conscious breathing only in meditation practices sorry but your traditional karate its missing a big and phenomenal part. Mentally conscious breathing can be applied in a very dynamic way. Ill insist one last time... That ''faith'' its even science supported.

When bringing mindfulness (of the breath and body) you can achieve, to name a few:

Start to gain a bit more control of the stress response, more mental concentration and synchonization of the body accordingly to what are your skills, tactics and limits and the way you can best apply those fluidly and almost instinctively. The hint is: The mental using conscious breath affecting the endocrine system getting in more control of your adrenals to keep one s clarity of mind and add in more power to your physical techniques/strikes.



DaveB said:


> Traditional Shotokan as it is commonly taught is quite limited on strategy, largely because of the faith issue above. If you have absolute belief in your one hit knockout and your indomitable spirit, you have no room for curiosity about how to escape from multiple assailants or how to get off the ground when being kicked. Every SD situation gets reduced to, "make some distance then Gyaku Zuki to the face".



I have agreed on that since i came first posting, the heavily sports conditioning thing. But again, one hit ko mentality its valid and it exists, its aplicable and desirable in SD. Of course not training what to do next and next if the guy you hit just have the jaws/balls of steel its naive. The mentality its valid and quite important.

The last part of your post its the one i completely agree and in justice i will have to buy some time to work more on that...


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> then use the commonly understood UFC70 so everyone can understand you or carry on being misunderstood.


|
Tez, I do not follow the UFC different fight designations / promotions.  What I understand is that there is a "Fight Night" that the UFC promotes or distributes separately from the historical & continuing "Ultimate Fighting Championships" or "UFC" promotions....  So FN70 is the correct designation for the Machida / Romero Card.  Why the UFC does that I really don't know.  They also have a TUF Finale where the TUFF House UFC Contestant's battle it out.  Again, some kind of separation.
|
Maybe you could look into that for me, you being in the MMA scene....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RTKDCMB said:


> Are you feeling alright?


|
Fine.  Not a ninja fine....
|
EDIT: What'ydd think of RAFA's karate treatise...?


----------



## ShotoNoob

DaveB said:


> ...My biggest trouble with Shoto's posts are that they are all faith and judgement, and like every good religious extremist they are based on taking a small part of the "faith" out of context and blowing it's importance way out of proportion. This then becomes the one true path and even others of the same group (in this case traditional karate) are just misguided fools for not following the one true way....


|
This isn't what I've been saying or what Shotokan promotes at all.  You don't understand Shotokan, you understand how to criticize Shotokan, which by the way will never be resolved on a blog...
|
Moreover, you say you don't make judgements and then your statements are full of judgements--"religious extremist," "faith blowing out of context."  They're's alot of practically minded SD authorities here but when it comes to Shotokan, you know the shell....
|
Your mindset the religious one.  I've been talking about the principles inherent in the traditional martial arts & referencing the Karate Master...  Like principles exist in any discipline.  Rant away....


DaveB said:


> The articles you posted do not support you. They are descriptions of physical exercises for physical results. Your description sounds like meditation, at best. As I've said, the mind and the body are tied, you can't work on one without the other.


|
Right, you're not judgemental....  You mean the descriptions of of articles I posted _ARE DESCRIPTIONS OF PHYSICAL EXERCISES FOR PHYSICAL RESULTS_ *IN YOUR EYES....*  aDD, and you are THE judge....
|
Talk about meaningless generalization [read rhetoric]: "As I've said, the mind & body are tied, you can't work on one without the other."
|
REALLY?



DaveB said:


> 1. That doesn't make a physical practice mental.


|
You're just stating a conclusion as a reason....  Isn't that what the religious zealot does....?


DaveB said:


> 2. This is in no way unique to Shotokan or karate in general.


I
See above?


DaveB said:


> Traditional Shotokan as it is commonly taught is quite limited on strategy, largely because of the faith issue above. If you have absolute belief in your one hit knockout and your indomitable spirit, you have no room for curiosity about how to escape from multiple assailants or how to get off the ground when being kicked. Every SD situation gets reduced to, "make some distance then Gyaku Zuki to the face".


|
You mean the narrow-mined and training shallowly, monkey-see-monkey-do in karate.  And you're right, this kind of thinking isn't restricted to karate....



DaveB said:


> But this is an issue of culture, not style and is easily fixed by adopting appropriate training methods, including those that highlight the need for other approaches like scenario training


|
I've spoken to just that, repeatedly....
|
Good luck with that....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...The last part of your post its the one i completely agree and in justice i will have to buy some time to work more on that...


|
Quote a clever showcase.  I don't recall anyone here @ M. T. or myself saying Shotokan karate was THE KARATE, or THE MARTIAL ART.
|
Carry on Rafa, forge karate ahead... it's really getting entertaining....
|
EDIT: When I get up from ROTF, I'll put & post 2 of the important dimensions of this T together.  Yes, there will be a YT vid, inc. posted by others..... including you RAFA-MAN.


----------



## RTKDCMB

ShotoNoob said:


> What'ydd think of RAFA's karate treatise...?


You will have to be more specific.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Tez, I do not follow the UFC different fight designations / promotions.  What I understand is that there is a "Fight Night" that the UFC promotes or distributes separately from the historical & continuing "Ultimate Fighting Championships" or "UFC" promotions....  So FN70 is the correct designation for the Machida / Romero Card.  Why the UFC does that I really don't know.  They also have a TUF Finale where the TUFF House UFC Contestant's battle it out.  Again, some kind of separation.
> |
> Maybe you could look into that for me, you being in the MMA scene....




Perhaps you could just use words, phrase and 'designation's everyone understands instead? 'FN' to Europeans is a Belgian arms manufacturer. If you say UFC Fight Night, that is understandable to everyone.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> This isn't what I've been saying or what Shotokan promotes at all. You don't understand Shotokan, you understand how to criticize Shotokan, which by the way will never be resolved on a blog...
> |
> Moreover, you say you don't make judgements and then your statements are full of judgements--"religious extremist," "faith blowing out of context."



He's not criticising, he's explaining why he's right and he is you know, your posts in the times when they are understandable are exactly as he describes them.


----------



## DaveB

RafaChan said:


> In MAs theres a lot of paths out there and each of them constantly carved out of these faiths with their own bibles. It was always working that way, one faith will serve your reality better while other dont or you just simply can take the best part of manny and be more creative.



Or you could observe what is happening with the individual, study and train in what works well in teaching and developing skill and trial different methods until the most effective is found. No need for faith at all.



> The article totally supports me when it states that we have to be in control of our breath so we can affect our whole body and mind. Now on this sentence you say that mind and body are tied (wich i have made no objections) but earlier you still insisted that the act of breathing is only physical. While i have said in the post totally accordingly to the article that conscious breathing its either physical and mental
> 
> If you have heard or even practiced any way of conscious breathing only in meditation practices sorry but your traditional karate its missing a big and phenomenal part. Mentally conscious breathing can be applied in a very dynamic way. Ill insist one last time... That ''faith'' its even science supported.



My point has always been that the mental component of martial arts is derived from the physical training. Not that there is no mental component, just that you cannot isolate the mental from the physical in the way that you and Shoto seem to want to do. 

So the breathing exercises that help build strength and help you control physiological responses (note: *phys*iological - 
*phys*ical) are still physical exercises. They can be combined with the mental practices of visualisation and meditation to positive effect, but control over your body and control over your mind are not the same thing.



> I have agreed on that since i came first posting, the heavily sports conditioning thing. But again, one hit ko mentality its valid and it exists, its aplicable and desirable in SD. Of course not training what to do next and next if the guy you hit just have the jaws/balls of steel its naive. The mentality its valid and quite important.



Agreed. The confusion comes when people take the idea literally, when Funakoshi actually wrote that we should throw each blow with the intent of a fight ender, not that we should throw only one blow.


----------



## DaveB

ShotoNoob said:


> This isn't what I've been saying or what Shotokan promotes at all.  You don't understand Shotokan, you understand how to criticize Shotokan, which by the way will never be resolved on a blog...



Apologies,  when I wrote "Shoto" I was referring to ShotoNoob, not Shotokan. Sorry for the confusion. 



> I've spoken to just that, repeatedly....
> |
> Good luck with that....



But when I said the same thing in my first post in the thread, you told me it showed my lack of understanding of traditional karate.


----------



## Tez3

DaveB said:


> Agreed. The confusion comes when people take the idea literally, when Funakoshi actually wrote that we should throw each blow with the intent of a fight ender, not that we should throw only one blow.



It's similar to the 'there's no first strike in karate', whereas people think that means you have to wait until you are hit before you can strike, when most actually believe it means 'don't start a fight if you don't have to ie stupidly' so that if you feel in danger of your life you certainly can make the first strike.


----------



## Buka

We don't get to pick when the fight starts, they do. Sometimes it starts before any strike is thrown.

Hopefully, we get to pick when it ends.


----------



## RafaChan

DaveB said:


> Or you could observe what is happening with the individual, study and train in what works well in teaching and developing skill and trial different methods until the most effective is found. No need for faith at all.



Be motivated to study and train in what you believe that will be the most effective method for you its a matter of ''verifiable/workable'' kind of personal faith after all. Not that will works with the same efectiveness for everyone, so in that matter its looking like religion. Thats why the label faith that you brought with detrimental sight and taboo can serve. 



DaveB said:


> My point has always been that the mental component of martial arts is derived from the physical training. Not that there is no mental component, just that* you cannot isolate the mental from the physical in the way that you and Shoto seem to want to do*.



Your point is valid. But the important point of the perfection/development of the physical component of martial arts being derived from the proper mental training its also valid.

Again ill must have to say... If you have concluded that we are isolating the physical component permanently from the mental just coz we have being highlighting it and bringing in more depht to it thats up to your only misjudgement and wrong conclusion. Btw our older posts are not attesting on that. No one have being discussing any kind of psychic blast techniques...

Im pretty sure theres not any kind of psychics or only mental or spiritual entities with no physical bodies discussing on this thread. For example when shoto ''vaguefully'' states that he have to ''out-think'' the boxer and not to ''ou-box'' him, in my conclusion hes saying that he will look for an opening adopting a more defensive manuever or maybe that he have to work in more kicks to add confusion to the boxer strategy. If i conclude with that ''out-think'' will be something psychic will be only a derailed conclusion.

And im pretty aware that the art im in its settled in 3 fundamentals pillars: body, mind and spirit. Not just only body and mind. But if the mental aspect is so misjudged what to say of the spiritual one. But really thats not the point and not the objective of the topic. I hope you can settle all of the misjudgement you have made.

Words can be pretty vague and stigmatized by pretty cheap prejudices and misjudgements out of the wrong conclusions.


----------



## RafaChan

RafaChan said:


> Question: How often do you see really special people regarding MA in your area amongst all of the mob that is focusing/executing the same aproach on hard physical conditioning training?
> 
> Ill play Shoto here assuming that my position its already clear. So you guess that what is missing its something more and is what lays in mental as i pointed.





DaveB said:


> 1. I don't make superficial judgements of other martial artists.
> 2. I don't make leaps of logic until all other options are ruled out.



I have found a nice video to illustrate the point of that question. In that vid you can see a guy performing physical techniques not only using the regular physical/mental aproach of hard mental/physical synapsis conditioning, but with a more in depth - conscious - ''connected'' physical/mental aproach. And thats whats making him special:






Its not a matter of superficial judgement of other martial artist but a very specific and in depth one...


----------



## DaveB

And that's why I don't make judgements about another's training. 

Your special is apparently my normal. 

If your first look at this instructor showed him demoing loose relaxed techniques that seemed to lack kime, would that mean he didn't know this stuff? Or would it just mean he was working on a different skillset,  one you might not know anything about?


----------



## RafaChan

DaveB said:


> And that's why I don't make judgements about another's training.



I make judgements about others training. And i constantly get for me what i can apply for myself and what i dont accordingly to my own reality, limits and... judgement.

Its quite natural for all humam beings by the way. I dont see why you put one judgement capacitie in such bad spot while you too judge.



DaveB said:


> Your special is apparently my normal.



So... Accordingly to the vid i showed, you have judged that the aspect of the training wich i found special, its quite similar of what you already do normally. Okay.

That alone doesnt change the fact that these aspect aproach and kind of training being regarded as special by me is not often be seen, and thats what makes it special.
Im judging it by special not using your experiences and training by scope (wich i doesnt know), but im judging from the majority of the people that have forgotten the said aspects and that you can see all around.



DaveB said:


> If your first look at this instructor showed him demoing loose relaxed techniques that seemed to lack kime, would that mean he didn't know this stuff?



Quoting myself to respond you in a very sensible and fair way regarding my opinion about that:



RafaChan said:


> The fast hip rotation, hands positioning along strong hikite that i havent seen Ian's doing. *Maybe he was relaxed coz it was just a demo* but for me even for a demo the right way should be in pursue of the right kime.





DaveB said:


> Or would it just mean he was working on a different skillset, one you might not know anything about?



On the highlighted techs and cases we have being discussing i really dont see other way to achieve the best results in terms of power-kime add in. I myself like to keep my mind always open so i can hear from others in wich ways a different skillset aproach will be valid and how they can serve me and serve others. (osae uke-shuto uke combo remember?) unorthodox aproach of shotokan block nowadays... Lets share...   

As an example i can point out the ''non-contraction, non-tension'' way of master egami but im really not in to talk about something that i dont know nor have dedicated sufficient study and practice yet. But note that even him and his different skillset and aproaches are not contradicting what is fundamental.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RTKDCMB said:


> You will have to be more specific.


|
I don't have to do anything.  And that's the issue.  A vested interested here can't make a general statement or venture an overall opinion.  You could have shown a courtesy, yet choose not to....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...I'm pretty sure theres not any kind of psychics or only mental or spiritual entities with no physical bodies discussing on this thread. For example when shoto ''vaguefully'' states that he have to ''out-think'' the boxer and not to ''ou-box'' him, in my conclusion hes saying that he will look for an opening adopting a more defensive manuever or maybe that he have to work in more kicks to add confusion to the boxer strategy. If i conclude with that ''out-think'' will be something psychic will be only a derailed conclusion.


|
Like karate master don't speak metaphotically, or doing so to highlight a concept or it's importance.  Rafa, bad Shotonoob here should let you do the talking..... NICE Treatise by the way....  Do you think anyone other than "username redacted" will read it?



RafaChan said:


> And im pretty aware that the art im in its settled in 3 fundamentals pillars: body, mind and spirit. Not just only body and mind. But if the mental aspect is so misjudged what to say of the spiritual one. But really thats not the point and not the objective of the topic. I hope you can settle all of the misjudgement you have made.


|
NO, RAFA.... the guy or 2 on the east coast & one in Britain claim it's getting together & PHYSICALLY punching the heck out of one another other....  Not that that doesn't work....



RafaChan said:


> Words can be pretty vague and stigmatized by pretty cheap prejudices and misjudgements out of the wrong conclusions.


|
I put up some commentary that frankly is explicitly stated in the Shotokan karate manual(s) & in the writings of traditional Shotokan karate masters.  Amazing the resistance to realizing there's some great emphasis on the mental dimension in martial applications, that mental activity is a separately definable component of the human entity....  RAFA.... carry on.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> _You_ may think so but most of us find boxers fairly easy. How many times have you sparred boxers? We do regularly as we have regimental boxing teams sent to us for sparring practice because they find us hard to spar, teaches them how to deal with, what is to them, unconventional fighters.


|
Ha, ha.  Caught you where we finally personally agree.  I talked about fighting boxers when I first posted here,,, don't care to revisit.
|
I can't image a professional boxer standing up to SD experts.... it's a completely different game.  Nonetheless, the mistake that will take me downhill quickly is underestimating my opponent, losing focus on the dangerous potential of the opponent, including boxers....  Best to maintain a healthy respect.....IMO.
|
On karate, I was specifically speaking to the more conventional ways of training, the sport karate fighter, as having trouble....  Not on the traditional level....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Dirty Dog said:


> There is a local boxing club that used to come to our dojang, until the Y put a stop to it for liability reasons.
> If our students boxed theirs, they got smacked around. As soon as kicking is introduced, their students got smacked around. This should not be a real shocker to most people.


|
You couldn't have captured better on how I DO NOT TRAIN....  That doesn't mean this same experience doesn't take place in karate dojo when boxing stylists visit or join.....
|
Traditional karate is capable of transcending physical style or technique....  and that's what provides the superior martial foundation over boxing for self defense....
|
EDIT: RAFA, nice vid on Shotokan body/mind mechanics.  Appears like Andre BErtel or look-alike....


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> On karate, I was specifically speaking to the more conventional ways of training, the sport karate fighter, as having trouble



Er, have you ever watched full contact 'sports' karate fighters? Somehow I don't think so if you think they would have difficulty with boxers. I think you are thinking of points sparring.


----------



## RTKDCMB

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> I don't have to do anything.  And that's the issue.  A vested interested here can't make a general statement or venture an overall opinion.  You could have shown a courtesy, yet choose not to....


You asked me a question and I asked you for more details so that I could know what the heck you were talking about. If you don't want to be specific then don't complain to me if you don't get an answer.


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> Like karate master don't speak metaphotically, or doing so to highlight a concept or it's importance.



And you know that masters doing that are quite often misunderstood, rite?  Specially for those in our modern fast-food mentality days...(including us)

Theres no one to blame... People nowadays like info already all stripped and exposed in its contents coz all around they are being bombarded constantly and by that they are often not in too much getting any effort to think by theirselves in a more, lets say, metaphoric or subjective way... (Maybe going to the cross with you now) ...

The bad side of this kind of more objective aproach all the time IMO, its that quite often takes away the personal capacitie of each others different conclusions and responses to fit in their different realities. Coz we have to work in a more particular conclusion and not being limited by one pre-stablished... And IMO that have its benefits...

That example again: When you said ''out-think'' the boxer in that said case, that could be that one have to work more in kicks for you but for me could be mess with the boxer balance ashi bara-ing and kuzushi waza-ing him, while for other person the conclusion could maybe be both or even more... And thats a good thing coz everyone can complete each other gaps in a more constructive way.

Besides that, the time factor its even scarce to make such kind of more comprehensive and in depth interpretations... IMO theres no need of peoples getting a grudge around...



ShotoNoob said:


> Rafa, bad Shotonoob here should let you do the talking..... NICE Treatise by the way...



Well thank you... You are not a bad guy... I can see your efforts lately to be ''less agressive'' and ''less metaphorical'' but maybe will help more in the construction of this topic if you could be even more specific/objective ?

That way i wont be having the need to make a treatise, maybe?   Or maybe its just me, i really like to explain things assuming that maybe a person outside the thread that doesnt have zero idea about karate its going to read the text and wont be getting lost...

Well, i dont know you IRL but i can say you are a good guy, a very spirited one btw, and i like that... Im not asking for you to be another guy, but just asking for you to adapt...
Its not that we MAs do when the fight its getting out of our control ? We just breath in and out deeply relaxing and start to adapt to the opponent...



ShotoNoob said:


> Do you think anyone other than "username redacted" will read it?



Oh yes... Its on a free forum on the internet anyways... 

Peace bro ! Keep going (posting)...


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> NO, RAFA.... the guy or 2 on the east coast & one in Britain claim it's getting together & PHYSICALLY punching the heck out of one another other.... Not that that doesn't work...



These can be getting all packed and backed up together but with, lets say, different intensities. And each of that can works its ways as you soundly stated. The more focus and importance some one gave separatedly in each one of those aspects could vary accordingly to each ones faith-judgement-experiences-reality-limits...

Like sensei Kase once stated when in comparison of two of his old masters:

''Yoshitaka was more physical karateka and Okuyama caught his energy from somewhere else...''



ShotoNoob said:


> I put up some commentary that frankly is explicitly stated in the Shotokan karate manual(s) & in the writings of traditional Shotokan karate masters. Amazing the resistance to realizing there's some great emphasis on the mental dimension in martial applications, that mental activity is a separately definable component of the human entity.... RAFA.... carry on.....



Will be better not to firmly expect to full fill others views and expectations that way, besides i find that valid and do the same way, but i just dont expect much.
I dont know if you will agree with me on this but in the end its every one looking at the same old truths but using a lot of different perspectives.

And thats why karate all around have being divided in so manny branches, ryus and styles (even the traditionalists ones), each one of them with their own particular aproach and lecture of the same old fundamentals.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> These can be getting all packed and backed up together but with, lets say, different intensities. And each of that can works its ways as you soundly stated. The more focus and importance some one gave separatedly in each one of those aspects could vary accordingly to each ones faith-judgement-experiences-reality-limits...


|
1. Every TMA school I've been to acknowledges the physical effort, the need for actual sparring....  Obviously the intensity varies with the commercial demands of the clientele.  Everyone is free to select a school that ranges from recreational Shotokan to full contact Shotokan or substitute another style such a Muay Thai to practice their karate skills on in a resisting, contact environment....
|
2. With traditional karate, there is an opportunity for building a base no offered by physical-centered training, Straight Blast Gym, etc, etc....  The caveat is that you have to recognize the opportunity afforded by the Masters who formulated traditional karate....  I firmly believe that many in America have taken the concept of football full contact with rules, applied that football mentality to Shotokan karate, karates, and came up with some full contact kickboxing-in-the-aegis-of-karate practice.  I think one is better off going the Matt Thornton Straight Blast Gym route from the outset than morphing karate into football or vice versa....  That's my Ariel Hwani[sic] view....


RafaChan said:


> Like sensei Kase once stated when in comparison of two of his old masters:
> 
> ''Yoshitaka was more physical karateka and Okuyama caught his energy from somewhere else...''


|
Well, any serious student of traditional karate would realize the differing theorems of styles of producing power for marital purposes.... There are differences put forth in the external body mechanics alone....  Here IMHO, Shotokan generally tends to employ heavy physical force, heavy muscular action.  I think Shotokan is at the extreme in this end, at least in the black-belt level curriculum.  Other traditional karate styles employ less use of rigid physical force.  Perhaps the "kime" vids you've posted advocate such examples.... I think so....


RafaChan said:


> Will be better not to firmly expect to full fill others views and expectations that way, besides i find that valid and do the same way, but i just dont expect much.
> I dont know if you will agree with me on this but in the end its every one looking at the same old truths but using a lot of different perspectives.


|
I'll say again, 'cause the focus is on "magical" shotonoob, you can practice a "modern" (re K-MAN) karate like Shotokan 2 ways:
A. Recreationally,  the commercially popular
B. Physically, the conventionally popular
C. Mentally, the traditionally correct.


RafaChan said:


> And thats why karate all around have being divided in so manny branches, ryus and styles (even the traditionalists ones), each one of them with their own particular approach and lecture of the same old fundamentals.


|
Sure.  All the Japanese Masters, starting in Okinawa, seeking to truly understand the Chinese TMA origins applicability to their own culture, put their own interpretation, their own stamp into the numerous styles.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> Er, have you ever watched full contact 'sports' karate fighters? Somehow I don't think so if you think they would have difficulty with boxers. I think you are thinking of points sparring.


|
OK tez, here's the best example of the aggressive, senior-belt who decided to punch my face in @ testing.  Ya know, the one I defeated in the first exchange?  I'm not in professional MMA like you so please afford me a little license to present a junior-league r....  Garbrandt is the guy who resembles my the senior-belt--the one with the darker skin & tatoos.  Almost a to a T in physicality, taller, larger, stronger than me.  Aggressive in your face, demeanor.  I'd be more like Mazzotta--the opponent in white shorts, not so aggressive outwardly, I'm smaller though.  NOTE: Jack up the weights 35 lbls.




Interestingly, Mazzotta is reported to have extensive standup experience in TKD.  In this bout, he's also got some decent ground skills, IMO.  Certainly better than me.  Mazzotta dioes very well in Round 1.  He's not afraid to engage & exchange with the more aggressive Garbrandt.  Mazzotta has a very good state of mental clarity in that he keeps his calm, and the announcers point this out.  They both do a silly egging on near the end of Round 1, a cardinal sin of traditional karate.  So what's the problem?
|
Mazzotta, for all his TMA / TKD, shows absolutely zero ability to exhibit the foundational karate skills in the basic kata, Taikyoku, or Kicho Hyung in TSD....  He's simply kickboxing, hoping to out physical his opponent with punches & kicks.  Garbrandt same.  Trouble is for Mazzotta, Garbrant is better @ tactics....  Garbrandt uses his head more tactically.  So when Garbrandt ramps up in Round 2, which Mazzotta attempts as well--he's tough mentally as you ascribe, he gets a horrible KO by Garbrandt.
|
Mazzotta gets KO'd when he kicks.  But it's not because he has the trite criticism of TKD about not using his hands... .he does well in round 1. IMO, It's because he doesn't have any traditional TKD / karate practice in that fatal kick attempt.  I repeat, Mazzotta is not intimidated @ all by Garbrandt--the athletic mental toughness.  The reason mAZZOTTA FAILS is there is a whole package of skills in the Kicho Huyng / kata and Mazzotta fails to present the package, or really any part of it.
|
The vid is long, sorry about that.  Fight starts @ 9:13.  Round 2 @ 15.25  KO occurs @ 15.47; with nice replays after that...  So what do you do when you initial technique against a bar bully prompts a vicious right punch to your face?  Garbrant's technical execution is perfect.  I take the page right out of Ippon Kumite, there's a Tang Soo do version I came across that is directly applicable...
|
The mental discipline key is you have to be prepared to move the instant your opponent move's >> here Garbrant with a looping overhand right cross....  In this case, I would not use a defensive hand technique move first because Garbrant has moved his head (ya know that much vaunted head movement that fools everyone.)  Generally speaking I would move directly in on Garbrandt as he punches Right _*(Unlike K-Man who moves back first--where is K-Man, is he on the phone with RTK?)*_ and follow through with the hand strike(s) following the kick (that Mazzotta used turned out worse than useless.)
|
I didn't spell out the precise move 'cause you guys all pan ippon kumite for _REAL_ fighting.  Like FN70, they are all over YT.  The key foundational skill that makes this work, however, is the "mental clarity" afforded by traditional Shotokan / karate training, particularly kata, but starting with kihon.  Not the tough-guy "mental clarity" that Mazzotta displayed, though both valuable & admirable, a complete disaster by itself when the SD chips were down on Garbrandt's explosive move....
|
Against the aggressive senior belt in class testing, I first employed a defensive hand block because that was the (one of) correct KIME against the specific form of his attack.  The opponent here, Garbrandt combined a shifting, lowering head move in conjunction with his right punch which also altered the trajectory of his right punch, which then dictates other KIME.
|
Matt Thorton / Straight Blast Gym says this can't be done....  The trick is to back up / duck & cover, etc....  Not what i did in the least....  My head & chin were moving ahead & totally upright....just like all of traditional karate practice.   The senior belt who was rolling over most all the students like Garbrant over Mazzotta was completely flummoxed....  The 2nd degree black-belt who was working with me ran over to congratulate me; the 3rd degree black-belt assisting the visiting Master that day in charge of testing > later shook my hand.  That's how it works....
|
Are others capable of doing this?  Like RTK deciding not to answer my query..... It's entirely possible, yet equally up to them////
|
Best of luck with that (& to connor against Chad Mendes--shotonoob is rooting for connor MG @ UFC 189 on July 11....(tez).


----------



## ShotoNoob

And so, I'm not going to out-muscle Garbarndt (or Romero), or out box him by alternatively trading punches/ kicks _[with some explosviely, aggressive opponent completely devoted to the glory of taking my head off-DA.]_ ..... I'm going to OUT THINK him.... in the traditional karate fashion (al a kihon technique, kata form, ippon kumite application) so dynamic he won't be able to react.... and instead it's over for him....
|
Shotokan karate done as a mental discipline is highly effective for self defense....


----------



## DaveB

You forgot to mention what it was you actually did other than move forwards with your head up. 

Perhaps if you describe what you did, posters might better understand how you out-thought this senior black belt and how you would have out-thought Garbrant (who, by the way, was the same size as the opponent he beat in your video), and how you take these skills from Taikyoku Shodan.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> OK tez, here's the best example of the aggressive, senior-belt who decided to punch my face in @ testing.



I take it we can now all post videos of professional fights to show people how we fight?

What is it with you and Matt Thornton, SBG and MMA? We are discussing Shookan yet time after time you bring this up, ok we get the 'liveness' training stuff but really we seem to be going over and over MMA.

I'm a karateka, have been for a *very* long time, not Shotokan but Wado Ryu, I train Bunkai, I train MMA as well but really can we just discuss Shotokan for defence instead of it being some sort of weird MMA thread?


----------



## DaveB

Shotokan as a fighting style, (distinct from training paradigm) does have a number of strengths in relation to self defense. 

Shotokan's core techniques are very versatile but at heart they are large simple and natural movements. 

Large movements are good because fine motor skills I.e small, intricate movements become much harder to do when adrenaline hits your system.  So should a fight whip up quickly and surprise you, big simple arm movements will still work for you. 

Shotokan's movements and stances are natural body positions that are refined to maximise balance and power transfer. When I teach people front stance, I make them push something immovable as hard as they can. That gets them aligning the skeleton and distributing their weight correctly and by either pushing back or removing the resistance they settle into a balanced zenkutsudachi. 

This more a training point but it is relevant. Because of the basis in natural but correct and balanced body use, transcending the exaggerated training postures is that much easier but the strength and stability gained from their use remain.

Traditional Shotokan places a strong emphasis on body motion which both adds to impact power while making avoiding weapons more natural. 

Koryu Shotokan (ie with an emphasis on applying kata and developing more rounded skill sets), builds strong control techniques to disable an opponent without needing space.

Most of the negatives in relation to self defense are to do with the training culture. Most Shotokan karateka don't progress beyond doing everything in long stances and needing lots of space to fight in.
There is usually little impact training leading to sprained wrists in real fights.
Often there is an over focus on theory and the single blow.

But ultimately self defense is much more than martial skills. There are elements of awareness, law, risk assessment, safety tactics like how to get up, how to run... Virtually none of which is commonly taught in a martial arts class.


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> Every TMA school I've been to acknowledges the physical effort, the need for actual sparring.... *Obviously the intensity varies with the commercial demands of the clientele.* Everyone is free to select a school that ranges from recreational Shotokan to full contact Shotokan or substitute another style such a Muay Thai to practice their karate skills on in a resisting, contact environment....



Shoto, that highlighted stated IMO its often, if not always, dictated not by the students in the gyms or dojos, but this is on the level of decision of instructors and organizations/associations... Mostly pre-stablished in a historical context by JKA (most notedly after master Gigos death). So its much more a historical impost thing than a matter of everyone is free for the choice...

In my posts i surely can agree with you and have said that the heavily sportive focus regarding the art effectivenes in SD will let it a lot in detrimental. But when you do your talk somewhat constantly bashing spar, kumite and matt thortons its like you are blaming people for that and making them looking bad and feeling miserable. IMO thats why you have being accused of extremist...

And the other thing i still didnt get its: If you talk so bad about kumite and spar why you do those like you told above ?

Maybe you will answer: But i do it using the mental dimension working... (wich i higly agree), but so, we can conclude that the more sportive aproach (spar,kumite) can have its benefits rite? in develop those...(wich i can agree too)...

So why the need to be constantly bashing those ?



ShotoNoob said:


> Well, any serious student of traditional karate would realize the differing theorems of styles of producing power for marital purposes.... There are differences put forth in the external body mechanics alone.... Here IMHO, Shotokan generally tends to employ heavy physical force, heavy muscular action. I think Shotokan is at the extreme in this end, at least in the black-belt level curriculum. Other traditional karate styles employ less use of rigid physical force. *Perhaps the "kime" vids you've posted advocate such examples.... I think so....*



Yes you are right about that... Sensei rick hotton on those vids ive found by coincidence when i typed shuto uke in YT trying to illustrate someone performing the tech with the right kime...IMO too hes one living example of shotokan people using the right aproach that doesnt make them over rigid and tense movement exagerated. If anyone wanna know more info of him ill recommend this link wich i have found pretty good:

Shotokan Karate Magazine - Training with Rick Hotton Sensei in Manchester UK.

In 20 years from here where i started, i can see a sensible increase of the ammount of people in shotokan using that ''hard and soft'' physical-mental concepts in their practices... At least in my area/state that was not and still not very common... Thats why i regard the right aplications of those aspects being so special to me...As far as i know, those concepts were always in goju-ryu from their chinese roots...

I still see in here in a lot of shotokan dojos, instructors that can make people performs like living statues, all over rigid, contracted and over tense... I started my martial and karate practice in my childhood and ill tell you my understandment and comprehension were zero to could make something about that regard in those times...

Posting in here a preview of an informative link on that matter that could lead to mind blowing conclusions for those who wanna goes deep on that matter:

''So the younger students trained with contraction not because they were taught to do it this way, rather because they thought contraction was the right way to do strong techniques..Yoshitaka (Gigo) Funakoshi sensei, O-sensei's son, took over the instruction in 1932, after Takeshi Shimoda sensei died of influenza (Layton, 1997, Egami, 1976). Considering the fact he was very ill (tuberculosis and later lung gangrene) and actually living on borrowed time, he seems to have been very uncompromising and at times emphasized strong training. This together with a militaristic spirit that prevailed in the late thirties and the first half of of the 40's may have been the reason in part for the tense and staccato movements encountered within sports karate groups (contraction styles) nowadays.

In any case, research was begun by Master Shimoda, he started to develop low karate stances and continued by Yoshitaka Funakoshi with a small group of students, among them Shigeru Egami and Genshin Hironishi (Layton, 1997; Cattel, 1989; Egami, 1973; Tokitsu, 199?). Karate-do evolved as a result of their discoveries, stances became more natural with respect to body mechanics and free from unnecessary tensions, this is clearly noticeable when we observe the front stance (zenkutsu-dachi). Leg position is natural, without strange and uncomfortable twists, the hip and the torso is placed in half-facing position (hanmi) and the back leg is in a natural bent position. These types of changes were done to all techniques and new ones were also developed by Gigo Funakoshi sensei and his research group, such as mawashi geri, yoko geri kekomi, ushiro geri, ura mawashi geri, fudo-dachi, etc (Anonynous, 1983, Layton, 1997; Harada, 1983; Cattel, 1989; Noble, 1985).''

Source: Another Way the way of non-tension relaxation in Karate-do


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> The mental discipline key is you have to be prepared to move the instant your opponent move's >> here Garbrant with a looping overhand right cross....* In this case, I would not use a defensive hand technique move first because Garbrant has moved his head (ya know that much vaunted head movement that fools everyone.) Generally speaking I would move directly in on Garbrandt as he punches Righ*t _(Unlike K-Man who moves back first--where is K-Man, is he on the phone with RTK?)_ and follow through with the hand strike(s) following the kick (that Mazzotta used turned out worse than useless.)
> |
> I didn't spell out the precise move 'cause you guys all pan ippon kumite for _REAL_ fighting. Like FN70, they are all over YT. The key foundational skill that makes this work, however, is the "mental clarity" afforded by traditional Shotokan / karate training, particularly kata, but starting with kihon. Not the tough-guy "mental clarity" that Mazzotta displayed, though both valuable & admirable, a complete disaster by itself when the SD chips were down on Garbrandt's explosive move....
> |
> *Against the aggressive senior belt in class testing, I first employed a defensive hand block because that was the (one of) correct KIME against the specific form of his attack. The opponent here, Garbrandt combined a shifting, lowering head move in conjunction with his right punch which also altered the trajectory of his right punch, which then dictates other KIME.
> |
> Matt Thorton / Straight Blast Gym says this can't be done.... The trick is to back up / duck & cover, etc.... Not what i did in the least.... My head & chin were moving ahead & totally upright....just like all of traditional karate practice.* The senior belt who was rolling over most all the students like Garbrant over Mazzotta was completely flummoxed.... The 2nd degree black-belt who was working with me ran over to congratulate me; the 3rd degree black-belt assisting the visiting Master that day in charge of testing > later shook my hand. That's how it works....



Nice Shoto, congratz. Well... I probably have got the idea about that fast fight (spar/kumite) of yours (i hope that was not the only one), and ill point out for you the possible flaws that i can see in the intensive use of that aproach...

Regarding mental dimension, you are using the old and good advanced concept of irimi...Thats the taikyoku spirit you are talking about... always forward...

Ill save myself (maybe) in the making of another ''thesis'' here ... From the wikepedia:

''In Japanese martial arts, *Irimi*(入り身?) is the act of entering straight into a technique, as opposed to the more indirect entrance into technique called _tenkan_. In basic training, irimi usually looks like a step forward, straight or at an angle but usually ending with the body facing the attacker, rather than in the direction of the step. To enter with irimi, the defender needs to move in the very moment of the attack or even himself initiate it... Irimi involves entering deeply around or behind an attack to defuse or neutralize the attack. The concept of irimi teaches one to blend with or enter into an opponent’s attack to become one with the opponent’s movement and leaving the opponent with nowhere to strike.[3] This movement is utilized during the moment of the opponent’s attack. To complete the movement, one moves out of the opponent's line of attack to the opponent’s shikaku, or blind spot. *When executed properly, one can strike an opponent with great force, combining his attacking momentum and one's forward movement*.''

Well, i have seen a lot of people getting KO'ed that way in all the places from the street to dojos, rings and so... It really have a high KO rate coz of the above highlighted characteristics... but its just like that... even from the start its a *high risk high reward movement*...but still, you can miss it, or the guy can swing/move head to evade/neutralize your punch force...the risk is there...

IMO thats a kind of advanced tactic besides its very simple in aplication but what makes it really a challenge its that the karateka must really have good and sharp/keen senses/reflexes...be fast, strong and most important... *precise*...

Some old masters former students of M Funakoshi even attests that ''karate doesnt have first strike'' principle idea its all about applying that irimi...

Not saying that its bad to use or that i myself never have used... Its highly recommended to abuse of it on a kumite/spar situation, coz its a controlled enviroment afterall, but for SD it have its risks... so the practitioner have to be pretty aware of those risks...

But lets see the possible bad out comes and draw backs of that if some one decide to use that aproach on a real SD situation...

I would point out one main problem with that:

If you happens to know the guy you are fighting its a dedicated grappler or a striker that will be better - know your enemy - often chances are that this will not be possible in probably most SD situations when you just simply doesnt know your opponent or you doesnt have made enough time on that moment to study him.

Chances are that if you dont manage to get that ''irimi KO'' precise momentum you will be in big trouble and very prone to be grabbed and go ground with him in the case of a grappler, or in the case of a boxer or another dedicated striker that you will lead you to fight in close range and thats not a shotokan speciality btw...

So lets talk/work about whats missing and how shotokan can manage to work it out with that or whats the art have as some responses to those outcomes if any...Lets construct/share this also.

So you have made an attempt of strike interception and went forward closing in range with your opponent...In case of miss it and he being a dedicated striker have you being familiar to defend effectivelly hooks, elbows, knees and uppercut strikes as response to your irimi aproach?

And in the case of a bad outcome with a grappler what shotokan will offer you to be able to broke up of his holds in your body, cloths, hands, arms...What shotokan katas maybe are telling you to do? Would they have gave you enough knowledge to even defend competently the attempt of tackle for you to defend agains that takedown? Whats that unsu (cloud hands) kata from the gorgeous female serbian team are telling us to do with their ''hidden'' sweeping hands techniques for you to be able to defend against those arms and wrists locks?

Lets all the shotokan true searchers fill in those gaps...


----------



## ShotoNoob

I'll start with best  1st...


RafaChan said:


> Shoto, that highlighted stated IMO its often, if not always, dictated not by the students in the gyms or dojos, but this is on the level of decision of instructors and organizations/associations... Mostly pre-stablished in a historical context by JKA (most notedly after master Gigos death). So its much more a historical impost thing than a matter of everyone is free for the choice...


|
We have agreement here, with K-Man.... Kiina of a "chicken / egg" phenomenon....  (where is he?)



RafaChan said:


> In my posts i surely can agree with you and have said that the heavily sportive focus regarding the art effectivenes in SD will let it a lot in detrimental. But when you do your talk somewhat constantly bashing spar, kumite and matt thortons its like you are blaming people for that and making them looking bad and feeling miserable. IMO thats why you have being accused of extremist...


|
Just 'cause those guys are popular doesn't make what they do over-ride the karate masters....  Criticizing a style is part of the learning process, the difference is I use ANALYSIS....  I think sparring training, the free sparring is over-rated & over-used.  It's an opinion.  Why are poster's here so afraid of an opinion of a traditionalist karateka..?


RafaChan said:


> And the other thing i still didnt get its: If you talk so bad about kumite and spar why you do those like you told above ?


|
_*Because if any one reads my posts accurately and not with their own promotional views, you'll see that I'm in favor of kumite, in the traditional sense.  Moreover.... I have said repeatedly that the MMA arena makes a great environment for pressure testing traditional karate...  RAFA, please have my critics note this....
|*
Hence, those claiming extremism, have really shot themselves in the foot....  being extremely inaccurate in their responses..._



RafaChan said:


> Maybe you will answer: But i do it using the mental dimension working... (wich i higly agree), but so, we can conclude that the more sportive aproach (spar,kumite) can have its benefits rite? in develop those...(wich i can agree too)...


|
Not sure what you are getting at.  Please see my answer above...  I've always stated my support for kumite.  What i disagree with is the type of fighting I've described in my recent posts.... AND incidently so do many, many traditional Shotokan other karate authories posted all over internet, YT.  guess all these karate officials, traditional stylists are extremists too.  Silly.
|
_*EDIT: Maybe this will help.  I've also said a number of times that sport fighting WORKS.  Let me repeat that, SPORT FIGHTING WORKS.  Excellent example, BOXING WORKS FOR SELF DEFENSE.  Matt Thornton's training, IMO, WORKS BETTER THAN BOXING FOR SELF DEFENSE....  Matt Bryers BJJ, especially the combat BJJ, WORKS FOR SELF DEFENSE...*_



RafaChan said:


> So why the need to be constantly bashing those ?


|
This statement does not apply to me.  What's bashing is coming up with derogatory labels instead of speaking to the subject of my posts....  I see there's some vested interest's here in the Matt Thornton-like approach, which I already validated had benefit.  Actually it's Matt Thornton going on record publicly saying TMA is ineffective.  Matt Thornton has also gone on record making derogatory comments concerning TMA theory principles.....Why are some afraid of a knowledgeable rebuttal?.  "cause they have a personal or vested interest in such methods.  Fine, be a man and admit that.....
|


RafaChan said:


> Yes you are right about that... Sensei rick hotton on those vids ive found by coincidence when i typed shuto uke in YT trying to illustrate someone performing the tech with the right kime...IMO too hes one living example of shotokan people using the right aproach that doesnt make them over rigid and tense movement exagerated. If anyone wanna know more info of him ill recommend this link wich i have found pretty good:
> 
> Shotokan Karate Magazine - Training with Rick Hotton Sensei in Manchester UK.


|
I've developed the same body / mechanic kime as shown in the Sensei Rick Horton vid.  Mines a little smoother....  RAFA, who's going to read these posts?



RafaChan said:


> In 20 years from here where i started, i can see a sensible increase of the ammount of people in shotokan using that ''hard and soft'' physical-mental concepts in their practices... At least in my area/state that was not and still not very common... Thats why i regard the right aplications of those aspects being so special to me...As far as i know, those concepts were always in goju-ryu from their chinese roots...


|
Well as k-man's cousin, I know you follow this mantra, "extreme" as it is by Matt Thorton dogma...  The heavy physicality of Shotokan practice is designed for the black-belt level program.  And that works.  Post Shodan, traditional Shotokan focuses more on relaxation & speed.  TMU.



RafaChan said:


> I still see in here in a lot of shotokan dojos, instructors that can make people performs like living statues, all over rigid, contracted and over tense... I started my martial and karate practice in my childhood and ill tell you my understandment and comprehension were zero to could make something about that regard in those times...


|
Yeah, I know, you & K-Man hate that kind of Shotokan.  By my view, that's not such a problem which ties into my mental dimension training....  I will grant you that many people practice Shotokan's physicality too literally....



RafaChan said:


> Posting in here a preview of an informative link on that matter that could lead to mind blowing conclusions for those who wanna goes deep on that matter:


|
yes, traditional karate is very sophisticated & deep...



RafaChan said:


> ''So the younger students trained with contraction not because they were taught to do it this way, rather because they thought contraction was the right way to do strong techniques..Yoshitaka (Gigo) Funakoshi sensei, O-sensei's son, took over the instruction in 1932, after Takeshi Shimoda sensei died of influenza (Layton, 1997, Egami, 1976). Considering the fact he was very ill (tuberculosis and later lung gangrene) and actually living on borrowed time, he seems to have been very uncompromising and at times emphasized strong training. This together with a militaristic spirit that prevailed in the late thirties and the first half of of the 40's may have been the reason in part for the tense and staccato movements encountered within sports karate groups (contraction styles) nowadays.


|
Yes, I believe the cultural & poltical mindset of Japan & Japanese karate progenitors of that time had a great, great impact on how  Shotokan karate traditions, later conventions developed....  We had the article on how the Japan military wanted quick, expedient results...  for upcoming battles in a compressed time frame...



RafaChan said:


> In any case, research was begun by Master Shimoda, he started to develop low karate stances and continued by Yoshitaka Funakoshi with a small group of students, among them Shigeru Egami and Genshin Hironishi (Layton, 1997; Cattel, 1989; Egami, 1973; Tokitsu, 199?). Karate-do evolved as a result of their discoveries, stances became more natural with respect to body mechanics and free from unnecessary tensions, this is clearly noticeable when we observe the front stance (zenkutsu-dachi). Leg position is natural, without strange and uncomfortable twists, the hip and the torso is placed in half-facing position (hanmi) and the back leg is in a natural bent position. These types of changes were done to all techniques and new ones were also developed by Gigo Funakoshi sensei and his research group, such as mawashi geri, yoko geri kekomi, ushiro geri, ura mawashi geri, fudo-dachi, etc (Anonynous, 1983, Layton, 1997; Harada, 1983; Cattel, 1989; Noble, 1985).''
> 
> Source: Another Way the way of non-tension relaxation in Karate-do


|
Well, you've certainly done some research here.  The action of karate stances is little understood, especially when we have the "ahrd sparring" group here @ MT talk about karate then reverting to similar stances as Boxers when fighting....
\
Right now let me say, I never saw all the controversy about karate stances, which is really true of non-traditional martial artists. I practice a 'harder' traditional style and the standard stances work fine for me & most students that I know of ....  could more sophisticated stance practice abound, I'm sure.
|
EDIT: Let me repeat that K-man is practicing a more sophisticated style of karate than Shotokan.... TMU....


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> This statement does not apply to me. What's bashing is coming up with derogatory labels instead of speaking to the subject of my posts.... I see there's some vested interest's here in the Matt Thornton-like approach, which I already validated had benefit. Actually it's Matt Thornton going on record publicly saying TMA is ineffective. Matt Thornton has also gone on record making derogatory comments concerning TMA theory principles.....Why are some afraid of a knowledgeable rebuttal?. "cause they have a personal or vested interest in such methods. Fine, be a man and admit that.....



Again with the Matt Thornton thing, you either have a massive crush on him or you are holding a heck of a grudge.

You should probably remember that Shotokan is only one style of karate, my style has short stances, yours has long but ours are short. We also have more stances than Shotokan. Not all karate is the same, what is true for Shotokan is not true of Wado Ryu for example, granted, this thread is about Shotokan but don't label all karate the same.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Nice Shoto, congratz. Well... I probably have got the idea about that fast fight (spar/kumite) of yours (i hope that was not the only one), and ill point out for you the possible flaws that i can see in the intensive use of that aproach...
> 
> Regarding mental dimension, you are using the old and good advanced concept of irimi...Thats the taikyoku spirit you are talking about... always forward...
> 
> Ill save myself in the making of another ''thesis'' here ... From the wikepedia:


|
_*Oh no, extremism @ work....*_



RafaChan said:


> ''In Japanese martial arts, *Irimi*(入り身?) is the act of entering straight into a technique, as opposed to the more indirect entrance into technique called _tenkan_. In basic training, irimi usually looks like a step forward, straight or at an angle but usually ending with the body facing the attacker, rather than in the direction of the step. To enter with irimi, the defender needs to move in the very moment of the attack or even himself initiate it... Irimi involves entering deeply around or behind an attack to defuse or neutralize the attack. The concept of irimi teaches one to blend with or enter into an opponent’s attack to become one with the opponent’s movement and leaving the opponent with nowhere to strike.[3] This movement is utilized during the moment of the opponent’s attack. To complete the movement, one moves out of the opponent's line of attack to the opponent’s shikaku, or blind spot. *When executed properly, one can strike an opponent with great force, combining his attacking momentum and one's forward movement*.''


|
In the last sentence, we see some of the bias of the traditional karate Masters, especially Shotokan, in advocating & incorporating body momentum...  Here is where I am more sophisticated.  Although I practice a hard, physical style of karate, I have evolved into more of the internally-generated strength akin to your Sensei Horton - immediate few posts above.  Hence I can project that power absent any reliance on body momentum of myself or the opponent, although those may contribute to the ultimate effect.



RafaChan said:


> Well, i have seen a lot of people getting KO'ed that way in all the places from the street to dojos, rings and so... It really have a high KO rate coz of the above highlighted characteristics... but its just like that... even from the start its a *high risk high reward movement*...but still, you can miss it, or the guy can swing/move head to evade/neutralize your punch force...the risk is there...


|
Yes, that happens.  In the MMA vid I posted, Garbrant is using some body momentum, but not excessive.  He's really using more of body rotation like a boxer.  Mattazotta is backing up a bit, so there's on contributing body momentum....
|
ON THE RISK.  IT IS A HIGH RISK MOVEMENT UNLESS EXECUTED WITH STRONG MENTAL DISCIPLINE...  The Matt Thornton crowd, etc. only has stronger reactions, which we see such reactive moment work well for Mattazotta in Round #1, same fatal in Round 2.  High Risk is almost inescapable for a multi-round MMA match...bigger truth...
|
What I have described is Shotokan Ippon kumite form.  The concept you have listed is a concept of the traditional Shotokan karate curriculum, it's manual, and a base principle of the Ippon Kumite exercise (and other traditional training kumite as well). Again, pardon my extremism for quoting what the Okinawan Master's came up with long ago--and Matt Thornton says is bunk....



RafaChan said:


> IMO thats a kind of advanced tactic besides its very simple in aplication but what makes it really a challenge its that the karateka must really have good and sharp/keen senses/reflexes... fast, strong and most important... *precise*...


 Not reflexes, the way you & K-man train, mental kime....  mental clarity, mental discipline, mind / body unity... spoken about by every japanese or Okinawan karate master I know of.  with differing interpretations of course....



RafaChan said:


> Some old masters former students of M Funakoshi even attests that ''karate doesnt have first strike'' principle idea its all about applying that irimi...


|
Again, how metaphorical was that statement"  How philosophical was that statement"  How much of that was budo-way and how much jutsu-fighting....?  The answer to me is again, in the form of the actual Ippon Kumite exercises &in  the Shotokan principles actually presented in the manual & taught in the curriculum traditionally....  I'm "extreme" in that I made a thorough study of the Shotokan manual in terms of the breadth of what it covers...  As opposed to showing I can walk into class and shove a heavy bag all around or smack focus mitts....



RafaChan said:


> Not saying that its bad to use or that i myself never have used... Its highly recommended to abuse of it on a kumite/spar situation, coz its a controlled enviroment afterall, but for SD it have its risks... so the practitioner have to be pretty aware of those risks...


|
No the ippon kumite applies anywhere.  It's a 'highish' risk when you are relying on reactions, or less on risky instincts... as K-Man does...



RafaChan said:


> But lets see the possible bad out comes and draw backs of that if some one decide to use that aproach on a real SD situation...
> 
> I would point out one main problem with that:
> 
> If you happens to know the guy you are fighting its a dedicated grappler or a striker that will be better - know your enemy - often chances are that this will not be possible in probably most SD situations when you just simply doesnt know your opponent or you doesnt have made enough time on that moment to study him.
> 
> Chances are that if you dont manage to get that ''irimi KO'' precise momentum you will be in big trouble and very prone to be grabbed and go ground with him or in the case of a boxer or another dedicated striker you will have to fight in close range and thats not a shotokan speciality btw...


|
Correction: What you are saying applies to the recreational or much of the conventional Shotokan kumite.  The better Shotokan kumite sport or traditioanl, are prepared for follow on techniques / tactics...  Good Shotokan follow on fighting is on YT...  That is made EXPLICIT in Ippon Kumite & kata////



RafaChan said:


> So lets talk/work about whats missing and how shotokan can manage to work it out with that or if the art still have some responses to those outcomes...


|
Answer: don't practice Shotokan monkey see, monkey do.  Read the Shotokan manual, and the masters.  Study & practice the whole curriculum.  If that's not too "extreme" to ask (Still waiting to hear from TEZ#)?
|
Don't sleep walk through the material and then assume 'cause you bullied some one who looks like me that you know karate...



RafaChan said:


> So you have made an attempt of strike interception and went forward closing in range with your opponent...In case of miss it and he being a dedicated striker have you being familiar to defend effectivelly hooks, elbows, knees and uppercut strikes as response to your irimi aproach?


|
Of course.  Taikyoku kata#1: low block for low defense.  It's so simple a concept it's taken as stupid 'cause a low block doesn't protect like the boxer hands up guard.  We are learning to place the mentally disciplined strength of the entire body in a precise & tactically strong way to defend against a low [middle?] attack, yet simultaneously position & chamber for an immediate follow on move....
|
It's foundational skill & principle, not the entire gamut of the curriculum... The mental discipline learn t is what goes on to make Shotokan really powerful action....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> ...I'm a karateka, have been for a *very* long time, not Shotokan but Wado Ryu, I train Bunkai, I train MMA as well but really can we just discuss Shotokan for defence instead of it being some sort of weird MMA thread?


|
no doubt.... and no....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...So you have made an attempt of strike interception and went forward closing in range with your opponent...In case of miss it and he being a dedicated striker have you being familiar to defend effectivelly hooks, elbows, knees and uppercut strikes as response to your irimi aproach?
> 
> And in the case of a bad outcome with a grappler what shotokan will offer you to be able to broke up of his holds in your body, cloths, hands, arms...What shotokan katas maybe are telling you to do? Would they have gave you enough knowledge to even defend competently the attempt of tackle for you to defend agains that takedown? Whats that unsu (cloud hands) kata from the gorgeous female serbian team are telling us to do with their ''hidden'' sweeping hands techniques for you to be able to defend against those arms and wrists locks?
> 
> Lets all the shotokan true searchers fill in those gaps...


|
Here's a well respected Shotokan karate master ["extremist?]".... doing that extreme Ippon Kumite.




|
Now, TEZ says I'm posting weird, stuff and am upset 'cause Matt Thornton boys have presumably been mean to me...    So RAFA, may I ask you to take over and point out what you see in this set of exercises that could START to answer the question / issue you so appropriately posed?
|
EDIT: I pulled myself togther for just a moment, may I direct attention to time 0.44? Maybe a little imagination, please...


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> and no....



so it's going to continue with your love/hate relationship with Matt Thornton and how MMA proves YOUR Shotokan karate is wonderfully better than anyone else's Shotokan karate. Wow.

Don't hold your breathe waiting for me, I'm Wado Ryu not Shotokan......


----------



## ShotoNoob

HERE'S A TANG SOO DO VERSION re Tang Soo do Master.
|
Now I can see what Matt Thornton, like-mined don't like here.  K-Man, the rigid, over tense physicality, expansive moves against exaggerated technique on part of uke [japanese].




|
So not ALL examples of Ippon Kumite have the same quality.  Note, however, I did see a YT vid of this same Tang Soo do Master when younger, put on an impressive display of Ippon Kumite (TSD style) which demonstrated some of the answers _IN PRINCIPLE_ to the questions RAFA asked about follow on.
|
One of those answers is present in this YT vid.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> So not ALL examples of Ippon Kumite have the same quality



Especially when they aren't Ippon Kumite because it's a Korean martial art...............


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...So you have made an attempt of strike interception and went forward closing in range with your opponent...In case of miss it and he being a dedicated striker have you being familiar to defend effectivelly hooks, elbows, knees and uppercut strikes as response to your irimi aproach?
> 
> And in the case of a bad outcome with a grappler what shotokan will offer you to be able to broke up of his holds in your body, cloths, hands, arms...What shotokan katas maybe are telling you to do? Would they have gave you enough knowledge to even defend competently the attempt of tackle for you to defend agains that takedown? Whats that unsu (cloud hands) kata from the gorgeous female serbian team are telling us to do with their ''hidden'' sweeping hands techniques for you to be able to defend against those arms and wrists locks?
> 
> Lets all the shotokan true searchers fill in those gaps...


|
Now we are finally getting down to cases:  Please remember I'm a more basic technique guy, and not so clever as K-Man's dojo or Pretty serbian girls kata team...
|
I will start on the MMA side by using Machida / rockhold:




|
Machida's striking was hailed as taking the round @ the outset. Machida is too fast & on target (in the head -good) for Rockhold.  See early part of video; this is verified.  So what's wrong?
|
Machida's strikes in a full contact setting have no effect/ no visible power.  Yet how much does Machida spar??? TONS & TONS with TEZ-like MMA partners...  So when Machida, like Mazzotta mets Garbrant in a bar & Garbrandt makes it clear he's gonna take your head off, what is the first mistake?  To tap the opponent with punches, egg-him on, (see Garbrandt, Mazzotta match) and then expect to walk away unharmed...
|
SO SHOTOKAN KUMITE RULE NO. 1: So the first kumite principle for SD is to make strikes count.  How does traditional Shotokan do that?--why doing what little debbie was training of course.... Or by K-man, the makiwara board, etc....
|
SHOTOKAN KUMITE RULE NO. 2: OK, RAFA asks your strike against tough striker or skilled grappler doesn't work.  FIRST ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:  REVISIT SHOTOKAN KUMITE RULE NO.1.  That's what Shotokan does, make strikes count.  If you strikes are having a "Machida / rockhold" effect, then I suggest you go back and start over from day 1 and train Shotokan to traditional standards...  here ED parker demostrates with short explain that TEZ should understand...




Tez, Guys, little Debbie is all grown up here....
|
BTW: For all the Shotokan guys, Ed Parker does use some body momentum to break the boards....
|
EDIT: other Machida / Rockhold lesson here, Shotokan doesn't want to end up like Machida, pretty helpless to Rockhold on ground....KMAN--HELP!!! Machida needs a new cornerman (I told you I don't depend on cornermen--there's why.).


----------



## ShotoNoob

Knew I could count on you to add value.... so predictable....  even telegraphed .... 


Tez3 said:


> Especially when they aren't Ippon Kumite because it's a Korean martial art...............


|
You also missed I spelled Sensei Hotten as "Horton."  Get with it....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ...
> 
> And in the case of a bad outcome with a grappler what shotokan will offer you to be able to broke up of his holds in your body, cloths, hands, arms...What shotokan katas maybe are telling you to do? Would they have gave you enough knowledge to even defend competently the attempt of tackle for you to defend agains that takedown? Whats that unsu (cloud hands) kata from the gorgeous female serbian team are telling us to do with their ''hidden'' sweeping hands techniques for you to be able to defend against those arms and wrists locks?
> 
> Lets all the shotokan true searchers fill in those gaps...


|
RAFA, taking piece by piece...  you ask the world here, TEZ help!
Machida / rockhold, Machida knocked to ground Round 1 by Rockhold counter right when MACHIDA PATENTED STRAIGHT LEFT WHIFFS.... this was shown on YT but can't find now on highlights...  Here's similar exchange where Rua KO counters Machida PATENTED STRAIGHT LEFT.




|
Muay Thai > Shotokan Karate right?  Is Kanazawa throwing his body momentum into the opponent like Machida and utilizing or relying on a single technique?  Or what's an ever better observation from Kanawaza demo? How bout the korean ippon kumite version?
|
Hint: the korean master demo does specifically something I rarely see Machida (Mazzotta the "TKD" practitoner also) even attempt.  OH WELL, now we know why karate fails in MMA....  Matt Thornton is smiling here.... karate debunked.... massive fail....
|
EDIT: Actually Shogun Rua's Muay Thai irimi-version was excellent here...


----------



## ShotoNoob

Rafa-Man, I'm in your hands....
|
EDIT: Best of luck with that....


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> Machida's strikes in a full contact setting have no effect/ no visible power. Yet how much does Machida spar??? TONS & TONS with TEZ-like MMA partners...



I very much doubt they are 'Tez like' partners, you have no idea how I spar, I don't even think you know who Machida spars with, you're waffling and rambling about nothing. I think you just like seeing your words written up, they don't even have to be in coherent sentences. You are also trying to bait people, that's not in the rules here.

So, we aren't talking about self defence anymore but discussing various MMA fights, perhaps this should be split off and stuck in the MMA section.


----------



## DaveB

It would have been nice to have a sincere and respectful discussion about our differing views on Shotokan, but this is just not feasible. 

ShotoNoob,  I'm glad you enjoy your way of training and I hope it yields results. 

RafaChan, I don't agree with all you wrote, but I think that in your case it's more a difference in emphasis rather than lunacy. It's a shame there was not more space to talk.


----------



## RafaChan

Guys plz... Lets get along with this...



ShotoNoob said:


> EDIT: Let me repeat that K-man is practicing a more sophisticated style of karate than Shotokan.... TMU....



I do believe... Have heard that before of someone somewhere...



ShotoNoob said:


> No the ippon kumite applies anywhere. It's a 'highish' risk when you are relying on reactions, or less on risky instincts... as K-Man does...



I understand your point but yup... still its a highrisk... I myself have learned to just dont underestimate any one besides mental clarity to track intentions its a heck of hard skill to tame while in stress... just agree that people will be in danger...I prefer most times observe, step back and hit - while they miss me and get frustraded.

In your vid #1 its all about wait the attack and not enter in to the attack so in this way the vid its contradicting you. He just wait, stepback and hitback keeping the distance pretty much the way i do when i can keep relaxed.



ShotoNoob said:


> Correction: What you are saying applies to the recreational or much of the conventional Shotokan kumite. The better Shotokan kumite sport or traditioanl, are prepared for follow on techniques / tactics... Good Shotokan follow on fighting is on YT... That is made EXPLICIT in Ippon Kumite & kata////



Agreed. Kata and bunkai will give the answers and the practitioner must fill in the gaps. Ill give a more in depth own lecture of shotokan for self defense with kata bunkai below the way i do. I have seen your vids and the way you personally contributed to those answers.

The answers i have made were intentional and was to serve a purpose in lead us a little away of training paradigms (the emphasis - right dave?) and next to the more practical aspects of the art and SD validity.

I consider that we have already pretty much dissecated a lot in the ''physical embodiment of the mental outlook'' realm and thats done for me IMO... Althought training paradigms issue was highlighted since the first OP post on this very thread and was to taken in to consideration in some part... 



ShotoNoob said:


> Don't sleep walk through the material and then assume 'cause you bullied some one who looks like me that you know karate...



kekeke, thats not me...



ShotoNoob said:


> Of course. Taikyoku kata#1: low block for low defense. It's so simple a concept it's taken as stupid 'cause a low block doesn't protect like the boxer hands up guard. We are learning to place the mentally disciplined strength of the entire body in a precise & tactically strong way to defend against a low [middle?] attack, yet simultaneously position & chamber for an immediate follow on move...



Even when starting from the start shotokan its very SD practical yet most can see only as fitness or recreational -  what the white belt (mine its heian shodan not taikyoku) kata is trying to say since day 1 yet some people from the higher dan grades still doesnt comprehend nor put in practice at all ?

Its really saying that the kata aplication for that gedan barai left block its to deplet an enemy strike coming from your left side? Really that you will be stopped there in musubi dachi looking forward while hes coming from your side and suddenly turns left to block his kick or stab with a gedan barai ? Whats the chances ?

I could find some vids that represents better what i do and think of that... while gedan barai its a block very used and usefull block in kumite for kick defenses to the waist, belly against some mawashi - mae geri kicks some people its applying also as a wrist grab release technique with the add bonus of a trow just like this:






Now zenkutsu will also plays a big role to create that trow momentum when the body turn and your front foot its trapping the opponent balance. Important things to note:

This can be performed even if the opponent still holding your two wrists when you raise your left arm around your head... the stronger is he holding the better to mess with his balance...

Thats a small part of the answer if you end up with your wrists grabbed: you raise your stance a little and transition to a strong zenkutsu to any degree to the side...

Follow on...

The more ''traditionalistic'' heian shodan bunkai in my view will be the wrist release presented only at the time of the tetsui uchi  wich IMO its a little gem of a strike from unexpected angle technique that can also serve as a wrist release also:






Well, they have not showned the gedan barai power hand swept potential or even the nage waza take downs aplications of age shuto - age uke techniques wich i found of fundamental importance of a good practice of the bunkai of this kata.

Those guys have worked had for shotokan and SD aplication i have found their video pretty decent and that was the only video that i have found that showned ''some'' of the potential of the age shuto - age uke techniques. If some one have found some plz share...

Check in 02:55:






I still doesnt have any videos of my own aplications - bad rafa - will work on that at some point perhaps as the material i look forward that can match what im doing its really scarce...

I couldnt find for example the usage of gedan barai - age shuto to block and trap a leg of the opponent when he kicks in and then trow him to the ground following by age uke.
Kata move 6, 7 and 8...

Nor the potential of age shuto - age uke against clinch aplication follow by a trow...

Heian Shodan... 21 moves - 6 basic techniques - really a lot of potential more that you could even imagine...

Not the answer for all the questions ofc but its a pretty decent start out of the blue.

Im open to hear from you guys if you all think thats not already too late for this thread.

Peace !


----------



## RafaChan

Shoto... Machida doesnt represent any shotokan failure by no means. And even more on the matter of this shotokan and SD debate...

Hes the only responsible for his failures not the style. And about his recent failures,

Ill risk that his over evasive hit and run tactic its not being effective anymore coz it makes him being more focused on connects evasion to the sides or back than be focused to connects in more attacks while he goes forward or back wards. I saw that two times with romero... he could have landed more hits but his evasiveness was put him already out of range for that...

Im not saying its a bad tactic at all but i would say its not much more effective as the time passes by and pretty much every one its already aware and studying it on the mainstream and learning how to deal with that. Pretty much like shogun did and studied. He practiced a lot with another karateka champion that was playing the role of machida while trying to emulate his tactic.


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Shoto... Machida doesnt represent any shotokan failure by no means. And even more on the matter of this shotokan and SD debate...


|
Too much sport fighting in Machida's karate.  Karate is not a sport; it's a mental discipline....



RafaChan said:


> Hes the only responsible for his failures not the style.


|
NO, there is weakness in the CONVENTIONAL Shotokan point-fighting style of kumite.  Machida is a product of that convention...


RafaChan said:


> And about his recent failures,
> 
> Ill risk that his over evasive hit and run tactic its not being effective anymore coz it makes him being more focused on connects evasion to the sides or back than be focused to connects in more attacks while he goes forward or back wards. I saw that two times with romero... he could have landed more hits but his evasiveness was put him already out of range for that...


|
No sure I follow your explanation completely.  Yet I think you looked @ it and go the gist....  Machida relies too much on elementary sport fighting technique, opponents applying same.


RafaChan said:


> Im not saying its a bad tactic at all but i would say its not much more effective as the time passes by and pretty much every one its already aware and studying it on the mainstream and learning how to deal with that. Pretty much like shogun did and studied. He practiced a lot with another karateka champion that was playing the role of machida while trying to emulate his tactic.


|
Exactly.  Initially, his style was effective against the really poor tactics of the rank & file MMA competition.
|
Subsequently, all his later UFC competitors have the luxury of watching him on tape for hours....   Because Machida relies on a few simple gambits for the most part and repeats those over & over like clockwork, he became fixed in strategy as well as predictable.  Shogun's training for UFC 113 was expert in it's approach....
|
Moreover, Machida should train like "LITTLE  DEBBIE"  for another weakness he has consistently failed to address....  TEZ3 still has Machida on focus mitts... massive fail against Romero...


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> Guys plz... Lets get along with this...





RafaChan said:


> I do believe... Have heard that before of someone somewhere...


|
That's what my  training & study have led me to understand...


RafaChan said:


> I understand your point but yup... still its a highrisk... I myself have learned to just dont underestimate any one besides mental clarity to track intentions its a heck of hard skill to tame while in stress... just agree that people will be in danger...I prefer most times observe, step back and hit - while they miss me and get frustraded.


|
That's because you're ghost-writing for K-Man.  You quote the Machida / Romero match, and so Machida  // NOT // engaging with karate effectiveness was actually the highest risk approach Machida could have taken against Romero....And yes, there is a lot to say for K-Man's approach. Perhaps the mentally easier approach is to wait and counter, so that is why the lower level of mental intensity is emphasized in the Shotokan black=belt curriculum...  The mental dimension training provides the calmness to act in stressful situations.  How many can dedicate this training, it's a minority.  You & K-Man have left out some depth on focusing on the issue this way....


RafaChan said:


> In your vid #1 its all about wait the attack and not enter in to the attack so in this way the vid its contradicting you. He just wait, stepback and hitback keeping the distance pretty much the way i do when i can keep relaxed.


|
Yes, what you say is largely the physical form....   My "extremist" view on your response would be what?


RafaChan said:


> Agreed. Kata and bunkai will give the answers and the practitioner must fill in the gaps. Ill give a more in depth own lecture of shotokan for self defense with kata bunkai below the way i do. I have seen your vids and the way you personally contributed to those answers.


|
Yes, there are lots of blanks to be filled in.  On a technique basis, you can just look at Iain A.'s work and go from there...  I just looked @ the black-belt curriculum and the fighting application exercise.... as I've stated over & over....


RafaChan said:


> The answers i have made were intentional and was to serve a purpose in lead us a little away of training paradigms (the emphasis - right dave?) and next to the more practical aspects of the art and SD validity.


|
K-Man's approach mentally of instinctual training is workable for many, and a huge step up over sport fighting....


RafaChan said:


> I consider that we have already pretty much dissecated a lot in the ''physical embodiment of the mental outlook'' realm and thats done for me IMO... Althought training paradigms issue was highlighted since the first OP post on this very thread and was to taken in to consideration in some part...


On the contrary, it's the key issue.   I wonder how many will actually embrace K-Man's instinctively=based  bunkai for self-defense.
|
Unfortunately, there's a lot of sleepwalking, monkey-see-monkey-do in karate practice out there....  good luck with that....


RafaChan said:


> Even when starting from the start shotokan its very SD practical yet most can see only as fitness or recreational -  what the white belt (mine its heian shodan not taikyoku) kata is trying to say since day 1 yet some people from the higher dan grades still doesnt comprehend nor put in practice at all ?


|
Well Machida violated the Taikyoku kata in the Romero fight; the major failing BEING lack of mental discipline which the Taikyoku kata are meant to ingrain....  There are physical form & tactical lessons Machida violated Taikyoku kata as well. particularly glaring in the Rockhold fight (loss)....  But since I religiously practiced the Taikyoku kata as advocated by Gichin F., I guess I an extreme.


RafaChan said:


> Its really saying that the kata aplication for that gedan barai left block its to deplet an enemy strike coming from your left side? Really that you will be stopped there in musubi dachi looking forward while hes coming from your side and suddenly turns left to block his kick or stab with a gedan barai ? Whats the chances ?


|
That is not the main purpose of that block.  You & K-Man are stuck in relying on technology of technique, instead of stating it to extreme, the technology of spirit...  I've already answered that issue elsewhere, on the physical form of the low block.  Technical people like K-Man get hung up on the low block and it's faults, I absorbed the traditional karate principles which that low block keystones into.  That's it...  BTW, wrote about those in my earliest postings..


RafaChan said:


> I could find some vids that represents better what i do and think of that... while gedan barai its a block very used and usefull block in kumite for kick defenses to the waist, belly against some mawashi - mae geri kicks some people its applying also as a wrist grab release technique with the add bonus of a trow just like this:


All your & K-Man's technical stuff is good.




|
Of course, use some imagination on how to apply kihon Shotokan, as opposed to putting up the hands-up guard and hope the opponent doesn't punch thorough opening(s).
Question Begged:
|
How does a physically weak female compared to the male uke develop the strength to throw that guy to the floor with that move?  There at least better be some K_MAN KIME behind it....  this is why I stressed the "LITTLE DEBBIE BOARD BREAKING KIHON SHOTOKAN TRAINING.  I'm not going to try some grappling bunkai on Romero, I'm going to smash his nose back into his skull and with his eye's tearing & vision blurring and pain distracting him, I have a chance to repeatedly pound him into disjunction....Quickly & repeatedly....Taikyoku kata....  Funny, Little Debbie (& her dad get it).
|
In Principle, I love the bunkai vid you posted.  It represents what traditional karate, traditional Shotokan is all about....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Actually, IMO, the DrobyshevskyK Karate bunkai illustration has K-Man's Okinawan-jutsu quality (on a number of fronts), hence it should receive the K-man stamp of approval...
|
EDIT: got to take a break.  On the above, good luck with that.  I'm sure the demonstration will appeal to many students interest....


----------



## ShotoNoob

RafaChan said:


> ....have worked had for shotokan and SD aplication i have found their video pretty decent and that was the only video that i have found that showned ''some'' of the potential of the age shuto - age uke techniques. If some one have found some plz share...
> 
> Check in 02:55:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I still doesnt have any videos of my own aplications - bad rafa - will work on that at some point perhaps as the material i look forward that can match what im doing its really scarce...
> 
> I couldnt find for example the usage of gedan barai - age shuto to block and trap a leg of the opponent when he kicks in and then trow him to the ground following by age uke.
> Kata move 6, 7 and 8...
> 
> Nor the potential of age shuto - age uke against clinch aplication follow by a trow...
> 
> Heian Shodan... 21 moves - 6 basic techniques - really a lot of potential more that you could even imagine...
> 
> Not the answer for all the questions ofc but its a pretty decent start out of the blue.
> 
> Im open to hear from you guys if you all think thats not already too late for this thread.
> 
> Peace !


|
Not at all.  Except for the hard spar-rers, pounding each other >>> will find this too meek (eek!)  I'll try to take a close look at all three and reply in greater detail.  First cut on Shotokan Bunkai Kata Vid #3...quoted above....
|
FIRST NEGATIVE CRITICISM: On the overhead hammer-strike bunkai to the opponent's head, in the 1st leg of heian godan, I think this as presented is a bit impractical & rigid.  Shotokan KARATE phys-ed form...
|
SECOND NEGATIVE CRITICISM: Now rafa, here's where your own vid violates the criticism you made of my practice of Ippon Kumite moving in... ya know "high risk."  The master instructor in the above vid doesn't move back either with the low block.  When the opponent advances, the master remains stationary.  He executes the low block against the front kick attack.  This  form of defense, as has been pointed out a million times all over everywhere, leaves the master instructor standing in place with his face completely exposed.   Boxing coaches poop all over this kihon form.  So, very high, extra risk by K-Man standards on 2 fronts very plain....
|
I don't have a big problem with such kihon training because the real purpose is not the SD application K-Man teaches or advocates.  The exercise is teaching foundational Shotokan strengths.....  It's teaching the mental discipline to stand and face Romero as he pressures.....  of course that is only the surface of the mental discipline actually sought to be developed....by such Shotokan training.....  Shotokan makes plain with the strong, rigid stance and muscular technique that you stand and fight back with the full strength of the entire body in an accurate and & efficient manner.  How often do you see this in a real fight.  You don't because the competitors don't have the mental discipline to do it...
|
POSITIVE #1: As K-man says, the Heian Shodan kata basically covers the Taikyoku kata #1 & #2.  Furthermore, we are introduced to the complexity of bunkai right off the bat.  As well as the knife hand block (strike).  So here we have a more sophisticated approach than pure kihon of simple repetition....
|
POSITIVE #2: The whole foundational purpose of the kata is whole body power, which then is applied in a tactically efficient way.  Once that whole body power is developed, then we can transition same into kihon or alternative technique & tactics as represented in the bunkai...   Bunkai doesn't cover nearly all of what is being conveyed....integrated into whole body power as noted....
|
RAFA, I thought Shotokan striking couldn't have any answer on that unstoppable closing-the-distance by the mystical Gracies....  Your references above to applications point to refutation of the Gracie grappling mystique.... I LIST THAT AS POSITIVE #3.....
|
And that's my _*"extreme"*_ view to DAvid B., whoever that is; and of course "Username redacted," my favorite poster....
|
good luck with all that extremism....


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> TEZ3 still has Machida on focus mitts... massive fail against Romero...




You do know that no one has any idea what you are talking about don't you least of all me. I've no idea why you wrote this, it's meaningless. BTW you can't 'violate' a kata you know, the idea is just funny.

 Oh and it's Tez.


----------



## DaveB

Is there an ignore feature on this forum?


----------



## Tez3

DaveB said:


> Is there an ignore feature on this forum?



Yes, thankfully. click onto the username, a little window pops up and along the top line there is a line of which the last word is 'ignore' click on and it's done.


----------



## DaveB

DaveB said:


> Is there an ignore feature on this forum?


Found it, problem solved. 

RafaChan, the video you posted of the girl applying a wrist release was the perfect example of why style/art is so much less important than understanding the environment you are training for. 

That application simply will not work in real life.

Forget that the girl hasn't got the leverage to force a resistant assailant over, or that if she could pull a larger opponent off balance with hikite he would need to grab her for his own stability and end up grappling. 
Forget that once the wrist is released there's nothing stopping the attacker from just hitting the girl; all that aside, no one who means to hurt you holds both your wrists. 

If someone holds both wrists and wants to do you harm either they have *A SECOND ATTACKER WITH THEM* who will do the harming, or the young girl is already on her back/front on the floor and can no longer prevent the bad things about to happen. 

Hence, the application is less than useless because even if it had been mechanically viable, it fails to account for anything approaching the environment it was intended for.

The skill of self defense pales in importance to the understanding of why and how assaults occur.


----------



## Buka

Critiquing Lyoto Machida as a fighter and Martial Artist. When your done, please, tell Mayweather how to box.


----------



## RafaChan

DaveB said:


> RafaChan, the video you posted of the girl applying a wrist release was the perfect example of why style/art is so much less important than understanding the environment you are training for.



Thats why some struggle hard in the understanding of how their art can be applicable with maximum effect in real cases in a lot of enviroments within its systems and how it can deal with all the variables... Ua...boring...

Btw thats the case of this thread isnt?



DaveB said:


> That application simply will not work in real life.



Judging by your own experiences and particular enviroment here you ended with that general conclusion.



DaveB said:


> Forget that the girl hasn't got the leverage to force a resistant assailant over, or that if she could pull a larger opponent off balance with hikite he would need to grab her for his own stability and end up grappling.
> Forget that once the wrist is released there's nothing stopping the attacker from just hitting the girl; all that aside, no one who means to hurt you holds both your wrists.



I do have stressed this move against a much stronger and bigger opponent assumin i was the weaker girl.

If you have made this drill by yourself instead of came here so diligently pointing the flaws of what you have saw just on the vid you will end up realizing all the move is real. Besides that i agree only with that if the guy really grabs hard it will very hard to release the hand as showned in the vid.

But anyways he will fall and lost balance when you transition to zenkutsu coz hes not expecting that. I havent told the guy i was about to do this just told its a karate drill and that he have to grab hard both of my wrists.

Now hes on the ground prone to get his head kicked while you still up there. Maybe you need a video footage of that also?




DaveB said:


> The skill of self defense pales in importance to the understanding of why and how assaults occur



SD its not only about de-escalation and awareness but either with escalation and right skill aplication.

Have been herr in any street carnival? Girls walking tru the mobs often get their wrists grabbed for the robbed kiss trial... Pull and push game comence... Hit directly the testicles with the knee on that occasions wont be the better idea coz the guy can hit back if he react fast. But ashi barai or gedan barai will makes him think twice now...


----------



## DaveB

Gedan Barai wrist release and take down. Iain Abernethy

If you won't listen to me, maybe you will listen to a group of self defense application specialist. Note I've not waited for responses to the thread that support me because I know that they will. 

You really can't see what is wrong with a technique that relies on the attacker re-grabbing the other wrist after she releases her hand when nothing compels him to do so?

This is the definition of poor unrealistic application. Nothing about your carnival example contradicts anything I've written.  I don't need to try it because I've not just theorised about realistic applications, I've trained and used them, both through karate and other arts. Hence I've been able to break down exactly what is wrong with the technique. 

If you think it can work then answer the specific criticisms. How will this help if there is a second opponent? What is stopping the assailant from grabbing or hitting the girl's head once his hand is released? 

I did not say anything about awareness and de-escalation. I said to create and use martial techniques for self defense, you have to understand the realities of self defense. Basic things like if you are not controlling an attacker you can't guarantee what his next move will be. 

It's even permissable to assume a limited range of follow up attacks based on common patterns  of violence but your next technique has to be able to counter all of that range of responseses. And grabbing an already grabbed wrist is not a common or reasonable follow on attack because it puts the assailant in a worse position. It's the kind of situation you don't need to train for because it's so stupid your general training should be enough. 

As a junior Karateka's attempt at developing application this is a good first try. As a showcase of the principles in Taikyoku/hiean shodan, it's a misunderstanding. As a practical technique for self defense this is a total failure.


----------



## Tez3

RafaChan said:


> I do have stressed this move against a much stronger and bigger opponent assumin i was the weaker girl.
> 
> If you have made this drill by yourself instead of came here so diligently pointing the flaws of what you have saw just on the vid you will end up realizing all the move is real. Besides that i agree only with that if the guy really grabs hard it will very hard to release the hand as showned in the vid.
> 
> But anyways he will fall and lost balance when you transition to zenkutsu coz hes not expecting that. I havent told the guy i was about to do this just told its a karate drill and that he have to grab hard both of my wrists.
> 
> Now hes on the ground prone to get his head kicked while you still up there. Maybe you need a video footage of that also?



I'm sorry but I am that weaker girl and I did just try this out to see what would happen and DaveB is correct, it doesn't work. I'm not speculating on this, I tried it out with a couple of guys, as self defence it doesn't work.


----------



## DaveB

Tez3 said:


> I'm sorry but I am that weaker girl and I did just try this out to see what would happen and DaveB is correct, it doesn't work. I'm not speculating on this, I tried it out with a couple of guys, as self defence it doesn't work.



The most important points about any grasping attack are the liklihood of multiple assailants and that the real thing will not be static. Either you are being dragged or pinned. 

Any defense you try will need to account for these and the simplest way to address both elements is by using body movement to avoid/overtake the grasper's energy and to place the attacker between you and any other attackers. 

From the hiean kata the best double wrist escape comes from the opening of hiean yondan:
Applied kokutsudachi from neutral stance is a lateral body shift, dragging the opponent with your bodyweight (not your arm) and changing your angle relative to their applied power.

Circle the arms over head. The drag from the opponents grip will cause you to cross hands, clearing their grip on one of yours and potentially trapping both of their hands with your one, leaving you free to strike etc.


----------



## RafaChan

RafaChan said:


> If you have made this drill by yourself instead of came here so diligently pointing the flaws of what you have saw just on the vid you will end up realizing all the move is real. *Besides that i agree only with that if the guy really grabs hard it will very hard to release the hand as showned in the vid*.



Yes...this move can be performed... but... as highlighted above ^^ its the implict condition above that can tell if it really will happen or not...but note that very hard still not impossible... 

Im pretty sure thats why Tez were not being able to do that. I was not there to see but i can guess that guys were holding her wrists very hard...

Those are one of the conditions that one can check while in a SD situation and by that can look which technique will be the best to apply.

For example: Is the guy holding your wrists, arm that hard? Is the guy holding the gun at you that hard, focused and tense or is he shaking trembling unstable and looking to the sides a lot ?

So in that specific case, gedan barai pretty much wont be doing the magic alone. But you will have to make that inside wrist/hand turn in their thumb direction to force the opening more easily... thats why i told about age shuto also if u have noted. Not only on yondan but shodan with age shuto its pretty much lauching the basis for that hidden cloud sweeping hands of unsu...



DaveB said:


> Gedan Barai wrist release and take down. Iain Abernethy
> 
> If you won't listen to me, maybe you will listen to a group of self defense application specialist. Note I've not waited for responses to the thread that support me because I know that they will.



Always nice to see others opinion judging by their own experiences. But i dont tend to be biased by those said specialists in a hurry but rather i prefer to apply what they are saying by myself and check what will be better. I personally have met some ''self titled'' self defense intructors that had even some good credibility but in reality with almost zero practical experience in IRL SD aplications. Not saying its your case or the case of posters. But well, thats not the point.

Its not that easy to judge and come to say whats viable or not by looking unidiretional before not even stressed that in some way with more than one condition as i pointed. I myself had my couple of real fights out there and i can say out of the moves i did (mostly karate and thai ones) what was usefull or not, regarding the particular opponent i was facing and his specific bio-type.  



DaveB said:


> You really can't see what is wrong with a technique that relies on the attacker re-grabbing the other wrist after she releases her hand when nothing compels him to do so?



First of all, and like ive said, i came to that conclusion of viability not coz of that vid alone, but when practicing bunkai of [gedan barai - age shuto - age uke] moves of heian shodan as strong combos that allows wrist escape, joint lock and trow. So thats lead me to start research around YT and check more of that bunkai moves aplications to check if i could found something about those being done in YT. Thats the way ive found that vid. Was not the vid that made me think initially, the vid was not the first cause the way are you pointing and looking at. The vid alone has its limitations when applying to a resistant opponent but in principle its right under conditions that ive said.

Initially, as i said in the previous post, the wrist escape in heian shodan i was practicing was made with age shuto (starting to move to the inside), and if you could i would like to see your opinion on that too and opinion of tez if you guys might think its viable. That age shuto its a response to a wrist grab on the gedan barai starting from move 6 than age shuto and wrist release at 7 as ive said previously. Gedan barai being the opening move that allows a wrist escape with that age shuto. 

The girls vid alone showned another situation, applying only gedan barai and zenkutsu balance mess. And the practice have showned me that was not specifically a wrist release in the begining but a balance mess that ends with a strong zenkutsu transition in any angle to the side trapping the opponent front leg from behind. That way he will fall and ending releasing the wrists coz he now have to set a guard or grab your leg trying to defend his layed down body. Its viable like ive said.



DaveB said:


> If you think it can work then answer the specific criticisms. How will this help if there is a second opponent?



That hypothesis of yours its leading to just one direction. That confirms your uni-diretional view but ok. The case is if the girl have her wrists grabbed and theres a second guy the context its saying that things will be pretty much requiring a massive knee to the testicles before trying to attempt in other moves or just her running away. Thats my take on that. You judge the situation guided by that hypothesis of the second guy ofc will limit a lot the possibility of other techniques...



DaveB said:


> What is stopping the assailant from grabbing or hitting the girl's head once his hand is released?



As showned in the vid she will make the turn and the release in a one single fluid moment. The guy will be going on the floor with that already, with his hand released or not. Down there he will have few options: protect his head from a step/kick or try to grab a leg maybe...


----------



## Tez3

RafaChan said:


> Always nice to see others opinion judging by their own experiences. But i dont tend to be biased by those said specialists in a hurry but rather i prefer to apply what they are saying by myself and check what will be better



I've trained with Iain Abernethy so I'm very well acquainted with his methods, what he does too is when you are training is give you variations for you in relation to your size, strength etc. If something doesn't work for me, I don't use it, I have plenty of techniques that I know work for me so I won't take risks using something that may/may not work.
If you only train something with your partner not gripping tightly you are doing yourself a great disservice, train realistically or don't bother.


----------



## RafaChan

Tez3 said:


> I've trained with Iain Abernethy so I'm very well acquainted with his methods, what he does too is when you are training is give you variations for you in relation to your size, strength etc.



You adressed one of a very fundamental aspect regarding kata bunkai here.

''Each kata is said to cover a complete combat system, wich varies in content and appearence, according to the creator's unique body set up.'' Burgar, Five years one kata pages 29/30.

I would add, as ive said, thats the body set up of the opponent really matters also when you think of the right tech. Unfortunelly, i myself have learned that the hard way. Now i keep my eyes wide open.



Tez3 said:


> If something doesn't work for me, I don't use it, I have plenty of techniques that I know work for me so I won't take risks using something that may/may not work.



You are right and thats pretty much my same line of thinking.



Tez3 said:


> If you only train something with your partner not gripping tightly you are doing yourself a great disservice, train realistically or don't bother.



Not really. As ive said to dave and i think he doesnt gave the fair importance: SD scenarios involves not only de-escalation but also escalation of force. Softer grips can happens when the hard things are almost going to happen next. In that case the guy that wanna drag the girl attention forcefully while she pass. Thats happening a lot by here 'realistically' speaking.

But dave insists only with the 2 guys going to attack the hardest way scenario and by that the tech its the utterly of trash. Ofc each tech and move have their own limitations and reach depending of the situations and scenarios. Sorry but your friend has being kinda hard on what ive told (extremist?) and close minded here. But i do agree if you guys think that can be a ''culturally'' impossible scenario for you. At least you miss took time to see by yourself instead of just being sitted typing behind the keyboard and i respect that a lot. Its easy to disagree if you just keep looking in one direction and not even going to check by yourself.

Finally the good thing about that gedan barai soft wrist swep its that the guy will end up on the ground in a very disadvantageous position. A thing that the techs designed for the very hard hand grips wont be allowing you to do that way... my loved unsu very hard hand grip release here also.

Thats why i stated the age shuto hand swept. Thats for a pretty ''very hard grip'' release wrist-hand swep technique and you can check by yourself too. Its on heian shodan also but really...i know people even of the 4th dan that dont know this and you can check a lot of heian shodans being performed on YT with people doing the age shuto part not doing with the adequated hand movement and a lot of people even not doing it forgeting that age shuto exists on this kata.

Im not saying that heian shodan nor the heian series are the supreme upper-dupper kata. Not really. But in that case, heian shodan its a pretty decent aswer for the starters.

As an example of the age shuto tech performed the right way with the right intention on the kata ill show you the vid above (after quite extensive research):






On 00:21... Unfortunelly couldnt have found any bunkai for that on YT. I know that YT can represent the supreme contestation of truth for a lot of people including here on that forum but fortunelly still exist some people that can search thing by theirselves putting things in experimentation.

Peace !


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> FIRST NEGATIVE CRITICISM: On the overhead hammer-strike bunkai to the opponent's head, in the 1st leg of heian godan, I think this as presented is a bit impractical & rigid. Shotokan KARATE phys-ed form...



Infamous hammer-fist tetsui uchi strike. In heian shodan bunkai thats a response that one do after the third move if the enemy happens to grab your wrist in that gedan barai. Again... i have stressed it and if its a very hard grip that circular swep movement before the strike wont be releasing you.

But if the guys its not that hard and not expecting it, thats a highly desirable wrist release tech besides you are defending and attacking with the same hand (hen te concept), and whats better, the attacking its going to hit from an unexpected angle.

And thats why i dont train only looking to one direction. That way i can have even perform a wrist release and strike at the same time...

On the vid above: 00:15 he makes that so obvious in a way most people forgets or just dont do the right way when they do perform this kata.


----------



## Tez3

I think though that if you train with someone using a hard grip and can get out of it getting out of a soft grip is easy. If you  train for the hardest scenario then it's a bonus if your attacker doesn't use techniques full on, it's a case perhaps of expect and train for the worst that can happen, you can't hope that your attacker uses a looser grip.


----------



## RafaChan

ShotoNoob said:


> That's because you're ghost-writing for K-Man. You quote the Machida / Romero match, and so Machida // NOT // engaging with karate effectiveness was actually the highest risk approach Machida could have taken against Romero....And yes, there is a lot to say for K-Man's approach. Perhaps the mentally easier approach is to wait and counter, so that is why the lower level of mental intensity is emphasized in the Shotokan black=belt curriculum... The mental dimension training provides the calmness to act in stressful situations. How many can dedicate this training, it's a minority. You & K-Man have left out some depth on focusing on the issue this way....



Talking by myself here... one can develop a very solid counter attack based strategy working with a lot of different array of passive-agressive tactics. And i must and will tell you this is not that easy the way you talking about. Ofc that in the case of machida when people its already expecting that he will start with some disadvantage.

And btw i think you underestimating the power of machidas left gyaku a lot...hes a very good sniper and him being lefted...even belfort refused to went against him by that. ''im not going. havent trained to went against a lefted...hhmmm... you guess... i can agree a little about his jabs tho...but its normal, everyone will always have room for improvement...and im with him being the winner or not. His family is divided rite now. Parents from his mom and wife side are telling him to stop while bigger part of the others are telling the oppposite.

And now theres a chance for him to come back with something new... lets see... i think will be him against jacaré next...


----------



## RafaChan

Tez3 said:


> *I think though that if you train with someone using a hard grip and can get out of it getting out of a soft grip is easy*. If you train for the hardest scenario then it's a bonus if your attacker doesn't use techniques full on, it's a case perhaps of expect and train for the worst that can happen, you can't hope that your attacker uses a looser grip.



So i must tell you that the techs i told above designed for that 'hard grip release' they are even easier to perform both in the case of a single hard wrist grab or both wrists.
Thats why i do train for both scenarios twists without limiting myself about what will be the most likely thing to happen. Theres no that ''unreal'' thing dave dropped on me since from the start. 

The objective of the techs are the same... but the consequences of each one for the opponent and his position its what makes them really unique and usefull depending of the situation and of what you want. Grip not so tied and you want him losing balance prone to go ground ? Ofc the hard grip releases ive told will work over all.

The best way to see whats happening for real ? Fast push and pull to feel the guy grip pressure and to check in wich degree your arms can move and if thats possible while arguing with the guy...no sir, no sir im such a tender girl 

I can agree with you and dave that in the case of that girl on the vid the grip applied on her was 'super soft' that she even managed to release one hand. But ive saw that movement potential since the first sight.

I could not manage that the same way she did coz i stressed the tech under some resistance since from the start as i told...

The 'soft grip' people used on me allowed me to move my arms enough to cross them and do that gedan barai the exact way she did, but it was not soft (compliant) enough for me to release one of my hands like her. And not even soft enough in a point that i wont be in the need of a specific technique to release and not soft enough that allowed me to punch...

I hope we could get always the better results from each situation.


----------



## Tez3

Usually a baton and handcuffs solved my problem with men trying to grab


----------



## DaveB

[QUOTE="RafaChan, post: 1715783, member: 33651"
That hypothesis of yours its leading to just one direction. That confirms your uni-diretional view but ok. The case is if the girl have her wrists grabbed and theres a second guy the context its saying that things will be pretty much requiring a massive knee to the testicles before trying to attempt in other moves or just her running away. Thats my take on that. You judge the situation guided by that hypothesis of the second guy ofc will limit a lot the possibility of other techniques.....[/QUOTE]

You're right, I do limit my thinking. I limit to techniques that work for situations that might actually occur.

This is a self defense thread pertaining to a self defense art.

The bottom line is efficiency in training. You can never train for every exact situation, so you train for the most serious and the most common. Then you rely on the flexibility and combat sense you have developed to guide you through everything else.

You gain nothing playing around with techniques that don't work when tested with strength. If your assailant uses a soft grip you use the same technique as if they have used a hard grip. Equally if your technique is sound for a realistic attack, it will work just as well against the idiot who does something so dumb that you didn't train for it. 

You are not limiting your ability to respond, you are making sure your responses are effective. 

And working with false assumptions about the self defense environment is just dangerous.

A knee to the groin is not a guaranteed win because all men have been learning to defend against it since childhood. It also leaves you vulnerable to the second attacker. That's why the tactic I described began with moving away from the danger. The groin/low kick is always there; in fact it is implied as a function of kokutsudachi, but you must be in a place of relative safety to employ it.

Incidentally the efficiency built into the kata means that you can use this kata movement as a defense to any grasping attack from the front. Train one movement and defend against a whole class of attack. 

Lastly, the age shuto uke works fine as a single wrist release. Single arm releases are more common and less tactically specific.


----------



## RafaChan

Tez3 said:


> Usually a baton and handcuffs solved my problem with men trying to grab



Uops things getting really dangerous now 



DaveB said:


> You're right, I do limit my thinking. I limit to techniques that work for situations that might actually occur.



Thats your right, i also have my own limits of techs and views. But please dave, dont limit what i can do judging only from your personal limits or just of what you think its viable or ideal coz my limits borders often expand.



DaveB said:


> This is a self defense thread pertaining to a self defense art.



Again... what you think its the ideal and real limiting hard other options for SD. And here is you acting like that foundamentalist that you hate so much...



DaveB said:


> The bottom line is efficiency in training. You can never train for every exact situation, *so you train for the most serious and the most common.* Then you rely on the flexibility and combat sense you have developed to guide you through everything else.



The most common for your environment its not the most common in my enviroment like i told. Uni-diretional way of thinking again. Not telling that your techs are wrong but you just close others and yourself for another possibilities and that is whats wrong with you for me.



DaveB said:


> You gain nothing playing around with techniques that don't work when tested with strength.



Read my posts above again man... you can gain a really expressive position advantage...you told earlier that in SD things are dynamic but now you saying thats not happening and have to be trained just in one way.



DaveB said:


> And working with* false assumptions* about the self defense environment is just dangerous.



Softer single and double hand grips can happens more frequent than you can even imagine in a lot of SD enviroments. Dont know why you insist in assuming im making false assumptions here. I can see only a man who feels the need and the hurry to hijack others way of thinking. A hard grip release like age shuto can be even more dangerous if you dont manage to gain any advantage with that if you choose it over the softer wrist release in a softer grab.



DaveB said:


> *A knee to the groin is not a guaranteed win because all men have been learning to defend against it since childhood.* It also leaves you vulnerable to the second attacker. That's why the tactic I described began with moving away from the danger. *The groin/low kick is always there; in fact it is implied as a function of kokutsudachi, but you must be in a place of relative safety to employ it*.



From my childhood memories i just can tell you that is pretty damn painfull and effective and a lot of times it caught me by surprise. Learn to defend it since childhood ? Thats why people are paying for thai and krav classes learning how to defend against knee strikes coz they knew it since their childhood...baaa

All i can say its in SD scenarios that will be pretty much unexpected but wait, you just know that someone will be expecting that also rite ? So again my assumption here its false and incorrect, no knees to the balls... kekeke... all right sir, all the way you want. Im not going further with this you can start your teachings ill be all ears. 

Btw a knee strike can be trown from other stances also and even from a neutral one but mostly from zenkutsu...Relative safety place to employ it???? wtf... where in the world launching a knee strike inside others clinch or at close range can be considered a safety position? sry thats a really false assumption.



DaveB said:


> Lastly, the age shuto uke works fine as a single wrist release. Single arm releases are more common and less tactically specific.



Finally we can agree  in the first part of the sentence. Age shuto is effective overall anykind of hand grips pressure and can open space for a wide array of tactics. 

I know a very simple (and i mean very very its so beatifull and natural) easy double wrist release that will function against very hard grips also. And guess what, age shuto its just the foundation for that.

But i pass, go on dave. I think you have a lot of more than me to contribute on this thread coz you are the maximum representative of the only and supreme real deal thing. Please show us...


----------



## dugite61

Quite a few years ago now when I was in the Aussie navy I was exiting a pub in Geelong (for pizza of course) when I was attacked from behind by 3 attackers who had planned on gaining my wallet and taking my pizza money, luckily for me the one first attacking alerted me by saying "hey mate" as he was launching a kick at my head, I automatically found myself without thinking pivoting, blocking and catching that kick while striking with a Shuto Uchi to the throat and sweeping his other foot putting him on the deck and out of the picture, the next closest attacker I managed a lucky shot of a Yoko Kekomi Geri to the Solar Plexus and then the rest of the defence was purely mongrel street fighting with maybe a technique thrown in here and there but I don't really remember as I really like pizza.  I was then joined by my mates who had been a minute or so behind me who then assisted with the clean up till the Police arrived who initially were going to arrest me.  By the end they said thanks as apparently the attackers had been mugging quite a few in the past in that area.
I tell this story not as a boast but like many Martial Artists one is never sure until it happens in the "real world" whether ones training will work or not.  
There is always conversations over which Martial Art is better than others and which would and wouldn't work in real life, BTW I have respect for all.  I have competed in sports Karate in the past but now my love is for traditional karate but I have also trained in Wing Chun and Jiu Jitsu (Japanese).  Just a few weeks ago I was reunited with one of me mates that was there that night and he is a practitioner of BJJ, as we were beering the old conversation of Shotokan v/s BJJ in the "real world" came up and he actually agreed that if I had of gone shoot and down to the deck with the first attacker that night I would have been stuffed because of the other two and the story would have ended differently with more than one attacker.
That all being said I think that too many believe that a couple of classes a week will solve all of the problems, but the real truth is there the same as for the 70's or 80's in that you must invest your own time outside the Dojo to sharpen the skills learn't within. 
Kata I believe still has a very relevant position for those like me who have a love of the traditions, I also believe that many of the blocks and strikes in the many Kata's have a relevant position in today's defence and counter situations also Kata's are an excellent tool in perfecting moving and transition, but if this is what you want to get out of your Kata you must go deeper than the sports side of the Kata which seems to be the trend and most popular which only emphasizes the dramatic and not the practical but looks very good. 
Anyway enough of my dribble and just my humble opinion
Cheers.


----------



## Tez3

RafaChan said:


> Thats your right, i also have my own limits of techs and views. But please dave, dont limit what i can do judging only from your personal limits or just of what you think its viable or ideal coz my limits borders often expand.


Are you trying to put him down here, if so you are wrong, he's not limiting anyone, like me and most others DaveB is practical.




RafaChan said:


> Uni-diretional way of thinking again.



I'm not sure what this means.



RafaChan said:


> you can gain a really expressive position advantage



Again I'm sorry I don't know what you mean.



RafaChan said:


> From my childhood memories i just can tell you that is pretty damn painfull and effective and a lot of times it caught me by surprise.



In MMA fights as well as altercations on 'the street' I've seen guys take hits there and carry on with only a wince, while it may well be painful it's also true that alcohol and adrenaline as well as anger etc can mask the pain long enough for a man to carry on attacking. It's true as well that when attacking men will take a stance that minimises the chance of a blow to his family jewels, we teach that should should never take it for granted that it will floor them.



RafaChan said:


> But i pass, go on dave. I think you have a lot of more than me to contribute on this thread coz you are the maximum representative of the only and supreme real deal thing. Please show us...



I think you are being sarcastic here and there's no need for that.



dugite61 said:


> but if this is what you want to get out of your Kata you must go deeper than the sports side of the Kata which seems to be the trend and most popular which only emphasizes the dramatic and not the practical but looks very good.



Absolutely, this is why I go when Iain Abernethy is teaching, plus follow his articles and videos, he introduces other instructors too, it's not all about him!


----------



## DaveB

RafaChan said:


> Read my posts above again man... you can gain a really expressive position advantage...you told earlier that in SD things are dynamic but now you saying thats not happening and have to be trained just in one way.



No you read my post again. I said techniques *that don't work *. That means you won't get any position advantage from them because they don't do what they are meant to do under pressure. They don't work.

Techniques that give you a position advantage are under the group that Do Work.

Now if you can make that application in the video work, then great, but I will not believe that until I see it.

As for training one way, I never said that. There are lots of ways to train and lots of combinations of skills to train in. My one point in this thread is that your training has to be appropriate to your goals, and where your goal is SD, that training needs to take into account the things that really happen, both in terms of common methods of assault and how we ourselves deal with violence.

I've given quite clear reasons why I think the video you posted falls short of this. If you don't want to accept those reasons that is up to you.



> Softer single and double hand grips can happens more frequent than you can even imagine in a lot of SD enviroments. Dont know why you insist in assuming im making false assumptions here. I can see only a man who feels the need and the hurry to hijack others way of thinking. A hard grip release like age shuto can be even more dangerous if you dont manage to gain any advantage with that if you choose it over the softer wrist release in a softer grab.



You can think how you want but we are here to discuss. If you can't cope with people disagreeing with your ideas and actually giving you reasons why then a discussion forum is probably not a good place for you.

In the heat of a confrontation you want to analyse the grip strength of your assailant,  then select an escape based on how hard he's holding.?

How is that better than using the first escape that comes to mind because you know it works no matter the grip strength?

Fewer techniques to train means more time to get good at them. This is why efficient training is good.



> From my childhood memories i just can tell you that is pretty damn painfull and effective and a lot of times it caught me by surprise. Learn to defend it since childhood ? Thats why people are paying for thai and krav classes learning how to defend against knee strikes coz they knew it since their childhood...baaa
> 
> All i can say its in SD scenarios that will be pretty much unexpected but wait, you just know that someone will be expecting that also rite ? So again my assumption here its false and incorrect, no knees to the balls... kekeke... all right sir, all the way you want. Im not going further with this you can start your teachings ill be all ears.



So because a knee to the groin will catch you by surprise you should assume it will catch everyone by surprise?

Think about what I'm saying. I just said you can't rely on it: that doesn't mean it won't work, just that it should not be your whole plan. You must always have a backup plan incase plan A fails.

Why would you argue with that?

My friends and I learned before I was 11, how to hold a girl and cover my groin because girls would fight us but we wouldn't hit them. I've never met a guy who hadn't been hit in the groin by a girl at least once so why a guy would hassle a woman and not expect it I couldn't say.




> Btw a knee strike can be trown from other stances also and even from a neutral one but mostly from zenkutsu...Relative safety place to employ it???? wtf... where in the world launching a knee strike inside others clinch or at close range can be considered a safety position? sry thats a really false assumption.



Rafa, I'm guessing English is not your first language. Relative safety means as safe as you can be in the situation. Not that you can be safe.

You might have worked that out if you were trying to understand what I've written rather than just trying to argue with it.

So it's spelled out, the lateral (sideways) movement takes you off the grasper's line and puts him between you and the second opponent. That gives you a split second longer to manage the situation. Going further with the applicatiion, you control the first attacker to keep him between you and the second assailant before striking.

Yes you can knee from a range of stances, but I was discussing the application potential of the heian yondan opening, not generic technique. It helps if you take phrases in context.

I don't really get why you are arguing about things you clearly have not been trained in or considered.

You can train how you like, but you are the first person I've met who doesn't want to train efficiently. Cluttering your mind with techniques that work sometimes under certain conditions may cause you to select the wrong technique under pressure. But that 's probably just my experience and not valid for you.



> But i pass, go on dave. I think you have a lot of more than me to contribute on this thread coz you are the maximum representative of the only and supreme real deal thing. Please show us...



If you can come down from this caricature of my views you might understand them better, but while you ignore the reasoning I give you in favour of this rubbish you won't get it.

There is really nothing controversial about my views. You can disagree as to whether the technique in the video works, (although I can't see why you would since Tez confirmed it doesn't, and in the Abernethy forum there's at least one poster offering a good analysis of it's weaknesses), but I am explaining things I've learned through training with skilled and experienced instructors, some of which I've done or observed through time policing a major city. It's not theory, guess work or supposition.

You seem to want your ideas to be correct more than you want to know what has been shown to work well. As I said in my introduction,  I'm no great master and that's why I will always give my reasons and explain the logic behind my views. So feel free to disbelieve anything I post, but at least do me the courtesy of trying to understand it first.


----------



## RafaChan

Tez3 said:


> In MMA fights as well as altercations on 'the street' I've seen guys take hits there and carry on with only a wince, while it may well be painful it's also true that alcohol and adrenaline as well as anger etc can mask the pain long enough for a man to carry on attacking. It's true as well that when attacking men will take a stance that minimises the chance of a blow to his family jewels, we teach that should should never take it for granted that it will floor them.



Im pretty aware one may have balls/jaws of steel or being under effect of high adrenal or other stuff like medicine or alcohol and in that cases neither a strike to the groin or a punch will do that KO/stun trick. Thats why pretty much all of us are training under a system of techs, if something fails you switch for other good stuff.

This what you said also proves that lot of possibilities can happen in practice and about carry on with a wince as a man i can tell you this is not a truth generally speaking. And thats why most MMA/kickboxer fighters use cup protectors while training or in competitions for example, coz they fear taking hits in that spot. No matter how they have being prepared for that since their childhood playground days nor counting on the adrenal leves in their blood stream to mask the pain.

Thats why i take with a grain of salt what some specialists or posters may tells that fast about what they think will be valid/happening or not in SD scenarios/cases just guiding the discussion by their own impressions and personal experiences.

By that i can tell you that alone doesnt invalidate knee attacks to the groin by no means just coz you as a girl have seen some guys handling the pain there, or else you will be restricting the scope of what you can do since from the start without even not knowing if will be really effective for the particular guy attacking you with his balls of glass.

Remember that vid i have posted of a security cam showing the girl doing that ascending schin to the guys groin ? What happened next ? The guy managed to hold on the pain ? No, he didnt. He felt on the ground in his knees and the girl kicked his face straight buying some time for the escape. That proves that we can act depending of whats happening in manny SD scenarios if we train and think about all the possibilities of those scenarios you will be pretty aware of what you can use and when.

If you think and train/practice only by the scope of the hardest situation with loads of pressure ever and the guy being under alcohol or drugs you are omiting a lot of usefull techniques that will gonna work smoother and faster when the altercation its escalating in the use of force progression and the adrenals are not yeat spread all over the blood stream.

I do have also some experience having to restrain violent people with brain damage under psychotic attack with the similar conditions you told. And the worst thing is that some of them were martial artists out of control coz of substances and agressive behaviour. In my earlier posts i talked a lot about shihon nukite being a lot of effective strike to the plexus the way i used it and people that work with me know as the kind of strikes we call as ''amansa doido''. (from google translator will be something like ''tames crazy'')... Have quite some guys who can attest the effective of this from practical experience in the field and how it can buy us some time to handcuff or tie the guy/s. If this is not working one should go for usual grabs and locks.



DaveB said:


> No you read my post again. I said techniques *that don't work *. That means you won't get any position advantage from them because they don't do what they are meant to do under pressure. They don't work.
> 
> Techniques that give you a position advantage are under the group that Do Work.
> 
> Now if you can make that application in the video work, then great, but I will not believe that until I see it.



I have stressed it like ive said. To make it work as showned in the girl vid the opponent grip cant be really that hard as i concluded also earlier. If you tell me that softer grips cant happen in SD scenario i must tell you that you are wrong. And if you tells me that you are practical i tell you that you are being practical just in one direction. No offense dave and nothing personal here. And i can show you also how we can make that technique happen with a hard grip also. Like ive sad age shuto foundation in heian shodan its the answer.



DaveB said:


> As for training one way, I never said that. There are lots of ways to train and lots of combinations of skills to train in. My one point in this thread is that your training has to be appropriate to your goals, and where your goal is SD, that training needs to take into account the things that really happen, both in terms of common methods of assault and how we ourselves deal with violence.
> 
> I've given quite clear reasons why I think the video you posted falls short of this. If you don't want to accept those reasons that is up to you.



My efforts are trying to go in that direction of what you saying above but i just cant see you doing the same of what you saying when you telling me its just happening the way you think. If you doesnt understand and cant apply the hard and soft components of MAs in the SD scenarios when things can be escalating in force progression then your practices are not aligned with your speech.



DaveB said:


> You can think how you want but we are here to discuss. If you can't cope with people disagreeing with your ideas and actually giving you reasons why then a discussion forum is probably not a good place for you.
> 
> *In the heat of a confrontation you want to analyse the grip strength of your assailant, then select an escape based on how hard he's holding.?*



Forum is a good place to people check in a lot of different opinions and i think im on my way.

Analyse the grip strenght its the easiest thing to do in the situation when a guy is starting to push in one direction and the girl start to resist and push back in the opposite side. BTW in the very moment someone grip my wrist i can have a good idea of the grip strenght being applied.



DaveB said:


> How is that better than using the first escape that comes to mind because you know it works no matter the grip strength?
> 
> Fewer techniques to train means more time to get good at them. This is why efficient training is good.



If we are here to discuss our different views regarding shotokan and SD why you trying so hard to make me look like a stubborn ? You cant accept whats different and fails to see the potential behind a technique. Its not my fault. You told me that it have flaws/limits while i can agree but im not entirely neglecting the entire potential as i can work on that to make it viable.

I must tell ya that other MAs for example have lot of techs thats for the use in more softer grips situation and when things are escalating. I can remeber some from aikido and jujutsu. The hard and soft components you are not efficiently taking in to consideration in your practices. Wanna make it work under pressure also ? Age shuto like ive said will do the trick.



DaveB said:


> So because a knee to the groin will catch you by surprise you should assume it will catch everyone by surprise?



Have not said that ''everyone'' but in the other hand you just telling me that ''coz since childhood'' the knee to the groin wont be working for everyone. I think we can skip on that as the guy spotted on that security cam footage have not managed to get your level of expertise in SD at the playgrounds.



DaveB said:


> Think about what I'm saying. I just said you can't rely on it: that doesn't mean it won't work, just that it should not be your whole plan. You must always have a backup plan incase plan A fails.



Yes dave i highly agree and my training consists in have at least three manuevers for each situation. Hard and softer outcomes. When things are escalating, when things are about to happen and when things are already really happening. I dunno but u took the girl vid as my only truth and the only think i pursue and i dont know why.



DaveB said:


> My friends and I learned before I was 11, how to hold a girl and cover my groin because girls would fight us but we wouldn't hit them. I've never met a guy who hadn't been hit in the groin by a girl at least once so why a guy would hassle a woman and not expect it I couldn't say.



Great, but that alone doesnt explain why theres a load of people learning how to defend effectively against knee to the groins in manny MAs classes. We do have also the more internal stances that we learn like hangetsu, sanchin and all of that being learnt effectively within a MA system and not in the play grounds.



DaveB said:


> You can train how you like, but you are the first person I've met who doesn't want to train efficiently. Cluttering your mind with techniques that work sometimes under certain conditions may cause you to select the wrong technique under pressure. But that 's probably just my experience and not valid for you.



You here are being completely ignorant about my backgrounds and my training as a whole. Thats consistently showing you just jump on this thread without have read all the pages and without read the things that ive posted earlier. If you clutter your mind or whatever if you train a lot of techs its your fault not mine.



DaveB said:


> There is really nothing controversial about my views. You can disagree as to whether the technique in the video works, (although I can't see why you would since Tez confirmed it doesn't, and in the Abernethy forum there's at least one poster offering a good analysis of it's weaknesses), but I am explaining things I've learned through training with skilled and experienced instructors, some of which I've done or observed through time policing a major city. It's not theory, guess work or supposition.
> 
> You seem to want your ideas to be correct more than you want to know what has been shown to work well. As I said in my introduction, I'm no great master and that's why I will always give my reasons and explain the logic behind my views. So feel free to disbelieve anything I post, but at least do me the courtesy of trying to understand it first.



Nope. I think you are the guy here trying to make a point getting that vid and posting it in another forum just out of its context as we discussing here and judging all of me by your personal way. I think thats not fair coz at least every time i see a movement and technique i stressed it for myself. And if you havent noted it was that have pointed the weaknesses/limit of the tech, the harder grip issue. And btw i was not there seeing her but i could made a right guess coz i have stressed it.

And again, i have worked it in a way its usefull against hard grips also. Maybe i have manage that coz i gave it a chance before just trying to deny it without apply it first. And you playing the role of the practical guy here now i can see clearly the issue...


----------



## DaveB

RafaChan said:


> My efforts are trying to go in that direction of what you saying above but i just cant see you doing the same of what you saying when you telling me its just happening the way you think. If you doesnt understand and cant apply the hard and soft components of MAs in the SD scenarios when things can be escalating in force progression then your practices are not aligned with your speech.



That’s not what is meant by hard and soft technique.

You need to read my posts over again as I was quite clear about SD training to enable a sufficient variety and adaptability.



> Analyse the grip strenght its the easiest thing to do in the situation when a guy is starting to push in one direction and the girl start to resist and push back in the opposite side. BTW in the very moment someone grip my wrist i can have a good idea of the grip strenght being applied.



Yes you can, but what if you are distracted by what else is going on? What about the guy who holds you gently until you try to move? What about the assailant who feels you pull to test the grip and goes straight into pounding your face, not giving you the second chance to move to a more effective technique? What about the second assailant that you didn't know was there?

Adding extra steps that don't directly improve your position is a risk because every heartbeat is potentially an action against you.

You keep repeating that I am limiting myself to only one way, but I seem to take a lot into account in my limited viewpoint.




> If we are here to discuss our different views regarding shotokan and SD why you trying so hard to make me look like a stubborn ? You cant accept whats different and fails to see the potential behind a technique. Its not my fault. You told me that it have flaws/limits while i can agree but im not entirely neglecting the entire potential as i can work on that to make it viable.



I'm not trying to make you look like anything. Your argument about the video has been that it works fine, then that it works for a soft grip, now that you can build on it to make it effective. All I did was explain why I disagree with the first two arguments.



> I must tell ya that other MAs for example have lot of techs thats for the use in more softer grips situation and when things are escalating. I can remeber some from aikido and jujutsu. The hard and soft components you are not efficiently taking in to consideration in your practices. Wanna make it work under pressure also ? Age shuto like ive said will do the trick.



As I said, that's not what hard/soft refers to in MA.

Many traditional MA are not considered fit for purpose by self defense experts precisely because they include too many techniques and ineffective techniques and inappropriate training methods for self defense.




> Yes dave i highly agree and my training consists in have at least three manuevers for each situation. Hard and softer outcomes. When things are escalating, when things are about to happen and when things are already really happening. I dunno but u took the girl vid as my only truth and the only think i pursue and i dont know why.



I've made no assumption about you based on the video, I've disagreed with you about it. My one comment about your training is based in you arguing against modern SD principles. If you are aware of them, arguing against them is not a good way to show it.



> Great, but that alone doesnt explain why theres a load of people learning how to defend effectively against knee to the groins in manny MAs classes. We do have also the more internal stances that we learn like hangetsu, sanchin and all of that being learnt effectively within a MA system and not in the play grounds.



You shouldn't need karate or krav to teach you to turn your knee in to cover your groin.



> You here are being completely ignorant about my backgrounds and my training as a whole. Thats consistently showing you just jump on this thread without have read all the pages and without read the things that ive posted earlier. If you clutter your mind or whatever if you train a lot of techs its your fault not mine.


That’s nice, but you forgot to answer the question you quoted. You also seem to have not understood me.

You can't have it both ways. You can't tell people to explore every half effective technique for the sake of covering every possible situation and every possible skill variation and also claim efficient training. You are either one or the other.



> Nope. I think you are the guy here trying to make a point getting that vid and posting it in another forum just out of its context as we discussing here and judging all of me by your personal way. I think thats not fair coz at least every time i see a movement and technique i stressed it for myself. And if you havent noted it was that have pointed the weaknesses/limit of the tech, the harder grip issue.



The context was, This video shows bad SD. That was what I said about it. By posting without that context I let the posters in that forum give opinions untainted by my own.

BTW, you keep on about hard grips and soft grips, but that wasn't even my biggest problem with the technique. 

I had issue with the fact that the technique relied on the attacker doing one exact technique and that it didn't account for other possibilities.

Again you complain that I see things one way, but my one way is covering many different elements that you seem to want to ignore in the hope that you encounter the exact circumstances needed by the technique.

Lastly, the things I've written are not my way, I didn't make them up. The methods and approaches to SD are things I've learned from skilled SD experts. From police and military trainers, as well as various martial arts instructors. That is why I knew my views would be supported in the Practical Karate forum. The principles of SD are pretty universal. There are details that people debate, but things like cutting out inefficient techniques and training have been settled.


----------



## Tez3

RafaChan said:


> By that i can tell you that alone doesnt invalidate knee attacks to the groin by no means just coz you as a girl have seen some guys handling the pain there, or else you will be restricting the scope of what you can do since from the start without even not knowing if will be really effective for the particular guy attacking you with his balls of glass.



I don't think you understood properly what I was saying. I wasn't saying that groin strikes are ineffective, not painful or shouldn't be done, I was saying that one shouldn't rely on them working and should always have something else ready.


----------



## RafaChan

DaveB said:


> Yes you can, but what if you are distracted by what else is going on? What about the guy who holds you gently until you try to move? What about the assailant who feels you pull to test the grip and goes straight into pounding your face, not giving you the second chance to move to a more effective technique? What about the second assailant that you didn't know was there?
> 
> Adding extra steps that don't directly improve your position is a risk because every heartbeat is potentially an action against you.
> 
> You keep repeating that I am limiting myself to only one way, but I seem to take a lot into account in my limited viewpoint.



You have trown a lot of ''ifs'' wich i always do also and find valid to analyse how far a technique can be strategically effective so we can hit commonground in good practice. As ive said before, each tech has its limits and reachs depending of the scenario outcomes. But here we have to agree that no matter how we try to be cautious or practical theres a lot of stuff out of our control in those scenarios. Regarding all those possibilities, the best thing we can do its training/practicing with all those ''ifs'' in mind.

For example, if the second guy happens to come by surprise what we will have to do next? How we can best react and try to still keep our backs covered? Is there any escape route nearby to avoid the agression? Have we being properly aware of the surroudings? Is there anything next to me that could be used as a weapon to aid me?

My opinion on that is if the second guy happens to come, pretty much we will need to act with more offensive manuevers always with evasion in mind (if we got the chance). Thats why i have suggested the knee strike to the groin for the first guy coz its a high rate technique for the most cases. Pretty much all the SD systems i had some experience with they point areas like the groin or throat for example as very sensible to these kind of attacks.

But consistently saying that attacking the groin can be not productive some times coz the guy can handle or the guy will be somewhat expecting it coz he was a naughy boy, while i can agree with that all, those things alone doesnt make attack to the groin ineffective. I pointed as an example only and havent said i rely entirely on technique X and Y and that i dont have a plan B,C,D...

Thats my opinion. You are free to disagree or make it your way based on your own practices and experiences.



DaveB said:


> I'm not trying to make you look like anything. Your argument about the video has been that it works fine, then that it works for a soft grip, now that you can build on it to make it effective. All I did was explain why I disagree with the first two arguments.



Yes, to make it work strictly like the video thats the condition as i pointed earlier. But in the other hand i have stressed it and discovered how i could manage that to work under pressure. If that will be ideal for you or not regarding X and Y conditions thats another matter in wich each technique can be put to test. If you revisit that post of mine i was saying how i was apllying age shuto from heian shodan as a wrist release also, i have said about unsu also, its the same principle for the hardest of grips. I have found this video to illustrate better what im trying to tell you and how we can make it effective. Check on 01:58.






Well... Thats the initial age shuto movement as performed in the kata as a wrist release, ill add a little wrist twist outside also not only to the inside of the grab. That way it can evolves to a standed arm lock as i experienced in my practice of that bunkai. Near future ill have more time to record some of that stuff on vid of my own and ill show the way i perform with an opponent resisting. Will be light years better instead of me here typing 1000 words and struggling with my bad engrish sorry for that...



DaveB said:


> You shouldn't need karate or krav to teach you to turn your knee in to cover your groin.



That alone will make an interest thread to check others opinions about that. But still, im pretty sure that theres a difference in know how to defend the groin instinctively and how to defend efficiently. Btw i will keep saying most people wont be expecting an attack there. Specially when they are concentrated on the harass/assault and looking eye on eye with you. Besides its the kind of strike that can be launched by surprise from the body blind spot (below the waist) when at close range.



DaveB said:


> That’s nice, but you forgot to answer the question you quoted. You also seem to have not understood me.
> 
> You can't have it both ways. You can't tell people to explore every half effective technique for the sake of covering every possible situation and every possible skill variation and also claim efficient training. You are either one or the other.



And thats why, like Ian said in his forum, that people judging the effectiveness of a specific technique he is doing sole by his 2 minute videos are often missing important parts of a whole bigger training practice.



DaveB said:


> The context was, This video shows bad SD. That was what I said about it. By posting without that context I let the posters in that forum give opinions untainted by my own.



I dont know the people that made the vid and envisioned that technique. My goal its not in promoting them either. I have watched some of their vids and like everything in life i get for me only the things that i can apply and see some potential. That way i can happen to make it work my way. Other poster also do admited the potential of that specific tech instead of just telling its bad or useless without even stress it or pointed that it need some more work to happen.

But yes. For the exact same way its happening on the vid and the way the opponent its compliant to make it happen ill agree with you in the matter of this debate will be pretty ineffective.



DaveB said:


> I had issue with the fact that the technique relied on the attacker doing one exact technique and that it didn't account for other possibilities.



Looking that way all the techniques are subject for other possibilities and by a 2 min video with a compliant opponent most of them will be useless like you said.



DaveB said:


> Again you complain that I see things one way, but my one way is covering many different elements that you seem to want to ignore in the hope that you encounter the exact circumstances needed by the technique.



Dave, lets agree here in one thing, every technique pretty much needs the right circumstances to happen. Even to trow a single jab you will have to be in range for that to make it happen, so i dont know/understand why you wanna invalidate techniques by that so fast with this argument.



DaveB said:


> Lastly, the things I've written are not my way, I didn't make them up. The methods and approaches to SD are things I've learned from skilled SD experts. From police and military trainers, as well as various martial arts instructors. That is why I knew my views would be supported in the Practical Karate forum. The principles of SD are pretty universal. There are details that people debate, but things like cutting out inefficient techniques and training have been settled.



Sorry but saying all of that to me and to others reading trying to validate your opinions i think its not the best way to make it work. And by that i can tell you that not all the skilled SD experts are in agreement with all they preach/do. Theres a lot of discussion and debate the same way we are doing here now. Theres not that thing of absolute truth coz i learnt with military and police trainers. Im from the military 5 years now in my state and received more than one kind of SD courses and the only thing i can tell you that is depending on the circles, instructors, agencies, still theres some disagreement in the discussion between the best techs to apply depending of the situation.

I agree that some SD principles are universal (the vital areas i.e. groin) but some of the principles sometimes are determined by culture, social behaviour and conditions of a particular country or place. As ive said regarding the best technique to apply could be even worst.

In SD, consensus between each tech will be the best for X, Y situation its not guaranted the way you talk. Same way that knee to the groin its not guaranted either.


----------



## RafaChan

Tez3 said:


> I don't think you understood properly what I was saying. I wasn't saying that groin strikes are ineffective, not painful or shouldn't be done, I was saying that one shouldn't rely on them working and should always have something else ready.



And i dont know if you understood the context in wich i was presenting the knee strike to the groin but lemme remind you. I was presenting it like a plan B in case of a second attacker comming like dave ''multi-questioned'' me. And by that alone the ''something else ready'' statement of yours here its totally unnecessary in my view as a reply to me coz it was already there since i replied him.

BTW strikes to the groin are considered to be consensus by pretty much all SD circles and authorities as the strike amongst having a high rate effectivenes. 

Since i have joined this forum i have being questioned and doubted a lot...nukite strikes, groin strikes, solar plexus strikes...i think its time to take a break and getting back by here when ive got all the material video documented proof for the YT mania video generation...not saying its your case. Besides that i wanna give space to other people talk.

My best regards.


----------



## Tez3

RafaChan said:


> And i dont know if you understood the context in wich i was presenting the knee strike to the groin but lemme remind you. I was presenting it like a plan B in case of a second attacker comming like dave ''multi-questioned'' me. And by that alone the ''something else ready'' statement of yours here its totally unnecessary in my view as a reply to me coz it was already there since i replied him.
> 
> BTW strikes to the groin are considered to be consensus by pretty much all SD circles and authorities as the strike amongst having a high rate effectivenes.
> 
> Since i have joined this forum i have being questioned and doubted a lot...nukite strikes, groin strikes, solar plexus strikes...i think its time to take a break and getting back by here when ive got all the material video documented proof for the YT mania video generation...not saying its your case. Besides that i wanna give space to other people talk.
> 
> My best regards.



People do question a lot, not just your posts everybody's, it how people debate and sort the wheat from the chaff so don't take it personally. The other thing is, that while your English is excellent there are some misunderstandings due to it not being your first language. It's hard even among native speakers to put points across as coherently as if we were speaking face to face, then body language, inflections and tone of voice tell half the story so understanding is easier.


----------



## DaveB

Some of it is language. Some of it is being wedded to ideas. People make discussions personal when they are discuss with their feelings.


----------



## K-man

RafaChan said:


> I could find some vids that represents better what I do and think of that... while gedan barai its a block very used and usefull block in kumite for kick defenses to the waist, belly against some mawashi - mae geri kicks some people its applying also as a wrist grab release technique with the add bonus of a throw just like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now zenkutsu will also plays a big role to create that trow momentum when the body turn and your front foot its trapping the opponent balance. Important things to note:
> 
> This can be performed even if the opponent still holding your two wrists when you raise your left arm around your head... the stronger is he holding the better to mess with his balance...
> 
> That's a small part of the answer if you end up with your wrists grabbed: you raise your stance a little and transition to a strong zenkutsu to any degree to the side...


I thank you for posting this video. It is a variation of an Aikido exercise we practise regularly from a double hand grip. Does it work against total resistance? Sure, it does. Can everyone do it? Not without a lot of practise. I introduced it to my Krav guys last night and will keep trainining it with them because it is so simple. Just a hint ... it will never work if you try to use strength.


----------



## BUCKNAKEDBULLFROG

Curious does anyone practice a backfist as a block or to stop a jab?


----------

