# Kata- Traditional or Modern?



## Vadim (Nov 11, 2004)

I was watching ESPN today and they had a Kata championship on from Orlando, FL. Some of the kata that I saw was done in a traditional manner while others were done in a more I guess I would call it "flashy" manner. The tv commentators kept saying that it was difficult to judge between the two types of kata.

   In your opinion do you feel it is appropriate to alter kata to make it more appealing to the possible uninformed viewers? Or is it better to keep kata in the traditional manner the way it was originally taught regardless of the style it came from?

-Vadim


----------



## Marginal (Nov 12, 2004)

Anything that frequently involves the use of the "Mortal Kombat" theme song is really, really hard to take seriously.


----------



## Oak Bo (Nov 12, 2004)

I feel they both have there place. 
 With that said, I think the backflips and cartwheels and all the other "stuff" are way over done though. Not to mention the kiai's on every other movement. It's to the point of silliness IMO.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 12, 2004)

Kata was not designed to entertain the masses. Therefore I cant see any reason to add a triple back flip with a half summy while spinning a pair of  lighted nunchaku performed by a 20 something year old grand master no less.. this is no joke I saw this on one of those ESPN type _kur-raw-dee_ tournaments
If people want to do that kind of crap I strongly urge them to call it something besides karateI suggest monkey flung pooh wu shoo or something along those lines.


----------



## The Kai (Nov 12, 2004)

Free-style Kata devaules the art/application of the arts.  If you want to do gymnastics, do gymnastics  as simply as that.  At a tournament 20 yrs ago there was a gentlemen doing a simple traditional form with plenty of tension breathing.  As odd as it sounds the kata raised the hairs on the back of your neck.  That is what a Kata should be (IMHO)

Todd


----------



## MJS (Nov 12, 2004)

Yes, I have to agree once again with Robert.  IMO, a kata, be it empty hand or a weapon, should be done in its pure form.  Katas were designed to contain fighting movements.  That being said, what application does all of the fancy acrobatics play??  If people say that going to the ground to grapple is not wise, then why would you want to do a cartwheel???  

Mike


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 12, 2004)

If kata weren't designed for entertainment then why are they frequently used at demonstrations?  Even the "old" masters did kata for demonstration purposes.

As for the extreme MA stuff, nothing wrong with that, it's just not for me.  It doesn't devalue anything, it is its own thing.  they aren't claiming it is anything that it isn't, so I see no problem with it.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 12, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Yes, I have to agree once again with Robert.  IMO, a kata, be it empty hand or a weapon, should be done in its pure form.  Katas were designed to contain fighting movements.  That being said, what application does all of the fancy acrobatics play??  *1)If people say that going to the ground to grapple is not wise, then why would you want to do a cartwheel???
> *
> Mike




1) Because there are too many egos in the MA lately that claim they have created something new and improved but actually just can't hack it doing the real stuff correctly.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 12, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> If kata weren't designed for entertainment then why are they frequently used at demonstrations?  Even the "old" masters did kata for demonstration purposes.
> 
> As for the extreme MA stuff, nothing wrong with that, it's just not for me.  It doesn't devalue anything, it is its own thing.  they aren't claiming it is anything that it isn't, so I see no problem with it.





Uhhhh please think about what you wrote and re-read what I wrote. 
REAL Kata were not developed for demonstrations.......they are done at them but were not made for them. You will also see technique demonstrated but it doesnt mean technique was made for demos.


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 12, 2004)

So basically you are saying that traditional kata are ill suited for competition?  I'll agree to that, now let the XMA folk do what they do...And really, isn't doing kata as a competition kind of like having a basketball player come out and dribble then get scorred on form?  If they are primarily for training then that is pretty much what is going on.


----------



## BlackCatBonz (Nov 12, 2004)

i have to agree with robert on this one. im sick to death of all these "new and improved" creations. if you wanna impress me, show some old fashioned hard working knowledge of a real kata, not some half-baked rejected olympic floor routine.

shawn


----------



## tshadowchaser (Nov 12, 2004)

> Free-style Kata devaules the art/application of the arts. If you want to do gymnastics, do gymnastics as simply as that. At a tournament 20 yrs ago there was a gentlemen doing a simple traditional form with plenty of tension breathing. As odd as it sounds the kata raised the hairs on the back of your neck. That is what a Kata should be (IMHO)


I could not agree more.  Dance is dance, gymnastics are gymnastics and Karta is something totaly different.
Call all this fancy stuff " Show form" or Acrobatic interpatation but don't call it a karta


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 12, 2004)

Ok, so what happens when you get a group of MMA fighters telling you to call your kata folk dancing or whatever you want, just don't try to call it martial arts cause your little punching the air number devalues the martial arts?


oh, and btw - They usually call it "Sport Karate", not "Karate". Which is exactly what it is

And one more thing   - They made a movie abouyt this, called "Strictly Ballroom", you should see it


----------



## MJS (Nov 12, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> If kata weren't designed for entertainment then why are they frequently used at demonstrations?  Even the "old" masters did kata for demonstration purposes.



I think the point is being missed here.  Yes, kata can be done for demos.  The title of this thread was regarding changes made to the kata to make it flashey.

Mike


----------



## MJS (Nov 12, 2004)

RRouuselot said:
			
		

> 1) Because there are too many egos in the MA lately that claim they have created something new and improved but actually just can't hack it doing the real stuff correctly.



Just so there is no confusion.  I wasn't trying to validate grappling, just simply making a ref. to going to the ground to do a cartwheel.

Mike


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 12, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> I think the point is being missed here. Yes, kata can be done for demos. The title of this thread was regarding changes made to the kata to make it flashey.
> 
> Mike


And I am quite sure I remember reading references to the old Okinawan masters doing it too...


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 12, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> That being said, what application does all of the fancy acrobatics play?? If people say that going to the ground to grapple is not wise, then why would you want to do a cartwheel???
> 
> Mike


Application?  who cares?  90% of traditional kata doers don't know any realistic applications for them.  And a cartwheel c an be used to pass guard.  Even the don't go to the ground people would have a hard time arguing that if you got a guy on his back getting on top of him and kneeing him is a pretty good way to hurt someone


----------



## MJS (Nov 12, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> And I am quite sure I remember reading references to the old Okinawan masters doing it too...



Again, some misunderstanding here.  Kata were designed to contain moves used for fighting.  Obviously, you're not going to fight someone using the kata pattern, but you can take moves from them, and apply them to a SD tech.  As for the old masters...again, sure, they did them, but did they do a cartwheel or keep the kata in its true form??  That is the difference here.

Mike


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 12, 2004)

MJS said:
			
		

> Again, some misunderstanding here. Kata were designed to contain moves used for fighting. Obviously, you're not going to fight someone using the kata pattern, but you can take moves from them, and apply them to a SD tech. As for the old masters...again, sure, they did them, but did they do a cartwheel or keep the kata in its true form?? That is the difference here.
> 
> Mike


No misunderstanding at all.  You are talking about modification for the purpose of impressing observers.  The exact modifications are not relevant, only the intent is.


----------



## MJS (Nov 12, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> Application?  who cares?  90% of traditional kata doers don't know any realistic applications for them.



And that is very sad.  There are people out there that do understand the true meaning though.




> And a cartwheel c an be used to pass guard.  Even the don't go to the ground people would have a hard time arguing that if you got a guy on his back getting on top of him and kneeing him is a pretty good way to hurt someone



Again, some misunderstanding here.  You hear people all the time talking about going to the ground and the pros/cons of it.  An example would be mult. attackers.  Keep in mind, not everyone is a gymnast.  Honestly Andrew, how many fights in the street have you seen people doing a cartwheel??  As for the knee...nothing wrong with that...technically, you're not 'going to the ground'.

mike


----------



## MJS (Nov 12, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> No misunderstanding at all.  You are talking about modification for the purpose of impressing observers.  The exact modifications are not relevant, only the intent is.




And its sad that people can't be impressed by the true nature of the kata.  Instead, it takes a gymnastics routine to keep everyones eyes open.

Mike


----------



## tshadowchaser (Nov 12, 2004)

This discussion is starting to go a bit off track.  Lets try to bring it back to the original guestion 


> In your opinion do you feel it is appropriate to alter kata to make it more appealing to the possible uninformed viewers? Or is it better to keep kata in the traditional manner the way it was originally taught regardless of the style it came from?


Discussions on "Will a kata work" are found in other threads


----------



## loki09789 (Nov 12, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> If kata weren't designed for entertainment then why are they frequently used at demonstrations? Even the "old" masters did kata for demonstration purposes.
> 
> As for the extreme MA stuff, nothing wrong with that, it's just not for me. It doesn't devalue anything, it is its own thing. they aren't claiming it is anything that it isn't, so I see no problem with it.


Key word is 'demonstration.'  The intent of demonstration is to show something not to entertain.  I can watch a porn for 'entertainment' and not as a 'demonstration' because the way the plot/setting/characterization is done is WAY beyond reality.

That said, I do think that there are 'performance kata' and 'traditional kata.'  The performance stuff is akin to gymnastic forms or choreographed dances and is meant to be inspiring/entertaining and artistically exciting (like porn ).
The 'traditional kata' generally are for learning and skill development; which is why they are part of testing environments in systems that use them.

I am being a little glib about this so don't read sarcasm please.  I try to look at this stuff as 'context/application' instead of 'good better best comparison' because it isn't 'THE ART' that really matters as much as how the art is being used.  THere are some great benefits being reeped by these kids (primarily) that are doing 'performance kata' because of the athletic, mental and personal growth that comes from that level of commitment and hard work.  It just isn't for me and I don't think it is my place to judge a performance based venue from my self defense based perspective - doesn't really seem fair.  But I can recognize how impressive the work they are doing is without having to 'judge it'.


----------



## MJS (Nov 12, 2004)

tshadowchaser said:
			
		

> This discussion is starting to go a bit off track.  Lets try to bring it back to the original guestion
> Discussions on "Will a kata work" are found in other threads



Thank you!!  Its a shame that discussions always seem to turn into a flame!!!

Mike


----------



## Andrew Green (Nov 12, 2004)

In a sense, "will it work" is a central issue though.

It gets argued that they shouldn't be changed because they are functional and work, and that is what kata should be about.  But that argument rests on the assumption that they do work.

And another question of "What about kata requires them to work to count?"  why are kata that stress athleticisim not "worthy"?

Athletisicm is definately a valuable skill in fighting, one of the most important, but a kata that stresses this is somehow less worthy...  I don't get it.  Maybe thats why I gave up on the idea of kata completely though...

How about another question, "What about modifying kata for functional purposes?" for example coming up on your toes, bringing your hands up, etc.  Is that sort of modification "acceptable"?

In a sense this whole thing sounds a lot like some tour de france guys complaining about how kids on BMX's in a half pipe are devaluing the art of biking...


----------



## loki09789 (Nov 12, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> In a sense, "will it work" is a central issue though.
> 
> It gets argued that they shouldn't be changed because they are functional and work, and that is what kata should be about. But that argument rests on the assumption that they do work.
> 
> ...


YUP!

The other thing to consider is 'will it work....' in what context?

I know of many a 'kata' that won't work in self defense....but the components that you use in that kata will 'work' if you restructure them to fit the momentary need.

The conditioning, explosive power and coordination from 'performance' kata can not be ignored as important that is for sure.

In hockey scouting, 'conditioning and fitness' is listed as a 'skill' that is evaluated just like skating, puck handling, shooting, checking and tactical/game sense...


----------



## loki09789 (Nov 12, 2004)

Double post, sorry, it looked like the first one wasn't going to take.


----------



## still learning (Nov 12, 2004)

Ture kata's or any....How long does it take to master just the first move?
 To be able to use all the right muscles,breathing,eyes,power and relaxing at the right times?  To be explosive and relax at the right monment?  The perfect Kata?  Is it possible?  Just my thoughts
 Todays tournments have turn into a more of a  entertainment feature,flash is nice!  Cool! They may need to separate the two Kata's (different divisons). Than again?
 Like all dances, they change with the times,music changes too, so must Kata's.  We don't live our life like the old days and ways, right?  History is just that, Modern is ..Now!  We must always update or keep improving to the enviroment around us, look at the War in Irag? the fighting is different today. We will always need to adjust to the NEW times?
 I like traditional Kata's and still do, the Heian kata's.  But todays kids like to make their own and love the flashly moves. Remember when we we teenagers,rock and roll was cooll. and Cha-Cha was? 
 Today both are fine, because both do what Kata's were made for. Think about it?  What are Kata made for?(this should be a new thread?


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 12, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> So basically you are saying that traditional kata are ill suited for competition?............




If I would have meant that I would have said so..


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 13, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> 1) Ok, so what happens when you get a group of MMA fighters telling you to call your kata folk dancing or whatever you want, just don't try to call it martial arts cause your little punching the air number devalues the martial arts?
> 
> 
> 2) oh, and btw - They usually call it "Sport Karate", not "Karate". Which is exactly what it is
> ...




1)	I take them on the matt and show them just how much grappling there is in kata, then we have a nice workout.
2)	Funny I havent ever seen it called that. Where I am from sport karate was the same as kick boxing.
3)	I guess you think that is amuzing..Actually strictly ballroom was a movie made in reference to tight fitting underwear.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 13, 2004)

tshadowchaser said:
			
		

> This discussion is starting to go a bit off track.  Lets try to bring it back to the original guestion
> Discussions on "Will a kata work" are found in other threads




Actually this was the question:
_
*In your opinion do you feel it is appropriate to alter kata to make it more appealing to the possible uninformed viewers? Or is it better to keep kata in the traditional manner the way it was originally taught regardless of the style it came from?*_


So to answer this question: 
Who cares what a bunch of people that know nothing about kata like or dislike.
Keep it the way you were taught it.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 13, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> And I am quite sure I remember reading references to the old Okinawan masters doing it too...



Which Okinawan masters altered kata to make them more flashy?
Off the top of my head I can't remember a single one.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 13, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> 1) Application?  who cares?  90% of traditional kata doers don't know any realistic applications for them.  2) And a cartwheel c an be used to pass guard.  Even the don't go to the ground people would have a hard time arguing that if you got a guy on his back getting on top of him and kneeing him is a pretty good way to hurt someone




1)	Just wondering where you are coming up with that statistic.
2)	Been watching some Ninja Turtles or mortal kombat?


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 13, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> No misunderstanding at all.  You are talking about modification for the purpose of impressing observers.  The exact modifications are not relevant, only the intent is.




I have yet to see any of the back flip crowd show the intent of moves/kata they create other than winning a trophy, or getting a few oooohhhs and aaahhss from a crowd of people. The few that do show what their technique is supposed to be in a real life situation have not really thought it out.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 13, 2004)

Andrew Green said:
			
		

> 1) In a sense, "will it work" is a central issue though.
> 
> It gets argued that they shouldn't be changed because they are functional and work, and that is what kata should be about.  But that argument rests on the assumption that they do work.
> 
> ...



1)	I have yet to see anything really usable coming from most of the fancy stuff they do. Fights just dont last that long and people wont wait for you.
2)	Do an old kata correctly and it WILL BE athletic if done properly. I think most people that pull kata out of their backside never actually learned how to do traditional ones properly with power, speed and timing. 
3)	Yes, and no. My teacher is a lot older than me but he could still hurt me bad enough to put me in the hospital even though he cant run the 100 in 11 seconds, do 100 push ups in 60 seconds or bench 350lbs..martial arts are for your whole life, not just for young people. In fact it has been said that the elderly need martial arts more since they are usually attacked more than a young fit person. 
4)	Depends on why and who is doing it. I have yet to see a move in kata that didnt work pretty well when done correctly. I have seen a lot of folks that try to make kata fit their needs. Meaning, they force the move in the kata to what they want. Like fitting a round peg in a square hole. Kata have moves for specific purposes, for example if you try to make the defense for a punch try to work for an attack from behind it most likely will get poor results. Learn what the moves ACTUALLY are before you try to improve them. I have adjusted certain techniques from the kata to allow for height differences but I have no need to adjust the kata movement. *You dont change the spelling in the dictionary just because YOU cant read it.*  Kata is the same way. 
5)	On the contrary. I think what I and some others are getting at is dont think what BMXers do is the Tour de France. The new back flip, flaming num-chuck twirlers can do whatever tricks their trigger, but dont call it karate kata..because it is not.


----------



## DeLamar.J (Nov 19, 2004)

Vadim said:
			
		

> I was watching ESPN today and they had a Kata championship on from Orlando, FL. Some of the kata that I saw was done in a traditional manner while others were done in a more I guess I would call it "flashy" manner. The tv commentators kept saying that it was difficult to judge between the two types of kata.
> 
> In your opinion do you feel it is appropriate to alter kata to make it more appealing to the possible uninformed viewers? Or is it better to keep kata in the traditional manner the way it was originally taught regardless of the style it came from?
> 
> -Vadim


There is so much to gain from kata, it is the internal part of your training. When its modified for looks it looses the reason for which it was made, but I guess you have to just give people what they want to see sometimes. But in the end all that does is just waters down martial arts more that what it already is.


----------



## RRouuselot (Nov 30, 2004)

DeLamar.J said:
			
		

> 1) There is so much to gain from kata, it is the internal part of your training. When its modified for looks it looses the reason for which it was made, but I guess you have to just give people what they want to see sometimes. But in the end all that does is just waters down martial arts more that what it already is.


 1) I agree. If kata is done right it looks fine....I don't need to do a flaming "numchuck" kata just so some teenager can get excited and join my school.....I think they call that "selling out"


----------

