# "Bringing karate back"



## Andrew Green (Apr 5, 2007)

Eric "Dragon Style" Henry
[yt]MSDR0NHdKw8[/yt]


----------



## PictonMA (Apr 6, 2007)

Good video find Andrew.

While it's nice to see someone using 'traditional' techniques, saying he's bringing karate back is a bit of a misnomer since he's clearly using techniques from a variety of styles (now I'm sure some karate purists are going to say that all those variety of kicks and jutsu exist in there syllabus, lets be really honesty - how many pure karate practioners are actually using them or any good at them?)

What I did find quite impressive tho in watching the video is his sense of timing - in that highlight reel he hardly missed an opportunity be it for a well timed kick or punch, or particularily impressive was the wherewithall to use ippon seionage when the guy had his back and was going for a rear naked choke.

Good fighter tho and I'd like to see some more from him.


----------



## zDom (Apr 6, 2007)

Thanks for posting!

This is kind of what I've been trying to get at  there are "traditional" techniques that can be extremely effective if simply given the time to train them to the point where they are viable.

As shown, a reverse punch to the body can fold someone over; a well-timed sidekick can put your opponent on their butt; and that one-armed shoulder throw might have been a finishing move if they weren't on a force-absorbing mat.


----------



## kidswarrior (Apr 6, 2007)

zDom said:


> Thanks for posting!
> 
> This is kind of what I've been trying to get at &#8212; there are "traditional" techniques that can be extremely effective if simply given the time to train them to the point where they are viable.
> 
> As shown, a reverse punch to the body can fold someone over; a well-timed sidekick can put your opponent on their butt; and that one-armed shoulder throw might have been a finishing move if they weren't on a force-absorbing mat.



All true. Likewise the standing armbar takedown w/ about 30 secs. left--easily a break on the street instead of releasing and settling for a throw to the mat to stay within ring protocol.

Wanted to add my thanks, too, Andrew. Pretty sure I'm not overstepping by saying it seems you have strong feelings about this stuff (tradition/innovation), so good of you to post from both sides.


----------



## matt.m (Apr 6, 2007)

Yes, I have to agree.  However, a good debater will always show knowledge and fairness to both sides.


----------



## Sukerkin (Apr 6, 2007)

I was going to post to say that the chap, from my limited understanding, is seemingly dressing up MMA with a 'traditional karate' cloak on but *Picton* beat me to it.

If I was pressed into an opinion I would say that MMA has some positive aspects as it has a technique for everyone in it whereas studying a given style may not produce fast results for many.  However, it all depends on what you do MA for, in the end.  Winning bouts in competition, I would say, gives the impression that 'learning a little about a lot' is the best way to go.  The flip side is that if your intent is to trully become competent at a style then diversification of techniques leads to dilution.

But, I'm talking in a court where I cannot hold a current opinion, having not practised 'empty handed' for a long time, so forgive me if I'm spouting errant nonsense here .

What I really started to post was that I concur with *Matt*'s point that any reasonable debater has to be able to see and understand both sides to carry an argument :tup:.


----------



## kidswarrior (Apr 6, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> What I really started to post was that I concur with *Matt*'s point that any reasonable debater has to be able to see and understand both sides to carry an argument :tup:.



Yes, this was exactly my point to begin with. Guess the compliment was overly subtle, evidently to the point of attenuation.


----------



## Sukerkin (Apr 6, 2007)

Oops ... when I typed "Matt's point" it is obviously clear that I meant "*Kidswarrior*'s point to which Matt has added confirmation" ...

... do you think anyone noticed my slip-up there? ... {sneaks away ninja-like into the shadows (only given away by the glowing, clown-like, redness of his cheeks)}.


----------



## kidswarrior (Apr 6, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> Oops ... when I typed "Matt's point" it is obviously clear that I meant "*Kidswarrior*'s point to which Matt has added confirmation" ...
> 
> ... do you think anyone noticed my slip-up there? ... {sneaks away ninja-like into the shadows (only given away by the glowing, clown-like, redness of his cheeks)}.



Naw, I'm sure no one noticed. Everyone knows ninjas are invisible, and only leave traces where they _mean _to do so, for the clumsy to stumble over them (that would be me ).


----------



## MJS (Apr 7, 2007)

zDom said:


> Thanks for posting!
> 
> This is kind of what I've been trying to get at  there are "traditional" techniques that can be extremely effective if simply given the time to train them to the point where they are viable.
> 
> As shown, a reverse punch to the body can fold someone over; a well-timed sidekick can put your opponent on their butt; and that one-armed shoulder throw might have been a finishing move if they weren't on a force-absorbing mat.


 
Yes, I agree.  This is what I try to stress all the time.  Some arts are looked down upon because people don't think they'll hold up well in the cage.  As I like to say, its how the technique is applied. 

Great post!!


----------



## kidswarrior (Apr 7, 2007)

Andrew Green said:


> Eric "Dragon Style" Henry
> [yt]MSDR0NHdKw8[/yt]



This is an excellent thread/op as I've told *Andrew*. And following up on Mike's post (*MJS*), anyone besides me care to offer an opinion on where Eric 'Dragon Style' Henry's ring style would land in the Tradition/Evolution poll that's been going on? Just a thought. Personally, I'm wondering if he would be using 75% traditional technique/strategy and under the refining fire of application (PAIN), letting it evolve the other 25%?* 

~kw

*Again, these numbers are somewhat arbitrary and approximate.


----------

