# Kata bunkai for self defense



## Kong Soo Do

For quite a while now we've had a plethora of threads on sparring, kata and bunkai, as it pertains to self defense and sport.  I figured that it would be interesting, and hopefully productive to have a thread where practitioners of kata, who feel kata has self defense value, to discuss which kata or which parts of a particular kata they feel is relative and why?  This thread is open to practitioners who feel the movements of a kata should be taken at face value as well as those who feel a kata has alternate explanations for movements.  Through such discussion, my hope is that we may glean from each others experience and perhaps learn something from each other. 

Thanks for participating 

I'll toss out a clip for discussion but feel free to toss any other kata or bunkai drill out for discussion as well.





 
As noted, these are some of the opening movements to Pinan Shodan.  I've seen him demonstrate the opening movements as a shoulder lock rather than the upper cut but I think this is one of the wonderful diversities of kata in that movements can demonstrate multiple applications effectively.  Thus a kata is more than a one dimensional catalog.  I also like how Abernethy Senei explains that the movements are a demonstration of what 'can' be done but they don't have to follow a specific sequence i.e. you can mix-n-match some of the punches.  The knife hand drill I especially like as it is one that we use as well (knife hand and forearm strikes).


----------



## Kong Soo Do

I think he does a good job of explaining applications in this video as well.


----------



## Drose427

The first bunkai I took from a former as a white belt was actually the knife hand from shodan to the guys neck. I prefer stepping back with  it though and really yanking on the punch at the right time to really through my opponent off balance.

To be fair, it took some practice. Improper timing and position resulted in a good bit of blood on my new belt, but after some effort I got it all down.

I'm a big fan of the gi choke from odan, but I prefer it from by back bease it's simply easier to apply at such a close range.

Another big common one we teach that all the head grab\elbows in forms can be applied really well if you slide in deep enough. I don't reach, opting for a boxing type block on the blocking arm, and use the slide to get deep enough that I don't have to reach for the head.

Abernathy videos are great. Something we always see with the gold belts when we tell them to look at their forms is they think it needs to be done that exact way, and they dont!


----------



## Hanzou

I'm sorry, but I just don't buy any of that. I've never personally seen anyone fight like that, and I have my doubts that fighting like that is possible. Even Loyoto Machida, a guy Karatekas like to prop up as an example of Karate in MMA doesn't fight like that.

Show a karateka fight like this in MMA or even while performing full contact kumite, and you'll make a believer out of me. Until then.....


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Drose427 said:


> The first bunkai I took from a former as a white belt was actually the knife hand from shodan to the guys neck.


 
I'm normally for joint locks and throws, however, if I do strike it is either knife hand or elbows strikes to the side of the neck.  Very effective even if against drunks, psychs or spicers.  I like it because I'm usually in very close anyways.  And it leads right into grapples, locks and take downs quite effectively. 



Drose427 said:


> Abernathy videos are great. Something we always see with the gold belts when we tell them to look at their forms is they think it needs to be done that exact way, and they dont!


 
That's the approach I take to kata.  They are a catalog of movements as a representation of what can be done, and what can be built upon.  As he mentions, fighting is an ugly, chaotic mess and it certainly isn't going to look choreographed.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

Hanzou said:


> I'm sorry, but I just don't buy any of that.


 
No one has asked you to buy anything.  You have demonstrated that you aren't yet experienced enough to understand the value of kata.  Thus this thread isn't for you, and that was clearly indicated in the OP:



Kong Soo Do said:


> I figured that it would be interesting, and hopefully productive to have a thread where* practitioners of kata, who feel kata has self defense value*, to discuss which kata or which parts of a particular kata they feel is relative and why?


 
You do not qualify and thus your only reason to be in this thread is to cause problems.  So if you continue in the same fashion as you've done in the past (disrupt threads) then I'll simply report your actions to the moderators and ask them to deal with it.  Once again, your lack of experience and understanding means you can add nothing of value and don't need to be in this thread.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> I'm sorry, but I just don't buy any of that. I've never personally seen anyone fight like that, and I have my doubts that fighting like that is possible. Even Loyoto Machida, a guy Karatekas like to prop up as an example of Karate in MMA doesn't fight like that.
> 
> Show a karateka fight like this in MMA or even while performing full contact kumite, and you'll make a believer out of me. Until then.....


Hanzou for goodness sake, butt out. Can we please just have one thread where up you don't derail it? I would love to discuss bunkai with like minded people without your constant interjection? You don't like kata, you never learned bunkai, so go and blow your trumpet elsewhere.


----------



## K-man

I know it's just a training drill but in the first video, pinan shodan, I wonder how practical it is to be changing hands all the time to strike. He is changing hands and striking where if he had the position he can continue striking until his partner defends. 

These kata were developed to teach basic principles and in this particular one there may be a problem that the partners left arm is not being controlled. Not that it always has to as I teach that sometimes that fist just won't arrive. Without training it myself, I really don't know. 

BTW, I do have Iain's bunkai videos. Perhaps I should watch them again.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Hanzou said:


> Show a karateka fight like this in MMA or even while performing full contact kumite, and you'll make a believer out of me. Until then.....


|
Well, I find myself kinda in the middle.  I mean, karate applied is self defense, one certainly has to defend themselves against tough, aggressive opponents in MMA.
|
OTOH, I wouldn't use the MMA 'experience' as a generality to judge the applicability or validity of kata bunkai.  I'm sure MMA fight analysts would agree, if they are serious & open minded that is.....


----------



## Flying Crane

Hanzou said:


> I'm sorry, but I just don't buy any of that. I've never personally seen anyone fight like that, and I have my doubts that fighting like that is possible. Even Loyoto Machida, a guy Karatekas like to prop up as an example of Karate in MMA doesn't fight like that.
> 
> Show a karateka fight like this in MMA or even while performing full contact kumite, and you'll make a believer out of me. Until then.....


This is exactly the response we expect from you.  You've made your point well.  Now go back to the kiddie table and let the adults have a discussion.


----------



## Flying Crane

I'm not a karate guy and I'm not familiar with the karate kata.  However, I am a kung fu guy who believes in forms as a valuable training tool and comes from a tradition that has a lot of forms in the curriculum and tends to use forms training a lot.  An interesting thing that I've noticed is that when Sifu discusses and demonstrates application, very often it is distilled down to a small number of simple techniques.  A movement in a form may seem complex and abstract, but when he shows the application it is usually clean and obvious and straight forward without any fancy nonsense.  It's the kind of thing that I mentally kick myself over afterward, for having not seen it myself.  And usually the application is very similar to an application derived from a different portion of the form.  It's a lesson to me:  fighting is straight forward and simple and not fancy.  That is what works.  If you get complicated and fancy, likely it won't work.

More importantly to me, I find the forms to be an excellent way to practice our fundamental principles of rooting and power generation thru rotation, within a moving and changing context.  On a basic level, we practice these fundamental principles in a fairly static position by training our basic techniques, or with simple movements.  The forms elevate this to a more complex and challenging level, with greater movement.  Learning to maintain our root and still generate power thru full body rotation even while moving more extensively is much more difficult. To me, this is more important than the translation and application of technique because, as I stated above, application should be simple and straight forward.  

Of course, this is a progression in the training methodology.  After this is some form of application drills and/or sparring.  But returning to the basics and the forms is critical to maintain the foundational skills and principles.  If the fundamental practices and the forms practice is abandoned, those skills will deteriorate.  Sparring alone can encourage the deterioration of these foundational skills, because it disrupts them.  Sparring and application drills are best if used in tandem with ongoing practice of basics, including forms.  They need to be used to constantly reinforce each other.  It's not a question of one or the other, but rather giving each of them the appropriate amount of time and energy.

Of course nobody needs to do forms.  If you don't like them, don't do them.  But there needs to be some way to return to the basics and train and reinforce those foundational skills.  Sparring alone is likely to undermine the technical skills if that is all, or mostly, what one does.


----------



## Kong Soo Do

K-man said:


> I know it's just a training drill but in the first video, pinan shodan, I wonder how practical it is to be changing hands all the time to strike. He is changing hands and striking where if he had the position he can continue striking until his partner defends.



If this application involves the attacker throwing a punch at you then I'd say this particular response is not practical at all.  The punch, the fight, the movement of both the defender and the attacker is far too wild to do all this switching around.  No economy of motion.  From a close in grapple though I could see some practical application.  The upper cut for example is applicable, depending of course upon each persons positioning if you can slip under the attackers outreached limb.  If you connect with a decent uppercut you can at least expect it to momentarily kick them  back to the beginning of their OODA loop which would give you the opportunity to clear one of their limbs off of you as demonstrated.  I think what follows in his drill is what 'could' be done but not necessarily what should be done.  What I mean by this is that a kata, if in a competition needs to be done to very exacting standards.  If used as a combative drill you really need to adapt it to the student as an individual.  This is our approach.  A students strengths and weaknesses need to be taken into account as well as any disability or injury.  For example, if someone has had say rotator cuff surgery and doesn't have full range of motion in one arm then the bunkai shown in the video can be adapted.   The drill, in my opinion shows avenues that can be taken rather than specific roads you 'have' to travel.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Flying Crane said:


> Of course nobody needs to do forms.  If you don't like them, don't do them.  But there needs to be some way to return to the basics and train and reinforce those foundational skills.  Sparring alone is likely to undermine the technical skills if that is all, or mostly, what one does.


|
You sounded like a "kung fu prophet," until you got here.  Although it has been said in both karate & kung fu, ">>> that basics are everything."  In any event, I think any bona-fide martial artist, TMA. MMA, boxer, etc, should respect your viewpoint.  I_M_O.

P.S. There is an aged Master at my school who blasts the tournament-junkies according to your last sentence....


----------



## tshadowchaser

In many if not all kata there is a simple downward block. The hand may be open or closed but usually starts in the general area of the shoulder and then moves down the body covering the side of the body (maybe not) , going across the groin area ( maybe to the outside of the front leg,maybe not). For the sake of keeping in mind what the OP asks lets start with discussing what applications this move may involve
I believe it is usually considered  a block for a kick to the midsection of the body or groin but  can we have some differing opinions of possible use age and how this simple move can be applied maybe in combination with the next move to become something completely different.
Not trying to derail but I think this may be what the OP was looking for


----------



## Dirty Dog

tshadowchaser said:


> In many if not all kata there is a simple downward block. The hand may be open or closed but usually starts in the general area of the shoulder and then moves down the body covering the side of the body (maybe not) , going across the groin area ( maybe to the outside of the front leg,maybe not). For the sake of keeping in mind what the OP asks lets start with discussing what applications this move may involve
> I believe it is usually considered  a block for a kick to the midsection of the body or groin but  can we have some differing opinions of possible use age and how this simple move can be applied maybe in combination with the next move to become something completely different.
> Not trying to derail but I think this may be what the OP was looking for



There are tons of applications for this move. 
How about a strike to the groin, femoral nerve, or common peroneal nerve? Any of these could be done with a hammer fist, and both the groin and femoral nerve attacks could be done with the knife hand.
Or a variation on the usual kick block... rotate the hand before/as contact is made with the kick, deflecting it to the outside and then trapping it in the crook of the arm.


----------



## tshadowchaser

I give one.  When the hand come up to the shoulder it could very easily be a grasping or locking of the opponents hand to your body.   Which in turn might lead to the opponents hand being pulled downward so instead of blocking you are unbalancing your opponent


----------



## Drose427

Flying Crane said:


> *forms as a valuable training tool.  If you don't like them, don't do them. * .



These are the biggest 2 points that need to be remembered about forms.

Especially by those who choose not to train them


----------



## jks9199

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please keep the conversation polite, respectful and on topic.

jks9199
Administrator


----------



## K-man

tshadowchaser said:


> In many if not all kata there is a simple downward block. The hand may be open or closed but usually starts in the general area of the shoulder and then moves down the body covering the side of the body (maybe not) , going across the groin area ( maybe to the outside of the front leg,maybe not). For the sake of keeping in mind what the OP asks lets start with discussing what applications this move may involve
> I believe it is usually considered  a block for a kick to the midsection of the body or groin but  can we have some differing opinions of possible use age and how this simple move can be applied maybe in combination with the next move to become something completely different.
> Not trying to derail but I think this may be what the OP was looking for


As I've said many times, I don't believe any 'blocks' are actually blocks. Certainly the all contain a form of parry but they don't stop the attack. In this way the attacker doesn't realise his attack has failed and he gets hit before he can react and launch a follow up strike.

Within a kata there cannot be blocks because to have a block in the middle of a fighting system implies a strike coming in at a particular time. That is choreography.

So to get to the downward 'block'. In the kihon the hand passes across the lower part of the face before moving down in the arc. I teach several applications for this technique. Firstly against a strike to the head it can be a parry from the outside in followed by a hammer fist to the groin. Following the parry the other hand is either protecting against another strike or grabbing the punching arm and pulling down to carriage. (That works better if the first attack is reaching for a grab.) Normally gedan barai is practised in the lower stance and dropping into lower stance here facilitates the groin strike.Another similar application is where the first move is an attack to the head followed by the hammer fist.

Next is a technique to control where there is a cupped palm strike to the ear and the motion is continued across and down, rotating the palm on the crown of the head pulling your attacker down and across. Think of it as an open hand technique right through. The follow up here is a strike to the back of the head, descending elbow to the spine or knee to the face.

Then we have choking applications. Here the initial upward move is coming across the face as you drop into lower stance behind your attacker. As you drop you apply the choke. Pulling him back makes escape difficult. Similar application exists if due to your relative position you need to step in front.

Take down application is similar to the preceding and pretty much the same as Aikido's Iriminage. Another version is if you are in front.

Clinching application is exactly as Hanzou showed for GJJ self defence. (Absolute classic that one. ) Step in and to the side grab around the chest and pull the arm back to lock in. From here you have numerous options to transfer to the rear or a couple of takedowns.

Perhaps arm bars are your speciality? From gripping the wrist with one hand (same side grip) extend his arm as you push his arm down with you arm on his upper arm. Secure by moving your arm down to his neck or just take him straight to the ground. There are several variations of this and I have seen Iain Abernethy do a couple as well.

Did I mention that some people might use it to deflect a kick?

Edit .. I forgot the neck break, but I won't describe it here.


----------



## K-man

Flying Crane said:


> I'm not a karate guy and I'm not familiar with the karate kata.  However, I am a kung fu guy who believes in forms as a valuable training tool and comes from a tradition that has a lot of forms in the curriculum and tends to use forms training a lot.


 Hey! Where do you think karate kata came from? All our early karate masters were Kung fu masters. In fact, in Okinawa, Kanbun Uechi taught his style of Kung fu exactly as he learned in in China. Mate, were all together in kata.

[QUOTE="Flying Crane, post: 1692920, member: 7260"An interesting thing that I've noticed is that when Sifu discusses and demonstrates application, very often it is distilled down to a small number of simple techniques.  A movement in a form may seem complex and abstract, but when he shows the application it is usually clean and obvious and straight forward without any fancy nonsense.  It's the kind of thing that I mentally kick myself over afterward, for having not seen it myself.  And usually the application is very similar to an application derived from a different portion of the form.  It's a lesson to me:  fighting is straight forward and simple and not fancy.  That is what works.  If you get complicated and fancy, likely it won't work.[/QUOTE]Once the fine motor skills close down you need simple moves. Any one who suggests a move in kata involves standing on one leg while scratching you **** while you pick your nose, is pulling your leg. 

[QUOTE="Flying Crane, post: 1692920, member: 7260"More importantly to me, I find the forms to be an excellent way to practice our fundamental principles of rooting and power generation thru rotation, within a moving and changing context.  On a basic level, we practice these fundamental principles in a fairly static position by training our basic techniques, or with simple movements.  The forms elevate this to a more complex and challenging level, with greater movement.  Learning to maintain our root and still generate power thru full body rotation even while moving more extensively is much more difficult. To me, this is more important than the translation and application of technique because, as I stated above, application should be simple and straight forward. [/QUOTE]Interesting points. I believe karate is also an internal martial art. Two of our kata are very much about developing Ki and maintaining your centre. Moving from your centre is also a critical part of karate.

[QUOTE="Flying Crane, post: 1692920, member: 7260"Of course, this is a progression in the training methodology.  After this is some form of application drills and/or sparring.  But returning to the basics and the forms is critical to maintain the foundational skills and principles.  If the fundamental practices and the forms practice is abandoned, those skills will deteriorate.  Sparring alone can encourage the deterioration of these foundational skills, because it disrupts them.  Sparring and application drills are best if used in tandem with ongoing practice of basics, including forms.  They need to be used to constantly reinforce each other.  It's not a question of one or the other, but rather giving each of them the appropriate amount of time and energy.[/QUOTE]Agree with all but the sparring. Bunkai is grappling. Depending on what you call sparring, in the accepted sense we don't spar.

[QUOTE="Flying Crane, post: 1692920, member: 7260"Of course nobody needs to do forms.  If you don't like them, don't do them.  But there needs to be some way to return to the basics and train and reinforce those foundational skills.  Sparring alone is likely to undermine the technical skills if that is all, or mostly, what one does.[/QUOTE]From a karate perspective, if you don't have kata you don't have karate.


----------



## OldKarateGuy

K-man said:


> I know it's just a training drill but in the first video, pinan shodan, I wonder how practical it is to be changing hands all the time to strike. He is changing hands and striking where if he had the position he can continue striking until his partner defends.
> 
> These kata were developed to teach basic principles and in this particular one there may be a problem that the partners left arm is not being controlled. Not that it always has to as I teach that sometimes that fist just won't arrive. Without training it myself, I really don't know.
> 
> BTW, I do have Iain's bunkai videos. Perhaps I should watch them again.


I have to go with K man on my first impression. All that hand-changing struck me immediately as something I probably (well, almost certainly) wouldn't try myself. If you control the opponent's arm/fist, don't let go of it (or at the least, maintain the block) until you move out of range. And if you have a open strike, take it as many times as you feel it's safe. I mean, if I have control of your arm and an open strike....well, shoot. Why give that up to switch and maybe lose control? It looks cool and it's a fun drill maybe, but as a practical application if that's the discussion....maybe I'm just too slow to make it work.

I seem to think that one fairly simple explanation for Heian Nidan might be left hand back fist blocks incoming right hand, then same (left hand) hand does hammer fist block on incoming left hand, defender simultaneously strikes (attacker's) left elbow with roundhouse right hammer fist, then defender counter attacks with straight left hand. All fast...1,2,3. There's lots of esoteric possibilities but this is fairly simple, (sort-of) realistic set-up. Stance and body weight shifts to match techniques. I am probably stating the obvious with this, and apologize to the seniors for doing so.

Edit: I found and added the video below after posting.


----------



## OldKarateGuy

My JKA bias showing. A video of Heian Nidan applications with 7th dan from JKA Canada. In the first minute, he shows several variations on the first three moves. Nice


----------



## K-man

OldKarateGuy said:


> I have to go with K man on my first impression. All that hand-changing struck me immediately as something I probably (well, almost certainly) wouldn't try myself. If you control the opponent's arm/fist, don't let go of it (or at the least, maintain the block) until you move out of range. And if you have a open strike, take it as many times as you feel it's safe. I mean, if I have control of your arm and an open strike....well, shoot. Why give that up to switch and maybe lose control? It looks cool and it's a fun drill maybe, but as a practical application if that's the discussion....maybe I'm just too slow to make it work.
> 
> I seem to think that one fairly simple explanation for Heian Nidan might be left hand back fist blocks incoming right hand, then same (left hand) hand does hammer fist block on incoming left hand, defender simultaneously strikes (attacker's) left elbow with roundhouse right hammer fist, then defender counter attacks with straight left hand. All fast...1,2,3. There's lots of esoteric possibilities but this is fairly simple, (sort-of) realistic set-up. Stance and body weight shifts to match techniques. I am probably stating the obvious with this, and apologize to the seniors for doing so.


No apology needed. I'm not familiar with the kata so I haven't really had much chance to think about it. That said, what I think doesn't matter. Bunkai is all about what it means to you. In time your understanding changes no matter how long you have been training. If it doesn't change you have stopped learning.


----------



## Hanzou

OldKarateGuy said:


> My JKA bias showing. A video of Heian Nidan applications with 7th dan from JKA Canada. In the first minute, he shows several variations on the first three moves. Nice



That actually looks more feasible in terms of practicality than the vid in the OP.


----------



## K-man

OldKarateGuy said:


> My JKA bias showing. A video of Heian Nidan applications with 7th dan from JKA Canada. In the first minute, he shows several variations on the first three moves. Nice
> 
> 
> 
> anada.


Good applications. In fact he even did my gedan barai, that I described above, as the arm bar takedown.

The only thing I would disagree with is that kata is for multiple attackers. It can't be without choreography. Against a single attacker, once you have engaged and control one arm you can use predicted response. If I am holding your left wrist with my left hand and I strike with a knife hand to your neck. One of two things will happen. Either you will lift your right arm to protect or you get hit. If you don't lift your arm I will keep hitting until you do and if you do lift your arm I will capture it and move on to the next technique as shown in the kata, or any other technique that grabs my fancy if I see a better option. 

Introduce another attacker and I have to disengage. I can no longer control the fight so I can't use kata.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> That actually looks more feasible in terms of practicality than the vid in the OP.


Really? Why? For example, could it be used if the arm wasn't left outstretched? Training against a punch left hanging out to dry is not realistic training. You would have kicked my **** if I had posted something like that as a real option. I can accept his applications as an explanation of the kata but I don't believe all of it was practical.

Could I suggest again that the second video is kihon whereas Iain's is advanced. I don't normally see him doing moves that I don't agree with. The first video was one of those.


----------



## dancingalone

Very simple and trainable.  The bunkai is obviously shown with a compliant partner for demonstration purposes and you have to gradually ratchet up variation of speed, angle, and combination of attacks, but it's easy enough to devise a series of lesson plans around this one.  

I've taught a similar application in an open seminar with participants from a variety of styles including TKD and kajukenbo guys.  They all found a fit within something they already do in their forms.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Show a karateka fight like this in MMA



Fighters in MMA usually fight like MMA fighters, makes sense really.


----------



## drop bear

For a bit of fun.


----------



## RTKDCMB

tshadowchaser said:


> In many if not all kata there is a simple downward block. The hand may be open or closed but usually starts in the general area of the shoulder and then moves down the body covering the side of the body (maybe not) , going across the groin area ( maybe to the outside of the front leg,maybe not).



When someone attacked me by trying to kick me in the groin that is exactly what I did to defend it, three times.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> That actually looks more feasible in terms of practicality than the vid in the OP.


Really? I would have thought you would have jumped on the fact that the second attacker was left unattended after his first (and only) punch.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> For a bit of fun.


Which has exactly what to do with kata bunkai? Please, you have no karate knowledge. If you would like to participate in a serious discussion feel free but it has nothing to do with MMA. This is a karate forum. If you're posting "for a bit of fun" to disrupt the discussion please take your posts elsewhere.


----------



## K-man

RTKDCMB said:


> When someone attacked me by trying to kick me in the groin that is exactly what I did to defend it, three times.


Ok, but three questions if I may. 
If you had never trained would you have blocked the kick the same way? 
When you 'blocked' the kick was it a strike or a block?
How come he got three goes?



RTKDCMB said:


> Really? I would have thought you would have jumped on the fact that the second attacker was left unattended after his first (and only) punch.


Com'on! Don't tell me that doesn't happen.  Surely it's only polite to wait your turn.


----------



## RTKDCMB

K-man said:


> Ok, but three questions if I may.



You may.



K-man said:


> If you had never trained would you have blocked the kick the same way?



If I had never trained I would have probably have been kicked in the groin.



K-man said:


> When you 'blocked' the kick was it a strike or a block?



The first two were deflections the third one was a grab with me hooking my wrist under his ankle.



K-man said:


> How come he got three goes?



Because he paused after each attempt and I made the mistake of not wanting to hurt him (a mistake I will never repeat) and I let it draw out for too long. I kept trying to walk away after each attack.but he followed me and the fight went on for a few more minutes.That was back in 1991.


----------



## TimoS

Hanzou said:


> Show a karateka fight like this in MMA or even while performing full contact kumite, and you'll make a believer out of me. Until then.....


You do realize that that's not the purpose of karate kata? I'm not a big fan of the bunkai shown, but you have to realize that there are other uses for a martial art than just MMA. Or shall we dismiss all the so-called reality based systems such as Krav Maga just because you don't see them compete?


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Which has exactly what to do with kata bunkai? Please, you have no karate knowledge. If you would like to participate in a serious discussion feel free but it has nothing to do with MMA. This is a karate forum. If you're posting "for a bit of fun" to disrupt the discussion please take your posts elsewhere.



Just to explain that the concept of bunkai exists in other styles even if kata does not. This is a discussion on bunkai. Which we call drills or flow drills or even Dutch drills.

This will help your understanding of bunkai when the concept is reflected in other systems.

You said this yourself when you do akido to understand karate kata.

That drill is the most recognized form of grappling bunkai. And a prime example of how concepts flow from one style to another.

Or as i put it.

A bit of fun.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Just to explain that the concept of bunkai exists in other styles even if kata does not. This is a discussion on bunkai. Which we call drills or flow drills or even Dutch drills.
> 
> This will help your understanding of bunkai when the concept is reflected in other systems.
> 
> You said this yourself when you do akido to understand karate kata.
> 
> That drill is the most recognized form of grappling bunkai. And a prime example of how concepts flow from one style to another.
> 
> Or as i put it.
> 
> A bit of fun.



This is a karate forum. 

I'm just going to paste from Wiki.



> *Bunkai* (分解?), literally meaning "analysis" or "disassembly", is a term used in *Japanese martial arts* referring to the application of *fighting techniques extracted from the moves of a "form"* (_kata_).
> 
> Bunkai is usually performed with a partner or a group of partners which execute predefined attacks, and the student performing the _kata_ responds with defenses, counterattacks, or other actions, based on a part of the _kata_. This allows the student in the middle to understand what the movements in _kata_ are meant to accomplish. It may also illustrate how to improve technique by adjusting distances, time moves properly, and adapt a technique depending on the size of an opponent.
> 
> Some _kata_ have another layer of application that is taught using an _Oyo Bunkai_, an "application of the kata in ways other than the standard bunkai." Different practitioners will learn or discover alternative applications, but the bunkai, like the _kata_, varies based on the style and the teacher.


What you posted was not Japanese, not from kata and not bunkai. As I said, I'm happy to have a sensible discussion with you but without any experience in karate, kata or bunkai, I doubt you have much to offer. If, however, you would genuinely like to try to understand bunkai, I'll go with that. Otherwise please don't try to disrupt yet another thread!

It's not fun, it's not bunkai and Dutch is nothing to do with Japanese. I study Aikido to learn the techniques that I use in bunkai. Aikido also has some kata but this is not the thread to discuss it.


----------



## K-man

TimoS said:


> You do realize that that's not the purpose of karate kata? I'm not a big fan of the bunkai shown, but you have to realize that there are other uses for a martial art than just MMA. Or shall we dismiss all the so-called reality based systems such as Krav Maga just because you don't see them compete?


He's already told me Krav is rubbish because we don't perform the strikes at full power in our training. I can just image the guys going home every night after being kneed in the face a couple of times. You will never win! Nothing will ever come close to MMA because it is real fighting.


----------



## Tez3

I am absolutely pants when it comes to describing moves and techniques I get quite muddled up trying to describe them, I can demonstrate though which isn't much use here but it's a hugely interesting thread about something dear to my heart.
The video from drop bear totally missed the point, it added nothing to what would be a very interesting discussion if left to those that have an actual interest in bunkai.
On one of the seminars I did that Iain Abernethy took I remember him saying that in SD his plan A is to punch the attacker and KO him ( he has very heavy hands btw, he's a powerful striker) but bunkai provides all the plans after that which means he has reliable, tried and tested techniques to survive an attack. He also says walking away before an attack happens is ideal, awareness comes into it big style ( he'd been contacted by someone who was at a station waiting for a train and had become concerned by youths who seemed to be looking for trouble, he'd walked away across to another platform out of the way. He'd contacted Iain because he felt he should have been able to defend himself when attacked. Iain said what the chap had done was perfect self defence and exactly what he would have done too)


----------



## ShotoNoob

tshadowchaser said:


> In many if not all kata there is a simple downward block. The hand may be open or closed but usually starts in the general area of the shoulder and then moves down the body covering the side of the body (maybe not) , going across the groin area ( maybe to the outside of the front leg,maybe not). For the sake of keeping in mind what the OP asks lets start with discussing what applications this move may involve.


|
I think this is precisely the way traditional karate should be approached.  Another poster stated with regard to Shotokan karate, which the taikyoku kata would definitely apply here, the Okinawan Masters had a simplification objective in mind, which later could be built on....  As per your statement below...


tshadowchaser said:


> I believe it is usually considered  a block for a kick to the midsection of the body or groin but  can we have some differing opinions of possible use age and how this simple move can be applied maybe in combination with the next move to become something completely different.
> Not trying to derail but I think this may be what the OP was looking for


|
Kata is series of interconnected movements, isn't it?


----------



## Never_A_Reflection

Kata oyo bunkai must be a key component of karate training, otherwise your kata are nothing more than dances--not that dances are bad, or have no cross-over benefits with martial arts, but they aren't the ideal way to develop self defense capabilities. Unfortunately, the bunkai process can be very hazy, and difficult to navigate and understand. I give anyone putting in legitimate effort to find practical applications for their kata credit, even if I don't necessarily like their results. Iain has a lot of great stuff, and a lot of stuff that I don't like. Either way, the work he is doing is good.

There are some general guidelines that you can follow when analyzing kata, about how to figure out what you are doing and what your opponent is doing, but they don't apply to every sequence in every kata in every style. You have to be open-minded about it, in that regard. Still, there are certain principles that are universal in fighting, and there are principles that have been written or passed down by masters of old that we can look to for guidance. Sometimes, these principles are disguised as unrelated bits of wisdom, or as seemingly useless drills, but you can find them if you look for them.

Something to keep in mind, too, is that drills related to kata are not always direct self defense applications--sometimes they are simply developing skills that improve your ability to use certain applications. The concepts that are found in the kata, the skills needed to apply them, and the adaptability to change what you are doing if necessary, all have to be developed. Otherwise, you can drill all kinds of techniques from the kata, but if your opponent does something strange or you make a mistake, you could be in trouble.


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> I think this is precisely the way traditional karate should be approached.  Another poster stated with regard to Shotokan karate, which the taikyoku kata would definitely apply here, the Okinawan Masters had a simplification objective in mind, which later could be built on....  As per your statement below...


The Okinawan masters didn't have, and still don't have to my knowledge, Taikyoku kata. They were developed by Funakoshi in Japan and then adopted by Yamaguchi for Goju Kai. I no longer teach taikyoko kata. They are not part of traditional karate.


----------



## K-man

Never_A_Reflection said:


> Something to keep in mind, too, is that drills related to kata are not always direct self defense applications--*sometimes they are simply developing skills that improve your ability to use certain applications*. The concepts that are found in the kata, the skills needed to apply them, and the adaptability to change what you are doing if necessary, all have to be developed. Otherwise, you can drill all kinds of techniques from the kata, but if your opponent does something strange or you make a mistake, you could be in trouble.


Perhaps you could elaborate on what you mean in the bolded type. Now I'm not sure about kata other than the ones I study but there is no such training in our kata. Our kata (Goju) are fighting systems. If you want to use them some other way, cool. I would say that the skills are developed outside of kata although there is no reason you can't take bits of kata and play with them. 

Now your last sentence is critical. If you are training your bunkai as a fighting system, you are working on predicted response. If your opponent does something strange he gets hit. If you do something wrong, well that's your problem, not the fault of the bunkai.


----------



## Flying Crane

K-man said:


> Hey! Where do you think karate kata came from? All our early karate masters were Kung fu masters. In fact, in Okinawa, Kanbun Uechi taught his style of Kung fu exactly as he learned in in China. Mate, were all together in kata.
> 
> [QUOTE="Flying Crane, post: 1692920, member: 7260"An interesting thing that I've noticed is that when Sifu discusses and demonstrates application, very often it is distilled down to a small number of simple techniques.  A movement in a form may seem complex and abstract, but when he shows the application it is usually clean and obvious and straight forward without any fancy nonsense.  It's the kind of thing that I mentally kick myself over afterward, for having not seen it myself.  And usually the application is very similar to an application derived from a different portion of the form.  It's a lesson to me:  fighting is straight forward and simple and not fancy.  That is what works.  If you get complicated and fancy, likely it won't work.Once the fine motor skills close down you need simple moves. Any one who suggests a move in kata involves standing on one leg while scratching you **** while you pick your nose, is pulling your leg.
> 
> [QUOTE="Flying Crane, post: 1692920, member: 7260"More importantly to me, I find the forms to be an excellent way to practice our fundamental principles of rooting and power generation thru rotation, within a moving and changing context.  On a basic level, we practice these fundamental principles in a fairly static position by training our basic techniques, or with simple movements.  The forms elevate this to a more complex and challenging level, with greater movement.  Learning to maintain our root and still generate power thru full body rotation even while moving more extensively is much more difficult. To me, this is more important than the translation and application of technique because, as I stated above, application should be simple and straight forward. Interesting points. I believe karate is also an internal martial art. Two of our kata are very much about developing Ki and maintaining your centre. Moving from your centre is also a critical part of karate.
> 
> [QUOTE="Flying Crane, post: 1692920, member: 7260"Of course, this is a progression in the training methodology.  After this is some form of application drills and/or sparring.  But returning to the basics and the forms is critical to maintain the foundational skills and principles.  If the fundamental practices and the forms practice is abandoned, those skills will deteriorate.  Sparring alone can encourage the deterioration of these foundational skills, because it disrupts them.  Sparring and application drills are best if used in tandem with ongoing practice of basics, including forms.  They need to be used to constantly reinforce each other.  It's not a question of one or the other, but rather giving each of them the appropriate amount of time and energy.Agree with all but the sparring. Bunkai is grappling. Depending on what you call sparring, in the accepted sense we don't spar.
> 
> [QUOTE="Flying Crane, post: 1692920, member: 7260"Of course nobody needs to do forms.  If you don't like them, don't do them.  But there needs to be some way to return to the basics and train and reinforce those foundational skills.  Sparring alone is likely to undermine the technical skills if that is all, or mostly, what one does.From a karate perspective, if you don't have kata you don't have karate.




Oh, I am well aware of the Chinese connection with Okinawan and Japanese martial arts.  I do believe, however, that the particular method that I study was not one that influenced the development of the karate methods.  And I simply recognize that my own lack of familiarity with the specific kata found in karate will limit my ability to contribute to this discussion in a meaningful way.

I also understand that karate has an identity closely linked to its kata and I would never suggest anyone toss that away.  It is part and parcel of the karate methodology.  That's just the way it is.  My comment about kata not being necessary is simply a recognition that solid skills may be built without kata,and that OTHER martial methods do so on a regular basis.  That's fine, and anyone for whom kata doesn't well mesh would be well advised to pursue one of those other methods.  That statement in no way diminishes either approach to training.  It simply acknowleges different strokes for different folks.

As far as the sparring goes, there are many definitions of the term and I was using it loosely to indicate some level of use and application trainig.  I'm not a fan of the tournament sparring that is common, I think it can lead to bad habits and undermine technique tho I won't say it's ALL junk.  I just say, if you do it, be careful of how you do it and be realistic about how much importance you give it.

As far as forms go, I see them as a tool.  You practice them as a way to improve.  I bristle when I see people talk about "performing" kata, because it implies it's done for the pleasure of a viewing audience.  In my opinion that is utterly inappropriate.  They were never meant for an audience.  They are a training tool.  If you pound a nail to build a house, you do not get an audience to watch.  You just pound the nail and get the job done. Likewise, when you do kata, it's not for an audience; it's for yourself, to build your skills.

I also do not see a form as something you "master".  That implies the kata is a product.  It's not a product.  You don't master it, you just do it to improve your skills.  It's your tool.  You pound the nail to build the house, not to master the hammer.  That's just a mindset that I keep.  Tho how well you do the kata may be indicative of your skill level and your understanding.  But that is a discussion to have between teacher and student, and isn't so meaningful outside of that context.

As such, in my mind kata is not sacred and was not handed down by the gods, and can be altered.  As I say, it's just a tool.  Sometimes you need to get a different hammer to do a better job.  Sometimes kata needs to be changed.  However, it should not be changed without very good reason, and most people lack the understanding and have no business making changes to it.  I point this out as I sometimes think some folks become overly attached to kata as a sacred object, and I don't feel that's the correct attitude towards it

Hope this clarifies my position a bit.


----------



## K-man

Flying Crane said:


> As such, in my mind kata is not sacred and was not handed down by the gods, and can be altered.  As I say, it's just a tool.  Sometimes you need to get a different hammer to do a better job.  Sometimes kata needs to be changed.  However, it should not be changed without very good reason, and most people lack the understanding and have no business making changes to it.  I point this out as I sometimes think some folks become overly attached to kata as a sacred object, and I don't feel that's the correct attitude towards it.


Kata are not sacred but they are fighting systems that have been proven over, maybe, centuries. The less effective ones didn't survive. Now I have no doubt my knowledge of kata is way below that of the masters but even so, they say to teach the kata as it was handed down. What you do within the kata is purely your own and that understanding may influence the way you practise the kata.


----------



## Never_A_Reflection

K-man said:


> Perhaps you could elaborate on what you mean in the bolded type. Now I'm not sure about kata other than the ones I study but there is no such training in our kata. Our kata (Goju) are fighting systems. If you want to use them some other way, cool. I would say that the skills are developed outside of kata although there is no reason you can't take bits of kata and play with them.
> 
> Now your last sentence is critical. If you are training your bunkai as a fighting system, you are working on predicted response. If your opponent does something strange he gets hit. If you do something wrong, well that's your problem, not the fault of the bunkai.



What I was talking about in the part you bolded was skill-building drills that people relate to a kata, but are not technically combative applications. I'm not saying that the kata are doing something other than fighting, just that you can use movements from kata to focus on developing specific skills. Tactile sensitivity and limb control are major ones that come to mind--you use them all the time in your applications, but it's good to sometimes focus on just developing those skills so you can apply them more effectively. Since you already have muscle memory for doing certain movements in a certain order, it can be a handy teaching tool to use those same movements to develop skills. Here is an example, from Goju-Ryu, of the kind of thing I'm talking about: 




My final comment was kind of along the same lines, in that I'm not faulting the kata, or saying that it isn't meant to be a fighting system--I am actually in complete agreement with you that, if an application fails, it is the fault of the person doing it. The thing I'm pointing out is that the way you train your applications can improve your ability to recover from failure. We can never predict with 100% certainty what an attacker is going to do, and how they are going to do it. We can restrict what they can do, of course, but until they are unconscious there are always going to be X factors. If a person develops a "feel" for applying the concepts of the techniques in kata in a practical way, it is easier to adapt and transition when those X factors come up.

Hopefully that makes sense? It's kind of hard to get these ideas across through text.


----------



## Flying Crane

K-man said:


> Kata are not sacred but they are fighting systems that have been proven over, maybe, centuries. The less effective ones didn't survive. Now I have no doubt my knowledge of kata is way below that of the masters but even so, they say to teach the kata as it was handed down. What you do within the kata is purely your own and that understanding may influence the way you practise the kata.


Sure, and my Sifu does make changes here and there.  He does so with good reason, and anyone learning it that way would take it as he taught it.  I know changing kata is something that makes a lot of people uneasy.  It should.


----------



## K-man

Never_A_Reflection said:


> What I was talking about in the part you bolded was skill-building drills that people relate to a kata, but are not technically combative applications. I'm not saying that the kata are doing something other than fighting, just that you can use movements from kata to focus on developing specific skills. Tactile sensitivity and limb control are major ones that come to mind--you use them all the time in your applications, but it's good to sometimes focus on just developing those skills so you can apply them more effectively. Since you already have muscle memory for doing certain movements in a certain order, it can be a handy teaching tool to use those same movements to develop skills. Here is an example, from Goju-Ryu, of the kind of thing I'm talking about:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My final comment was kind of along the same lines, in that I'm not faulting the kata, or saying that it isn't meant to be a fighting system--I am actually in complete agreement with you that, if an application fails, it is the fault of the person doing it. The thing I'm pointing out is that the way you train your applications can improve your ability to recover from failure. We can never predict with 100% certainty what an attacker is going to do, and how they are going to do it. We can restrict what they can do, of course, but until they are unconscious there are always going to be X factors. If a person develops a "feel" for applying the concepts of the techniques in kata in a practical way, it is easier to adapt and transition when those X factors come up.
> 
> Hopefully that makes sense? It's kind of hard to get these ideas across through text.


Ok these a guys I have trained with. They are Jundokan now training with Masaji Taira. The drills they are doing in this video are drills of individual techniques, nothing to do with kata. At a later stage they can be incorporated into bunkai. If you ever get the chance to train with Taira he will blow your mind. His understanding of Goju bunkai is second to none.


----------



## Never_A_Reflection

K-man said:


> Ok these a guys I have trained with. They are Jundokan now training with Masaji Taira. The drills they are doing in this video are drills of individual techniques, nothing to do with kata. At a later stage they can be incorporated into bunkai. If you ever get the chance to train with Taira he will blow your mind. His understanding of Goju bunkai is second to none.



I feel like we're talking about the same thing in two different ways, haha. We probably can't straighten that out very well in this format, though, so I won't worry about it. Suffice it to say that I think we are actually in agreement. 

I don't practice Goju-Ryu, although I do practice Sanchin, Tensho, and Seiyunchin--mostly Seiyunchin, though, if I'm being honest. Enfield Sensei and I have participated in quite a few discussions on kata bunkai, and karate, in general. He's actually helped me a bit with my Goju kata, and my understanding of Taira Sensei's methods. I've also attended a Seiyunchin seminar with him over Skype, which was a nice way to get around the inability to travel to him. I certainly have found Taira Sensei's approach (through Enfield Sensei's assistance) to be very thorough and effective. Many of the things he does are very similar to things that we do, and others are very interestingly different.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> The Okinawan masters didn't have, and still don't have to my knowledge, Taikyoku kata. They were developed by Funakoshi in Japan and then adopted by Yamaguchi for Goju Kai.


|
Academically, I believe you are correct.
|
My interest is not in what exactly Shotokan is & isn't compared to the Okinawans.  My interest in Shotokan is the Okinawan principles that Gichin Funakoshi distilled or adopted and adapted to create the Japanese styles of traditional karate.  In that light, the taikyoku kata are illustrative of those Okinawan, traditional karate principles.


K-man said:


> I no longer teach taikyoko kata. They are not part of traditional karate.


|
Completely & utterly disagree with your final statement re traditional karate & the taikyoku kata.  So we have a definitional difference.
|
The fact that you no longer teach the taikyoku kata is of course an instructor's prerogative.  The taikyoku kata are panned by many karateka and applied fighters such the MMA conventional coaches--across the board.  Yet some other's here @ MT are not so dismissive.
|
In the proper perspective, the taikyoku kata are extremely powerful karate training.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Kata are not sacred but they are fighting systems that have been proven over, maybe, centuries. The less effective ones didn't survive. Now I have no doubt my knowledge of kata is way below that of the masters but even so, they say to teach the kata as it was handed down. What you do within the kata is purely your own and that understanding may influence the way you practise the kata.



I don't think you will understand kata until you loose the idea that kata has been proven over centuries.

There is a difference between proven and what has always been done.

You cant properly test something if you already have the conclusion.


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Academically, I believe you are correct.
> |
> My interest is not in what exactly Shotokan is & isn't compared to the Okinawans.  My interest in Shotokan is the Okinawan principles that Gichin Funakoshi distilled or adopted and adapted to create the Japanese styles of traditional karate.  In that light, the taikyoku kata are illustrative of those Okinawan, traditional karate principles.
> 
> |
> Completely & utterly disagree with your final statement re traditional karate & the taikyoku kata.  So we have a definitional difference.
> |
> The fact that you no longer teach the taikyoku kata is of course an instructor's prerogative.  The taikyoku kata are panned by many karateka and applied fighters such the MMA conventional coaches--across the board.  Yet some other's here @ MT are not so dismissive.
> |
> In the proper perspective, the taikyoku kata are extremely powerful karate training.


Don't get too stressed. I no longer teach Taikyoku kata because I no longer teach Japanese Goju. In fact I think that the Taikyoku kata as introduced by Funakoshi are really good. I have never liked the Goju ones except as a means of training kihon. But Taikyoku is the name given to those kata by Funakoshi in Japan. Yes, Taikyoku kata contain Okinawan principles but they are not Okinawan kata. On the whole we are in agreement. As to being dismissive of kata, I think you will find I am one of its most passionate supporters.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> I don't think you will understand kata until you loose the idea that kata has been proven over centuries.
> 
> There is a difference between proven and what has always been done.
> 
> You cant properly test something if you already have the conclusion.


Kata in China were the families' systems of fighting that were handed down from generation to generation. I think it is fair to say that they were totally tested.

I have spent more time deeply studying kata than you have been training in the martial arts. I have travelled overseas numerous times to study purely kata, or at least the application of kata. Coming from someone who had never studied kata your assertion that I will not understand kata until I deny its history is a bit rich!


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> Don't get too stressed. I no longer teach Taikyoku kata because I no longer teach Japanese Goju. In fact I think that the Taikyoku kata as introduced by Funakoshi are really good. I have never liked the Goju ones except as a means of training kihon.


|
Right, every body has an adaptation and this is another reason why I only study Shotokan.  I'm interested in what Gichin Funakoshi found was important to everyday practitioners like me.  You won't see me in the endless technical discussions about style vs. style for this reason.  That's stress I don't need!



K-man said:


> But Taikyoku is the name given to those kata by Funakoshi in Japan. Yes, Taikyoku kata contain Okinawan principles but they are not Okinawan kata. On the whole we are in agreement. As to being dismissive of kata, I think you will find I am one of its most passionate supporters.


|
So they are Gichin Funakoshi's brainchild.  I'm now clear on that.  But the process, the concept he embodied in the simplified kata came from Okinawa, later on of course.  Again, what compelled the Okinawan's to move this way and why, as a rhetorical question.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Kata in China were the families' systems of fighting that were handed down from generation to generation. I think it is fair to say that they were totally tested.
> 
> I have spent more time deeply studying kata than you have been training in the martial arts. I have travelled overseas numerous times to study purely kata, or at least the application of kata. Coming from someone who had never studied kata your assertion that I will not understand kata until I deny its history is a bit rich!



Have you ever talked to a young earther?


----------



## tshadowchaser

for those that do not study kata or bunkai  let me explain the bunkai this way: 
  If you box or wrestle or do BJJ you go over a situation of you opponent being in certian posistions and you work on drills to counter that position.  Now if the counters you are practiceing today are all based on a certain movement being first and then what comes after you are in a way practice the same way a person taking a move from a kata is practiceing bunkai.  That first movement in your routine is the same as the first move in a kata, the next is but a variation of what the second move may be. Thus you may move you left hand to block, grab, strike useing the same basic motion from there with that hand in the same position you also have multiple uses for that hand if you explore the possibilities.


----------



## drop bear

tshadowchaser said:


> for those that do not study kata or bunkai  let me explain the bunkai this way:
> If you box or wrestle or do BJJ you go over a situation of you opponent being in certian posistions and you work on drills to counter that position.  Now if the counters you are practiceing today are all based on a certain movement being first and then what comes after you are in a way practice the same way a person taking a move from a kata is practiceing bunkai.  That first movement in your routine is the same as the first move in a kata, the next is but a variation of what the second move may be. Thus you may move you left hand to block, grab, strike useing the same basic motion from there with that hand in the same position you also have multiple uses for that hand if you explore the possibilities.



ok. Kata is like a text or guide book.

Now i can copy that text without ever understanding how to read.

I can read and follow the text without ever understanding the the purpose of that text.

I can understand the purpose of the text and not understand that it could be wrong.

I can fully understand the text accepting its strengths as well as its faults


----------



## tshadowchaser

Kata are slow and fast, beautiful and ugly, invigorating and painful, and some have all these elements. Some are flashy and have no meaning or bunkai in them but are simply for show. The ones that have meaning to most people that study them have many movements of the hands and feet that instruct a practitioner how to move correctly and if a good instructor is teaching the he will explain the WHY of the moves to the practitioner.
 If you study   an art that dose not have kata and bunkai you are told do this do that and you do it if you want more instruction. you are then told your next move is this or that and you practice  those moves over and over  and over until you learn them and get them correct.
It is the same damn thing

Those of us that like learning bunkai and forms no matter what area of the world they come from can find many reasons for doing them (each to their own on why). I think many of us have studied a certain aspect of a form and taken that movement and thought long and hard on how and when we would like to use it. Some  of us have then one day without thinking used the technique before we have even realized we have done so.  AND damn but that feeling we get after knowing that it worked and that all of our practice and thought had been put to good use is special. It may not have been exactly like the form but the variation we worked on worked and that is what it is all aout.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Have you ever talked to a young earther?


It's a bit like talking to you.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Have you ever talked to a young earther?


No.


drop bear said:


> ok. Kata is like a text or guide book.


Yes


drop bear said:


> Now i can copy that text without ever understanding how to read.


Yes. That is performing the kata which is as far as most people get.



drop bear said:


> I can read and follow the text without ever understanding the the purpose of that text.


Yes and that is just doing kihon. Again, as far as most people get.



drop bear said:


> I can understand the purpose of the text and not understand that it could be wrong.


Yes, you may understand the purpose but not understand how what you are reading applies, and that's why you have a teacher who hopefully has more knowledge than you.



drop bear said:


> I can fully understand the text accepting its strengths as well as its faults


False. You can read the print but you don't understand the meaning. Pick up any pure maths book. You can read it, you can copy it, you won't have a clue if what's there is right or wrong and you can accept it for what it is. The book itself has absolutely zero value if you don't understand pure maths. If you do understand pure maths it could be a treasure trove of information just as kata is to those who study it.

Another example. You have a book in Japanese that is titled 'Understanding Kata'. If you can't read Japanese you can copy it, you know what is meant to be saying but you haven't got the first idea of what it's really about even if it has pictures. That applies to the Bubishi as translated by Patrick McCarthy. There are pictures and captions but to even trained people the meaning is a mystery. The masters lent their book for their senior students to faithfully copy. They had all the information but without the masters knowledge it was just another book.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Another example. You have a book in Japanese that is titled 'Understanding Kata'. If you can't read Japanese you can copy it, you know what is meant to be saying but you haven't got the first idea of what it's really about even if it has pictures. That applies to the Bubishi as translated by Patrick McCarthy. There are pictures and captions but to even trained people the meaning is a mystery. The masters lent their book for their senior students to faithfully copy. They had all the information but without the masters knowledge it was just another book.



So kata has been created perfect but has been understood imperfectly.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> So kata has been created perfect but has been understood imperfectly.



Thats not what he said either.....


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Thats not what he said either.....



So kata was not created perfect. And so can be improved on. Mabye by these students when there knowledge surpasses the master.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> So kata was not created perfect. And so can be improved on. Mabye by these students when there knowledge surpasses the master.



Well.. again you're missing the point  of kata and bunkai....

There isnt a standard interpretation, its whatever moves you personally can make work.

We've tried explaining this to you in the past and you seem to have trouble understanding it


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> Well.. again you're missing the point  of kata and bunkai....
> 
> There isnt a standard interpretation, its whatever moves you personally can make work.
> 
> We've tried explaining this to you in the past and you seem to have trouble understanding it



So understanding where kata is wrong is part of the way to understanding kata.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> So understanding where kata is wrong is part of the way to understanding kata.



If your reasoning is "kata is a waste of time" you dont have an understanding, you have an opinion.

An uneducated one at that considering you've never had any training of kata and applying them.

When there are professional fighters who make time to study kata, even if I havent personally use applications, id be inclined to believe kata do something right.

Many of us dont even need the opinion of a professional fighter, we've used kata applications, or have seen members in our association use them.

Having an uneducated opinion is okay, but it doesnt make those who do kata wrong.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> If your reasoning is "kata is a waste of time" you dont have an understanding, you have an opinion.
> 
> An uneducated one at that considering you've never had any training of kata and applying them.
> 
> When there are professional fighters who make time to study kata, even if I havent personally use applications, id be inclined to believe kata do something right.
> 
> Many of us dont even need the opinion of a professional fighter, we've used kata applications, or have seen members in our association use them.
> 
> Having an uneducated opinion is okay, but it doesnt make those who do kata wrong.



And that is not at all what i said.


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> And that is not at all what i said.



In your post you stated "understanding where kata is wrong", in many previous posts you've repeatedly affirmed that you believe kata to be a waste. I simply responded to the direction this conversation was heading.

assuming you meant something else entirely, kata is neither right or wrong. The same moves will be interpreted 3 different ways by three different people.

Kata being "right or wrong" is like a right or wrong answer to a rorshach test, or considering an IQ test Pass/Fail.

We've explained this to you so many times now Im beginning to think you simply like to argue


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> So kata has been created perfect but has been understood imperfectly.


Not at all. The kata is the kata. Nothing about being perfect or otherwise. All kata are different and even within Goju there is the Japanese version and the Okinawan version.  

What your understanding is is up to you, nothing to do with perfect or imperfect. In time your understanding changes and you see more opportunities. I have studied under some of the best people in the world so when it comes to Goju kata, I think I have a fair grasp. Pretty much 15 years of personal study to date. That is when I first realised that despite knowing dozens of kata I really knew very little. So when you, with no training, tell me I don't understand, I think that is a bit rude.


----------



## drop bear

Drose427 said:


> In your post you stated "understanding where kata is wrong", in many previous posts you've repeatedly affirmed that you believe kata to be a waste. I simply responded to the direction this conversation was heading.
> 
> assuming you meant something else entirely, kata is neither right or wrong. The same moves will be interpreted 3 different ways by three different people.
> 
> Kata being "right or wrong" is like a right or wrong answer to a rorshach test, or considering an IQ test Pass/Fail.
> 
> We've explained this to you so many times now Im beginning to think you simply like to argue



show me where i have affirmed kata to be a waste?

Otherwise I have repeatedly explained what i mean regarding my quote. And you still arguing a point I am not making.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Not at all. The kata is the kata. Nothing about being perfect or otherwise. All kata are different and even within Goju there is the Japanese version and the Okinawan version.
> 
> What your understanding is is up to you, nothing to do with perfect or imperfect. In time your understanding changes and you see more opportunities. I have studied under some of the best people in the world so when it comes to Goju kata, I think I have a fair grasp. Pretty much 15 years of personal study to date. That is when I first realised that despite knowing dozens of kata I really knew very little. So when you, with no training, tell me I don't understand, I think that is a bit rude.



Ok name one part ok a kata you do that is wrong.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> So when you, with no training, tell me I don't understand, I think that is a bit rude.



But is ok when you do it constantly.

It is not the kata i am discussing but the logic supporting it.


----------



## Dinkydoo

I've not read the thread so apologies if I'm simply reposting what another has said.

Kata and Forms and their Bunkai/Applications are training tools that work - although neither of which, on their own, will develop you into a good fighter (competitively or for self defence purposes).

Kata/Set Form: teaches you the essence of the art, the strategy of fighting - e.g. this is how a northern mantis practitioner could respond to attacks x, y and z.

The rehersed bunkai/application/2 person drills practice helps to practice these techniques against an opponent who is resisting moderately - not fully. If someone knows exactly what counter youre going to throw and tenses up the correct muscles in defence then the liklihood is the technique will not work very well. At this stage we are only practising, when we do this 'for real', hopefully your opponent hasnt guessed what youre going to do.

The most important part of this training is a 3rd component that unfortunately, doesn't seem to be trained as frequently as the other two methods: pressure testing, against fully resisting opponents in an unscripted environment - call it sparring, sanda or whatever...the key is that as you progress, the training becomes more 'free form' until we reach the point of basically, what most people refer to as sparring - this doesnt have to be a 'fight' or an enagagement, it can be defend, counter and run away/disengage - the important part is that youre naturally responding to unpredictable aggression.

For me, the absence of the 3rd component is a real issue and it serves to single handedly tarnish the reputation of TMAs. I'm now at a point in my training whereby I'm not prepared to spend X hours training in a style that doesnt offer this, because I'm not getting the benefits associated with forms and application training. This is really annoying, because i communicate with a number of TMA guys in the UK and I watch videos of their training and really like what I see........I want to train a TMA like that, but I dont have much of an opportunity where I am.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Ok name one part ok a kata you do that is wrong.



What do you mean? It makes no sense.


----------



## K-man

Tez3 said:


> What do you mean? It makes no sense.


Sadly, the truth.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Ok name one part ok a kata you do that is wrong.


Um! Yes. Exactly what do you mean? I perform my karate to the best of my ability and as close to what I have been taught as possible. How is that wrong?


drop bear said:


> But is ok when you do it constantly.


You are telling me I don't understand something that I have studied in depth over many years with the top people in the field.

You have never trained it, never studied it and yet you claim to have a greater understanding. How exactly does that work? Why are you even posting in this thread?


drop bear said:


> It is not the kata i am discussing but the logic supporting it.


I fail to see any logic and this thread was to discuss bunkai for self defence. Perhaps you might like to address the topic.


----------



## Tez3

This is an interesting article from Iain Abernethy. I think there is confusion over what is 'fighting', 'self defence' and 'competitive fighting' and 'street fighting' often when talking about one we actually mean another.
The problems with street fighting Iain Abernethy


----------



## MaxRob

Interesting I need to study and look into this.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> Um! Yes. Exactly what do you mean? I perform my karate to the best of my ability and as close to what I have been taught as possible. How is that wrong?
> 
> You are telling me I don't understand something that I have studied in depth over many years with the top people in the field.
> 
> You have never trained it, never studied it and yet you claim to have a greater understanding. How exactly does that work? Why are you even posting in this thread?
> I fail to see any logic and this thread was to discuss bunkai for self defence. Perhaps you might like to address the topic.



you were moving into dogma again regarding kata. Some of the arguments just went way off. (kata survives because of its effectiveness Something something. I could find the quote but I am not that bothered.)

 With some really interesting similarities between creationism. (system created perfect but handed down flawed)
And Darwinism.(system created flawed but evolves.) 

That was all. It interests me not only how people train but how they think about their training.

But it is a pretty difficult concept to get across so I am out.


----------



## drop bear

I am back.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> I am back.



Is this trolling?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> I am back.


Were you gone?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> With some really interesting similarities between creationism. .



As in people who do not understand something but think they know more than the experts, never admit when they are wrong and try to hammer in the same flawed points that have already been repeatedly refuted? 



drop bear said:


> (system created perfect but handed down flawed)



That system has always been flawed.



drop bear said:


> And Darwinism.(system created flawed but evolves.).


I am sure you mean the theory of evolution by natural selection, which is not a cult.


----------



## OldKarateGuy

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Academically, I believe you are correct.
> |
> 
> Completely & utterly disagree with your final statement re traditional karate & the taikyoku kata.  So we have a definitional difference.
> |
> The fact that you no longer teach the taikyoku kata is of course an instructor's prerogative.  The taikyoku kata are panned by many karateka and applied fighters such the MMA conventional coaches--across the board.  Yet some other's here @ MT are not so dismissive.
> |
> In the proper perspective, the taikyoku kata are extremely powerful karate training.



The Taikyoku kata are no longer part of the official JKA syllabus I think. Many schools still teach them, of course, but especially in Japan and the U S, commonly, Heian Shodan will be the first kata learned in shotokan. I believe that the viewpoint of many is that the Taikyoku kata are really about acquainting the student with the idea, the concept of what a kata is, rather than actually being a genuine kata with a sense of some underlying bunkai. Also, as noted by others, Itosu Sensei, an Okinawan, created the Heian (Pinan) kata specifically to be taught in the schools on Okinawan to larger groups of school children. Although they obviously have martial arts value, and we all look to them for bunkai, they were designed for schoolchildren. Legend says Itosu created them from an older kata, now lost, possibly called Channan or Chai Nang. Like so many stories about the origins, who really knows now? 
So, the Taikyoku kata, probably based on the Heian kata, which were probably based on some now unknown kata...etc. Anyway, because the Taikyoku kata are so repetitious (in technique) and so similar to other kata, many instructors no longer use them, and at least the JKA no longer requires knowledge of them for promotion. K Man doesn't. I don't either. But if someone else wants to, that's cool. If you have a choice yourself, try moving up to the Heian kata, which are far more nuanced, with weight shifts, multiple possibilities of technique, etc. Plus they're not nearly so boring to perform. :  <  )


----------



## OldKarateGuy

Back to the OP: Here's 2 videos of Heian Godan, one of my favorite basic forms to teach. The first looks like a group of high school age students doing a team form, then doing it again with applications, and typically since it's competition, somewhat fancifully. But I used to teach a similar application with lots of foot sweeps to brown belts, to get them thinking. Of note in both videos is the high X block, which can be a very effective real world technique. 



The second is a seminar - in German which I don't speak - shorter and more practical, since the instructor shows both right and left hand blocks. Wish I understood the commentary.


----------



## OldKarateGuy

@ drop bear

...But it is a pretty difficult concept to get across...[/QUOTE]

I have been away from these boards for a time, and I've obviously missed some previous difference of opinion. But...
Some people train in kata because they're into that whole tradition thing, kihon, kata, kumite. 
Others do kata because it's all part of the spiritual experience. Maybe this is the same thing. 
I personally feel kata exist on their own as an art form. 
I find doing kata a very physically satisfying exercise, and it relieves stress.
I think it definitely improves my karate, my balance and speed, my basic technique. 
I also think that there are definite apllications for real world fighting inherent in some kata, maybe most or all (traditional) kata. I think there are also some moves and techniques that are just present in the kata for aesthetics or for show, and which have zero application no matter how hard one might strain to find one. I think both of these assumptions are patently obvious on their face. Some of these nonfunctional techniques may have had a real application at one point, but whatever it was, it's gone now into history, like some of those old kata.  
There are obviously some martial artists (and systems) who thrive without resorting to kata. Fine. There are just as obviously martial artists who rely upon kata and preach reliance upon kata, who are no one to have a harsh word with. 
Plenty of room for both opinions, and if you feel kata are meaningless, that does not diminish my views. My views on kata shouldn't offend you either. 
So, do you see any value in any kata training?


----------



## K-man

OldKarateGuy said:


> Back to the OP: Here's 2 videos of Heian Godan, one of my favorite basic forms to teach. The first looks like a group of high school age students doing a team form, then doing it again with applications, and typically since it's competition, somewhat fancifully. But I used to teach a similar application with lots of foot sweeps to brown belts, to get them thinking. Of note in both videos is the high X block, which can be a very effective real world technique.
> 
> 
> 
> The second is a seminar - in German which I don't speak - shorter and more practical, since the instructor shows both right and left hand blocks. Wish I understood the commentary.


The first video I thought was well performed and traditional. I agree that the applications were a bit fanciful.

The second video didn't appeal to me at all. To me bunkai is the real application against a realistic attack. Attacks don't happen like that and you don't defend like that. If he was teaching kihon like that, ok, but I would have thought a seminar would be exploring more realistic options.

Here is a Goju bunkai from Iain Abernethy that shows what I like to see.


----------



## OldKarateGuy

K-man said:


> The second video didn't appeal to me at all.
> 
> Here is a Goju bunkai from Iain Abernethy that shows what I like to see.



Re: 2nd video, first thing that struck me was that you're right, you don't normally expect a full stepping punch attack like that, so the attack was unrealistic and everything that followed was a little strained as a result. But in at least some of his examples, the instructor moved to the outside of the attack, blocking outside to inside, which I like, taking away the off-hand and countering to the opponent's back side, shifting weight for the block and counter. It would have worked with a jab or even a clumsy roundhouse drunk-punch I think. So that part was OK. 
Re: Abernathy, generally, I know he is teaching to a specific kata, so trying to stay within the moves, but again, just generally, he moves & changes his hands more than I would be comfortable doing. It's just too complicated for me, re-arranging the grip like that so much. I'm sure he's very good at it, but it would, say, require a high level of practice to maintain effectiveness. I would be better with more simple and direct. From the video, I liked the initial block and backhand strike, but then the next two moves were too much movement for me, say, when he shuffled his feet to change stance. I'd feel more comfortable just dropping back and letting fly. Then the spinning arm bar toward the end was really good. I liked that with the bad guy ending on his knees. Perfect. And he didn't grab, so the drop would work even if the opponent wasn't nice enough to wear a gi for you. 
Don't misunderstand. No doubt Abernathy could box my ears and teach me a lot. I'd love to do one his seminars. But by training and experience, I'm better with block and strike, move in and out of range maybe, but nothing too complicated and definitely no grabbing and holding until I feel I'm already pretty much in control of things. Personal preference maybe.


----------



## K-man

OldKarateGuy said:


> Re: 2nd video, first thing that struck me was that you're right, you don't normally expect a full stepping punch attack like that, so the attack was unrealistic and everything that followed was a little strained as a result. But in at least some of his examples, the instructor moved to the outside of the attack, blocking outside to inside, which I like, taking away the off-hand and countering to the opponent's back side, shifting weight for the block and counter. It would have worked with a jab or even a clumsy roundhouse drunk-punch I think. So that part was OK.
> Re: Abernathy, generally, I know he is teaching to a specific kata, so trying to stay within the moves, but again, just generally, he moves & changes his hands more than I would be comfortable doing. It's just too complicated for me, re-arranging the grip like that so much. I'm sure he's very good at it, but it would, say, require a high level of practice to maintain effectiveness. I would be better with more simple and direct. From the video, I liked the initial block and backhand strike, but then the next two moves were too much movement for me, say, when he shuffled his feet to change stance. I'd feel more comfortable just dropping back and letting fly. Then the spinning arm bar toward the end was really good. I liked that with the bad guy ending on his knees. Perfect. And he didn't grab, so the drop would work even if the opponent wasn't nice enough to wear a gi for you.
> Don't misunderstand. No doubt Abernathy could box my ears and teach me a lot. I'd love to do one his seminars. But by training and experience, I'm better with block and strike, move in and out of range maybe, but nothing too complicated and definitely no grabbing and holding until I feel I'm already pretty much in control of things. Personal preference maybe.


I have only just come across Iain's Shisochin bunkai. I have trained a similar one with Masaji Taira. Taira's doesn't contain the extra arm move but I really like Iain's interpretation, especially the elbow to the face after the elbow break. The next move if that fails is the Teisho to the face which with the step through is a take down.


----------



## ShotoNoob

OldKarateGuy said:


> The Taikyoku kata are no longer part of the official JKA syllabus I think. Many schools still teach them, of course, but especially in Japan and the U S, commonly, Heian Shodan will be the first kata learned in shotokan. I believe that the viewpoint of many is that the Taikyoku kata are really about acquainting the student with the idea, the concept of what a kata is, rather than actually being a genuine kata with a sense of some underlying bunkai.


|
Yes, it's late for me.  I understand and agree with the thrust of all what you say.  Nonetheless, the principles in Taikyoku are not school children level, IMO.  The mistake you make, in my mind, is in saying that technique trumps foundation.  How much you want to invest in the Taikyoku foundation is a judgment call.  I concur that the Heian kata teach the same principles with less similar repetition, better technical excellence.
|
The reason I can outfight my opponent's, however, is the Taikyoku kata.  Mind & body union....  Any karateka can do the same through the Heian series, etc.  The real question, IMO, is are you doing the kata the way Gichin Funakoshi sought?  Any of your kata?


----------



## Tez3

OldKarateGuy said:


> I'd love to do one his seminars.



I don't know if you can travel to them but Iain has two seminars in the US this year. One is in Chicago 1-3 May the other is in Connecticut 17,18,19th July.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> The real question, IMO, is are you doing the kata the way Gichin Funakoshi sought? Any of your kata?



We use the Pinan katas in Wado Ryu and we do them the way Ohtsuka Sensei taught them, we are lucky in that we have videos of the founder doing the katas.


----------



## ShotoNoob

I wish you well on your quest....


Tez3 said:


> We use the Pinan katas in Wado Ryu and we do them the way Ohtsuka Sensei taught them, we are lucky in that we have videos of the founder doing the katas.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> I wish you well on your quest....




Wado is Iain Abernethy's original style though now he works on Bunkai for all katas, many are similar enough anyway.
The problem some seem to have with Wado is the JJ content that is there, not karateka I hasten to add but many who feel there is no grappling or ground work in karate, that it has to have been brought in as cross training rather than being in karate in it's own right.


----------



## K-man

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Yes, it's late for me.  I understand and agree with the thrust of all what you say.  Nonetheless, the principles in Taikyoku are not school children level, IMO.  The mistake you make, in my mind, is in saying that technique trumps foundation.  How much you want to invest in the Taikyoku foundation is a judgment call.  I concur that the Heian kata teach the same principles with less similar repetition, better technical excellence.
> |
> The reason I can outfight my opponent's, however, is the Taikyoku kata.  Mind & body union....  Any karateka can do the same through the Heian series, etc.  The real question, IMO, is are you doing the kata the way Gichin Funakoshi sought?  Any of your kata?


I teach Okinawan Goju. When I was with the Goju Kai we had Taikyoku kata but it was nothing like Funakoshi's, apart from the embusen. Our kata are totally different to Shotokan.


----------



## Tez3

Tez3 said:


> We use the Pinan katas in Wado Ryu and we do them the way Ohtsuka Sensei taught them, we are lucky in that we have videos of the founder doing the katas.



*Flying Crane*, I'm sorry, my curiosity makes me ask  you why you 'disagreed' with my post here? I can't see anything to disagree with, I train Wado Ryu, we do the Pinan katas and Ohtsuka Sensei was videoed doing the katas. Do you not think we should think ourselves lucky we have the videos?  I don't mind being disagreed with but just can't see why here.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> I teach Okinawan Goju. When I was with the Goju Kai we had Taikyoku kata but it was nothing like Funakoshi's, apart from the embusen. Our kata are totally different to Shotokan.


|
I can readily see your point.  In my mind, I am deferring to Gichin Funakoshi and his mentors, his Okinawan comrades.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> Wado is Iain Abernethy's original style though now he works on Bunkai for all katas, many are similar enough anyway.


|
This is good evidence of classical similarities across all traditional karate kata.


Tez3 said:


> The problem some seem to have with Wado is the JJ content that is there, not karateka I hasten to add but many who feel there is no grappling or ground work in karate, that it has to have been brought in as cross training rather than being in karate in it's own right.


|
Yes, the different sources is a concern of mine as well.  Yet, are we qualified enough to criticize the founder of Wado-Ryu?
|
Taking the opposite view, the Wado-Ryu founder actively sought to bolster & round out the Wado-Ryu karate style by addressing the move away from the grappling more prevalent in Okinawan and early-on Shotokan.  It's really an intelligent way to address that tactical  weakness inherent among the Japanese karate styles, the original MMA concept from a cross training perspective, just as you say.
|
I was just having a conversation with Matt Bryers over @ the "What Paul Vunak Said About BJJ" T.  The Wado-Ryu founder exactly targeted what Matt B. was talking about--by combining Japanese karate (Shotokan-like?)  karate with Japanese JuJitsu.  Again, it's why it's also wise not to overgeneralize when speaking about karate styles, they are so diverse....


----------



## OldKarateGuy

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> The real question, IMO, is are you doing the kata the way Gichin Funakoshi sought?  Any of your kata?


There is a story from maybe Kanazawa, possibly apocryphal, about a converation he had with Funakoshi when the master was an older man. Kanazawa had learned a kata from his original instructor, one of Funakoshi's original students. Now, as a student of Funakoshi himself, Kanazawa was learning the same kata from Funakoshi, and he asked Funakoshi why the kata was different from the version he had learned from his first instructor. Funakoshi told him (I'm paraphrasing) "When I taught your instructor, I was a young man, and I did the kata as a young man was able. Now I am old, and perform the kata as old men will. Why does this surprise you?" Get it? Sometimes we are incorporating into kata idiosyncracies which are not really part of the kata, but which are from the instructor. How do any of us know, really, which is true in the version we learn, since none of us were there when the masters came up with these kata? Remember, too, that at a certain level, dan students are charged to make kata their own, to make the form fit the person. That doesn't mean to change the steps or techniques, of course, but you see, the feeling I have of a form may be entirely different from the way another senior does the same form, even if we do exactly the same sequence of techniques.  
There are existing some very old videos of Funakoshi doing Tekki. They're on You Tube, so take a look. It doesn't look all that much like I would expect a black belt to perform it today, but Funakoshi was in his 80's I think when the video was made, plus many of the kata we perform today in shotokan are really the product of Funakoshi's eldest son Gigo, and of Nakayama Sensei, at least in the detail of step and technique. 
Don't let anyone kid you. Kata are evolving, and they should. 
Back to the Taikyoku kata: they are something of a Frakenstein creation, not quite basics, and not quite real kata in that they do not contain subtle and sequential Bunkai. If they help you, then very good. But you should concentrate on more advanced kata as soon as you feel comfortable, because the Heian kata each teach you something different, progressions, weight shifts, etc. They are far better in teaching you karate. Just my opinion, and not everyone agrees with me.


----------



## ShotoNoob

OldKarateGuy said:


> There is a story from maybe Kanazawa, possibly apocryphal, about a converation he had with Funakoshi when the master was an older man.


|
Kanazawa probably the foremost authority on Shotokan karate living at this time-IMHO.  Came up through JKA, I believe.


----------



## ShotoNoob

OldKarateGuy said:


> ...
> |
> Don't let anyone kid you. Kata are evolving, and they should.


|
IMO, kata does not evolve.  We evolve (personally) by kata.  That's how I take Kanawaza.





OldKarateGuy said:


> Back to the Taikyoku kata: they are something of a Frakenstein creation, not quite basics, and not quite real kata in that they do not contain subtle and sequential Bunkai. If they help you, then very good.


|
Who said kata is defined by bunkai?


OldKarateGuy said:


> But you should concentrate on more advanced kata as soon as you feel comfortable, because the Heian kata each teach you something different, progressions, weight shifts, etc. They are far better in teaching you karate. Just my opinion, and not everyone agrees with me.


|
This isn't Gichin Funakoshi, nor the OKinawan Masters to my knowledge.  We have instructors at my school who know all the kata in the curriculum; yet who won't spar with me out of frustration.  It's not technique that makes you a good karate fighter, it's the karate foundation, the "DO" that makes you a great karate fighter.  This is the Gichin Funakoshi message, nor the Kanawaza message.
|
In any case, to each his own.  How you approach the curriculum with the testing qualifications is up to the individual....
|
And good luck to any grappler who thinks he can "close the distance" and tackle me while I stand idly....


----------



## clautz

There are seven aspects of kata: pattern, breathng, combination/timing, bunkai, tight/no-tight, kiai, and eyes (spirit) - the end state if put all together is you are in a real fight and a state of "no-mind" but experiencing the fight.  There has been a trend lately with folks making a living off of focusing on only one of the seven aspects - bunkai.  It is important, but to practice kata from that technical viewpoint alone like an archealogist (digging though kata trying to find new interpretation) - ignores the whole point of kata to reach a mental and physical state where actions are thoughtless and instinctive.  Too many people are just making up crap when it comes to bunkai - "I can block, then chop, then turn the arm over, then kick to the groin, then throw him down to the ground" - Yeah so what, anyone can do that.  Better to do your kata as hard as you can - over and over again, visualize your opponent (simple bunkai); and have spirit!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

OldKarateGuy said:


> Kata are evolving, and they should.


Agree! If you can't evolve your forms/kata, you are just a good copy machine, no more and not less. You will have no contribution to your MA system.



ShotoNoob said:


> IMO, kata does not evolve.  We evolve (personally) by kata. ....


In the

- beginner stage training, forms/kata will change you.
- advance stage training, you should change forms/kata.

When you are in

- high school, you will read books that somebody wrote.
- PhD level, you start to write papers that others will read.


----------



## drop bear

clautz said:


> combination/timing, bunkai, tight/no-tight, kiai, and eyes (spirit) - the end state if put all together is you are in a real fight and a state of "no-mind" but experiencing the fight



Ok I have been in fights. I understand how it puts you in the present and creates a state of no mind.

In part that is the appeal of fighting.

I would say that is what you experience in a competition. In that you become so focused on the moment you cant hear the crowd.

I would say that hard sparring or challenging sparring does the same thing.

For those who do both are you really getting the same thing out of kata?


----------



## K-man

clautz said:


> There are seven aspects of kata: pattern, breathng, combination/timing, bunkai, tight/no-tight, kiai, and eyes (spirit) - the end state if put all together is you are in a real fight and a state of "no-mind" but experiencing the fight.  There has been a trend lately with folks making a living off of focusing on only one of the seven aspects - bunkai.  It is important, but to practice kata from that technical viewpoint alone like an archealogist (digging though kata trying to find new interpretation) - ignores the whole point of kata to reach a mental and physical state where actions are thoughtless and instinctive.  Too many people are just making up crap when it comes to bunkai - "I can block, then chop, then turn the arm over, then kick to the groin, then throw him down to the ground" - Yeah so what, anyone can do that.  Better to do your kata as hard as you can - over and over again, visualize your opponent (simple bunkai); and have spirit!


*clautz*, welcome to MT. Perhaps you could introduce yourself and tell us a bit of your background or even put up some of your background and interests in your profile.

I would challenge what you are claiming in that kata and bunkai are quite separate and you wouldn't use kata to fight.

So let's look at what you have claimed:

Pattern or embusen. Well there might be several reasons for that but as Chojun Miyagi is alleged to have said, "don't be fooled by the rule of embusen". The turns and angles of kata are important but not in terms of the kata. They are important in the bunkai.

Breathing. Sure you can practise your breathing while performing a kata. You can just as easily practise your breathing while not doing a kata. 

Combination/timing. Sure the kata is a combination of techniques and if you are performing the kata correctly the timing is important, but will you always use that same timing in a real fight? I would suggest that the timing in kata is adding to the realism of the kata, not the effectiveness of it.

Tight/non-tight. What exactly does this mean. I am going to pull on my understanding here and suggest you are talking of beginning from a relaxed state, contracting the muscles at the moment of impact then returning to the relaxed state. This is fundamentally the teaching of Okinawan Goju so yes, that is definitely a part of kata. Mind you, it is part of all the training, not just kata.

Kiai. ??? Hmm. Ok, it is certainly a big part of Japanese karate but not so much the Okinawan. What relevance it has to kata specifically, you might like to expand on.

Eyes (spirit). Um, no! Certainly looking in the right direction and creating intent might be part of kata but again, nothing that is specifically part of kata. I prefer to think of 'spirit' as Ki and there is hard Ki and soft Ki. Hard Ki involves the eyes, soft Ki doesn't.

Bunkai. Well here you have demonstrated convincingly you have no comprehension of Bunkai, which is, I would think, why *Tez* disagreed with your post. But you will be among friends as there are several others here who share some of your views. They think kata is a total waste of time, both the kata and the Bunkai.

If too many people are making up crap Bunkai, it has nothing to do with the Bunkai or the kata. It is merely that stage of their understanding and development. They will get a better understanding with time. Those who remain thinking the way you do, will not.

You said,_ "Better to do your kata as hard as you can - over and over again, visualize your opponent (simple bunkai); and have spirit!" _I would suggest that this advice will ensure you never get past basic level karate, even though you will be exceptionally good at it.


----------



## K-man

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree! If you can't evolve your forms/kata, you are just a good copy machine, no more and not less. You will have no contribution to your MA system.
> 
> 
> In the
> 
> - beginner stage training, forms/kata will change you.
> - advance stage training, you should change forms/kata.
> 
> When you are in
> 
> - high school, you will read books that somebody wrote.
> - PhD level, you start to write papers that others will read.


I disagree totally. If you have to change the kata you haven't understood the kata. To change the kata you need far more understanding than most people will ever achieve. I have neither the time nor the understanding to either create a new kata or even modify the ones I have.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> I disagree totally. If you have to change the kata you haven't understood the kata. To change the kata you need far more understanding than most people will ever achieve. I have neither the time nor the understanding to either create a new kata or even modify the ones I have.



Ok. But then do you feel you can modify techniques at all?
 And where would the understanding come from to do that.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

K-man said:


> I disagree totally. If you have to change the kata you haven't understood the kata. To change the kata you need far more understanding than most people will ever achieve. I have neither the time nor the understanding to either create a new kata or even modify the ones I have.


Even if you can't today, will you say that you still can't 10 years, 20 years, 30 years, or even 40 years from today?

I have 2 copies of my teacher's forms. One was done when he was 55 year old. The other was done when he was 74 years old.  If I put both forms side by side, I can clearly see the change that he made. I can also clearly see the reason why he made such change.

When you get older, you will have better understanding in MA than when you were young. You should add your understanding into your training so people in the future will be benefited from it (unless you just want to keep it for yourself).


----------



## Drose427

drop bear said:


> Ok I have been in fights. I understand how it puts you in the present and creates a state of no mind.
> 
> In part that is the appeal of fighting.
> 
> I would say that is what you experience in a competition. In that you become so focused on the moment you cant hear the crowd.
> 
> I would say that hard sparring or challenging sparring does the same thing.
> 
> For those who do both are you really getting the same thing out of kata?



Essentially, yes

While we arent getting the "Learn how to stay focused after a gut punch"

We are still getting "Focus on your opponent, theres nothing but you and him"

Drowning out everything and everybody while one does a form, and staying focused on his "opponent" is the same as drowning out a crowd and focusing on the guy in front of you

That said, dont forget we arent doing forms alone. While we do get that strong focus from it,  we also get it and the "how to focus after being hit" elsewhere in our training as well.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Ok. But then do you feel you can modify techniques at all?
> And where would the understanding come from to do that.


I don't have any problem with modifying the techniques in the application or Bunkai. I have an enormous difficulty accepting a fundamental change in kata. I have seen kata changed by people who didn't understand kata. I have never seen anyone who understands kata change kata. Eiichi Miyazato, elected successor to Miyagi in Goju, made one small change of hand position in Sepai kata to better resemble the application. That is a slight change of one technique in perhaps five hundred odd techniques in the Goju kata, and he was the head of the style and taught by the founder of the style.  I believe my obligation is to pass on the kata as I was taught it, not to change a thing. 

When it comes to application it is completely flexible. There is no Bunkai passed down because it is always going to be different for different practitioners. If you consider gedan barai, or lower 'block', there are multiple applications. When developing your Bunkai it is up to you what application you assign to the technique.

The understanding comes from experience and that experience is enhanced by learning from guys like Iain Abernethy and Masaji Taira.


----------



## K-man

Drose427 said:


> Essentially, yes
> 
> While we arent getting the "Learn how to stay focused after a gut punch"
> 
> We are still getting "Focus on your opponent, theres nothing but you and him"
> 
> Drowning out everything and everybody while one does a form, and staying focused on his "opponent" is the same as drowning out a crowd and focusing on the guy in front of you
> 
> That said, dont forget we arent doing forms alone. While we do get that strong focus from it,  we also get it and the "how to focus after being hit" elsewhere in our training as well.


It depends on context. In a sporting context you can focus on your opponent and drown out the crowd. In a street context, that could get you badly beaten or even killed. Adrenalin gives you tunnel vision. The training is to help you overcome tunnel vision.


----------



## TimoS

K-man said:


> When it comes to application it is completely flexible. There is no Bunkai passed down because it is always going to be different for different practitioners.


On this my experience is a bit different. For us, there is always an "official" bunkai that is passed down, but that in itself is most likely not a very good for self defense, but it shows the idea about what the move might be for. An example to try to show what I mean




Here's the Seibukan version of kata Seisan. I'm talking now only the technique that starts at :46. The official bunkai for that is blocking an oitsuki. Now, in a self defense situation you're quite unlikely to ever be attacked by anybody using oitsuki. However, the same technique we practiced against oitsuki can be used against e.g. a gyakutsuki-type attack or a shove or even against wild swing. So, we use the principles of the bunkai to "create" the applications.


----------



## K-man

TimoS said:


> On this my experience is a bit different. For us, there is always an "official" bunkai that is passed down, but that in itself is most likely not a very good for self defense, but it shows the idea about what the move might be for. An example to try to show what I mean
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the Seibukan version of kata Seisan. I'm talking now only the technique that starts at :46. The official bunkai for that is blocking an oitsuki. Now, in a self defense situation you're quite unlikely to ever be attacked by anybody using oitsuki. However, the same technique we practiced against oitsuki can be used against e.g. a gyakutsuki-type attack or a shove or even against wild swing. So, we use the principles of the bunkai to "create" the applications.


We had an 'official' bunkai with Goju Kai back in the 80s. It was simplistic to describe in in the best light and totally impractical at its worst. Again, it was put together by people who did not understand what they were doing. I have that first hand. 

As to using a technique from kata in isolation. Sure it can be used against different attacks but if you are using it from kata, as Bunkai, it really needs to be taken in the context of the kata. You need to take into account the techniques before and after the one selected.


----------



## TimoS

Our "official" bunkai for Seisan looks a bit like this: 



. There are some differences, but they are quite minor. From these we can then extract some more realistic applications, but they should still use the same principles as in the official version.


----------



## Tez3

K-man said:


> Bunkai. Well here you have demonstrated convincingly you have no comprehension of Bunkai, which is, I would think, why *Tez* disagreed with your post. But you will be among friends as there are several others here who share some of your views. They think kata is a total waste of time, both the kata and the Bunkai.



I did indeed disagree but it was late at night for me, so didn't feel I could put together a proper argument at that point. However K-man has put together one that I totally agree with.

Our katas, in Wado Ryu aren't  usually changed because we still have videos of the Founder doing them, I believe very minor changes have been made by one organisation but they are very minor.


----------



## TimoS

K-man said:


> If you have to change the kata you haven't understood the kata.


I guess that depends. As we know, kata have changed. People like Zenryo Shimabukuro, Tatsuo Shimabukuro and Joen Nakazato all changed the kata they learned from Kyan and I am quite sure they understood the kata. There are others, of course, but those are the ones I'm most familiar with. The changes aren't radical, mostly, but the fact remains that they changed the kata. Even Zenpo Shimabukuro, the current head of Seibukan, changed for a while the way a certain kata is done. This is evidenced by looking at old videos and comparing those to the way they are performed today.


----------



## K-man

TimoS said:


> I guess that depends. As we know, kata have changed. People like Zenryo Shimabukuro, Tatsuo Shimabukuro and Joen Nakazato all changed the kata they learned from Kyan and I am quite sure they understood the kata. There are others, of course, but those are the ones I'm most familiar with. The changes aren't radical, mostly, but the fact remains that they changed the kata. Even Zenpo Shimabukuro, the current head of Seibukan, changed for a while the way a certain kata is done. This is evidenced by looking at old videos and comparing those to the way they are performed today.


I think this reinforces my point. These are the top guys of their styles and as you said, the changes are minimal. *Kung Fu Wang* was suggesting that we should be changing the kata ourselves. Now, I reckon that I know a little more about kata than most guys but I am a minnow compared to the guys you have named. In my circle of training Masaji Taira is a giant in the field of Bunkai, yet even he maintains the kata that he was taught.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> Ok. But then do you feel you can modify techniques at all?
> And where would the understanding come from to do that.


So, what did you dislike about my answer? I tried to answer your question as best I could.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> I don't have any problem with modifying the techniques in the application or Bunkai. I have an enormous difficulty accepting a fundamental change in kata. I have seen kata changed by people who didn't understand kata. I have never seen anyone who understands kata change kata. Eiichi Miyazato, elected successor to Miyagi in Goju, made one small change of hand position in Sepai kata to better resemble the application. That is a slight change of one technique in perhaps five hundred odd techniques in the Goju kata, and he was the head of the style and taught by the founder of the style.  I believe my obligation is to pass on the kata as I was taught it, not to change a thing.
> 
> When it comes to application it is completely flexible. There is no Bunkai passed down because it is always going to be different for different practitioners. If you consider gedan barai, or lower 'block', there are multiple applications. When developing your Bunkai it is up to you what application you assign to the technique.
> 
> The understanding comes from experience and that experience is enhanced by learning from guys like Iain Abernethy and Masaji Taira.



And you are not concerned that the kata becomes irrelevant due to the lack of change?

It doesn't change but has become almost a man out of time eventually.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> So, what did you dislike about my answer? I tried to answer your question as best I could.



 a miss hit of the button. 

Small phone.


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> a miss hit of the button.
> 
> Small phone.


You do realise you can remove it?


----------



## TimoS

drop bear said:


> And you are not concerned that the kata becomes irrelevant due to the lack of change?


Have people grown extra limbs? If not, what has changed so dramatically that the self defense principles in kata are in danger of becoming irrelevant?


----------



## K-man

drop bear said:


> And you are not concerned that the kata becomes irrelevant due to the lack of change?
> 
> It doesn't change but has become almost a man out of time eventually.


I can only talk of Goju kata. Other styles may have kata with particular bunkai to fit the kata. In some of those maybe you are correct but they are outside my knowledge. Within Goju, I don't believe there is any need to change. 

Perhaps I can put it another way. There are many ways of using your knowledge of your style to fight. We used to practise one step sparring and two step sparring. I think there might even have been three step sparring. We didn't have bunkai for fighting. We had some bunkai that was unrealistic and it was more of a basic explanation of kata than anything of any use. If I was still training that way I would be 100% in agreement with you. Almost all karate guys would agree that you don't need knowledge of kata to fight and most karate guys wouldn't know how to use kata bunkai to fight.

So what has changed over the years that would change the way of fighting? The only thing I can think of is the proliferation of ground fighting. Despite some people trying to apply bunkai to ground fighting, I don't believe it was ever intended that way and I have not seen any evidence of people utilising it that way and still retain the concepts of kata. So, if you are arguing that karate needs to take measures to ensure the training remains relevant particularly in the area of ground fighting, then I would agree. How that comes about we will have to wait and see. Of course, that has nothing to do with kata. As I've said many times, bunkai works because of predictive response and I cannot see how that can work on the ground and keep the rules of kata. Without that there is no point in designing a new kata and there is absolutely no reason to change an existing one.

Now let's look at the context of self defence. What is the context? I have done all I can to avoid the conflict but now it's all turning pear shaped. Am I going to launch a pre-emotive strike or am I going to wait? If I elected to take the first option then I could move straight into bukai. If I wait for an attack I cannot use bunkai, at least not initially. The value of bunkai is that I know ahead of time what I can do if my attack fails, but I need to have controlling contact. If I lose contact and don't control my opponent, again, I can't use bunkai. If the fight goes to the ground, I can't use bunkai


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> You do realise you can remove it?



Yes.


----------



## drop bear

K-man said:


> I can only talk of Goju kata. Other styles may have kata with particular bunkai to fit the kata. In some of those maybe you are correct but they are outside my knowledge. Within Goju, I don't believe there is any need to change.
> 
> Perhaps I can put it another way. There are many ways of using your knowledge of your style to fight. We used to practise one step sparring and two step sparring. I think there might even have been three step sparring. We didn't have bunkai for fighting. We had some bunkai that was unrealistic and it was more of a basic explanation of kata than anything of any use. If I was still training that way I would be 100% in agreement with you. Almost all karate guys would agree that you don't need knowledge of kata to fight and most karate guys wouldn't know how to use kata bunkai to fight.
> 
> So what has changed over the years that would change the way of fighting? The only thing I can think of is the proliferation of ground fighting. Despite some people trying to apply bunkai to ground fighting, I don't believe it was ever intended that way and I have not seen any evidence of people utilising it that way and still retain the concepts of kata. So, if you are arguing that karate needs to take measures to ensure the training remains relevant particularly in the area of ground fighting, then I would agree. How that comes about we will have to wait and see. Of course, that has nothing to do with kata. As I've said many times, bunkai works because of predictive response and I cannot see how that can work on the ground and keep the rules of kata. Without that there is no point in designing a new kata and there is absolutely no reason to change an existing one.
> 
> Now let's look at the context of self defence. What is the context? I have done all I can to avoid the conflict but now it's all turning pear shaped. Am I going to launch a pre-emotive strike or am I going to wait? If I elected to take the first option then I could move straight into bukai. If I wait for an attack I cannot use bunkai, at least not initially. The value of bunkai is that I know ahead of time what I can do if my attack fails, but I need to have controlling contact. If I lose contact and don't control my opponent, again, I can't use bunkai. If the fight goes to the ground, I can't use bunkai



Well I put an even simpler math to the idea. That you change the drills to update for a reason. It can be ground fighting or whatever.

So you are changing and updating. Just not the kata.


----------



## drop bear

TimoS said:


> Have people grown extra limbs? If not, what has changed so dramatically that the self defense principles in kata are in danger of becoming irrelevant?



I have grown extra knowledge. I have defences that null some older attacks.

I have new strikes. New strategies, different combinations, and just more techniques.


----------



## TimoS

drop bear said:


> I have new strikes.


So your limbs move in a different way than people from let's say ten or hundred years ago? If not, I really doubt your strikes are anything new


----------



## drop bear

TimoS said:


> So your limbs move in a different way than people from let's say ten or hundred years ago? If not, I really doubt your strikes are anything new



How many people were involved in discovering these strikes. And set ups to striking. Before it went into kata and got sealed in stone?


----------



## TimoS

drop bear said:


> How many people were involved in discovering these strikes. And set ups to striking. Before it went into kata and got sealed in stone?


Huh? 

You know, it is already well established that you don't understand kata, so why are you _still _talking about it, because it sure isn't because you want to understand it


----------



## drop bear

TimoS said:


> Huh?
> 
> You know, it is already well established that you don't understand kata, so why are you _still _talking about it, because it sure isn't because you want to understand it



I understand that techniques need updating. I don't understand why kata doesn't.

As far as I can tell. You are suggesting kata has already incorporated the best possible combinations of movements. 

I think understanding kata might be different to worshiping it.


----------



## TimoS

drop bear said:


> I understand that techniques need updating. I don't understand why kata doesn't.


You could've said that with just four words: "I don't understand kata"


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


> I understand that techniques need updating. I don't understand why kata doesn't.


Agree!

If a technique can be used in many different ways, it will require many different "set ups". Unfortunately, the form/kata can only "record" 1 set up.

For example, When you throw a "right back reverse punch", if your intention is to

- punch on your opponent's face, your left hand may not have to do much.
- take your opponent down, your left hand may need to pull on his arm, or leg. That will require some modification.

The form/kata is "dead". It's you that have to bring it back "alive".

The day my teacher told me that form/kata is for teaching and learning only. It's not for "training". That was the most valuable MA lesson that I have learned in my life. Every time I did my form/kata, I put different "soul" into my "dead" form and gave my form/kata different "spirit".


----------



## drop bear

TimoS said:


> You could've said that with just four words: "I don't understand kata"



Well no I really couldn't. I don't understand the worship of kata. Which is a different thing.


----------



## drop bear

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree!
> 
> If a technique can be used in many different ways, it will require many different "set ups". Unfortunately, the form/kata can only "record" 1 set up.
> 
> For example, When you throw a "right back reverse punch", if your intention is to
> 
> - punch on your opponent's face, your left hand may not have to do much.
> - take your opponent down, your left hand may need to pull on his arm, or leg. That will require some modification.
> 
> The form/kata is "dead". It's you that have to bring it back "alive".



Mabye generations of martial artists who really had no way to transfer information except dogmatically have become stuck with a mindset now.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


> Mabye generations of martial artists who really had no way to transfer information except dogmatically have become stuck with a mindset now.


Even the same technique, when you apply it on your opponent while he has

- right side forward, or
- left side forward,

your "set up" may be different. How many form/kata creator had recorded both "set ups" in the form/kata that he created?

I have learned 2 different forms/katas.

- In one form, when I did a left side kick, my opponent downward blocks it and spins my body to my "left". I then have to follow a right palm strike on his neck.
- In another form, when I did a left side kick, my opponent downward blocks it and spins my body to my "right". I then have to follow a right spin back fist on his head.

What if I just learned one form, or what if 1 of these 2 forms was lost and never passed down through the generations? Since the move after that left side kick is different in the form/kata, will I just learn 1/2 of the application for the rest of my life if I never have the intention to "modify" that form?


----------



## TimoS

You do realize that you can't design a form/kata/whatever that has all the possible combinations in it? The kata shows you the principles, it is up to you and your instructor/training partner to learn to apply them.


----------



## drop bear

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Even the same technique, when you apply it on your opponent while he has
> 
> - right side forward, or
> - left side forward,
> 
> your "set up" may be different. How many form/kata creator had recorded both "set ups" in the form/kata that he created?
> 
> I have learned 2 different forms/katas.
> 
> - In one form, when I did a left side kick, my opponent downward blocks it and spins my body to my "left". I then have to follow a right palm strike on his neck.
> - In another form, when I did a left side kick, my opponent downward blocks it and spins my body to my "right". I then have to follow a right spin back fist on his head.
> 
> What if I just learned one form? Since the move after that left side kick is different, will I just learn 1/2 of the application for the rest of my life?



Or if you are eating some sort of counter that could be readily fixed with a tweaked technique. I mean I am always in a state of doing that.

The other day was slightly flared elbows on my jab that let a really fast boxer punch my ribs in.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

TimoS said:


> You do realize that you can't design a form/kata/whatever that has all the possible combinations in it? The kata shows you the principles, it is up to you and your instructor/training partner to learn to apply them.


Now you are talking about "partner training" that map the content of form/kata into application. I agree that will be the best and only way to "develop" your skill.


----------



## TimoS

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Now you are talking about "partner training" that map the content form/kata into application. I agree that will be the best and only way to "develop" your skill.


Well, partner training is and always has been a major part of kata, at least in those systems that haven't lost their knowledge.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


> Or if you are eating some sort of counter that could be readily fixed with a tweaked technique. I mean I am always in a state of doing that.
> 
> The other day was slightly flared elbows on my jab that let a really fast boxer punch my ribs in.


Another good example will be when you use downward parry on your opponent's leading arm, if he

- resists (contact is made), you then grab and pull his leading arm.
- rotates his arm to avoid contact, you then rotate your arm into the opposite direction to meet his arm 1/2 way.

Will both follow on moves (after downward parry) be recorded in the form/kata? The chance is very small.


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If a technique can be used in many different ways, it will require many different "set ups". Unfortunately, the form/kata can only "record" 1 set up.





Kung Fu Wang said:


> Will both follow on moves (after downward parry) be recorded in the form/kata? The chance is very small.



These comments show you don't understand what kata is and how Bunkai is studied, I think you are jumping on the bandwagon of slagging kata off because you think it sounds cool to. Explanations are been given time and time again but you don't want to understand what kata or Bunkai is, as for the comment about the 'worship' of kata that is verging on being insulting. I will say nothing more than it's very disappointing that a martial artist's cup is full and brings it here overflowing.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> These comments show you don't understand what kata is and how Bunkai is studied, I think you are jumping on the bandwagon of slagging kata off because you think it sounds cool to. Explanations are been given time and time again but you don't want to understand what kata or Bunkai is, as for the comment about the 'worship' of kata that is verging on being insulting. I will say nothing more than it's very disappointing that a martial artist's cup is full and brings it here overflowing.



The explanations tend not to make much sense is all. If they were better more people possibly would understand.

And we would have better discussion.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> The explanations tend not to make much sense is all. If they were better more people possibly would understand.
> 
> And we would have better discussion.




So you don't think articles written by such people as Iain Abernethy, and posted by us make any sense? You don't think that blaming _everyone_ who posted an explanation for your lack of understanding is a bit odd?


----------



## Tez3

*The Pinan-Heian Series as a Fighting System*
1.  The Pinan / Heian Series as a Fighting System: Part One
2.  The Pinan / Heian Series as a Fighting System: Part Two
3.  The Pinan / Heian Series as a Fighting System: Part Three
4.  The Pinan / Heian Series as a Fighting System: Part Four
5.  The Pinan / Heian Series as a Fighting System: Part Five
*The Basics of Bunkai (Kata Application)*
1.  The Basics of Bunkai: Part 1
2.  The Basics of Bunkai: Part 2
3.  The Basics of Bunkai: Part 3
4.  The Basics of Bunkai: Part 4
5.  The Basics of Bunkai: Part 5
6.  The Basics of Bunkai: Part 6
7.  The Basics of Bunkai: Part 7
8.  The Basics of Bunkai: Part 8


----------



## Tez3

Iain Abernethy The practical application of Karate


----------



## Tez3

As you think our explanations are unintelligible  perhaps you will understand what an accepted expert ( and not just by karateka) has to say, perhaps you'd like to expand as well on the kata used in Judo?


----------



## clautz

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Agree! If you can't evolve your forms/kata, you are just a good copy machine, no more and not less. You will have no contribution to your MA system.
> 
> 
> In the
> 
> - beginner stage training, forms/kata will change you.
> - advance stage training, you should change forms/kata.
> 
> When you are in
> 
> - high school, you will read books that somebody wrote.
> - PhD level, you start to write papers that others will read.



If you are a master and recognized by the Rengo-Kai as such – go ahead, change the kata.  But as soon as you do also know that you will be a ronin in the eyes of the Rengo-kai for breaking with tradition. Every change moves the kata further and further away from its intent until all meaning is lost and as students become teachers and their students change things – all is lost. 

Much of this focus on bunkai of late to find “the secret meaning of kata” is oft done by folks who just make stuff up to impress their students; make a name for themselves, or for profit.  Few have been trained with bunkai from a recognized master but claim to be masters themselves.  The tradition of the kata and its purity need to be honored as most masters will tell you.  

In my earlier post I mentioned there are seven aspects to kata (pattern, breathing,  combination/timing, bunkai, tight/no-tight, kiai and eyes (spirit).  Bunkai is one of the seven aspects of kata – not the only aspect which so many focus on as tactical technicians (a technician is not a warrior but bookworms studying a scroll they don’t understand) and ignore the value of the other aspects.  Training in all of these aspects will improve fighting skill as well as heart and mind. 

There are no secrets in Karate.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> So you don't think articles written by such people as Iain Abernethy, and posted by us make any sense? You don't think that blaming _everyone_ who posted an explanation for your lack of understanding is a bit odd?



Some people make sense and some don't. Some elements make sense and some don't.

You are generalizing a bit here.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> *The explanations* tend not to make much sense is all. If they were better more people possibly would understand.



I don't think I'm the one generalising here, you said *the explanations*, you didn't specify whose, just indicated that all of them didn't make sense.


----------



## Drose427

Two of the big disconnects that havent been brought up:

Drop Bear, forms do change. They've been changing since they were created. In this year alone, my KJN has changed 4 or 5 things. while they seem like minor changes, actually affect how one would use it in a fight

Random example: If a punch in a form gets shorter, now I have to be close to use it

Second, The order of moves in a form is only pertinent when performing that specific form.

Not when doing any sort of Bunkai or SD drilling.

Remember forms are a dictionary. To make a coherent sentence with a dictionary, you have the flip though different parts of the book.

Sometimes Bunkai are simpler to accomplish when you "mix 'n match"


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> I think this reinforces my point. These are the top guys of their styles and as you said, the changes are minimal. *Kung Fu Wang* was suggesting that we should be changing the kata ourselves. Now, I reckon that I know a little more about kata than most guys but I am a minnow compared to the guys you have named. In my circle of training Masaji Taira is a giant in the field of Bunkai, yet even he maintains the kata that he was taught.


|
Shotonoob here.
|
I always thought the challenge & the lesson of traditional karate was to get really good at kata.
|
TMA practitioners who don't, then can't effectuate kata skills in application, then want to change what they can't do well.  Make perfect sense for the egotistical.


----------



## ShotoNoob

TimoS said:


> Our "official" bunkai for Seisan looks a bit like this:
> 
> 
> 
> . There are some differences, but they are quite minor. From these we can then extract some more realistic applications, but they should still use the same principles as in the official version.


|
Your concept of kata was always plain to me.
|
Critics of kata just don't have the discipline or patience or thinking chops to study kata seriously.  So the kata critics criticize what they are insufficient in character to attain....  Traditional karate kata is not for the "hard rollers," it's for the thinkers who seek to develop the mental strengths to take on the "hard rollers."


----------



## ShotoNoob

Kung Fu Wang said:


> ...
> The day my teacher told me that form/kata is for teaching and learning only. It's not for "training". That was the most valuable MA lesson that I have learned in my life. Every time I did my form/kata, I put different "soul" into my "dead" form and gave my form/kata different "spirit".


|
I don't know what all the confusion is about.  Dead kata/ / Live Kata?  You are either doing kata  the way the Okinawan Masters intended or you're not.
|
These phrases like, "...kata is for teachning only. It's not for training."  While apparently helpful for you to get out of some kind of kata-funk, is silly.
|
I never heard any statement like that from any TMA instructor.   Kata is a part of the traditional martial art training, Okinawan, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, American TMA.
|
On of the most valuable lessons of such statements are the temptation to over-think -the qualities of kata, rather than just think about what the Master's intended to begin with.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> ...You said,_ "Better to do your kata as hard as you can - over and over again, visualize your opponent (simple bunkai); and have spirit!" _I would suggest that this advice will ensure you never get past basic level karate, even though you will be exceptionally good at it.


|
Exceptionally good @ what?  Unfortunately we have the global, [I'll borrow a phrase-from-K-MAN]  your "modern," Shotokan kata versions which tend to employ rigid tension & heavy physical force.
|
Nonetheless, kata was never intended by the Master's to be trained with full physical strength.  Kata is a training exercise, a developmental exercise, not a weight-lifting, resistive physical exercise of maximum aerobic output....where the body functions just takes over.....  Never.
|
The practitioner you mention may get good at a physical demonstration, yet one that doesn't even qualify for traditional kihon karate.


----------



## ShotoNoob

K-man said:


> I think this reinforces my point. These are the top guys of their styles and as you said, the changes are minimal. *Kung Fu Wang* was suggesting that we should be changing the kata ourselves.


|
The Masters at my dojo are strict traditionalist and don't change or adapt the kata.  I agree in principle; where I disagree it that the rule is an absolute about something man-made.
|
So I think it's ok to change a kata (which I don't really spend a whole lot of time on but have done so--that's a whole 'nother topic);however, we are then faced with: "Why are we changing kata which was developed by expert, authorities,  TMA masters?"
|
I suppose if you believe you are not more knowledgeable & skilled at what the original kata offered, you're now qualified to change them.  Who determines whether you are @ that level and by what standards is one so qualified?
|
Good luck with that.....


----------



## ShotoNoob

TimoS said:


> Our "official" bunkai for Seisan looks a bit like this: [edit]. There are some differences, but they are quite minor. From these we can then extract some more realistic applications, but they should still use the same principles as in the official version.


|
Precisely.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I don't think I'm the one generalising here, you said *the explanations*, you didn't specify whose, just indicated that all of them didn't make sense.



I don't have to I did not make that statement in a vacuum. It is in response to a conversation I was having.

So it would be specifically the people I am conversing with. There are other posters who have different views. Like kung fu wang who consider kata a mouldable tool.

Ian atherby might have a different view again.

You are the one who has jumped mid conversation and said that everybody is kata bashing. And again I think kung fu wang does kata.

I am not going to recap on every post just so people don have to follow the conversation it would be a painful way to discuss things.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


> You are the one who has jumped mid conversation and said that everybody is kata bashing. And again I think kung fu wang does kata.


Just to be clear, not only I train form/kata (if we agree that form and kata are the same thing), I may have trained more forms than most people in this forum have. If you have trained more than 50 forms/katas then you beat me.

Here are my personal form/kata clips. I can at least put up more than 20 of my personal form/kata clips if I have to. It just proves that I do train form/kata and I'm not "form/kata bashing".

Sorry that both clips were recorded about 44 years ago. I just can't do form/kata with that kind of speed any more.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Just to be clear, not only I train form/kata, I may have trained more forms than most people in this forum have. If you have trained more than 50 forms/katas then you beat me.


|
I don't recognize that quote being a comment made to you?  It must be old.  Anyway, I have only practiced 9 traditional karate kata, don't envision doing more than that.


Kung Fu Wang said:


> Here are clips (I can at least put up 20 form/kata clips if needed) to prove that I do train form/kata and I'm not "form/kata bashing".


|
Read that quote again. It indicates I am referencing you as a kata practitioner... from what you've copied.  Beyond that, I can't fathom the context.
|
That I may have a different take on kata / forms.... well....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Kung Fu Wang said:


> ...Here are clips (I can at least put up 20 form/kata clips if needed) to prove that I do train form/kata and I'm not "form/kata bashing".


|
If there has been some confusion in the past, I'll like to set the record straight.
|
I wouldn't consider any of the work by the person present in the vids as 'bashing' kata / forms.  I'm sure my historic comment / quote has been taken out of context.
|
Furthermore, I consider the CMA forms superior as a whole to the traditional karate kata that I practice, in imparting skill & power.  I just practice something simpler for reasons of practicality & efficiency first.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Now that I've put that to bed, I'll post a response to the Isshin Ryu Kata Bunkai vid re K=MAM later.....


----------



## TimoS

This is something a friend of mine has been saying for years: "karate isn't a method of fighting. It is a method to teach fighting. These are two different things". As he just happens to train Okinawan karate, we can substitute the word karate with kata, because like me, he considers karate = kata (okay, that is a bit simplified, but essentially that's how I see it)


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> I don't have to I did not make that statement in a vacuum. It is in response to a conversation I was having.
> 
> So it would be specifically the people I am conversing with. There are other posters who have different views. Like kung fu wang who consider kata a mouldable tool.
> 
> Ian atherby might have a different view again.
> 
> You are the one who has jumped mid conversation and said that everybody is kata bashing. And again I think kung fu wang does kata.
> 
> I am not going to recap on every post just so people don have to follow the conversation it would be a painful way to discuss things.




Who is Ian Atherby?
I think that you don't actually read people's posts because I certainly DIDN'T say everyone is kata bashing and I don't see what KFW doing or not doing kata has to do with anything with a post I directed at you.


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> If you have trained more than 50 forms/katas then you beat me.



Training any amount of 'forms' ( are they karate kata by the way?) isn't the point of learning kata, any of us could learn any amount of kata but it doesn't mean we'd understand them, far better to have learnt one kata and understand it thoroughly rather than be able to perform fifty but not understand them.

this is what Tsutomo Ohshima,  one of Funakoshi's students says.

_"One guy invents one kata. After five or ten years' practice, his students, ten students, make ten kata. By the next generation, a person wants to study karate, and there are ten thousand kata. Which one is the authentic one? They have trouble. Imagine one teacher in the United States makes up one kata. There are maybe 100,000 karate teachers in America, so maybe 100,000 new kata come out. That's the worst situation I can imagine. Before Master Funakoshi went to Tokyo from Okinawa, he visited experts to learn their kata. He knew that the general public would ask how many kata he had learned. Maybe he learned 60 or 80 kata and maybe he did each kata 100 times or 200 times, but not that much. If he did each kata 100 times that's 6000 times. So with only one or two years' preparation, he couldn't do each kata - 1,000 times. After a certain age, he said it's ridiculous to memorize all these forms. He never told me this, I never asked him, but I know. When I came here in 1955, people would ask me , "How many kata do you know?" I'd say ,"maybe 25". They'd say, "Only 25, I know a man who knows 30 kata". 

 They'd think that the guy who knows 30 kata is more an expert than the one that knows 25. I realized that the general public asks this kind of question - their mentality is variety, different kinds, the actual number. For the martial artist, it has to be completely opposite. We have to simplify, simplify, simplify. If you know 20, you have to make 10 kata better. If you know 10, you've got to cut to five, five kata that are really, really good. Even five kata are too many. Cut it to two. Each one performed 50000 times. Do them 100000 times, you realize that one kata is a little better than the other. Do the one that is better 50000 more times. When you reach 150000 or 200000 times, then I think that kata is yours_."


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tez3 said:


> Training any amount of 'forms' ( are they karate kata by the way?) isn't the point of learning kata, any of us could learn any amount of kata but it doesn't mean we'd understand them, far better to have learnt one kata and understand it thoroughly rather than be able to perform fifty but not understand them."


This is a Karate thread. I really should not talk too much about CMA. But since you have asked. I try to respond to your post to the best that I can.

You may need only 1 open hand form from any particular MA system. But I think 3 should be the proper number.

- 1 beginner level form,
- 1 intermediate level form, and
- 1 advance level form.

My major "long fist" system includes 5 branches:

1. 查 (Cha),
2. 花 (Hua),
3. 洪 (Hong),
4. 弹 (Tan),
5. 炮 (Pao).

You have to learn forms from all those 5 branches in order to claim that you have trained the "long fist" system. That's at least 5 forms there.

You will also need to learn at least 1 form for each different weapon that you have trained. My major "long fist" system requires 7 different weapon training such as:

1. staff,
2. Dao (single edge knife),
3. spear,
4. Jian (double edge sword),
5. dagger,
6. Miao Dao (similar to Japanese sword but longer),
7. Guan Dao (knife at the end of staff).

That's at least another 7 forms there.

For example, the staff weapon training is complete different from that Dao weapon training.


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You will also need to learn at least 1 form for each different weapon that you have trained. My major "long fist" system requires 7 different weapon training such as:
> 
> 1. staff,
> 2. Dao (single edge knife),
> 3. spear,
> 4. Jian (double edge sword),
> 5. dagger,
> 6. Miao Dao (similar to Japanese sword but longer),
> 7. Guan Dao (knife at the end of staff).



That sounds enormously enjoyable! I don't have as much weapons training as I'd like.
I may be wrong but aren't Chinese forms somewhat different from karate kata in that they don't have or at least people don't train Bunkai from them?
It's believed by some masters that one only needs to train in one kata to have everything you need to defend yourself, that kata is Naihanchi, to be honest I can believe it. I know it well but still find more in it.

Our founder showing how Naihanchi should be done in Wado Ryu.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tez3 said:


> I may be wrong but aren't Chinese forms somewhat different from karate kata in that they don't have or at least people don't train Bunkai from them?
> It's believed by some masters that one only needs to train in one kata to have everything you need to defend yourself, that kata is Naihanchi, to be honest I can believe it. I know it well but still find more in it.


The CMA forms don't always have "application" associated with it. It's up to the instructor to explain the application to his students. But some CMA forms are 2 men form. It was designed that the 1st half of the form can match to the 2nd half of the form. Forms like these are pretty much self explained. The "too many forms" is a serious CMA problem.


----------



## ShotoNoob

TimoS said:


> This is something a friend of mine has been saying for years: "karate isn't a method of fighting. It is a method to teach fighting. These are two different things". As he just happens to train Okinawan karate, we can substitute the word karate with kata, because like me, he considers karate = kata (okay, that is a bit simplified, but essentially that's how I see it)


|
Artistically. I'm A-OK on that....


----------



## TimoS

clautz said:


> If you are a master and recognized by the Rengo-Kai as such – go ahead, change the kata.  But as soon as you do also know that you will be a ronin in the eyes of the Rengo-kai for breaking with tradition


I don't think it's quite as straightforward as this. Many of the Rengokai masters have modified the kata they learned, probably not dramatically, but they have changed them. If they hadn't, everyone's kata would look exactly the same, but now there are some differences, e.g. stances. Example, I know for a fact that Zenpo Shimabukuro sensei has changed the way kata Wansu was performed. Later on he changed it back to the way it was. Apparently he wanted to emphasize the usage of hips in a particular movement, that is to say that the movement shouldn't be performed with just hands, rather the whole body should be used in it.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Who is Ian Atherby?
> I think that you don't actually read people's posts because I certainly DIDN'T say everyone is kata bashing and I don't see what KFW doing or not doing kata has to do with anything with a post I directed at you.



You did say kfw was on the kata bashing band wagon. 

It shows that people who do kata may have a different interpretation about it than you.

You post at kfw also included a response to me. So I am addressing it.

So yes I do read peoples posts.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> You did say kfw was on the kata bashing band wagon.
> 
> It shows that people who do kata may have a different interpretation about it than you.
> 
> You post at kfw also included a response to me. So I am addressing it.
> 
> So yes I do read peoples posts.




So you and KFW are _everybody_?

KFW does forms, in CMA not Japanese kata and you don't do either, you think someone called Ian Atherby does kata, he may well do but I've never heard of him


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tez3 said:


> KFW does forms, in CMA not Japanese kata ...



Actually, I did spent 3 months and trained in local YMCA "Goju Ryu" Karate club (on the drag of UT Austin) back in 1972. I did learn 2 katas from that Karate system. I still remember the 1st move was:

- left arm downward block to left,
- right arm back reverse punch,
- ...

One of the 2-men drills was:

- Your opponent right punches at your chest,
- you slide to your left with both feet, left palm block his punch to your right, followed by a right back reverse punch to his chest.

Even if I'm still a white belt in Karate, I do have some Karate training.


----------



## clautz

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Exceptionally good @ what?  Unfortunately we have the global, [I'll borrow a phrase-from-K-MAN]  your "modern," Shotokan kata versions which tend to employ rigid tension & heavy physical force.
> |
> Nonetheless, kata was never intended by the Master's to be trained with full physical strength.  Kata is a training exercise, a developmental exercise, not a weight-lifting, resistive physical exercise of maximum aerobic output....where the body functions just takes over.....  Never.
> |
> The practitioner you mention may get good at a physical demonstration, yet one that doesn't even qualify for traditional kihon karate.


Kata is intended to be done with both full physical and mental strength -- what, you would go into a fight with 1/4 power, or 1/4 spirit, or half technique.  Anything is less is academic or just dance.  Way, way to many people teaching dance out there. This whole thread has been looking at kata from a physical aspect and not the phyiscial, mental and heart Way.


----------



## Tez3

clautz said:


> This whole thread has been looking at kata from a physical aspect and not the phyiscial, mental and heart Way.



That is because the OP is about kata for self defence so the discussion is narrowed to that, if the OP had been training kata then the discussion would have included the physical and mental aspects.


----------



## ShotoNoob

clautz said:


> Kata is intended to be done with both full physical and mental strength -- what, you would go into a fight with 1/4 power, or 1/4 spirit, or half technique.


|
NOPE, NOPE, NOPE..... NOPE<NOPE<NOPE....


clautz said:


> Anything is less is academic or just dance.  Way, way to many people teaching dance out there.


|
Dance is a physical, recreational objective seeking activity....  Traditional karate is a mental discipline.  World's apart....
|
Answer: read the Masters, get the curriculum & STUDY THE MANUAL, interview instructors, research the web....  it's up to you to get it....


clautz said:


> This whole thread has been looking at kata from a physical aspect and not the phyiscial, mental and heart Way.


|
AND???


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> That is because the OP is about kata for self defence so the discussion is narrowed to that, if the OP had been training kata then the discussion would have included the physical and mental aspects.


|
AW Shucks, I thought the thread was talking KARATE bunkai....  my bad....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Even if I'm still a white belt in Karate, I do have some Karate training. ....


|
Oh, how could YOU!!!!!


----------



## ShotoNoob

TimoS said:


> I don't think it's quite as straightforward as this. Many of the Rengokai masters have modified the kata they learned, probably not dramatically, but they have changed them.....


|
I can't fathom all that lineage stuff (feel like Matt Bryers here).  Yet the great irony (as you so accurately laid out) or contradiction is that the Master's who created kata, many were patterned off of another Master's (so-called) work.  Master's of different styles obviously made changes & alterations, including kata....
|
This argument can then go 'round in circles.... if one let's it....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The "too many forms" is a serious CMA problem.


|
It's a traditional karate & related styles problem too.  One Okinawan Master stated that learning the Pinon kata would provide all one need's to know to fight effectively.  In principle, I largely (not quite) agree--if one believes traditional karate is broad enough a TMA style overall.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> So you and KFW are _everybody_?
> 
> KFW does forms, in CMA not Japanese kata and you don't do either, you think someone called Ian Atherby does kata, he may well do but I've never heard of him



So you are suggesting there is a difference between forms and kata?


----------



## TimoS

drop bear said:


> So you are suggesting there is a difference between forms and kata?


IMHO, there isn't that much of a difference. Okinawans most likely took the idea of long solo forms from Chinese martial arts. Also some kata, e.g. Seisan and Sanchin, are Chinese in origin


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> So you are suggesting there is a difference between forms and kata?


Obviously there is a difference if there is no Bunkai in forms and they seem to serve a different purpose from kata.



ShotoNoob said:


> |
> AW Shucks, I thought the thread was talking KARATE bunkai....  my bad....



Yes it's talking about kata for self defence which of course is Bunkai, we aren't talking about spirituality, mental training for life skills or anything else other than karate for self defence.


----------



## TimoS

Tez3 said:


> Obviously there is a difference if there is no Bunkai in forms and they seem to serve a different purpose from kata.


I have no real experience from Chinese martial arts, but some of my friends are training in seven star praying mantis and my understanding is that they have applications to their forms. I'm also not quite sure what you mean that the forms in kung-fu serve a different purpose, when many of the kata in existence are in fact Chinese in origin.


----------



## Tez3

TimoS said:


> I have no real experience from Chinese martial arts, but some of my friends are training in seven star praying mantis and my understanding is that they have applications to their forms. I'm also not quite sure what you mean that the forms in kung-fu serve a different purpose, when many of the kata in existence are in fact Chinese in origin.




I didn't say that Chinese forms serve a different purpose I said that "Obviously there is a difference *if* there is no Bunkai in forms and they *seem* to serve a different purpose from kata." which is true isn't it?


----------



## drop bear

TimoS said:


> IMHO, there isn't that much of a difference. Okinawans most likely took the idea of long solo forms from Chinese martial arts. Also some kata, e.g. Seisan and Sanchin, are Chinese in origin



Yeah would have thought the same. Karate does seem to have this kata is perfect nonsense though. Which so far hasn't been reflected in the kung fu guys. Who look at it more like a training tool.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Obviously there is a difference if there is no Bunkai in forms and they seem to serve a different purpose from kata.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it's talking about kata for self defence which of course is Bunkai, we aren't talking about spirituality, mental training for life skills or anything else other than karate for self defence.



If the kung fu guys don't pull moves out of there kata and drill them I would be very surprised.

Which is bunkai to my understanding.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> ...Yes it's talking about kata for self defence which of course is Bunkai, we aren't talking about spirituality, mental training for life skills or anything else other than karate for self defence.


|
And not about karate either....


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> Yeah would have thought the same. Karate does seem to have this kata is perfect nonsense though. Which so far hasn't been reflected in the kung fu guys. Who look at it more like a training tool.


|
You should get out more....


----------



## ShotoNoob

@K-man  & CO.


TimoS said:


> Our "official" bunkai for Seisan looks a bit like this:
> 
> 
> 
> . There are some differences, but they are quite minor. From these we can then extract some more realistic applications, but they should still use the same principles as in the official version.


|
Now when you can fight like this and move so dynamically that the opponent can not react against your action, then you will know kata...
|
EDIT: Good luck with that....


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Yeah would have thought the same. Karate does seem to have this kata is perfect nonsense though. Which so far hasn't been reflected in the kung fu guys. Who look at it more like a training tool.




No one has ever said kata is perfect, no one in karate thinks that at all, stop trying to muddy the waters by making silly comments. Nothing is perfect in anything.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> No one has ever said kata is perfect, no one in karate thinks that at all, stop trying to muddy the waters by making silly comments. Nothing is perfect in anything.



Really?

The system is perfect or it needs updating.

So the perfect kata is basically the theme here. Always has been. That is not muddying the waters it is just an observation on how it is described.

All very creationist.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> So the perfect kata is basically the theme here. Always has been. That is not muddying the waters it is just an observation on how it is described.


Please point us to to an example of who is describing kata that way.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Really?
> 
> The system is perfect or it needs updating.
> 
> So the perfect kata is basically the theme here. Always has been. That is not muddying the waters it is just an observation on how it is described.
> 
> All very creationist.




Really? What does 'all very creationist' mean?
No one has described kata as being perfect, why would they? I think that you are stirring here or trolling.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Really? What does 'all very creationist' mean?
> No one has described kata as being perfect, why would they? I think that you are stirring here or trolling.



Rubbish. You have been playing semantic games around a very simple idea.
 It was created in a manner that we cant even hope to understand it. Let alone modify it.

That it the issue I have had in this whole theme

Creationist. God created man who then created sightly less and less perfect copies 

Like kata created by the founder and understood slightly less and less by the students.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Please point us to to an example of who is describing kata that way.



Ok. Please explain how this is an imperfect or mouldable idea.



K-man said:


> I disagree totally. If you have to change the kata you haven't understood the kata. To change the kata you need far more understanding than most people will ever achieve. I have neither the time nor the understanding to either create a new kata or even modify the ones I have.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Ok. Please explain how this is an imperfect or mouldable idea.




There's nothing in what you have quoted that says kata is 'perfect' or that anyone thinks it is. I'd say that changing a kata because *you *can't make it work is not the answer, rather you should study/practice/think at it until it does work, that's far from being perfect, that is working rather than having everything handed to you on a plate.
Bunkai does mean having to work, no one values something that is easy and cheap.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Ok. Please explain how this is an imperfect or mouldable idea.


How about you just answer my question instead of deflecting.


----------



## TimoS

drop bear said:


> It was created in a manner that we cant even hope to understand it


That's simply not true. It requires lots of work and a good instructor, but understanding is not impossible


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Rubbish. You have been playing semantic games around a very simple idea.
> It was created in a manner that we cant even hope to understand it. Let alone modify it.
> 
> That it the issue I have had in this whole theme
> 
> Creationist. God created man who then created sightly less and less perfect copies
> 
> Like kata created by the founder and understood slightly less and less by the students.



ROFLMAO. Luckily in my style our founder didn't depart this life until  1982 so we do have a very good understanding of our katas. We even have videos of him doing the katas as well as plenty of his students and instructors still around.
I think you have a very strange idea of what kata is. Either that or as I said you just like stirring.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> How about you just answer my question instead of deflecting.



How about I did answer the question.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> There's nothing in what you have quoted that says kata is 'perfect' or that anyone thinks it is. I'd say that changing a kata because *you *can't make it work is not the answer, rather you should study/practice/think at it until it does work, that's far from being perfect, that is working rather than having everything handed to you on a plate.
> Bunkai does mean having to work, no one values something that is easy and cheap.



You are not reading the posts. Nobody changes the kata. 

You need to read back and get a bit of reference to what I am writing. And stop projecting.

The bunkai is changed to adapt.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> You are not reading the posts. Nobody changes the kata.
> 
> You need to read back and get a bit of reference to what I am writing. And stop projecting.
> 
> The bunkai is changed to adapt.




You know you write a lot of very weird things. 'Projecting'... which one of this meanings were you trying to convey?
*proj·ect*
 (prŏj′ĕkt′, -ĭkt)
_n._
*1. * An undertaking requiring concerted effort: a community cleanup project; a government-funded irrigation project.
*2. * An extensive task undertaken by a student or group of students to apply, illustrate, or supplement classroom lessons.
*3. * A plan or proposal for accomplishing something. See Synonyms at  plan.
*4. * also *projects* A housing project.
_v._ *pro·ject* (prə-jĕkt′) *pro·ject·ed*, *pro·ject·ing*, *pro·jects*
_v.tr._
*1. * To thrust outward or forward: project one's jaw in defiance.
*2. * To throw forward; hurl: project an arrow.
*3. * To send out into space; cast: project a light beam.
*4. * To cause (an image) to appear on a surface by the controlled direction of light: projected the slide onto a screen.
*5. * _Mathematics_ To produce (a projection).
*6. * To direct (one's voice) so as to be heard clearly at a distance.
*7. * _Psychology_ To externalize and attribute (an emotion or motive, for example) unconsciously to someone or something else in order to avoid anxiety.
*8. * To convey an impression of to an audience or to others: a posture that projects defeat.
*9. * To form a plan or intention for: project a new business enterprise.
*10. * To calculate, estimate, or predict (something in the future), based on present data or trends: projecting next year's expenses.
_v.intr._
*1. * To extend forward or out; jut out: beams that project beyond the eaves. See Synonyms at  bulge.
*2. * To direct one's voice so as to be heard clearly at a distance.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> How about I did answer the question.



Your statement was; 



drop bear said:


> Karate does seem to have this kata is perfect nonsense though..



I asked you to point to where kata was described as being perfect.

You quoted this as your answer;



drop bear said:


> Ok. Please explain how this is an imperfect or mouldable idea.





K-man said:


> I disagree totally. If you have to change the kata you haven't understood the kata. To change the kata you need far more understanding than most people will ever achieve. I have neither the time nor the understanding to either create a new kata or even modify the ones I have.



This answer does not describe kata as being perfect, it only describes kata as being hard to understand.

Try again.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> ROFLMAO. Luckily in my style our founder didn't depart this life until  1982 so we do have a very good understanding of our katas. We even have videos of him doing the katas as well as plenty of his students and instructors still around.
> I think you have a very strange idea of what kata is. Either that or as I said you just like stirring.



Not at all. Kata is basically a moving syllabus you take that and use it as a foundation for the rest of your stuff.

That people are making up kata is the more versatile option. 

There was also an issue as to if fighting itself has changed. And so again kata would need to be fluid rather than static.

That was where the discussion was before you jumped in with the false accusations of trolling and style bashing.

So if your kata is essentially a new idea. Then at least someone has had the same thought as me on this.

Otherwise it is as kung fu wang put it. A copy of a copy.

The issue with understanding kata without being able to talk to the guy who made it up is that you can attribute anything to it. It becomes like understanding modern art. And how people can look at a line drawn on a wall and decide it represents the powerlessness of the common man or something. 

 Which seems to be a lot of pretentious making stuff up.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> _Psychology_ To externalize and attribute (an emotion or motive, for example) unconsciously to someone or something else in order to avoid anxiety.
> *8*



Supposed to be that one.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Your statement was;
> 
> 
> 
> I asked you to point to where kata was described as being perfect.
> 
> You quoted this as your answer;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This answer does not describe kata as being perfect, it only describes kata as being hard to understand.
> 
> Try again.



I disagree. As it is an argument for nobody changing kata.


----------



## Steve

drop bear said:


> The issue with understanding kata without being able to talk to the guy who made it up is that you can attribute anything to it. It becomes like understanding modern art. And how people can look at a line drawn on a wall and decide it represents the powerlessness of the common man or something.
> 
> Which seems to be a lot of pretentious making stuff up.


I generally agree with you and your opinions on kata, but I don't see this.  Modern art.. art in general, really... puts some of the responsibility on the viewer.  There are elements within art that are not subjective.  Taste can be personal and subjective, but when you look at a painting of a line on an otherwise blank canvas, it matters where the line is, how the line is drawn, how thick or long that line is.  What color is the line?  What color is the background?  All of these things have an effect.  Tension, balance, contrast, color temperature.  These are things that are all able to be identified consistently and objectively.  In order to appreciate those things, one must learn to see them, and also understand what they mean.

The interpretations of these elements, coupled with some knowledge of the artist's intent behind them, can lead to interpretations such as, "the powerlessness of the common man." In some cases, without knowing the context of the art piece, you will miss things like irony, which could be very important to the piece.

The same principles apply to all art, including commercial art.  Graphic designers are skilled at using objective, consistent principles to create designs that evoke emotions or feelings.  Tension, for example, is often about where objects are placed on a page, how closely they are together.  How close they are to the edge of a page.  Sometimes, a designer will create a sense of unease on purpose.

In the same way, I believe, the proponents of kata would say that the onus of understanding the kata is on the practitioner, but that the value is objective, repeatable and consistent.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Supposed to be that one.




Ok, so you're assuming I'm anxious, you are funny, you know.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> I disagree. As it is an argument for nobody changing kata.


Which is a far cry from saying it is perfect. Try again.


----------



## Steve

Tez3 said:


> Ok, so you're assuming I'm anxious, you are funny, you know.


I think only the freedictionary.com site you used includes the bit about anxiety.  Kind of sneaky of you, I think. 

*Oxford*:  (project something onto)
transfer or attribute one's own emotion or desire to (another person), especially unconsciously:
"men may sometimes project their own fears onto women"

*Merriam Webster*:  to attribute (one's own ideas, feelings, or characteristics) to other people or to objects

*Cambridge*:  to wrongly imagine that someone else is feeling a particular emotion or desire when in fact it is you who feels this way:


----------



## Tez3

RTKDCMB said:


> Which is a far cry from saying it is perfect. Try again.




I don't think you will get an answer because dropbear doesn't know or want to know what kata actually is, so we will just get more of his obfuscation. I do admire though his ability to not mind showing his ignorance of the subject though, it's a bravura performance showing how to argue about something you don't understand.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Which is a far cry from saying it is perfect. Try again.



No it isn't.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> I don't think you will get an answer because dropbear doesn't know or want to know what kata actually is, so we will just get more of his obfuscation. I do admire though his ability to not mind showing his ignorance of the subject though, it's a bravura performance showing how to argue about something you don't understand.



Ad hominem.


----------



## drop bear

Steve said:


> I generally agree with you and your opinions on kata, but I don't see this.  Modern art.. art in general, really... puts some of the responsibility on the viewer.  There are elements within art that are not subjective.  Taste can be personal and subjective, but when you look at a painting of a line on an otherwise blank canvas, it matters where the line is, how the line is drawn, how thick or long that line is.  What color is the line?  What color is the background?  All of these things have an effect.  Tension, balance, contrast, color temperature.  These are things that are all able to be identified consistently and objectively.  In order to appreciate those things, one must learn to see them, and also understand what they mean.
> 
> The interpretations of these elements, coupled with some knowledge of the artist's intent behind them, can lead to interpretations such as, "the powerlessness of the common man." In some cases, without knowing the context of the art piece, you will miss things like irony, which could be very important to the piece.
> 
> The same principles apply to all art, including commercial art.  Graphic designers are skilled at using objective, consistent principles to create designs that evoke emotions or feelings.  Tension, for example, is often about where objects are placed on a page, how closely they are together.  How close they are to the edge of a page.  Sometimes, a designer will create a sense of unease on purpose.
> 
> In the same way, I believe, the proponents of kata would say that the onus of understanding the kata is on the practitioner, but that the value is objective, repeatable and consistent.



Done right. And you have a point. But there seems to be a degree of attributing more depth and mysticism to kata than it potentially warrants. And well that is on the viewer. People can create depth out of anything.

It seems a romantic notion that there is a master who is so clever he has invented this key to fighting and all we have to do is figure it out. But it really is more likely he just drew a line on a page.


----------



## TimoS

Does anyone have anything NEW to say on this topic? It has degenerated into a shouting match


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> Ad hominem.




Actually I was admiring you, it's a compliment.


----------



## Tez3

TimoS said:


> Does anyone have anything NEW to say on this topic? It has degenerated into a shouting match




Sadly it always ends up this way, so much so it is driving posters away.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

TimoS said:


> Does anyone have anything NEW to say on this topic?


Instead of discussion "kata changing", how about let's discuss the idea of "kata creation"?

The follow from/kata (Xing Jing Chuan) was created by XingYi GM 刘二彪 Liu Er-Biao around 1910. It was created as a "self-training form/kata". But it has been passed down for more than 3 generations already. If you watch this form, you will find out that the 2nd half of the form is identical to the 1st half of the form.

Just throw out some ideas here for discussion:

- Will you call this traditional form, or modern self-created form?
- Why did the original form creator created the form by repeating the same sequence twice?
- Also instead of repeating the same form twice, why not just make the 2nd half of the form to be the reverse side (switch right side into left side) of the 1st half of  the form?
- If someone 2 generations above us (100 years ago) can create form/kata, why can't we? also why can't people in the future generation create new form/kata as well?
- If you say that you may not be qualified to "create form/kata" today, will you say that you may be qualified in the future some day?

This form/kata is performed by a 1st generation.






This form/kata is performed by a 3rd generation.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Kong Soo Do said:


> I think he does a good job of explaining applications in this video as well....


|
I haven't reviewed this vid in detail here (originally POST #2).
|
First off, I consider these applications of traditional karate ADVANCED TECHNIQUES.
|
Also though 1st off the bat, and this applies to the 'Anti-grappling' Thread, the author dispels the notion that somehow traditional karate is some kind of kickboxing endeavor.  The author makes quite plain here that traditional karate curriculum contains a heavy dose of infighting tactics....
|
Hate to upset the apple cart of all those who maintain karate in actual kumite practice is right cross off jab, left hook.... mixed in with a lot of evasive boxing footwork....
|
Vid is a great eye opener for the serious karate practitioner.....


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> No it isn't.


So not changing something means its perfect? Good to know.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Kong Soo Do said:


> For quite a while now we've had a plethora of threads on sparring, kata and bunkai, as it pertains to self defense and sport.  *I figured that it would be interesting, and hopefully productive to have a thread where practitioners of kata, who feel kata has self defense value, to discuss which kata or which parts of a particular kata they feel is relative and why?*  This thread is open to practitioners who feel the movements of a kata should be taken at face value as well as those who feel a kata has alternate explanations for movements.  Through such discussion, my hope is that we may glean from each others experience and perhaps learn something from each other.
> 
> Thanks for participating
> 
> I'll toss out a clip for discussion but feel free to toss any other kata or bunkai drill out for discussion as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As noted, these are some of the opening movements to Pinan Shodan.  I've seen him demonstrate the opening movements as a shoulder lock rather than the upper cut but I think this is one of the wonderful diversities of kata in that movements can demonstrate multiple applications effectively.  Thus a kata is more than a one dimensional catalog.  I also like how Abernethy Senei explains that the movements are a demonstration of what 'can' be done but they don't have to follow a specific sequence i.e. you can mix-n-match some of the punches.  The knife hand drill I especially like as it is one that we use as well (knife hand and forearm strikes).



Okay we have had some derailment of this thread lately.  I have quoted the OP and highlighted a part for everyone to read and then let's carry on with good discussion of Kata Bunkai as the OP wished!  Let's try to stay on topic!


----------



## ShotoNoob

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Okay we have had some derailment of this thread lately.  I have quoted the OP and highlighted a part for everyone to read and then let's carry on with good discussion of Kata Bunkai as the OP wished!  Let's try to stay on topic!


|
OK. In the opening sequence of Iain's 2nd Bunkai Vid, I see in what I will say is the 2nd tactic a counter-response to the Muay thai clinch which is supposed to be so problematic.
|
I never understood why the Muay Thai clinch, once put on, was so immune to counter action?
|
BTW: I absolutely hate the Naihanchi kata.  I think it is one of the worst, designed kata out there for practical applications.
|
Yet rather than commiserate, Iain A. took a deeper look and either found or evolved practicality for that infighting that modern karate isn't supposed to have.


----------



## Tez3

ShotoNoob said:


> I absolutely hate the Naihanchi kata. I think it is one of the worst, designed kata out there for practical applications



Now I like it precisely for it's practical applications! I would start a thread on it where we could discuss it amicably but you know what would happen, it would just get trashed by the anti kata brigade.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Tez3 please start a thread or discuss it's practical applications here.  Anyone straying off topic will be reported.  We are going to try to stay with the original posters intent as a thread for practitioners of Kata to discuss bunkai!


----------



## Tez3

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Tez3 please start a thread or discuss it's practical applications here.  Anyone straying off topic will be reported.  We are going to try to stay with the original posters intent as a thread for practitioners of Kata to discuss bunkai!




I know Shotonoob knows Naihanchi, does anyone else? Otherwise would it be just us two discussing? If others know it I will post the Bunkai and applications I like from it.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Instead of just talking about "Kata bunkai for self defense", if we talk about "form/kata for fighting", we will get people who are interesting in

- both Japanese MA and non-Japanese MA,
- both self defense and sport,
- both striking art and grappling art,
- both form/kata lovers and form/kata haters,
- ...

to participate into our discussion. We will then have much wider range of opinions to "compare". IMO, that's a good thing.


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Instead of just talking about "Kata bunkai for self defense", if we talk about "form/kata for fighting", we will get people who are interesting in
> 
> - both Japanese MA and non-Japanese MA,
> - both self defense and sport,
> - both striking art and grappling art,
> - both form/kata lovers and form/kata haters,
> - ...
> 
> to participate into our discussion. We will then have much wider range of opinions to "compare". IMO, that's a good thing.




Karate is designed for self defence though not fighting. The whole point of it is self defence for unarmed civilians so you won't get a discussion of it's uses for 'fighting'.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tez3 said:


> Karate is designed for self defence though not fighting. The whole point of it is self defence for unarmed civilians so you won't get a discussion of it's uses for 'fighting'.


I assume when you say, "self-defense", you are talking about when someone attacks you and you respond to it. How about when someone attacks your love one, you have to "attack" that person in order to save your love one's life? Will you call that "self-defense" as well as "fighting"?


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I assume when you say, "self-defense", you are talking about when someone attacks you and you respond to it. How about when someone attacks your love one, you have to "attack" that person in order to save your love one's life? Will you call that "self-defense" as well as "fighting"?




Yes, that is self defence as well. It's also considered as such under British law,  if under threat of your or your loved ones life a pre-emptive strike *is* considered self defence.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I assume when you say, "self-defense", you are talking about when someone attacks you and you respond to it. How about when someone attacks your love one, you have to "attack" that person in order to save your love one's life? Will you call that "self-defense" as well as "fighting"?



I'm pretty sure most people and most cultures around the world will consider that self-defense, not an attack.
In the US, I'm willing to bet that most (if not virtually all) areas consider defense of oneself or others as being essentially the same thing, in the eyes of the law.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> Now I like it precisely for it's practical applications! I would start a thread on it where we could discuss it amicably but you know what would happen, it would just get trashed by the anti kata brigade.


|
Well, that's beyond my purview.
|
My personal feeling is that bunkai study is for advanced practitioners.  I don't agree, traditional karate wise, that bunkai can be separated from kata.  Bunkai to me is an extension of kata, a layering on of examples of application, and more importantly the principles for same.
|
For discussion purposes, I can see why some would advocate for separating the topics of kata / bunkai for discussion.  However, this disambiguation then runs of the risk of looking @ bunkai at sets of physical technique alone, which is not the context or more importantly the way to develop traditional karate skill at bunkai.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tez3 said:


> I know Shotonoob knows Naihanchi, does anyone else? Otherwise would it be just us two discussing? If others know it I will post the Bunkai and applications I like from it.


|
Fire away.  My interest to-date in Naihanchi is only the fact that it is required in the curriculum.  I am concentrating on the Heian kata, with some exception.
|
The Iain A. video I'm looking at near the OP.  At my level, I'm looking at simple lessons such as the use of elbow strikes, since same are seldom seen in free sparring convention.  Kata is a way to be sure one is approaching the traditional karate curriculum from a broader perspective....
|
In that video, Iain A makes plain the use of elbows.... with infighting application.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Kong Soo Do said:


> For quite a while now we've had a plethora of threads on sparring, kata and bunkai, as it pertains to self defense and sport.  I figured that it would be interesting, and hopefully productive to have a thread where practitioners of kata, who feel kata has self defense value, to discuss which kata or which parts of a particular kata they feel is relative and why?  This thread is open to practitioners who feel the movements of a kata should be taken at face value as well as those who feel a kata has alternate explanations for movements.  Through such discussion, my hope is that we may glean from each others experience and perhaps learn something from each other.
> 
> Thanks for participating
> 
> I'll toss out a clip for discussion but feel free to toss any other kata or bunkai drill out for discussion as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As noted, these are some of the opening movements to Pinan Shodan.  I've seen him demonstrate the opening movements as a shoulder lock rather than the upper cut but I think this is one of the wonderful diversities of kata in that movements can demonstrate multiple applications effectively.  Thus a kata is more than a one dimensional catalog.  I also like how Abernethy Senei explains that the movements are a demonstration of what 'can' be done but they don't have to follow a specific sequence i.e. you can mix-n-match some of the punches.  The knife hand drill I especially like as it is one that we use as well (knife hand and forearm strikes).



Kung Fu Wang let's keep the discussion in thread on topic of what the OP wished.  Thank you....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Kung Fu Wang let's keep the discussion in thread on topic of what the OP wished.  Thank you....


|
I clicked your link.  Now see how I missed you thrust here.....


----------



## TimoS

ShotoNoob said:


> My personal feeling is that bunkai study is for advanced practitioners.


Not quite sure what you mean by that, but my opinion is that the bunkai/applications/whatever you want to call them should be taught from the beginning. It makes the kata easier to remember. 


> Bunkai to me is an extension of kata, a layering on of examples of application, and more importantly the principles for same.
> |


Kind of, yes, although to me it isn't so much an extension, rather it is an integral part of kata, without which you're just left with an empty shell, an "ugly dance"


----------



## ShotoNoob

TimoS said:


> Not quite sure what you mean by that, but my opinion is that the bunkai/applications/whatever you want to call them should be taught from the beginning. It makes the kata easier to remember.
> 
> Kind of, yes, although to me it isn't so much an extension, rather it is an integral part of kata, without which you're just left with an empty shell, an "ugly dance"


|
Yes well both interpretations are legitimate, yours & mine. My approach recognizes the essence of traditional karate in how one internally trains the overt exercises.


TimoS said:


> Not quite sure what you mean by that, but my opinion is that the bunkai/applications/whatever you want to call them should be taught from the beginning. It makes the kata easier to remember.
> 
> Kind of, yes, although to me it isn't so much an extension, rather it is an integral part of kata, without which you're just left with an empty shell, an "ugly dance"


|
Yes, the 'dance' moniker gets repeated over & over.  Kata as a whole has virtually nothing in common with dancing.  Kata with no overt bunkai has virtually nothing in common with dancing.
|
The absolute failure of the heavies here to recognize that moral in my 'little debbie' post confirms how little & how few understand kata....  I'm not surprised that post was ridiculed....
|
The conventional kata-dance monkier...Good luck with that....


----------



## Tez3

The word kata is used in Japan not just for martial arts but also other arts including dance. It's not specific to martial arts. Martial arts kata isn't dancing though. An interesting article on kata.
FightingArts.com - Creativity Bound Flow The Concept of Shu-Ha-Ri In Kata


----------



## DaveB

Kong Soo Do said:


> For quite a while now we've had a plethora of threads on sparring, kata and bunkai, as it pertains to self defense and sport.  I figured that it would be interesting, and hopefully productive to have a thread where practitioners of kata, who feel kata has self defense value, to discuss which kata or which parts of a particular kata they feel is relative and why?  This thread is open to practitioners who feel the movements of a kata should be taken at face value as well as those who feel a kata has alternate explanations for movements.  Through such discussion, my hope is that we may glean from each others experience and perhaps learn something from each other.
> 
> Thanks for participating
> 
> I'll toss out a clip for discussion but feel free to toss any other kata or bunkai drill out for discussion as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As noted, these are some of the opening movements to Pinan Shodan.  I've seen him demonstrate the opening movements as a shoulder lock rather than the upper cut but I think this is one of the wonderful diversities of kata in that movements can demonstrate multiple applications effectively.  Thus a kata is more than a one dimensional catalog.  I also like how Abernethy Senei explains that the movements are a demonstration of what 'can' be done but they don't have to follow a specific sequence i.e. you can mix-n-match some of the punches.  The knife hand drill I especially like as it is one that we use as well (knife hand and forearm strikes).



Hello all.

Perhaps a slightly controversial view for my first contribution, but this is one of my least favourite applications of Iain Abernethy. 

The problem is that I think he is shoe-horning this form to fit a faulty theory, namely that kata series present a progression from simple to advanced self defense methods.

My own observation is that rather than a simple first kata, karate sets begin with a Hub or System kata that describes the key elements of the fighting method. This is usually at least as complex as the following forms, which act as supplements to show variations and expansions on the theme of the primary form. 

That said, Iain's method works for Iain. It let's him teach what he sees as foundational, in this case clearing limbs and the coordination that this requires. 

My favoured application and the basic lesson I think this sequence is trying to get across is actually a modified flinch and body shift, then using the space you've gained to recover the initiative through a counter strike and using footwork to press the advantage. 

I think that evasive footwork and manipulation of distance is a key element of the Hiean/Pinan fighting method.


----------

