# Wado-Ryu vs Shotokan vs TKD



## SPX

I am looking to get back into martial arts after a multi-year layoff and need a bit of info.

First off, my background is in TKD and Judo (as well as a tiny bit of Wushu).  I am, of course, familiar with other martial arts, but only nominally and only as a spectator.

I'm considering getting back into TKD, but I've been having a hard time finding a good school in the area (Salt Lake City, UT).  I've also considered Shotokan, but have been having a hard time finding a good Shotokan school as well.  

There is, however, a Wado-Ryu school that I have been looking into and will probably go check out within the next week or so.  The problem is that I have very little knowledge of Wado-Ryu.  I've read a few threads I've found through the search and have done a bit of looking around online, but I figured I would get some tailored opinions from you guys.

Basically, how does both Shotokan AND Wado compare to TKD?  And how do Shotokan and Wado compare to each other?  What are the benefits of each?  And which style, in your opinion, make for a better combative art?

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.


----------



## Grenadier

Having trained in both Shotokan and Wado, I may be able to offer a bit of insight here.  

Shotokan Karate and Wado Ryu are related systems, in that Wado Ryu was derived from Shotokan Karate, by Hironori Ohtsuka.  

Ohtsuka Shihan already had an extensive background in Shinto Yoshin Ryu Ju Jutsu, and formed the Wado Ryu system from his knowledge of both the Ju Jutsu and the Shotokan Karate.  

In a nutshell, Wado Ryu incorporates more "soft" techniques than Shotokan does, and also tends to use more upright stances, as opposed to the deeper stances favored by Shotokan.   

Both are excellent combative arts.  If you favor hard striking, then Shotokan may be the better choice, while if you favor softer techniques that incorporate more throws / locks, then Wado Ryu may be the better choice. 

Of course, this is a very gross generalization.  I've seen some Shotokan schools teach a significant amount of the "softer" techniques, and have also seen quite a few Wado schools incorporate a good bit of the "harder" techniques favored by Shotokan.  It all depends on who is teaching, and what their backgrounds are.  

In the competitive aspect, I've noticed that while the Wado Ryu folks generally don't score too well in Kata competition, they show very well in the Kumite aspect.


----------



## SPX

Hi Grenadier,

Thanks for the response.  I appreciate it.



Grenadier said:


> Ohtsuka Shihan already had an extensive background in Shinto Yoshin Ryu Ju Jutsu, and formed the Wado Ryu system from his knowledge of both the Ju Jutsu and the Shotokan Karate.
> 
> In a nutshell, Wado Ryu incorporates more "soft" techniques than Shotokan does, and also tends to use more upright stances, as opposed to the deeper stances favored by Shotokan.
> 
> Both are excellent combative arts.  If you favor hard striking, then  Shotokan may be the better choice, while if you favor softer techniques  that incorporate more throws / locks, then Wado Ryu may be the better  choice.



I've heard more than one person say this, but I'm not sure I totally understand.

First off, I've never studied Jujutsu directly, only it's offshoot Judo.  In Wado, do you find judo-style throws, or is it something different?  How about any ground work, chokes, armbars, etc?

In regard to the striking, how do the two styles differ?  From watching Shotokan kumite vids, the style seems to be very linear and "in your face" . . . effective in close range.  I don't know how Wado compares to this.  

Also, how do you feel that either style will work in a real self-defense situation?  Truthfully, I feel that 90% of TMA practitioners really know nothing about real fighting and would get crushed even by common brawlers.  But I've seen some high-level guys who are pretty devastating.





Grenadier said:


> In the competitive aspect, I've noticed that while the Wado Ryu folks generally don't score too well in Kata competition, they show very well in the Kumite aspect.



I've heard that too, regarding kata.  Supposedly Shotokan kata are more impressive looking with the deep stances and whatnot.

Glad to hear that Wado guys do well in kumite, though.  That's really my primary concern.  

Speaking of which, the head instructor of the school I've been checking out is apparently a "7 time Utah Open Karate Championship kumite champion."  I hope that means there's lots of sparring.

For the record, here's their website:  www.wado-institute.com.  Can't tell too much, but at least they have an adults-only class.


----------



## Grenadier

SPX said:


> I've heard more than one person say this, but I'm not sure I totally understand.
> 
> First off, I've never studied Jujutsu directly, only it's offshoot Judo. In Wado, do you find judo-style throws, or is it something different? How about any ground work, chokes, armbars, etc?



Most of the Ju Jutsu techniques in Wado Ryu are of the stand-up type, where a significant amount of throwing and locking are practiced in the kihon training.  Given that Shinto Yoshin Ryu Ju Jutsu uses more of the upsetting of the balance methods, it's not considered one of the "harder" systems of Ju Jutsu.  Thus, most of the techniques taken from the Shinto Yoshin Ryu system that were incorporated into the Wado Ryu system, aren't going to be focussed on the ground game.  

This is not to say, however, that a Wado Ryu school will not teach ground techniques.  It can, and certainly does, vary between one school to the next.  




> In regard to the striking, how do the two styles differ? From watching Shotokan kumite vids, the style seems to be very linear and "in your face" . . . effective in close range. I don't know how Wado compares to this.



Shotokan Karate is more geared towards straight line, linear fighting, whereas Wado Ryu might favor more of finding a weaker angle and attacking.  I've found both ways to be good methods, and wouldn't put one method over the other, in terms of efficacy.  Again, though, both systems favor hard linear strikes.  



> Also, how do you feel that either style will work in a real self-defense situation? Truthfully, I feel that 90% of TMA practitioners really know nothing about real fighting and would get crushed even by common brawlers. But I've seen some high-level guys who are pretty devastating.



Either system will work just fine for a self-defense situation, provided that the trainee has the right mindset.  When you claim that 90% of TMA practitioners would get beated in a "real" brawl, maybe it's not so far off, since a lot of people who train in the martial arts aren't in it to blast away the other guy, and that most elderly folks are going to lose to younger, stronger adults in their primes.  

However, all things being equal, if you take a well conditioned adult who has been training in traditional Karate, and put him up against a common brawler of similar size, the trained fighter is going to be better off, just as a trained boxer, a trained wrestler, judoka, etc., will as well.  



> I've heard that too, regarding kata. Supposedly Shotokan kata are more impressive looking with the deep stances and whatnot.



It really doesn't have to do much with stances.  It's just that most judges out there are quite familiar with Shotokan and Shito Ryu kata, yet, not many are very familiar with Wado Ryu or Goju Ryu kata.  As a result, a lot of narrow minded judges do not have the ability to give a fair evaluation, since they can only go by what they think is right according to their own systems.  Hopefully, more of them will continue to attend referee seminars, and understand the fundamentals of each of the four major systems.  



> Speaking of which, the head instructor of the school I've been checking out is apparently a "7 time Utah Open Karate Championship kumite champion." I hope that means there's lots of sparring.
> 
> For the record, here's their website: www.wado-institute.com. Can't tell too much, but at least they have an adults-only class.



Interesting...  It appears that the school was founded by Osaka Sensei, who is the real deal, with his being the president of the Wado Ryu Renmei (Federation).  

The chief instructor there is Sensei Aurora Taylor-Rojas, and she does have a pretty nice listing of accomplishments, since she was part of the US National Team that competed at the world level.  She's a very sharp individual, and I would feel quite comfortable recommending her school.


----------



## SPX

Thanks for the info.  That's very helpful.

Regarding my comment on TMA guys not really knowing how to fight, in my experience at least it has largely had to do with the fact that they don't spend much time actually doing contact sparring and they also are not prepared for someone coming at them with a totally different style.  For instance, a TKD guy might be able to throw really nice kicks and score points during sparring, but when a Tank Abbot kind of dude comes windmilling at him he gets overwhelmed by aggression and haymakers.  As I mentioned, that's not to say that no TMA guys can handle themselves . . . only that, in my opinion, the ones who can train a manner that gives them the tools to deal with scenarios they're likely to encounter beyond the dojo.  

I certainly don't want to get into a TMA vs MT discussion here, but I've heard plenty of former TKD or Karate guys who spent several years in the style before switching over to Muay Thai say that they learned more about actual fighting in MT in 3 months than they learned in 3 years in their previous classes.  Now I don't fault the styles for this . . . but I do fault the schools.  TMAs today largely want to be the martial arts that "anyone can do" and are "fun for the whole family" and that's their focus instead of developing proficient fighters.

Thanks for the info about the school.  I would not have known that if you hadn't told me and that gives me more incentive to go check it out.


----------



## Cyriacus

SPX said:


> Thanks for the info.  That's very helpful.
> 
> Regarding my comment on TMA guys not really knowing how to fight, in my experience at least it has largely had to do with the fact that they don't spend much time actually doing contact sparring and they also are not prepared for someone coming at them with a totally different style.  *For instance, a TKD guy might be able to throw really nice kicks and score points during sparring, but when a Tank Abbot kind of dude comes windmilling at him he gets overwhelmed by aggression and haymakers.*  As I mentioned, that's not to say that no TMA guys can handle themselves . . . only that, in my opinion, the ones who can train a manner that gives them the tools to deal with scenarios they're likely to encounter beyond the dojo.
> 
> I certainly don't want to get into a TMA vs MT discussion here, but I've heard plenty of former TKD or Karate guys who spent several years in the style before switching over to Muay Thai say that they learned more about actual fighting in MT in 3 months than they learned in 3 years in their previous classes.  Now I don't fault the styles for this . . . but I do fault the schools.  TMAs today largely want to be the martial arts that "anyone can do" and are "fun for the whole family" and that's their focus instead of developing proficient fighters.
> 
> Thanks for the info about the school.  I would not have known that if you hadn't told me and that gives me more incentive to go check it out.



*A TMA *System wouldnt be based so heavily on Kicking. Tis a Question of who is Teaching it, and what Theyre Teaching. Because if its Teaching You to score points in Sparring, it isnt a complete TMA. Its an MMA (Modern Martial Art; Just incase I confused anyone).

I think Youre talking about McDojos, buddy


----------



## SPX

Cyriacus said:


> I think Youre talking about McDojos, buddy



Hmm, not necessarily.  I would argue that a karate or TKD school that trains championship competitors but is entirely sports focused isn't a McDojo, but is just single-minded.  When I think "McDojo" I think of martial arts schools that take your money without giving you any legitimate skills in return.


----------



## Cyriacus

SPX said:


> Hmm, not necessarily.  I would argue that a karate or TKD school that trains championship competitors but is entirely sports focused isn't a McDojo, but is just single-minded.  When I think "McDojo" I think of martial arts schools that take your money without giving you any legitimate skills in return.


I was referring to the Underlined Text - "TMAs today largely want to be the martial arts that "anyone can do" and are "fun for the whole family" and that's their focus instead of developing proficient fighters."


Hence why I underlined "I think". And why I Bolded "A TMA", as regard to what I Bolded and Underlined in the Quote.


----------



## SPX

Indeed.  I see what you meant now.  And yes, I totally agree.


----------



## Tez3

Wado Ryu kata wouldn't do well in a Shotokan competition and vice versa. A lot of emphasis in Wado is placed on Bunkai as well as sparring so it's very good for self defence. I was always told that Shotokan favours the big strong guys while Wado is better for the smaller types, could be quite true. I know a great many karateka who are fearsome strikers and fight full contact. Perhaps we haven't caught up with the States, i expect we shall but we don't have quite as many of the McDojos as they do yet, we still have many hard fighting karate clubs.


----------



## SPX

Tez3 said:


> Wado Ryu kata wouldn't do well in a Shotokan competition and vice versa.



How so?  Are the rules different?



Tez3 said:


> I was always told that Shotokan favours the big strong guys while Wado is better for the smaller types, could be quite true.



Well that sounds promising, since I'm only 5'6", 155 lbs.  (Not sure what that translates to in UK terms.)


----------



## Tez3

SPX said:


> How so? Are the rules different?
> 
> 
> 
> Well that sounds promising, since I'm only 5'6", 155 lbs. (Not sure what that translates to in UK terms.)



The rules aren't different but the katas are so it makes judging harder if you don't know what moves, stances etc are supposed to be in there, I wouldn't judge TKD patterns although I would 'understand' the gist of what they were doing I wouldn't know if they were the correct moves or whether they'd missed bits out. 

155lbs is 11st and a bit, I'm 5'4" and find the shorter stances and linear movements of Wado suit me, my instructor who's Shotokan is 6' 2" and likes the deeper stances. I also like the practice in Wado of 'not being there' when the strikes are thrown, it's done simply by moving slightly out of the way, very effective and energy efficient to my mind.

Iain Abernethy is Wado Ryu, his Bunkai is amazing as is his fighting skills. Whatever you decide to do I hope you will spend time on Bunkai, it is a very valuable resource, a bit mocked by some but worth doing trust me!
http://iainabernethy.co.uk/article/kata-why-bother


----------



## dancingalone

SPX said:


> How so?  Are the rules different?



Kata of one karate style can be aesthetically unappealing to adherents of another.  Okinawan Goju-ryu for example has a certain pelvic tilt that is very characteristic, yet is not usually found in Shotokan training.  Shotokan on the other hand likes to set up a comparatively extreme hip action on almost every technique, something out of place in Goju-ryu kata.  There are many other examples of varying standards, even within the same nominal thing, like zenkutsu dachi or front stance.  For this reason, I've always looked a little askance at people who say things like a punch is a punch -  well yes it is, but how we get there can be quite different based on the system studied.

There is an attempt within competitive karate circuits like the WKF to minimize the differences through 'shitei' or mandatory kata to form an impartial basis for karate-ka of different styles to compete with each other. The WKF shitei kata are standardized ones with 2 each coming out of Shotokan, Goju-ryu, Wado-ryu, and Shito-ryu.


----------



## dancingalone

SPX said:


> As I mentioned, that's not to say that no TMA guys can handle themselves . . . only that, in my opinion, the ones who can train a manner that gives them the tools to deal with scenarios they're likely to encounter beyond the dojo.



Agreed.  Thankfully the goal to KEEP traditional karate a viable fighting art is alive and well.  If you are training in a place that only does static drills along with light contact stand up sparring, you're probably not learning karate as a fighting system.


----------



## Tez3

I've never competed in any comps other than of my style, it's not common here to have all styles comps. 
I agree with Dancingalone about not learning karate properly if all you are doing is line drills and light contact sparring. So many denigrate karate as fighting system only knowing what they've learnt/seen in McDojos, it's not the system at fault it's the instructors who have watered down a powerful system for money and easy results.


----------



## Cyriacus

Tez3 said:


> I've never competed in any comps other than of my style, it's not common here to have all styles comps.
> I agree with Dancingalone about not learning karate properly if all you are doing is line drills and light contact sparring. So many denigrate karate as fighting system only knowing what they've learnt/seen in McDojos, it's not the system at fault it's the instructors who have watered down a powerful system for money and easy results.


This would depend.
If the Light Contact is being done for Injury Prevention, and not "safety", it isnt too bad. That said, doing a majority of Line Drills is more often than not disfunctional. Let Me emphasise more often than not. Like, REALLY emphasise it.


----------



## dancingalone

Cyriacus said:


> This would depend.
> If the Light Contact is being done for Injury Prevention, and not "safety", it isnt too bad.



I understand that 99% (my guesstimate) of people taking karate aren't really looking to learn how to fight, even those when you ask them why they want to join your club, self-defense skills is somewhere in the top 3 reasons given usually.  And that is fine.  But guess what?  If we really want to learn how to the fight, we need the occasional experience of taking a hard shot to build toughness, to get used to the physiological shock and pain.




Cyriacus said:


> That said, doing a majority of Line Drills is more often than not disfunctional. Let Me emphasise more often than not. Like, REALLY emphasise it.



How do you define line drills?  Just practicing techniques in the air?  If so, I agree.  Line drills are good for developing form, but eventually you have to progress onto striking objects (bags, makiwara, BOBs, wing chun dummies, etc.) and then moving targets (partner held pads & people).


----------



## Cyriacus

dancingalone said:


> I understand that 99% (my guesstimate) of people taking karate aren't really looking to learn how to fight, even those when you ask them why they want to join your club, self-defense skills is somewhere in the top 3 reasons given usually.  And that is fine.  But guess what?  If we really want to learn how to the fight, we need the occasional experience of taking a hard shot to build toughness, to get used to the physiological shock and pain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you define line drills?  Just practicing techniques in the air?  If so, I agree.  Line drills are good for developing form, but eventually you have to progress onto striking objects (bags, makiwara, BOBs, wing chun dummies, etc.) and then moving targets (partner held pads & people).



To the first Paragraph; Yeah, of course hard contact = better. Hell, ive never actually done anything other than Full Contact.

To the second Paragraph; We agree. I also think Air Striking helps to Train You to Strike through, rather than onto, Your Target. Bags and whatnot can, without constant supervision, lead to hitting, then pushing off. That isnt to say hitting and pushing off isnt good. Only that it shouldnt perhaps be your baseline method.


----------



## Tez3

I did say *IF ALL* you are doing is line drills and light sparring it wasn't the real thing, the TMA students I have do line drills and will spar lightly for safety reasons when the occasion calls for it (as will the MMA fighters) but it's not all we do.


----------



## Cyriacus

Tez3 said:


> I did say *IF ALL* you are doing is line drills and light sparring it wasn't the real thing, the TMA students I have do line drills and will spar lightly for safety reasons when the occasion calls for it (as will the MMA fighters) but it's not all we do.


I *think* we both know that - I believe We were more discussing an aspect of that point. Or, that was My take on it, anyway.


----------



## Tez3

Cyriacus said:


> I *think* we both know that - I believe We were more discussing an aspect of that point. Or, that was My take on it, anyway.



It's that rising inflection again.......always sounds like a question roflmao.


----------



## Cyriacus

Tez3 said:


> It's that rising inflection again.......always sounds like a question roflmao.


Well, at least it isnt some kind of weird Rising Inception.


----------



## Grenadier

There's a right way to allow decent contact, and a wrong way.  

Doing it the right way will encourage your students to keep their techniques sharp, while also making them realize that punching the air isn't the same thing as punching a solid target.  

A trained Karate-ka should have reasonably good conditioning, and should be able to take a decent blow to the body.  At the same time, he should be able to apply such a blow with enough focus, power, and accuracy, that would cause enough damage to be effective.  However, this does NOT mean that he should swing away.  If it means stopping the impact at the surface, then so be it.  It doesn't take any more skill to extend that punch another 5-6 inches, and if the Karate-ka wants to train to hit a solid target to get used to it, then there are always heavy bags that can be mounted against a wall, as to not allow any swing to them.

Even in full contact Karate schools, such as Oyama Shihan's Kyokushin Kai dojo, they'll certainly spar with full contact to the body, but will not make impacts on the head.  

Why?  

Simply put, it takes no real extra skill to apply that same vigorous punch to someone's head.  For the most part, you can't condition your head to get tougher (without sacrificing your brain cells), and a vigorous punch that normally lands to the body can easily be applied to the head, and with results that are just fine.  This is an assumption that is actually a safe one to make.  

I applaud Oyama Shihan for keeping his school a safe place to train, and have a lot of respect for him.  

In the end, if you allow all of your students to punch full force to the head of each other, with or without pads, what have you really accomplished?  You really haven't increased their skill levels, and probably killed a good number of their brain neurons in the process.  Also, some people who get hit there aren't going to want to come back.  


On another note...

Doing it the wrong way will simply be another surefire way to kill off your dojo, and close your business.  I've seen a MMA school open up a few years ago nearby, and at first, its parking was full of cars on any given night, where they would train in a modified version of Hapkido (calling it "Korean Jiu Jitsu...") and incorporate MMA-style matches on a regular basis.  During those bouts, they'd encourage full contact to the head as well.  

After about 6 months, I noticed that there were only about half as many cars in the parking lot on any given night, and after a few more months, that number dwindled to even lower numbers, until they closed the school entirely.  As it turned out, there were several occasions where the ambulance had to be called in, due to concussions, broken bones, etc.  

What did their "anything goes" policy get them?  A dead school. 

Does this mean that MMA schools are junk?  Of course not; just the ones that have a disregard for their students' well-being.  Maybe a few individuals came out of the above mentioned school with some more skills, but in the end, it's only going to be that small number of people.  

Just because a school does more lighter contact sparring that hard contact sparring, does NOT make it a garbage school or a worthless school that can't fight.  

I use a combination of light contact sparring (yet near full speed), as well as regular contact sparring (vigorous application allowed to the body using pads, touch contact to the head), and feel quite comfortable about our students having to defend themselves, since they're done so in the past.  They'll hit just as hard as any out there, should the need arise.


----------



## dancingalone

Grenadier said:


> In the end, if you allow all of your students to punch full force to the head of each other, with or without pads, what have you really accomplished?  You really haven't increased their skill levels, and probably killed a good number of their brain neurons in the process.  Also, some people who get hit there aren't going to want to come back.



I don't think anyone was saying they promoted what you wrote in their schools.  Even professional boxers and MMA fighters go light most of the time too or else they would be too injured to compete.

I agree we should train smartly and every drill should be reviewed judiciously for value and fit for the students and their individual goals.  Karate should not be mass-produced education even though in modern times it has frequently devolved to that.  Wise students should look for teachers who can and will align their training and teaching methodology to the student's respective goals and needs.


----------



## Tez3

What I meant was places that just do the very, very lightest sparring, some even no touch sparring aren't doing their students any favours. It's not a case of going full out, banging to the head every session but of having a nice balance of techniques and giving students the best training you can, this will involve hitting hard at times and being hit hard. I've seen students on seminars spar with people who go harder than just touch, get hit and freeze in panic, that's not what you need to be doing in a self defence situation. Our MMA fighters don't go full on every session, they know they can hit hard when they want to but that's by proper training not training but hitting just into the air and doing no touch sparring.


----------



## SPX

Tez3 said:


> The rules aren't different but the katas are so it makes judging harder if you don't know what moves, stances etc are supposed to be in there, I wouldn't judge TKD patterns although I would 'understand' the gist of what they were doing I wouldn't know if they were the correct moves or whether they'd missed bits out.



Ah, okay, so it sounds like you're referring to kata competition then, not kumite?




Tez3 said:


> Iain Abernethy is Wado Ryu, his Bunkai is amazing as is his fighting skills. Whatever you decide to do I hope you will spend time on Bunkai, it is a very valuable resource, a bit mocked by some but worth doing trust me!
> http://iainabernethy.co.uk/article/kata-why-bother



I've actually listened to his podcast a few times.  I don't always understand what he's talking about since I'm not familiar with karate kata, but he has some interesting thoughts nonetheless.


----------



## SPX

dancingalone said:


> There is an attempt within competitive karate circuits like the WKF to minimize the differences through 'shitei' or mandatory kata to form an impartial basis for karate-ka of different styles to compete with each other. The WKF shitei kata are standardized ones with 2 each coming out of Shotokan, Goju-ryu, Wado-ryu, and Shito-ryu.



So basically regardless of everyone's native karate style they would need to learn the "approved" version of each kata to compete?


----------



## SPX

dancingalone said:


> Agreed.  Thankfully the goal to KEEP traditional karate a viable fighting art is alive and well.  If you are training in a place that only does static drills along with light contact stand up sparring, you're probably not learning karate as a fighting system.



Yes, I have noticed that there are practitioners who actually care about keeping karate a legitimate fighting art, though I tend to find them much more on forums like this one instead of in real life (not that this isn't real life, but you know what I mean).

In any case, it seems that it's been a debate that's been raging for a long time, one that actually causes me to wonder how "hardcore" most traditional classes really were.  I was looking through a copy of Black Belt recently and they had a timeline of martial arts developments in the 70s.

1975?  "Contact karate angers traditionalists who prefer no contact."


----------



## dancingalone

SPX said:


> So basically regardless of everyone's native karate style they would need to learn the "approved" version of each kata to compete?



That's my understanding although I am not active in WKF circles.  Grenadier could probably tell you more about it if you're interested.


----------



## elder999

SPX said:


> Yes, I have noticed that there are practitioners who actually care about keeping karate a legitimate fighting art, though I tend to find them much more on forums like this one instead of in real life (not that this isn't real life, but you know what I mean).



You need to go to a kyokushin or offshoot dojo.



SPX said:


> In any case, it seems that it's been a debate that's been raging for a long time, one that actually causes me to wonder how "hardcore" most traditional classes really were. I was looking through a copy of Black Belt recently and they had a timeline of martial arts developments in the 70s.



You're probably too young too have been in a kyokushin dojo in the 60's and 70s's.



SPX said:


> 1975? "Contact karate angers traditionalists who prefer no contact."



In 1969, Oyama staged _The First All-Japan *Full Contact *Karate Open Championships._


----------



## dancingalone

SPX said:


> Yes, I have noticed that there are practitioners who actually care about keeping karate a legitimate fighting art, though I tend to find them much more on forums like this one instead of in real life (not that this isn't real life, but you know what I mean).



Not so unusual in my opinion.  There is a lot of unexceptional karate out there.  It's not necessarily all the teachers' fault either.  I'm not sure there is much of a big market for quality, traditional martial arts training, whether it is karate or hung gar or whatever else.  A lot of the 'real' training is physically demanding and yes 'boring'.  Most people aren't into that.  



SPX said:


> In any case, it seems that it's been a debate that's been raging for a long time, one that actually causes me to wonder how "hardcore" most traditional classes really were.  I was looking through a copy of Black Belt recently and they had a timeline of martial arts developments in the 70s.
> 
> 1975?  "Contact karate angers traditionalists who prefer no contact."



Yes, it's an interesting conundrum.  We KNOW that sparring is a relatively recent development from around the 1930s or so as from the Japanese university clubs.  Famous sensei from before that era like Miyagi, Chojun did not believe in sparring, yet surely it would be heresy to argue that they could not fight.  (I know of no accounts about Miyagi Sensei getting into a fight, but there are tales of others from his period and before that did and successfully so.)

My karate is infected by modernism in this respect.  I believe sparring is necessary.


----------



## SPX

elder999 said:


> You need to go to a kyokushin or offshoot dojo.



Nearest one is an hour away.  



elder999 said:


> You're probably too young too have been in a kyokushin dojo in the 60's and 70s's.



I am, but I've seen the documentary Fighting Black Kings so I know what you're getting at.




elder999 said:


> In 1969, Oyama staged _The First All-Japan *Full Contact *Karate Open Championships._



No one's saying full-contact didn't exist, but was it the norm in most karate styles at the time?


----------



## SPX

dancingalone said:


> Yes, it's an interesting conundrum.  We KNOW that sparring is a relatively recent development from around the 1930s or so as from the Japanese university clubs.  Famous sensei from before that era like Miyagi, Chojun did not believe in sparring, yet surely it would be heresy to argue that they could not fight.



That's a concept that I don't even understand.  How could "no sparring" ever be considered a GOOD thing for the development of effective fighters?


----------



## elder999

SPX said:


> Nearest one is an hour away.



Was worth the commute when I was 12, was worth a longer commute when I was 15, was worth an even longer commute from Long Island to Manhattan when I was in college.

It's worth the commute *now*.




SPX said:


> I am, but I've seen the documentary Fighting Black Kings so I know what you're getting at.



Those were my seniors.




SPX said:


> No one's saying full-contact didn't exist, but was it the norm in most karate styles at the time?



Hell no.


----------



## dancingalone

SPX said:


> That's a concept that I don't even understand.  How could "no sparring" ever be considered a GOOD thing for the development of effective fighters?



I've discussed this many times with my teacher who is an Okinawan and thus perhaps more nuanced in how sensei from that era may have thought.  The remarks he came back to me on several occasions was that typical stand up sparring, even of the full contact type, does not align with the specific tactics of our karate.  MMA is perhaps a little closer but it too has certain abstractions and assumptions that render it a different activity altogether.

For my part, I try to teach sparring as more of a contact partner drill.  It is understood that we are doing things a little differently than how we would in actual usage, but it is still a valuable activity because we can apply _some _of what we practice against a live resisting target.


----------



## Grenadier

SPX said:


> So basically regardless of everyone's native karate style they would need to learn the "approved" version of each kata to compete?



It depends.  

There are essentially two major divisions for kata competition, the Tokui division, where you can use any kata listed in the rulebooks (and they encompass almost all of them), and the Shitei division, which involves the first two rounds using only the eight kata on the Shitei list (Shotokan's Kanku Dai and Jion, Wado Ryu's Chinto and Seisan, Goju Ryu's Seipai and Saifa, and Shito Ryu's Bassai Dai and Seienchin).  

In Tokui, you can use the same kata until you reach the medal rounds, where you must change.  The kata can be almost anything out there that's from a known system.  For example, for me, I use kata Unsu through my first few rounds, until the medal round, where I'll switch to Gojushiho Dai.  You can choose any kata from the Tokui or Shitei list.  Also, if your school chooses to make modifications to a kata listed on the Shitei list, then it's OK.  

In Shitei, you must do one of the eight Shitei kata for each of your first two rounds (so you need two Shitei kata).  During these first two rounds, you must perform the kata as described in the Shitei listing.  Thus, if you kiai in move #13 of Kanku Dai instead of the required #12, then you can be disqualified.  Or, if your particular Shotokan school uses a high block instead of a middle block in the kata, and you do the high block, you'll be disqualified.  

This way, everyone's on the same playing field, and no school-specific alterations are allowed.  

After those first two rounds, you can do any kata on the Shitei or Tokui list, and school-specific alterations of the Shitei kata are allowed.  

For example, I would use Shotokan's Jion in the 1st round, Shotokan's Kanku Dai in the second round, and then for rounds 3-5, I would choose maybe Unsu, Kanku Sho, and Gojushihi Dai, not necessarily in that order.  

Just because you practice one style, though, does not mean you can't do another system's kata in the Shitei division.  Back when I was more of a Wado practitioner, I would use Chinto in the 1st round for Shitei, and then use Shotokan's Jion, since Wado Ryu's Seisan doesn't show that well in kata competition (what were they thinking when they chose it?!?  Why not Wanshu?), even though at the time, I hadn't trained in Shotokan for several years.  I also know of Goju Ryu Karate-Ka who might do Goju's Seipai, but won't use Saifa, since it doesn't show well.  They'll usually use Shito Ryu Bassai Dai or Shito Ryu Seienchin, or something else.  


In general, Shitei division carries a bit more prestige to it.  For the USA-NKF national championships, some of the US team members are selected from those who choose to compete in Shitei kata division, and not Tokui, unless that person's a legacy.  It's also thought of as a more "fair" division, but to truly have a fair division, you need judges and referees who are at least somewhat versed in how the four major systems do their kata, and how their fundamentals differ.  Judges and referees who have the attitude of "my way is the best way, others are inferior" are the ones who stink up the judging, since their ignorance does more harm to the integrity of the sport.


----------



## Tez3

SPX said:


> Ah, okay, so it sounds like you're referring to kata competition then, not kumite?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've actually listened to his podcast a few times. I don't always understand what he's talking about since I'm not familiar with karate kata, but he has some interesting thoughts nonetheless.



We did say kata competitions. i will pass your thoughts on to Iain.


----------

