# Indian girl uses Karate to defend herself. Is Karate an effective martial art for self defense?



## Tom21

It is sometimes said that karate is not the best martial art for self-defense. Many people prefer Krav Maga and Jiu-Jitsu. An incident which occurred  in India this year seems to prove otherwise: A girl which was attacked by two rapists magaged to beat them up so that they fled. 

"The teenager punched them in the face, kicked them where it hurts most, left them bloody, battered and bewildered — and running for their lives. In Madhyamgram, the northern outskirts of Kolkata where molestation and rape are almost an everyday nightmare, the story of a fightback has turned this karate girl into an instant hero. (...)
Passersby stood stunned. Still no one came forward to help. The battered duo staggered to their feet, got back on their cycles and pedaled away, threatening to teach her a lesson. Local resident Shankari Haldar, who witnessed her in action, said, "I was stunned by her courage. She kicked and punched the youths and they fell flat. But it is unfortunate that they managed to flee. Other girls should also learn martial arts to keep such criminals at bay.""
Karate Girl Takes Down Would-Be Molesters With Well-Aimed Kicks
Karate girl kicks her way out of molesters’ clutches - The Times of India

How can Karate enable a smaller person to overpower two bigger persons? How could she do that? What do you think?


----------



## Bill Mattocks

Simple.  Karate works.


----------



## lklawson

Tom21 said:


> It is sometimes said that karate is not the best martial art for self-defense. Many people prefer Krav Maga and Jiu-Jitsu. An incident which occurred  in India this year seems to prove otherwise: A girl which was attacked by two rapists magaged to beat them up so that they fled.
> 
> "The teenager punched them in the face, kicked them where it hurts most, left them bloody, battered and bewildered — and running for their lives. In Madhyamgram, the northern outskirts of Kolkata where molestation and rape are almost an everyday nightmare, the story of a fightback has turned this karate girl into an instant hero. (...)
> Passersby stood stunned. Still no one came forward to help. The battered duo staggered to their feet, got back on their cycles and pedaled away, threatening to teach her a lesson. Local resident Shankari Haldar, who witnessed her in action, said, "I was stunned by her courage. She kicked and punched the youths and they fell flat. But it is unfortunate that they managed to flee. Other girls should also learn martial arts to keep such criminals at bay.""
> Karate Girl Takes Down Would-Be Molesters With Well-Aimed Kicks
> Karate girl kicks her way out of molesters’ clutches - The Times of India
> 
> How can Karate enable a smaller person to overpower two bigger persons? How could she do that? What do you think?


I think it worked for her.

Other than that, I also think that it's a rather leading question/post.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Touch Of Death

Karate is more suited to the street, than the grappling styles. Although, knowing both is a plus.


----------



## Bill Mattocks

lklawson said:


> Other than that, I also think that it's a rather leading question/post.



Agreed, or as Robert Conrad said...


----------



## drop bear

Touch Of Death said:


> Karate is more suited to the street, than the grappling styles. Although, knowing both is a plus.



They both have merits.


----------



## WaterGal

A lot of would-be attackers are basically cowards looking to intimidate someone they see as an easy target, and someone that fights back will leave them running. Whether karate is better or worse than other martial arts styles is kind of irrelevant, it taught her some basic fighting techniques that she was able to use in the moment to get a couple criminals to leave her alone.


----------



## Skullpunch

"Is karate a good martial art for self-defense?"

It has it's place and it has it's limitations.  It obviously worked for her, which is awesome.  That said, I wouldn't be jumping to such hasty conclusions and generalizations over a single incident, if we did that then karate is utterly useless because of Royce Gracie vs. *insert any karate guy that competed in early UFC*.


----------



## donald1

Tom21 said:


> It is sometimes said that karate is not the best martial art for self-defense. Many people prefer Krav Maga and Jiu-Jitsu. An incident which occurred  in India this year seems to prove otherwise: A girl which was attacked by two rapists magaged to beat them up so that they fled.
> 
> "The teenager punched them in the face, kicked them where it hurts most, left them bloody, battered and bewildered — and running for their lives. In Madhyamgram, the northern outskirts of Kolkata where molestation and rape are almost an everyday nightmare, the story of a fightback has turned this karate girl into an instant hero. (...)
> Passersby stood stunned. Still no one came forward to help. The battered duo staggered to their feet, got back on their cycles and pedaled away, threatening to teach her a lesson. Local resident Shankari Haldar, who witnessed her in action, said, "I was stunned by her courage. She kicked and punched the youths and they fell flat. But it is unfortunate that they managed to flee. Other girls should also learn martial arts to keep such criminals at bay.""
> Karate Girl Takes Down Would-Be Molesters With Well-Aimed Kicks
> Karate girl kicks her way out of molesters’ clutches - The Times of India
> 
> How can Karate enable a smaller person to overpower two bigger persons? How could she do that? What do you think?



ummm... who said that? I just left karate class a few minutes ago (not even 30 minutes ago) it works. If someone says it either never tried karate or never done it right

More people like other martial arts styles?? How does that effect the effectiveness of karate???

People who dont get involved or help the victim.  Sadly thats almost everywhere actually.  Although if I were someone who didnt have any fighting or martial arts experience theres not much I can do. I can call the cops but that might be too late.

How does a small person beat a bigger person? Use their size against them. Get them off balance. There are other ways too.(but that's the only one I can think of currently)


----------



## oftheherd1

Good for the young girl!

As to Karate and self defense, who says it is no good?  In fact, I think any legitimate MA properly taught and properly learned, would be good in any fight situation, especially against people who aren't versed in fighting against that art.


----------



## WaterGal

Skullpunch said:


> It has it's place and it has it's limitations.  It obviously worked for her, which is awesome.  That said, I wouldn't be jumping to such hasty conclusions and generalizations over a single incident, if we did that then karate is utterly useless because of Royce Gracie vs. *insert any karate guy that competed in early UFC*.



Sure.  But most assailants aren't Royce Gracie.  Karate may not be the best martial art to use against highly trained professional fighters, but for your average untrained jerk on the street who mostly just knows how to throw a haymaker and relies on looking scary to get their way, a couple of decent kicks and punches may be enough to make you seem like too hard of a target to bother with.


----------



## Ironbear24

Yes it does, if you keep up with it and practice the foundational core it will.


----------



## Skullpunch

WaterGal said:


> Sure.  But most assailants aren't Royce Gracie.  Karate may not be the best martial art to use against highly trained professional fighters, but for your average untrained jerk on the street who mostly just knows how to throw a haymaker and relies on looking scary to get their way, a couple of decent kicks and punches may be enough to make you seem like too hard of a target to bother with.



The point to OP was that you can't rely on a single isolated incident as proof of it's effectiveness any more than you can use Gracie vs. Karate guys - another isolated incident(s), as proof that it's useless.


----------



## Paul_D

Skullpunch said:


> "Is karate a good martial art for self-defense?"
> 
> It has it's place and it has it's limitations.  It obviously worked for her, which is awesome.  That said, I wouldn't be jumping to such hasty conclusions and generalizations over a single incident, if we did that then karate is utterly useless because of Royce Gracie vs. *insert any karate guy that competed in early UFC*.


Fighting/combat sports and self defence are not the same thing (the differences have been discussed elsewhere on this site many times) and that fact that something works (or does not work) in one field does not mean it will (or will not) work in the other.  So the lack of effectiveness of [insert name of martial art here] in the UFC has absolutely no bearing on it's effectiveness for self defence.


----------



## Paul_D

You cannot judge an art on it's practitioners.

You don't take your karate out of your pocket and hit people with it, and then if it doesn't work say "Well that's **** it didn't work".  It's you that is in the fight and you has to use what you've learnt.  If you do it well, great, if you don't do we blame the art or the student?


----------



## drop bear

Paul_D said:


> Fighting/combat sports and self defence are not the same thing (the differences have been discussed elsewhere on this site many times) and that fact that something works (or does not work) in one field does not mean it will (or will not) work in the other.  So the lack of effectiveness of [insert name of martial art here] in the UFC has absolutely no bearing on it's effectiveness for self defence.



There are non martial arts skills that are effective for self defence. Like locking doors.

There are situational self defence moves that don't have a high percentage use in mma. Like the standing sleeper.

And there are self defence moves that are poorly thought out due to compliant training. Like backward elbows to defend bear hugs.

There is an overlap where techniques will work in training and therefore have a higher percentage of working in a fight.

But as a statement made in general like you did. It just isnt true.


----------



## Hanzou

Tom21 said:


> It is sometimes said that karate is not the best martial art for self-defense. Many people prefer Krav Maga and Jiu-Jitsu. An incident which occurred  in India this year seems to prove otherwise: A girl which was attacked by two rapists magaged to beat them up so that they fled.



It isn't. The preference for Krav Maga or Bjj is because if the karate practitioner gets tackled or ends up on the ground they're pretty much done for. Additionally other striking styles (mainly forms of boxing) teaches more effective fighting tactics, like head movement and footwork. KM, MMA, and Bjj incorporates what works, and actively evolve their respective systems constantly. Karate by and large does not, and prefers to adhere to tradition above everything else.

The majority of Karate is simply too archaic for the modern world. There are modern styles that buck this trend (namely Kyokushin and its descendant systems), but for the most part, you're better off doing something else if you can.

That's probably not the case for this little girl, so at least she had something instead of nothing.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> if the karate practitioner gets tackled or ends up on the ground they're pretty much done for.



Actually, no they aren't. You may choose not to believe it but many karateka do know how to cope with being taken down and it's karate that's taught them.
Just because you believe that karate is useless doesn't make it so, you constantly repeating that it doesn't work doesn't make it so either. What it does show is that your lack of knowledge is hindering your ability to make an unbiased critique of karate. Also bear in mind that 'karate' is a generic term much like 'Hoover' is for vacuum cleaner, you know little about it other than the short time you took Shotokan and left deciding it was pants. I went to a BJJ class not so long ago when it opened at a local sports centre, the teaching was poor, the techniques badly executed, that makes it a bad class and a poor instructor, it doesn't make BJJ a bad style and I don't go posting about the place that people shouldn't do BJJ as it won't help in any way.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> Actually, no they aren't.



Actually yes they are. It makes perfect sense given that that range of fighting wasn't deemed important when Karate was formulated. The problem is that now in the modern day that range of fighting (along with stand up) has matured and Karate simply hasn't modernized itself to meet those changing dynamics. If you value pre-arranged forms and traditions, than by all means. However, if someone was learning how to fight I wouldn't suggest a karate school unless it was Kyukushin or similar.

BTW, I never said that Karate was "pants". I said that its better than nothing and that the more modern variations derived from Kyukushin are just fine.


----------



## ballen0351

Hmm 1st post on the forum is to post a thread about a topic thats beat to death around here.  Then the resident BJJ fan boy shows up shortly after to "pounce"  lol


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> It makes perfect sense given that that range of fighting wasn't deemed important when Karate was formulated. The problem is that now in the modern day that range of fighting (along with stand up) has matured and Karate simply hasn't modernized itself to meet those changing dynamics.


And you think that applies to all Karate except for the ones you personally accept? How cute.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> Actually yes they are. It makes perfect sense given that that range of fighting wasn't deemed important when Karate was formulated. The problem is that now in the modern day that range of fighting (along with stand up) has matured and Karate simply hasn't modernized itself to meet those changing dynamics. If you value pre-arranged forms and traditions, than by all means. However, if someone was learning how to fight I wouldn't suggest a karate school unless it was Kyukushin or similar.
> 
> BTW, I never said that Karate was "pants". I said that its better than nothing and that the more modern variations derived from Kyukushin are just fine.



You haven't trained enough karate nor know enough about it to give an informed opinion of karate. You make so many assumptions I'm not going to debunk them because I don't want to sit typing for hours. Karate was designed for civilian self defence as we have told you time and time again and time and time again you insist on cluttering up threads with ideas about karate that simply aren't true. We get that you don't like karate, that's fine I hate green vegetables, I don't however go around foodie sites telling people they are useless and horrible. We know your opinion and that it flies in the face of everything that is we know to be true , we call that  Donald Trumpitis. It's the ability to totally ignore truths and to make up your own world, sometimes to a dangerous to others degree. Just accept than we make karate work, you can't but that's another problem altogether.


----------



## Hanzou

Tez3 said:


> You haven't trained enough karate nor know enough about it to give an informed opinion of karate. You make so many assumptions I'm not going to debunk them because I don't want to sit typing for hours. Karate was designed for civilian self defence as we have told you time and time again and time and time again you insist on cluttering up threads with ideas about karate that simply aren't true. We get that you don't like karate, that's fine I hate green vegetables, I don't however go around foodie sites telling people they are useless and horrible. We know your opinion and that it flies in the face of everything that is we know to be true , we call that  Donald Trumpitis. It's the ability to totally ignore truths and to make up your own world, sometimes to a dangerous to others degree. Just accept than we make karate work, you can't but that's another problem altogether.



It was designed for civilian self defense almost a century ago in Asia. Quite a bit has changed since that time, and Karate hasn't changed much at all.


----------



## oftheherd1

Touch Of Death said:


> Karate is more suited to the street, than the grappling styles. Although, knowing both is a plus.



Out of curiosity, which style of Karate and which style of grappling art do you study?


----------



## Touch Of Death

oftheherd1 said:


> Out of curiosity, which style of Karate and which style of grappling art do you study?


Kenpo. We just steal grappling stuff.


----------



## Tez3

Hanzou said:


> It was designed for civilian self defense almost a century ago in Asia. Quite a bit has changed since that time, and Karate hasn't changed much at all.



Ah my dear, you are just so wrong. The more things change the more they stay the same. Modern karate instructors aren't stuck in the past and I would remind you than many styles of karate such as my own had a founder who was alive for most of my lifetime.


----------



## donald1

Hanzou said:


> It isn't. The preference for Krav Maga or Bjj is because if the karate practitioner gets tackled or ends up on the ground they're pretty much done for.


Anyone who dosn't have ground fighting experience will be done for that does not always mean the karateka student it done for. If someone is done for its because they are not good at ground fighting. Do some karate schools dont teach ground fighting? Maybe. But just because they cant does not mean all. it does not mean most. I know quite a bit of karate students who practice ground falls and ground fighting. Its still traditional karate.



ballen0351 said:


> Hmm 1st post on the forum is to post a thread about a topic thats beat to death around here.  Then the resident BJJ fan boy shows up shortly after to "pounce"  lol



And it probably wont be the last. Im sure somewhere along the line someone else will post something similar


----------



## Hanzou

donald1 said:


> Anyone who dosn't have ground fighting experience will be done for that does not always mean the karateka student it done for. If someone is done for its because they are not good at ground fighting. Do some karate schools dont teach ground fighting? Maybe. But just because they cant does not mean all. it does not mean most. I know quite a bit of karate students who practice ground falls and ground fighting. Its still traditional karate.



Spending 20 minutes every month or so on break falling, or kicking and punching while on your knees isn't what I'm talking about when I say "ground fighting".

Anyway, feel free to have the last word.


----------



## TimoS

Do you really have to have this "conversation " about karate's effectiveness again? Here's how it goes: someone says something positive about karate as a self defense art. Another, usually Hanzou, comes to tell that karate is useless for self defense. People point out examples, Hanzou ignores everything and keeps insisting that his point of view is the only valid. People lose their cool, arguments start. This goes on for pages, neither side changes their opinion. Then a few months of silence and everything starts all over again in a different thread


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Tom21 said:


> It is sometimes said that karate is not the best martial art for self-defense. Many people prefer Krav Maga and Jiu-Jitsu.



No art is the "best" for self-defense. Too much depends on the individual and the situation.

Some people prefer Krav Maga and Jiu-jitsu. Some people prefer Karate of one form or another. Some people prefer Wing Chun or Judo or Kali or any one of a myriad of arts.

The only folks making a big deal about "my martial art is better than all these others are either instructors engaged in advertising for their product or evangelical partisans who believe they've found the one true way and that they can convince everybody else of that if they just repeat it enough. (Cue Hanzou's arrival in the thread a little further down.)



Tom21 said:


> An incident which occurred in India this year seems to prove otherwise:



A single incident doesn't prove anything about whether an art is good or bad or the best for self-defense. It just indicates that one individual was able to defend themself in one particular situation using whatever they've learned.



Touch Of Death said:


> Karate is more suited to the street, than the grappling styles. Although, knowing both is a plus.



I'd say it mostly depends on how the karate or grappling art was trained than anything else, although I agree that it's good to understand both striking and grappling.



Paul_D said:


> Fighting/combat sports and self defence are not the same thing (the differences have been discussed elsewhere on this site many times) and that fact that something works (or does not work) in one field does not mean it will (or will not) work in the other.  So the lack of effectiveness of [insert name of martial art here] in the UFC has absolutely no bearing on it's effectiveness for self defence.



Yes and no.

As we've discussed before, most of self-defense is not about fighting. However the primary use of any martial art in self-defense is in the subsection of self-defense that involves fighting. If a martial doesn't improve your ability to fight in some context, then it probably is not going to help your self-defense capability much.

The most useful and appropriate tactics and techniques for fighting do vary considerably in different contexts. Two trained unarmed fighters squaring off in a challenge match is not the same as a teenage girl fending off a date rapist is not the same as a group of orderlies trying to subdue a psychiatric patient having a violent psychotic break is  not the same as soldiers using bayonets in the trenches of WWI. Nevertheless, there are also commonalities as well and it is possible to gain useful insights from observations in one context that can be applied to another. I would recommend that anyone interested in "street application" of their martial art not dismiss the lessons from MMA any more than they should blindly assume that the best tactics for the cage match those of the street.



Hanzou said:


> The preference for Krav Maga or Bjj is because if the karate practitioner gets tackled or ends up on the ground they're pretty much done for.



Maybe if they are taken down by someone who is an expert in groundfighting. Fortunately for the karateka, the overwhelming majority of self-defense situations don't involve assailants who are expert groundfighters.



Hanzou said:


> Additionally other striking styles (mainly forms of boxing) teaches more effective fighting tactics, like head movement and footwork.



Good karate has good footwork. I'll agree that boxing is best for head movement, however there are other useful elements that can be found in karate but not boxing.



Hanzou said:


> KM, MMA, and Bjj incorporates what works, and actively evolve their respective systems constantly.



True, but evolution (in biology or martial arts) improves fitness within a specific context. You could easily argue that a large percentage of BJJ students are being more poorly prepared for street self-defense than they would have been a generation ago because they are focused on learning how to win BJJ tournaments at the expense of stand-up, takedown, and punch defense skills.



Hanzou said:


> Karate by and large does not, and prefers to adhere to tradition above everything else.



Eh. "Karate" is a huge umbrella and it includes people who are innovating, people dedicated to tradition, and people who think they are innovating or being traditional when they really aren't.


----------



## drop bear

donald1 said:


> Anyone who dosn't have ground fighting experience will be done for that does not always mean the karateka student it done for. If someone is done for its because they are not good at ground fighting. Do some karate schools dont teach ground fighting? Maybe. But just because they cant does not mean all. it does not mean most. I know quite a bit of karate students who practice ground falls and ground fighting. Its still traditional karate.



I have never seen it or heard of it. I done done 3 ot 4 mabye a year stretch back in the day. Shotokan,wado ryu I know the kyokushin guys. Even did Zen do kai for a bit. Not exactly heaps but enough to have noticed if they do comprehensive ground work.

Zen do kai did the most but took it from the beej and were honest about that.

I had done 5 years of judo and jjj before I looked at a karate. So I had a bit of an idea what comprehensive ground work looked like. (We were rolling for sub's even then)

Most of what I saw in karate was trip and strike stuff. With the mantra that strong stances were enough to prevent take downs. But all of that was just after ufc 1 so the grappling boom had not really started.

So to sum up in my experience I would say most karate do not do ground work. I am not even sure why that opinion would even be an issue.


----------



## Tez3

drop bear said:


> I have never seen it or heard of it. I done done 3 ot 4 mabye a year stretch back in the day. Shotokan,wado ryu I know the kyokushin guys. Even did Zen do kai for a bit. Not exactly heaps but enough to have noticed if they do comprehensive ground work.
> 
> Zen do kai did the most but took it from the beej and were honest about that.
> 
> I had done 5 years of judo and jjj before I looked at a karate. So I had a bit of an idea what comprehensive ground work looked like. (We were rolling for sub's even then)
> 
> Most of what I saw in karate was trip and strike stuff. With the mantra that strong stances were enough to prevent take downs. But all of that was just after ufc 1 so the grappling boom had not really started.
> 
> So to sum up in my experience I would say most karate do not do ground work. I am not even sure why that opinion would even be an issue.



Well you said it, it's your opinion, you are entitled to it of course but you aren't entitled to your own truth. You have had a slight experience with karate, 3 or 4 years in multiple styles, not really long enough in any one to actually know what they do. Ok, you didn't do 'ground work' in your fleeting karate career and 5 years of Judo makes you an expert lol ( my instructor has 45 years of Judo experience and 40 of karate so guess who I'll listen to) There are karateka who have an extensive experience in ground work, there's Judoka with extensive experience in striking, the trick of course is not to generalise and not to disagree just because you like arguments or should I say 'sparring' online which is what you call it. You don't know all the karateka and karate clubs/schools so really cannot say based on your slight acquaintance with karate what is done. It might surprise you to know that we were grappling in karate looooong before UFC1,  our founder was an extremely good 'grappler', a master in fact.


----------



## JP3

This sounds very much like a thread from bullshido.net, just sayin'.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Well you said it, it's your opinion, you are entitled to it of course but you aren't entitled to your own truth. You have had a slight experience with karate, 3 or 4 years in multiple styles, not really long enough in any one to actually know what they do. Ok, you didn't do 'ground work' in your fleeting karate career and 5 years of Judo makes you an expert lol ( my instructor has 45 years of Judo experience and 40 of karate so guess who I'll listen to) There are karateka who have an extensive experience in ground work, there's Judoka with extensive experience in striking, the trick of course is not to generalise and not to disagree just because you like arguments or should I say 'sparring' online which is what you call it. You don't know all the karateka and karate clubs/schools so really cannot say based on your slight acquaintance with karate what is done. It might surprise you to know that we were grappling in karate looooong before UFC1,  our founder was an extremely good 'grappler', a master in fact.



Yes it would surprise me. And not because i like sparring or argument. The trick is to be swayed by evidence  rather than stories.

And because i have seen no evidence of karate based grappling other than mabye the ocasional arm lock or trip. I am going to still follow the logic that they dont really do it.

  I mean i am pretty sure i dont have to do ten years of a martial art to notice if they do ground fighting.

I have never seen karate grappling anywhere.

Now the interesting thing is the karate styles i have been in contact with are also ego free enough to accept they dont really grapple. They dont get in a huff.  And would even suggest that their guys do some grappling.


----------



## Skullpunch

Tez3 said:


> You have had a slight experience with karate, 3 or 4 years in multiple styles, not really long enough in any one to actually know what they do. Ok, you didn't do 'ground work' in your fleeting karate career and 5 years of Judo makes you an expert lol ( my instructor has 45 years of Judo experience and 40 of karate so guess who I'll listen to)



So how long does someone have to do karate before they start meeting these members who became experts on the ground just by studying karate?  Several years isn't enough?  It's reasonable to train for several years without meeting a single grappling expert in an art that supposedly can turn you into an expert grappler?  In MMA, bjj, and judo, I met competent ground grapplers my first day in all three of those training environments.


----------



## Tez3

Skullpunch said:


> In MMA, bjj, and judo, I met competent ground grapplers my first day in all three of those training environments.



Well I would really hope you would otherwise it would have been pointless training there wouldn't it!

Putting your sarcasm to one side, I think you perhaps have to know what karate is before you can criticise it. I could spend some time telling you but you could also spend some times looking at what experienced karateka on this site have said. To keep reiterating  what we say is tiresome when those who think they know what karate is have closed minds and a tendency to only believe their own prejudices. It's not attacking the two posters who dismiss karate here when I say that they both have admitted they have only attended karate classes for a short time before deciding they know all there is to know about karate.
For you benefit I will tell you I also take BJJ, have some Judo and am heavily involved in all aspects of MMA including training.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> Well I would really hope you would otherwise it would have been pointless training there wouldn't it!
> 
> Putting your sarcasm to one side, I think you perhaps have to know what karate is before you can criticise it. I could spend some time telling you but you could also spend some times looking at what experienced karateka on this site have said. To keep reiterating  what we say is tiresome when those who think they know what karate is have closed minds and a tendency to only believe their own prejudices. It's not attacking the two posters who dismiss karate here when I say that they both have admitted they have only attended karate classes for a short time before deciding they know all there is to know about karate.
> For you benefit I will tell you I also take BJJ, have some Judo and am heavily involved in all aspects of MMA including training.



So how long would I have to have done karate before I saw the grappling system?


----------



## drop bear

Looks like this ian guy hasn't been studying karate long enough to learn the comprehensive grappling.

Karate Grappling: Did It Really Exist? | Iain Abernethy

Which is scarily along the lines of what hanzau said.


----------



## Skullpunch

Tez3 said:


> Well I would really hope you would otherwise it would have been pointless training there wouldn't it!
> 
> Putting your sarcasm to one side, I think you perhaps have to know what karate is before you can criticise it. I could spend some time telling you but you could also spend some times looking at what experienced karateka on this site have said. To keep reiterating  what we say is tiresome when those who think they know what karate is have closed minds and a tendency to only believe their own prejudices. It's not attacking the two posters who dismiss karate here when I say that they both have admitted they have only attended karate classes for a short time before deciding they know all there is to know about karate.
> For you benefit I will tell you I also take BJJ, have some Judo and am heavily involved in all aspects of MMA including training.



It wasn't sarcasm, it was a literal question.  In every art I know of that is proven to be able to make you a competent grappler you can see the competent grapplers in that art in one day.  So how long do you have to train karate before you start meeting the guys that became good ground fighters just by training karate?  And why is karate the only martial art in human history that can make you an expert grappler where you have to train for so many years to be able to even see it's grappling prowess that can make you an expert grappler?


----------



## ballen0351

Skullpunch said:


> It wasn't sarcasm, it was a literal question.  In every art I know of that is proven to be able to make you a competent grappler you can see the competent grapplers in that art in one day.


HUH? 


> So how long do you have to train karate before you start meeting the guys that became good ground fighters just by training karate?


depends on style, school, instructor, and student


> And why is karate the only martial art in human history that can make you an expert grappler where you have to train for so many years to be able to even see it's grappling prowess that can make you an expert grappler?


You don't need to be an "expert" to effectively use ground ighting skills taught in certain styles of karate


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> So how long would I have to have done karate before I saw the grappling system?


We learned grappling in the 1st few weeks in my Goju classes so....... a few weeks


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> than mabye the ocasional arm lock or trip.
> 
> 
> 
> I have never seen karate grappling anywhere.
> .


So you have seen occasional grappling yet you have never seen it anywhere?  Which is it?


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> So you have seen occasional grappling yet you have never seen it anywhere?  Which is it?



OK. When I say grappling I am generally talking about a comprehensive system of throws clinching groundwork possibility submissions. 

I have seen takedowns in karate. Mabye the occasional wrist lock. But nothing to suggest their system is a stand alone grappling system.

This is an important distinction for self defence when I suggest that someone needs to know grappling I am not talking about osotogari trained in karate class.

I suggest you need enough grappling to get off your back while the person on top is trying to rain bombs on you.

So however to want to define that distinction is up to you.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> We learned grappling in the 1st few weeks in my Goju classes so....... a few weeks



Was it really? Could you tell it was grappling within a few weeks though.

Because apparently you can't tell until you have mastered all karate.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> Was it really? Could you tell it was grappling within a few weeks though.


sure I could. It was basic grappling.


> Because apparently you can't tell until you have mastered all karate.


says who?


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> sure I could. It was basic grappling.
> says who?


Well I was told I couldn't tell after a year whether I did grappling or not.

So I imagine you could not know after a few weeks.

Here we go.

"You have had a slight experience with karate, 3 or 4 years in multiple styles, not really long enough in any one to actually know what they do. Ok, you didn't do 'ground work' in your fleeting karate career and 5 years of Judo makes you an expert lol ( my instructor has 45 years of Judo experience and 40 of karate so guess who I'll listen to)"


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Spending 20 minutes every month or so on break falling, or kicking and punching while on your knees isn't what I'm talking about when I say "ground fighting".


And how much time does a predominantly "ground fighting" art spend on kicking and punching whilst standing up?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> And because i have seen no evidence of karate based grappling other than mabye the ocasional arm lock or trip. I am going to still follow the logic that they dont really do it.


Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> I suggest you need enough grappling to get off your back while the person on top is trying to rain bombs on you.


I would say that most predominantly striking arts teach that much at least. On a side note, in a fight I got into 20 years ago I did just that except I did it purely with striking,although he tried but did not actually get on top.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> Well I was told I couldn't tell after a year whether I did grappling or not.


Well I have no idea where you training who you trained with or what style you were training so......I know we were learning grappling.  Was it as specialized as say BJJ of course not thats not the focus of the style but even basic grappling is stil grapling 


> So I imagine you could not know after a few weeks.


And you would  be wrong


> Here we go.
> 
> "You have had a slight experience with karate, 3 or 4 years in multiple styles, not really long enough in any one to actually know what they do. Ok, you didn't do 'ground work' in your fleeting karate career and 5 years of Judo makes you an expert lol ( my instructor has 45 years of Judo experience and 40 of karate so guess who I'll listen to)"


And?


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> OK. When I say grappling I am generally talking about a comprehensive system of throws clinching groundwork possibility submissions.


even basic grappling is still grappling


> I have seen takedowns in karate. Mabye the occasional wrist lock. But nothing to suggest their system is a stand alone grappling system.


WHO claimed it was?  Nobody is saying Karate is a stand alone grappling system. I learned grappling in Goju can I enter a BJJ tournament and beat trained BJJ or judo guys 99 out of 100 no.  Can I use it to defend myself in the street yes, is it in the style yes.  Ive never compared grappling in Karate to BJJ or JJJ or Judo but to say it doesnt exist at all is just wrong


> This is an important distinction for self defence when I suggest that someone needs to know grappling I am not talking about osotogari trained in karate class.
> 
> I suggest you need enough grappling to get off your back while the person on top is trying to rain bombs on you.


and we have that and more in my style


> So however to want to define that distinction is up to you.


ok


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> I am not talking about osotogari trained in karate class.


That is just a basic leg sweep takedown that appears in many styles, including mine. We did that at our end of year beach training yesterday.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> And how much time does a predominantly "ground fighting" art spend on kicking and punching whilst standing up?



Probably not enough.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> Probably not enough.


How do you know?


----------



## RTKDCMB

ballen0351 said:


> How do you know?


He did say 'probably'.


----------



## Tez3

Skullpunch said:


> It wasn't sarcasm, it was a literal question.  In every art I know of that is proven to be able to make you a competent grappler you can see the competent grapplers in that art in one day.  So how long do you have to train karate before you start meeting the guys that became good ground fighters just by training karate?  And why is karate the only martial art in human history that can make you an expert grappler where you have to train for so many years to be able to even see it's grappling prowess that can make you an expert grappler?



Karate is a self defence art, it's techniques are for defending yourself, sorry if I've repeated myself but it needs to be emphasised. Competent in karate is being able to defend yourself, do you get it yet? it's not 'competent' to be able to compete in grappling competitions, it's enough to get you out of bad situations.
Your comment about seeing competent grapplers in one day makes little sense, you can't train people to be competent in one day.


----------



## Bill Mattocks

If you guys would just settle down and learn Isshin-Ryu, everything would be fine. It is the only real martial art. You're welcome.


----------



## Tez3

Bill Mattocks said:


> If you guys would just settle down and learn Isshin-Ryu, everything would be fine. It is the only real martial art. You're welcome.



But but it can't be, surely UFC is the only style that works...................................


----------



## seasoned

JP3 said:


> This sounds very much like a thread from bullshido.net, just sayin'.



This of course is your opinion. 

Martial Talk is very well monitored. Members are allowed to have their opinion on a wide variety of topics as long as they stay within the site rules. 

Even though you can have an opinion whether good or bad the fact is you have not been here long enough to render the statement you did, "just sayin"


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> How do you know?



Really?


----------



## ballen0351

seasoned said:


> This of course is your opinion.
> 
> Martial Talk is very well monitored. Members are allowed to have their opinion on a wide variety of topics as long as they stay within the site rules.
> 
> Even though you can have an opinion whether good or bad the fact is you have not been here long enough to render the statement you did, "just sayin"


I agree with him. Have I been here long enough?  Just sayin


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> Really?


yeah you post your ignorant opinion as if it's fact


----------



## oftheherd1

Touch Of Death said:


> Kenpo. We just steal grappling stuff.



Perhaps that explains your apparent disdain for grappling arts.


----------



## Touch Of Death

oftheherd1 said:


> Perhaps that explains your apparent disdain for grappling arts.


Apparent disdain? let me make it clearer for you, BJJ against more that one person is suicide, Karate against multiple opponents is a typical street fight. Sorry if it only looked like I thought, taking people to the ground and rolling around seemed like a bad idea.  That being said, you still need to know the escapes.


----------



## oftheherd1

Touch Of Death said:


> Apparent disdain? let me make it clearer for you, BJJ against more that one person is suicide, Karate against multiple opponents is a typical street fight. Sorry if it only looked like I thought, taking people to the ground and rolling around seemed like a bad idea.  That being said, you still need to know the escapes.



It occurs to me we are probably talking apples and oranges here.  My fault no doubt.  You are talking about ground fighting arts and mention BJJ, and I am talking about grappling arts such as the art I studied, Hapkido.  We learn ground fighting techniques at higher levels, but more with the intent of getting back on our feet as quickly as possible.  We don't prefer to be on the ground, but prefer to defend while on our feet, using grappling moves, and we can work against more than one opponent as can many other MA, but it isn't preferred by us any more than most martial arts.

A couple of things occur to me though, that might be worthy of discussion in this thread.  First, I really know little about BJJ.  However, do they really intend to do most of their fighting on the ground, or is that just their way of doing damage before getting back up as quickly as possible to take on any other possible attackers?  Is Karate or TKD ineffective because they don't have ground fighting, or more effective because they employ blocks, strikes and kicks that make it more dangerous to try to take a them to the ground?


----------



## Touch Of Death

oftheherd1 said:


> It occurs to me we are probably talking apples and oranges here.  My fault no doubt.  You are talking about ground fighting arts and mention BJJ, and I am talking about grappling arts such as the art I studied, Hapkido.  We learn ground fighting techniques at higher levels, but more with the intent of getting back on our feet as quickly as possible.  We don't prefer to be on the ground, but prefer to defend while on our feet, using grappling moves, and we can work against more than one opponent as can many other MA, but it isn't preferred by us any more than most martial arts.
> 
> A couple of things occur to me though, that might be worthy of discussion in this thread.  First, I really know little about BJJ.  However, do they really intend to do most of their fighting on the ground, or is that just their way of doing damage before getting back up as quickly as possible to take on any other possible attackers?  Is Karate or TKD ineffective because they don't have ground fighting, or more effective because they employ blocks, strikes and kicks that make it more dangerous to try to take a them to the ground?


Hapkido is cool, and BJJ is a sport, and a dueling art. Dueling arts are nice, but there is an assumption it is, and will always be, one on one.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Hapkido is typically described as Korean Karate; so, it is a karate art that has a strong anti-grappling feel. You call what you do, grappling, I call Hapkido, anti-grappling; so, let's call the whole thing off.


----------



## Touch Of Death

So, in my mind, attacks are grappling, escapes are anti-grappling. You need to know the attacks before you can escape one of those pesky buggars; so, if you want to know how to fight, grappling training is a must, but it is not the end all be all of fighting.


----------



## seasoned

ballen0351 said:


> I agree with him. Have I been here long enough?  Just sayin


You been here long enough to know better. "just sayin".


----------



## Tez3

Anyway, there's one young lady in India who will tell you that absolutely karate is good for self defence. I for one agree with her and am very pleased she's fine after what must have been a very scary experience which could have been so much worst.
Now all we have to do is lobby the Indian government to stop tribal councils issuing orders for girls and women to be gang raped for such offences as falling in love, being the sister of a man who fell in love with the wrong women, not being able to pay fines etc.
Yep that's political but puts things into perspective though doesn't it.


----------



## ballen0351

seasoned said:


> You been here long enough to know better. "just sayin".


what should I "know better"  lol


----------



## oftheherd1

Touch Of Death said:


> Hapkido is cool, and BJJ is a sport, and a dueling art. Dueling arts are nice, but there is an assumption it is, and will always be, one on one.



OK if so.  As I said, I really know nothing about BJJ.



Touch Of Death said:


> Hapkido is typically described as Korean Karate; so, it is a karate art that has a strong anti-grappling feel. You call what you do, grappling, I call Hapkido, anti-grappling; so, let's call the whole thing off.



I am totally unaware of that.  Korea is where I studied and earned my 1st and 2nd dan.  I call Hapkido a grappling art simply to be understand by most people here.  Where I studied, we simply called Hapkido one thing; Hapkido.



Touch Of Death said:


> So, in my mind, attacks are grappling, escapes are anti-grappling. You need to know the attacks before you can escape one of those pesky buggars; so, if you want to know how to fight, grappling training is a must, but it is not the end all be all of fighting.



Your are untitled to your beliefs.  But I cannot agree as I understand attacks and defenses, and grappling.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> yeah you post your ignorant opinion as if it's fact



No when i post a fact i add a source.  That is how you tell the difference.


----------



## oftheherd1

Tez3 said:


> Anyway, there's one young lady in India who will tell you that absolutely karate is good for self defence. I for one agree with her and am very pleased she's fine after what must have been a very scary experience which could have been so much worst.
> Now all we have to do is lobby the Indian government to stop tribal councils issuing orders for girls and women to be gang raped for such offences as falling in love, being the sister of a man who fell in love with the wrong women, not being able to pay fines etc.
> Yep that's political but puts things into perspective though doesn't it.



Oh, yeah, that was what this thread started out to be wasn't it; a celebration of a wonderful young lady, learning how, and actually having the confidence and ability to defend herself.  Again, good on her!  I hope she continues to have success in life,


----------



## drop bear

By the way.  Either grappling or anti grappling. Escapes are generally the hardest to pull of and take the most time to get right.

And again why i would advise if you do grappling for self defence you realy want to learn a comprehensive system and then work at it.


----------



## aedrasteia

Tez3 said:


> Anyway, there's one young lady in India who will tell you that absolutely karate is good for self defence. I for one agree with her and am very pleased she's fine after what must have been a very scary experience which could have been so much worst.
> Now all we have to do is lobby the Indian government to stop tribal councils issuing orders for girls and women to be gang raped for such offences as falling in love, being the sister of a man who fell in love with the wrong women, not being able to pay fines etc.
> Yep that's political but puts things into perspective though doesn't it.



Ah Tez, thank you and a deep gassho.   I often despair of having conversations about SD4W, here on forums, even MT or even F2F - so many dissolve into what this thread became very early: a circular debate that goes nowhere in terms of realistic, thoughtful discussions *_grounded in real experience_*. 

The experience of girls/women disappears  Once again.   I Re-read this thread and see where we disappear or vanish. And there are no questions about what life is like for girls/women in s. asia (India, Pakistan etc.)  From the speed of the diversion into the predictable argument and the complete absence of any interest (visible and expressed here)   in daily life for girls/women in the region, I'm reminded again of how discouraging these threads usually become.

And then there is this:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/hundreds-protest-release-of-new-delhi-rapist/2015/12/20/

NEW DELHI — Hundreds of demonstrators gathered in the heart of the Indian capital on Sunday to protest the release of the man who as a juvenile was convicted of raping a young woman in a moving bus three years ago.

Authorities released the rapist from the correctional home where he spent the past three years, but he did not walk free. He was shifted to a rehabilitation home run by a nonprofit group where, an official said, he will undergo psychological rehabilitation, be given sewing work and be monitored.


_"The youth was among six males who brutally gang-raped the 23-year-old woman and threw her out of the bus. The victim died of her severe injuries a few days later. Of the other five men who were sent to jail, one man hanged himself in his cell in 2013. The other four were sentenced to death. They have appealed the verdicts.

But the case of the juvenile rapist, who is now 20, has led many Indians to question whether the law has let him get away too easily because of his age.
_
_[India gang rapes persist despite growing awareness of women’s rights]" _ 

And I wish everyone posting on this thread would watch this:  India's Daughter






I recognize and  thank the young Indian/Pakistani women who have shared their stories and experience with me in classes. some are remaining here, some are returning to their countries to live and work and fight with every tool they have to stop this horror and change the deeply rooted mind-set that feeds it. Their courage is enormous. I promised them I would remember and tell.
They deserve that, at the very least.

So deep thanks to Tez, as ever.


----------



## Skullpunch

Tez3 said:


> Karate is a self defence art, it's techniques are for defending yourself, sorry if I've repeated myself but it needs to be emphasised. Competent in karate is being able to defend yourself, *do you get it yet?* it's not 'competent' to be able to compete in grappling competitions, it's enough to get you out of bad situations.



Everyone "gets it" just fine, as everyone has heard this argument ad nauseum over the years and it has the same holes now that it's always had.  The first is that it damn well *is* competent to be able to compete in grappling competitions because if you can do that then you can handle yourself that much more easily against untrained thugs on the street - or worse yet someone who has a couple of years of competitive wrestling under their belt - someone you may not be able to fight off if all you have are very basic self defense grappling skills.

The second is that self defense vs. competition is not completely binary.  For example, if an international karate champion enters an early UFC and can't even defend against a muscled-in guillotine from a guy that has the grappling ability of a bjj white belt, that doesn't bode well for his ability to grapple altogether and I seriously doubt that changing this scenario into a self defense situation would unlock grappling abilities that we can't see because it was in the cage.



			
				Tez3 said:
			
		

> Your comment about seeing competent grapplers in one day makes little sense, you can't train people to be competent in one day.



Never said you could.  Speaking of having to repeat oneself, what I was actually saying is that I could SEE competent grapplers my first day of training, as in, I could tell after one day of training that there were competent grapplers in the class.  Actually I could tell in about 10 minutes.  I never once said or even implied that the guys who were competent became competent in one day.  I'm calling into question the idea that if you train karate for 5 years you're still too much of an inexperienced noob to be able to see it's grappling prowess, whereas it takes one day in the arts where we don't have to have this debate - you still haven't really responded to this, instead choosing to go off on another vaguely related tangent and starting a different debate altogether (self-defense vs. competition, as opposed to the actual subject I brought up).


----------



## ballen0351

Skullpunch said:


> .  I'm calling into question the idea that if you train karate for 5 years you're still too much of an inexperienced noob to be able to see it's grappling prowess,


Why would I want to grapple at all?  If I have 5 years of training in Karate I have far more useful tools in my memory banks that I dont need or want to grapple with anyone.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> Why would I want to grapple at all?  If I have 5 years of training in Karate I have far more useful tools in my memory banks that I dont need or want to grapple with anyone.



Do you know the saying "a fool who knows he is a fool is wiser than a wise man?"

This suggests that you will be better if you can be humble and accept you don't have all the answers.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> Do you know the saying "a fool who knows he is a fool is wiser than a wise man?"
> 
> This suggests that you will be better if you can be humble and accept you don't have all the answers.


lol says the guy that keeps spouting off that Karate has no grappling.

However I was asking him a question I obviously dont have the answer, if I did I wouldn't have asked him the question


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> lol says the guy that keeps spouting off that Karate has no grappling.
> 
> However I was asking him a question I obviously dont have the answer, if I did I wouldn't have asked him the question



That was the answer to your question. 

And no comprehensive grappling. I even explained the difference.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> That was the answer to your question.


I wasnt asking you I dont care about your answer


> And no comprehensive grappling. I even explained the difference.


Grappling is grappling


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> And no comprehensive grappling. I even explained the difference.


Define 'comprehensive'.


----------



## Tez3

and so it goes on. Style X doesn't work because it failed in an early fixed UFC, style Y is better because 'I' do it and 'I'm' awesome, 'you're' talking rubbish, only 'I' know'. Okay guys, crack on, keep up the good work, in the meantime a young lady has kept her 'honour' and come out unscathed because she defended herself and apart from two other people here, no one cares because it's more important to bicker about style versus style. I'm done with this thread.


----------



## drop bear

Tez3 said:


> and so it goes on. Style X doesn't work because it failed in an early fixed UFC, style Y is better because 'I' do it and 'I'm' awesome, 'you're' talking rubbish, only 'I' know'. Okay guys, crack on, keep up the good work, in the meantime a young lady has kept her 'honour' and come out unscathed because she defended herself and apart from two other people here, no one cares because it's more important to bicker about style versus style. I'm done with this thread.



You helped start this line of discussion then suddenly jumped ship and went all moral high ground. You were basically neck deep in my style is better than yours.

And most of your accusations are wrong there.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Define 'comprehensive'.



Hard to define. But the odd throw or takedown wouldn't be a comprehensive system.


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> I wasnt asking you I dont care about your answer
> 
> Grappling is grappling



Well it is the best answer you have so far. And the value of a public discussion is it is not all about you.

Grappling so isn't grappling. In the same way karate isn't karate.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> Well it is the best answer you have so far. And the value of a public discussion is it is not all about you.


I didn't say you couldn't answer I said I don't care 


> Grappling so isn't grappling. In the same way karate isn't karate.


except it is so.........


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> I didn't say you couldn't answer I said I don't care
> 
> except it is so.........



So karate is karate? Well that is going to make things interesting.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> So karate is karate? Well that is going to make things interesting.


In general terms yes.  What else would karate be Horse back riding?


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> In general terms yes.  What else would karate be Horse back riding?




We then I will go back to my original statement that I really haven't seen much grappling in karate.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> We then I will go back to my original statement that I really haven't seen much grappling in karate.


So because YOU haven't seen it that means its not there?


----------



## drop bear

ballen0351 said:


> So because YOU haven't seen it that means its not there?



Apparently.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> Apparently.


Well I had no Idea you were the final authority please forgive me master


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Hard to define. But the odd throw or takedown wouldn't be a comprehensive system.


So how many throws or takedowns would have to be performed how often to classify as comprehensive?


----------



## Hanzou

Tony Dismukes said:


> Maybe if they are taken down by someone who is an expert in groundfighting. Fortunately for the karateka, the overwhelming majority of self-defense situations don't involve assailants who are expert ground fighters.



You don't need to be an expert at ground fighting to dominate someone inexperienced with that range of fighting.  All you really need is a size advantage and basic knowledge of takedowns. High school wrestlers, backyard wrestlers, MMA wannabes, ex-football players, etc. all have those attributes. Hell, white belts with a few stripes on their belts can do the same thing.



> Good karate has good footwork. I'll agree that boxing is best for head movement, however there are other useful elements that can be found in karate but not boxing.



Perhaps. I was saying that boxing has BETTER footwork. It also has a much better system of defense, and its method of clinching works well with grappling systems.



> True, but evolution (in biology or martial arts) improves fitness within a specific context. You could easily argue that a large percentage of BJJ students are being more poorly prepared for street self-defense than they would have been a generation ago because they are focused on learning how to win BJJ tournaments at the expense of stand-up, takedown, and punch defense skills.



Eh, I don't know if I agree with that argument. I'm more in line with Ryan Hall's thoughts on that topic.



drop bear said:


> Looks like this ian guy hasn't been studying karate long enough to learn the comprehensive grappling.
> 
> Karate Grappling: Did It Really Exist? | Iain Abernethy
> 
> Which is scarily along the lines of what hanzau said.



Shocking isn't it? 



RTKDCMB said:


> And how much time does a predominantly "ground fighting" art spend on kicking and punching whilst standing up?



Little to none.

Many Bjj schools offer separate striking classes. You simply don't have enough time to properly teach both disciplines at once. The striking you find in classic Bjj is typically used for takedown set ups.

I think MMA does a better job of blending striking and grappling than anything I've seen out of traditional arts, but MMA grappling isn't as in depth as what you'd find in a grappling style (obviously).


----------



## Kenpoguy123

Well obviously it does work because of this story and plenty of others. People need to realise there's more to combat than the ufc no karate wouldn't work in the ufc but most people who train karate don't give a damm about winning a cage fight they care about defending themselves. Karate has loads of moves that are illegal in cage fighting eye gouges, groin kicks, head butts, throat strikes etc


----------



## donald1

Tez3 said:


> But but it can't be, surely UFC is the only style that works...................................



Clearly that honor belongs to ameri-do-te


----------



## Hanzou

Kenpoguy123 said:


> Well obviously it does work because of this story and plenty of others. People need to realise there's more to combat than the ufc no karate wouldn't work in the ufc but most people who train karate don't give a damm about winning a cage fight they care about defending themselves. Karate has loads of moves that are illegal in cage fighting eye gouges, groin kicks, head butts, throat strikes etc



Many of those "illegal moves" were perfectly legal in the first UFCs, and we got pretty much the same results we get now.

As someone said, Karate is designed to take down untrained opponents. The problem is that more and more people are getting "trained" thanks to the dispersal of information in the modern era. 

As I said in my first post, great for the girl defending herself. Karate is better than nothing if you have no other options available.


----------



## Skullpunch

Tez3 said:


> and so it goes on. Style X doesn't work because it failed in an early fixed UFC, style Y is better because 'I' do it and 'I'm' awesome, 'you're' talking rubbish, only 'I' know'.



Funny, I don't recall ever saying or even implying that (starting to notice a trend here).  My point was that competition and self defense are not completely binary.  They're not the same but varying levels of carryover depending on the type of competition is undeniable.  At no point have I ever said anything even remotely close to "karate doesn't work because of UFC".  In fact, I said almost the exact opposite of that in my second reply to this thread, back on the first page.

I know you said you're done with this thread but just in case you decide to respond again, please keep in mind that we would make a lot more progress here if you responded to the arguments I'm presenting instead of making up whatever you want to believe about my stance to fit your own little narrative.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Many of those "illegal moves" were perfectly legal in the first UFCs, and we got pretty much the same results we get now.


I know there was a few minor groin shots and a head butt or two but I don't recall any fighter doing eye gouges or throat strikes in the early UFC. Perhaps you could point some out to me?


----------



## Skullpunch

RTKDCMB said:


> I know there was a few minor groin shots and a head butt or two but I don't recall any fighter doing eye gouges or throat strikes in the early UFC. Perhaps you could point some out to me?



Throat strikes were allowed, it just turned out to be a lot harder to get a good shot on the throat than everyone thought it was going to be.

Eye gouges I believe were always illegal but there were guys who would've done so anyway if the opportunity had presented itself.  Gerard Gordeau, for example.  He tried to bite his way out of Royce's RNC at the finals of UFC 1 and rammed his thumb into Yuki Nakai's eye at Japan Vale Tudo in 1994 I believe - the latter technique was considered especially dirty considering he was like a foot taller and 80 lbs heavier than Nakai or something absurd like that.  Amazingly enough, Nakai still managed to submit him and make it to the finals (after fighting for a combined total of like an hour and with both eyes swollen shut)


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Skullpunch said:


> Throat strikes were allowed, it just turned out to be a lot harder to get a good shot on the throat than everyone thought it was going to be.
> 
> Eye gouges I believe were always illegal but there were guys who would've done so anyway if the opportunity had presented itself.  Gerard Gordeau, for example.  He tried to bite his way out of Royce's RNC at the finals of UFC 1 and rammed his thumb into Yuki Nakai's eye at Japan Vale Tudo in 1994 I believe - the latter technique was considered especially dirty considering he was like a foot taller and 80 lbs heavier than Nakai or something absurd like that.  Amazingly enough, Nakai still managed to submit him and make it to the finals (after fighting for a combined total of like an hour and with both eyes swollen shut)


I think in UFC 1, eye gouges were not technically forbidden, but they were on a list of techniques that would cause the fighter using them to forfeit a portion of his purse for the fight.

There have been enough instances over the years of fighters (accidentally or deliberately) poking their opponents in the eye without getting immediately disqualified to confirm that in general
a) attacking the eyes can be very effective
b) it's still not any kind of guaranteed win or a substitute for overall fighting ability.

BTW - Gordeau is a scumbag and a psychopath. I'm very glad he retired from MMA after losing his first two fights.


----------



## lklawson

OK, enough of this "Karate does have grappling/Karate doesn't have grappling" bullcrap.

Karateka, please do this; it will help qualify this argument and, hopefully, put to rest the entire thing.

1) Define what "grappling" means in the context of your art.  Please be specific to include standing grabbing & hugging, takedowns, trips & throws, ground wrestling, joint locks & chokes and if they are taught standing or on the ground while wrastle'n.

2) Describe what grappling techniques your art teaches.  A comprehensive or semi-comprehensive list would be helpful.  The name and/or brief description of the technique and, again, if standing or ground wrastle'n.  You know, "Rear Naked Choke, standing & ground," "Arm & Neck hip throw," and "mount and side-control."  That kinda stuff.

3) Describe how the techniques are taught and practiced.  Please include if the techniques are used in sparring and to what extent.

4) Describe when the techniques are taught in the general time-line of a student's training.  Are they taught within the first few lessons or only after a certain belt-grade is achieved?

5) Please describe how often these techniques are trained during the normal course of training, such as "every class," or "a few times a month," or "occasionally during the year," or some similar description.

Thank you.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> I know there was a few minor groin shots and a head butt or two but I don't recall any fighter doing eye gouges or throat strikes in the early UFC. Perhaps you could point some out to me?



John Jones used them pretty effectively. But then he could also fight which is the trick here.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> I know there was a few minor groin shots and a head butt or two but I don't recall any fighter doing eye gouges or throat strikes in the early UFC. Perhaps you could point some out to me?



Throat strikes were permitted in the early UFCs, and even more was permitted in the Vale Tudo fights before that.

Again, the results didn't change much. The same arts that dominate in modern NHB dominated back then as well.


----------



## Buka

Some of the posts here have been telling me what is and isn't in my art. When my art was first practiced, what works in it and what doesn't.

Okay, you smarty pantses, what did I have for lunch today?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

lklawson said:


> OK, enough of this "Karate does have grappling/Karate doesn't have grappling" bullcrap.
> 
> Karateka, please do this; it will help qualify this argument and, hopefully, put to rest the entire thing.
> 
> 1) Define what "grappling" means in the context of your art.  Please be specific to include standing grabbing & hugging, takedowns, trips & throws, ground wrestling, joint locks & chokes and if they are taught standing or on the ground while wrastle'n.
> 
> 2) Describe what grappling techniques your art teaches.  A comprehensive or semi-comprehensive list would be helpful.  The name and/or brief description of the technique and, again, if standing or ground wrastle'n.  You know, "Rear Naked Choke, standing & ground," "Arm & Neck hip throw," and "mount and side-control."  That kinda stuff.
> 
> 3) Describe how the techniques are taught and practiced.  Please include if the techniques are used in sparring and to what extent.
> 
> 4) Describe when the techniques are taught in the general time-line of a student's training.  Are they taught within the first few lessons or only after a certain belt-grade is achieved?
> 
> 5) Please describe how often these techniques are trained during the normal course of training, such as "every class," or "a few times a month," or "occasionally during the year," or some similar description.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



6) Specify what style of karate you practice.
7) If you have experience beyond your own dojo, please give your impression as to whether your answers for 1-5 apply just to your own dojo or are typical of what is widely practiced in your style.


----------



## oftheherd1

Tom21 said:


> It is sometimes said that karate is not the best martial art for self-defense. Many people prefer Krav Maga and Jiu-Jitsu. An incident which occurred  in India this year seems to prove otherwise: A girl which was attacked by two rapists magaged to beat them up so that they fled.
> 
> "The teenager punched them in the face, kicked them where it hurts most, left them bloody, battered and bewildered — and running for their lives. In Madhyamgram, the northern outskirts of Kolkata where molestation and rape are almost an everyday nightmare, the story of a fightback has turned this karate girl into an instant hero. (...)
> Passersby stood stunned. Still no one came forward to help. The battered duo staggered to their feet, got back on their cycles and pedaled away, threatening to teach her a lesson. Local resident Shankari Haldar, who witnessed her in action, said, "I was stunned by her courage. She kicked and punched the youths and they fell flat. But it is unfortunate that they managed to flee. Other girls should also learn martial arts to keep such criminals at bay.""
> Karate Girl Takes Down Would-Be Molesters With Well-Aimed Kicks
> Karate girl kicks her way out of molesters’ clutches - The Times of India
> 
> How can Karate enable a smaller person to overpower two bigger persons? How could she do that? What do you think?





Tez3 said:


> and so it goes on. Style X doesn't work because it failed in an early fixed UFC, style Y is better because 'I' do it and 'I'm' awesome, 'you're' talking rubbish, only 'I' know'. Okay guys, crack on, keep up the good work, in the meantime a young lady has kept her 'honour' and come out unscathed because she defended herself and apart from two other people here, no one cares because it's more important to bicker about style versus style. I'm done with this thread.



Well, I agree, in that I think this thread has degenerated, unfortunately an all too common occurrence.  I even show the OP's original post above.  His last sentence does question Karate's usefulness in overcoming "bigger persons", so I guess some discussion on that is proper. 

I do wonder why there is no great interest the plight of women in that area, or even in the plight of the young lady in question?  That takes up more of the original post than the last sentence.  I also wonder about the OP.  Have we scared him off, or was he trolling?  He has made only that one post.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Buka said:


> Okay, you smarty pantses, what did I have for lunch today?


Sandwiches.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Throat strikes were permitted in the early UFCs, and even more was permitted in the Vale Tudo fights before that.


They were permitted, but were they used?


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> John Jones used them pretty effectively.


Used throat strikes and eye gouges when?


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> They were permitted, but were they used?



I'm not seeing how that is a relevant question. If they were allowed and weren't used, that should indicate that they weren't viewed as effective. On the other hand, maybe they were used, and again, weren't viewed as very effective. 

The point remains; If you lack too many advantages in a conflict, using a bunch of "dirty tricks" isn't going to save your hide.


----------



## ballen0351

lklawson said:


> OK, enough of this "Karate does have grappling/Karate doesn't have grappling" bullcrap


if you feel its bullcrap you know your free to not read it right?


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I'm not seeing how that is a relevant question.



Then why did you bring it up?



Hanzou said:


> If they were allowed and weren't used, that should indicate that they weren't viewed as effective. On the other hand, maybe they were used, and again, weren't viewed as very effective.



That is only two possibilities. On the other hand maybe they were viewed as too effective and that is why they were not used. If they weren't viewed as effective then there would be no need to ban them. If I put a guy down in a self defence situation and I do not stomp my foot through his head is it because I don't think it will be effective or because I don't want to kill him?



Hanzou said:


> The point remains; If you lack too many advantages in a conflict, using a bunch of "dirty tricks" isn't going to save your hide.



One situation's dirty tricks is another situation's survival techniques.

In any case you are dodging the question; When Did Jon Jones use throat strikes and eye gouges? You are a stickler for wanting evidence that is not just anecdotal after all.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Used throat strikes and eye gouges when?



Eyegouged a few guys.  In the ufc.


----------



## ballen0351

drop bear said:


> Eyegouged a few guys.  In the ufc.


poking someone in the eye isn't eye gouging


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Eyegouged a few guys. In the ufc.


Is there a throat strike compilation? But done on purpose.


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Is there a throat strike compilation? But done on purpose.



Not really.  I could find a couple where people got dropped but that would be about it.


----------



## RTKDCMB

drop bear said:


> Not really. I could find a couple where people got dropped but that would be about it.


What about in the early UFC or Vale Tudo? You would probably know where to look more than I do.


----------



## lklawson

ballen0351 said:


> if you feel its bullcrap you know your free to not read it right?


You're missing the point.  For years now there's been an argument, "Karate doesn't have 'grappling' in it."  And Karateka always reply, "Oh yes it does!"  That's what's bullcrap.  The incessant argument.  I want it to go away and replace "Yuh-huh!" "Nuh-ugh" with actual facts.

Now, my personal experience is that the Karateka I've encountered & trained with have limited or no grappling, but maybe I just haven't met the right ones.  Maybe there are lots and tons of Karate styles which include all kinds of grappling.  I'd love for that to be true.  But show me.

Just saying, "feel free to not read" is the same thing as saying, "your experience is indicative of Karate as a whole."  Instead, try answering the question.  Say, "The Sokitume style I study has a list of 12 throws, 10 joint locks, 8 chokes, and 9 ground holding techniques.  We practice them regularly and are required to know and demonstrate an increasing number for each belt-grade test.  We are free to use them after X belt-grade in sparring and people regularly do so."

I'd love to hear that.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> Then why did you bring it up?



I didn't bring it up, YOU did. I said that throat strikes have been legal in older NHB fights, and that never changed the outcome of what the dominant styles turned out to be.

Your questions are silly. Why weren't they used more? Maybe because they weren't effective?



> That is only two possibilities. On the other hand maybe they were viewed as too effective and that is why they were not used. If they weren't viewed as effective then there would be no need to ban them. If I put a guy down in a self defense situation and I do not stomp my foot through his head is it because I don't think it will be effective or because I don't want to kill him?



They were banned when the sport was seeking to expand and become a profitable business. The UFC did the exact same thing since throat shots were perfectly legal in the first UFCs as well. Again, banned because they are dangerous and can lead to some pretty nasty injuries, not banned because they're some super-awesome instant-win technique.



> One situation's dirty tricks is another situation's survival techniques.



It only becomes a survival technique because you lacked the skill to avoid getting placed in that predicament in the first place. If you need to resort to bite, gouge, or claw your way out of a bad situation, you messed up a long time ago. 



> In any case you are dodging the question; When Did Jon Jones use throat strikes and eye gouges? You are a stickler for wanting evidence that is not just anecdotal after all.



Jon Jones wouldn't be outwardly using either since the UFC bans both.


----------



## Balrog

Tom21 said:


> It is sometimes said that karate is not the best martial art for self-defense.


The martial art that works best for self defense is the one that you are proficient in.

*All* martial arts have a foundation in self-defense.  That is why they originally came into being in the first place.  And if we practice with that concept of self-defense in our minds at all times, then stories like that of the young lady will not be uncommon.


----------



## ballen0351

lklawson said:


> You're missing the point.  For years now there's been an argument, "Karate doesn't have 'grappling' in it."  And Karateka always reply, "Oh yes it does!"  That's what's bullcrap.  The incessant argument.  I want it to go away and replace "Yuh-huh!" "Nuh-ugh" with actual facts.
> 
> Now, my personal experience is that the Karateka I've encountered & trained with have limited or no grappling, but maybe I just haven't met the right ones.  Maybe there are lots and tons of Karate styles which include all kinds of grappling.  I'd love for that to be true.  But show me.
> 
> Just saying, "feel free to not read" is the same thing as saying, "your experience is indicative of Karate as a whole."  Instead, try answering the question.  Say, "The Sokitume style I study has a list of 12 throws, 10 joint locks, 8 chokes, and 9 ground holding techniques.  We practice them regularly and are required to know and demonstrate an increasing number for each belt-grade test.  We are free to use them after X belt-grade in sparring and people regularly do so."
> 
> I'd love to hear that.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


why should we?  I train in Karate it has grappling.  Why do I need to prove to you that 2+2=4 it's a basic fact.  And for The little fanboys running around here facts don't matter.  They say in the same post "I've seen arm bars" and "there is no grappling"   when pointed out to them an arm bar is grappling then the goal line moves to well it's not advanced grappling. 
There are several people here that actually train in Karate and say yes we learn grappling,  the ones saying it's not don't even train in Karate.  So I don't care if you find it to be bull crap as i said nobody forces you to be here


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> I didn't bring it up, YOU did.



Technically it was Kempoguy123 who brought it up.



Hanzou said:


> I said that throat strikes have been legal in older NHB fights, and that never changed the outcome of what the dominant styles turned out to be.



So we are stuck at anecdotal evidence then.



Hanzou said:


> Your questions are silly. Why weren't they used more? Maybe because they weren't effective?
> 
> The UFC did the exact same thing since throat shots were perfectly legal in the first UFCs as well. Again, banned because they are dangerous and can lead to some pretty nasty injuries,



So they weren't effective but they were dangerous and can lead to some pretty nasty injuries,? You are contradicting yourself.



Hanzou said:


> not banned because they're some super-awesome instant-win technique.



No one said they were instant win.



Hanzou said:


> It only becomes a survival technique because you lacked the skill to avoid getting placed in that predicament in the first place. If you need to resort to bite, gouge, or claw your way out of a bad situation, you messed up a long time ago.



This is true if you have to resort to ANY physical techniques to get out of a bad situation.



Hanzou said:


> Jon Jones wouldn't be outwardly using either since the UFC bans both.



So then how could he have been 'using them effectively'?



drop bear said:


> John Jones used them pretty effectively.


----------



## lklawson

ballen0351 said:


> why should we?


Because you're the one making the claim.  It should be easy.  Just post the curriculum and the techniques list.  That's often available online now or in a handout.



> The little fanboys running around here facts don't matter.  They say in the same post "I've seen arm bars" and "there is no grappling"   when pointed out to them an arm bar is grappling then the goal line moves to well it's not advanced grappling.


Don't confuse me with someone else.  I'm Kirk, not any other person.  You got a beef with them, take it to them.



> There are several people here that actually train in Karate and say yes we learn grappling,  the ones saying it's not don't even train in Karate.


That's nice.  Please give me the details.



> So I don't care if you find it to be bull crap as i said nobody forces you to be here


I'm just asking for evidence to back up the claim.  That's not such a wild thing to ask for.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Buka

RTKDCMB said:


> Sandwiches.



Son of a gun, you got me. (they were good, too.)


----------



## drop bear

RTKDCMB said:


> Technically it was Kempoguy123 who brought it up.
> 
> 
> 
> So we are stuck at anecdotal evidence then.
> 
> 
> 
> So they weren't effective but they were dangerous and can lead to some pretty nasty injuries,? You are contradicting yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> No one said they were instant win.
> 
> 
> 
> This is true if you have to resort to ANY physical techniques to get out of a bad situation.
> 
> 
> 
> So then how could he have been 'using them effectively'?



I don't think eye gouges and throat punches would have changed the outcome of a ufc fight. Except for the odd time someone just gets caught. (Think Connor McGregor jose Aldo )

Otherwise the dominant fighter generally would have won anyway.

All the setups are the same as striking. All the defences are the same as striking. So you would be hard pressed to be a good striker and a crap throat puncher.

So you would be busting people up for no reason.


----------



## ballen0351

lklawson said:


> Because you're the one making the claim.  It should be easy.  Just post the curriculum and the techniques list.  That's often available online now or in a handout.


not making a claim I'm stating a fact.   You go look for it yourself. 


> Don't confuse me with someone else.  I'm Kirk, not any other person.  You got a beef with them, take it to them.


right, your just the one calling it bullcrap......but you keep coming back


> That's nice.  Please give me the details.
> 
> I'm just asking for evidence to back up the claim.  That's not such a wild thing to ask for.


show me the evidence it doesn't exist.


> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


I don't have a sword


----------



## JP3

Seasoned said, "This of course is your opinion. 

Martial Talk is very well monitored. Members are allowed to have their opinion on a wide variety of topics as long as they stay within the site rules. 

Even though you can have an opinion whether good or bad the fact is you have not been here long enough to render the statement you did, "just sayin"

Actually, I've been here plenty long enough to point this out, yes.  I did not say it was truth, I said it was my opinion.

My thrust was to point out that, in my opinion, this sounds just like tens of thousands of other threads which have no resolution, those about "X art is better than Y style."  As some of your more experienced practitioners in the thread seemed to have indicated, it is the person, the practitioner, that makes the difference.  I grant you, that, too, is my opinion, but I have met 85 year old great grandfathers who have done the movie scene Tai Chi in the park each morning, and they can put the whomp on a body. I've met olt fat guys with knees so bad that they can hardly step onto the mat, but you don't really want to get in range. I could go on, but I expect the point would be lost.

I believe that my actual "point" has been made simply by checking when the initial post in this thread was made, and the pages (7 at current count) is only a few days later. What is it... 3 days. 7 pages? Over a debate about if Karate has grappling included?  Really?  Of course it does, If the instructor wants it to be there.

Is such karate-taught grappling effective? Oh boy, there we go again into one of the great black holes of martial arts debate.  Simply, I would say that yes, if the instructor had a background in grappling, then the instructor would/could teach grappling inside a karate curriculum.  Would it then be "karate?" I have no idea, I only spent 4 years in  karate school, and the style I was in did not do groundwork, or grappling, though there was some throws involved, I would assert that we did not study "grappling" as there was no organized randori, as one experiences in a judo school, but there was some exposure tot he concepts involved.  I can easily see where an instructor could carve out some time each class, or each week, for some ongoing groundwork training. Why not? 

But do they? I've no idea. I went to judo and BJJ to get mine. But that does not indicate that it doesn't exist.

But to say that I have not been "here" long enough to have an opinion?  Hubris, anyone?


----------



## ballen0351

In this extract from his book, “The History of Karate: Okinawan Goju” (May 1996), Morio Hiagonna tells us the tale of a meeting in the 1930s where Jigoro Kano (founder of Judo) and Chojun Miyagi (founder of Goju-Ryu karate) discussed grappling and groundwork in karate:

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


----------



## Buka

In my time in Martial Arts it has morphed greatly. I think it will continue to do so exponentially. There are so many Martial Artists who have experience in so many aspects of fighting arts it blows my mind. You can just look at the people on this forum. Combined, they're like an encyclopedia. And it doesn't matter if they're traditional Artists or not, their knowledge is vast.

My guess is their long time students will have even more knowledge, more experience and be more talented than they are. As will those who train under them as well.

I think a time will come when there isn't an art that doesn't cover everything.
I think Martial Arts are just getting better, all of them. And I think it's fantastic.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

ballen0351 said:


> right, your just the one calling it bullcrap......but you keep coming back


I don't think Kirk was calling the claim that Karate has grappling bullcrap. I think he was saying that it's bullcrap to keep arguing about it when we can't agree on what counts as grappling or what karate we're talking about. It's hard to have a discussion when people aren't using the same terms to mean the same thing.

Rather than going back and forth on whether this or that counts as grappling or how many years you have to train in karate to see the grappling, it makes more sense to say something like:

"Karate style A as it is commonly trained includes a systematic approach to close range grabbing/trapping limbs which may be used to set up strikes or standing armlocks. It also contains about a half-dozen throws and takedowns. It does not include any significant ground grappling. The stand-up grappling is intended for civilian self-defense against an untrained attacker. Most of the grappling is not used in free-sparring, although the foot sweeps may be used. The grappling techniques may be trained cooperatively or in a more free form manner from a "sticky hands" sort of set up."

"Karate style B as I learned it contained significant amounts of standing and ground grappling. However my instructor was also a 4th dan in Judo and may have added methods from Judo into the curriculum."

"Karate style C historically contains an official syllabus which includes 7 throws and 5 standing joint locks. However these methods are commonly neglected and usually not taught until after black belt."

"Karate style D contains a full syllabus of standing arm and wrist locks. However these are always practiced cooperatively and are not used in any form of sparring."

Once we've established basic information like that, then people can argue if they want to about whether these approaches constitute an effective approach to grappling training, but at least we won't be going around in circles about the definition of grappling or arguing about whether you can make generalizations about "Karate" as a whole, given the huge range of arts which fall under that umbrella.


----------



## lklawson

ballen0351 said:


> not making a claim I'm stating a fact.   You go look for it yourself.


How can I?  You've refused to give me any information.



> right, your just the one calling it bullcrap......but you keep coming back


You're still confusing me with someone else.  Again, what I called BS to is the *ARGUMENT* itself; the whole he-said-she-said thing.  It's BS because it doesn't need to exist.  Just post the curriculum and a few easy details and the whole argument goes away.  It's really that simple.



> show me the evidence it doesn't exist.


Prove a negative?  Did you really just say that?  <boggle>

Look, you made a claim.  I *want* to believe the claim.  Just, please, post the details as I asked and end the bullcrap from the supposed "little fanboys" you're complaining about.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

ballen0351 said:


> In this extract from his book, “The History of Karate: Okinawan Goju” (May 1996), Morio Hiagonna tells us the tale of a meeting in the 1930s where Jigoro Kano (founder of Judo) and Chojun Miyagi (founder of Goju-Ryu karate) discussed grappling and groundwork in karate:
> 
> _“When they spoke later Kano Sensei asked, "Are there ne-waza (ground fighting techniques) in karate?" Miyagi explained that there are, along with nage waza (throwing techniques), shime waza (choking techniques) and gyaku waza (joint locking techniques). He then demonstrated some examples explaining the continual importance of harmonizing and focusing the breath. Kano was surprised to find that karate was much more than just punching and kicking techniques, but that it encompassed the depth of a complete martial art."_ – *The History of Karate, Okinawan Goju-Ryu, Morio Hiagonna*


That's nice, but the quote is light on the details I requested.  It's nothing more than someone famous saying, "sure it does."  It doesn't actually give useful information.  Which is exactly like every other post in this thread.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## ballen0351

lklawson said:


> That's nice, but the quote is light on the details I requested.  It's nothing more than someone famous saying, "sure it does."  It doesn't actually give useful information.  Which is exactly like every other post in this thread.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


so your calling 3 of the top Martial Artists of the last 100 years liars......cool


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> I don't think Kirk was calling the claim that Karate has grappling bullcrap. I think he was saying that it's bullcrap to keep arguing about it when we can't agree on what counts as grappling or what karate we're talking about. It's hard to have a discussion when people aren't using the same terms to mean the same thing.
> 
> Rather than going back and forth on whether this or that counts as grappling or how many years you have to train in karate to see the grappling, it makes more sense to say something like:
> 
> "Karate style A as it is commonly trained includes a systematic approach to close range grabbing/trapping limbs which may be used to set up strikes or standing armlocks. It also contains about a half-dozen throws and takedowns. It does not include any significant ground grappling. The stand-up grappling is intended for civilian self-defense against an untrained attacker. Most of the grappling is not used in free-sparring, although the foot sweeps may be used. The grappling techniques may be trained cooperatively or in a more free form manner from a "sticky hands" sort of set up."
> 
> "Karate style B as I learned it contained significant amounts of standing and ground grappling. However my instructor was also a 4th dan in Judo and may have added methods from Judo into the curriculum."
> 
> "Karate style C historically contains an official syllabus which includes 7 throws and 5 standing joint locks. However these methods are commonly neglected and usually not taught until after black belt."
> 
> "Karate style D contains a full syllabus of standing arm and wrist locks. However these are always practiced cooperatively and are not used in any form of sparring."
> 
> Once we've established basic information like that, then people can argue if they want to about whether these approaches constitute an effective approach to grappling training, but at least we won't be going around in circles about the definition of grappling or arguing about whether you can make generalizations about "Karate" as a whole, given the huge range of arts which fall under that umbrella.


great except the people that actually DO train in Karate say it's there I study Goju Ryu we have grappling case closed I know we have it beacause I have done it.  I don't care if Kirk believes it or not.


----------



## Koshiki

lklawson said:


> You're missing the point.  For years now there's been an argument, "Karate doesn't have 'grappling' in it."  And Karateka always reply, "Oh yes it does!"  That's what's bullcrap.  The incessant argument.  I want it to go away and replace "Yuh-huh!" "Nuh-ugh" with actual facts.
> 
> Now, my personal experience is that the Karateka I've encountered & trained with have limited or no grappling, but maybe I just haven't met the right ones.  Maybe there are lots and tons of Karate styles which include all kinds of grappling.  I'd love for that to be true.  But show me.
> 
> Just saying, "feel free to not read" is the same thing as saying, "your experience is indicative of Karate as a whole."  Instead, try answering the question.  Say, "The Sokitume style I study has a list of 12 throws, 10 joint locks, 8 chokes, and 9 ground holding techniques.  We practice them regularly and are required to know and demonstrate an increasing number for each belt-grade test.  We are free to use them after X belt-grade in sparring and people regularly do so."
> 
> I'd love to hear that.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



Honestly, I come from a Korean Karate background, and I'm somewhat familiar with the repertoire of many of the karate and karate-based schools in the area. All of them have grappling. None of them have comprehensive grappling, unless you count schools that _also_ teach a separate grappling art as part of the curriculum.

In my own style, as in most kata based styles, the art is, to a certain extent, what you make it, so I'll take the set of 100 applied techniques that everyone is required to learn and practice and test on, rather than the 381713847183 applied techniques that various individuals in my system practice and train, because otherwise, well, that's just chaos.

Out of one hundred formal applied techniques, the grappling versus striking, and standing versus ground fighting counts are as follows, as offense, as defense, and as an offense to which you are to learn to defend. The count will be extremely rough, and will likely exceed 100, since most of the drills have two or three parts, often with multiple possible classifications. The techniques which involve going to the ground begin at green belt (out of white, yellow, green, red). A swift moving, dedicated adult student should be able to easily reach green belt within the first year and a half:

Standing strikes and parries/blocks/traps/etc:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-|||- FINAL COUNT - 29
Standing kicks and parries/blocks/traps/etc:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 25
Ground fighting strikes and parries/blocks/traps/etc: ||||-||||-|||| FINAL COUNT - 14
Ground fighting kicks and parries/blocks/traps/etc: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Standing armbars/locks: ||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 32
Ground fighting armbars/locks: ||||-||| FINAL COUNT - 8
Standing head controls/chokes (RNC, Guillotine, reverse guillotine, Full nelson, etc.): ||||-||| FINAL COUNT - 8
Grounded head controls/chokes: |||| FINAL COUNT - 4
Standing sweeps/throws:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-| FINAL COUNT - 26
Ground fighting sweeps: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Standing leg locks/bars: || FINAL COUNT - 2
Ground fighting leg locks/bars: || FINAL COUNT - 2
Ground positions (Mount/Guard/Side-Control): ||||-||||-|||| FINAL COUNT - 14
Tackles/bearhugs, etc: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Chair-based striking: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Chair-based grappling: ||||-| FINAL COUNT - 6
Grappling against a wall: ||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 10
Mixed Grappling and striking in a car: ||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 10
Techniques while being dragged: ||||-| FINAL COUNT - 6

I suddenly realize, thinking that this sounds more grappling/ground heavy than I expected, that part way through counting, I switched from classifying entire drills to classifying the requisite pieces, but I'm too lazy to re-do it all.

So, at a very, _very_ rough count, I find that 97 out 100 techniques include some form of striking, so obviously striking plays a large role. However, I also counted, roughly, 137 grappling techniques, both standing and grounded. I counted 129 instances of standing technique, versus only 69 instances of grounded techniques.

Anyway, by this rough count, over half the drills end with at least one partner on the ground, and exactly 1/8th of the drills begin and end with both partners on the ground. 

The primary teachers in the style come from entirely karate backgrounds, with the exception of a little Tai Shing Pekwar in one, and some Taiji Chuan and Bagua in another. I can't say if this level of grappling is typical of many karate schools, but it certainly isn't out of the ordinary around here. I personally haven't worked with anyone who teaches applications mainly of a punch/block nature, with the exception of a Shoalin Kempo Karate place I attended briefly.

I know chair-defenses extend back to early Japanese Karate with the original Shotokan. I'm assuming the car-stuff is slightly newer...

So again, my system is not terribly traditional, (I mean, it's American from Korea from Japan from Okinawa), but it's also not terribly mixed. When I've visited other schools, or otherwise interacted, I never feel like my school is more grapple-heavy, generally speaking.

And yes, it's apparent that we're more strikers than grapplers, and also that we are much more stand-up than ground, and that our ground is mainly anti-ground. But I think it's also fair to say that we _do_ grapple, and that we don't ignore the ground.

Be interesting to see some other Karate-ka TKDers give some rough breakdowns.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

ballen0351 said:


> great except the people that actually DO train in Karate say it's there I study Goju Ryu we have grappling case closed I know we have it beacause I have done it.


I don't even train karate and I agree that Goju Ryu has grappling, based on what I've seen of it.

The problem is that people are using "grappling" to mean different things and that's where a lot of the arguments are coming from*. My definition of grappling is fairly broad. Other people have more restrictive definitions. Rather than going around in circles debating definitions of very broad terms, it makes sense to communicate more specifically what sort of training we're talking about.

*(Much of the rest probably comes from the broadness of the umbrella term "karate", which covers a multitude of different practices.)


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Zack Cart said:


> Honestly, I come from a Korean Karate background, and I'm somewhat familiar with the repertoire of many of the karate and karate-based schools in the area. All of them have grappling. None of them have comprehensive grappling, unless you count schools that _also_ teach a separate grappling art as part of the curriculum.
> 
> In my own style, as in most kata based styles, the art is, to a certain extent, what you make it, so I'll take the set of 100 applied techniques that everyone is required to learn and practice and test on, rather than the 381713847183 applied techniques that various individuals in my system practice and train, because otherwise, well, that's just chaos.
> 
> Out of one hundred formal applied techniques, the grappling versus striking, and standing versus ground fighting counts are as follows, as offense, as defense, and as an offense to which you are to learn to defend. The count will be extremely rough, and will likely exceed 100, since most of the drills have two or three parts, often with multiple possible classifications. The techniques which involve going to the ground begin at green belt (out of white, yellow, green, red). A swift moving, dedicated adult student should be able to easily reach green belt within the first year and a half:
> 
> Standing strikes and parries/blocks/traps/etc:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-|||- FINAL COUNT - 29
> Standing kicks and parries/blocks/traps/etc:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 25
> Ground fighting strikes and parries/blocks/traps/etc: ||||-||||-|||| FINAL COUNT - 14
> Ground fighting kicks and parries/blocks/traps/etc: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
> Standing armbars/locks: ||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 32
> Ground fighting armbars/locks: ||||-||| FINAL COUNT - 8
> Standing head controls/chokes (RNC, Guillotine, reverse guillotine, Full nelson, etc.): ||||-||| FINAL COUNT - 8
> Grounded head controls/chokes: |||| FINAL COUNT - 4
> Standing sweeps/throws:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-| FINAL COUNT - 26
> Ground fighting sweeps: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
> Standing leg locks/bars: || FINAL COUNT - 2
> Ground fighting leg locks/bars: || FINAL COUNT - 2
> Ground positions (Mount/Guard/Side-Control): ||||-||||-|||| FINAL COUNT - 14
> Tackles/bearhugs, etc: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
> Chair-based striking: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
> Chair-based grappling: ||||-| FINAL COUNT - 6
> Grappling against a wall: ||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 10
> Mixed Grappling and striking in a car: ||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 10
> Techniques while being dragged: ||||-| FINAL COUNT - 6
> 
> I suddenly realize, thinking that this sounds more grappling/ground heavy than I expected, that part way through counting, I switched from classifying entire drills to classifying the requisite pieces, but I'm too lazy to re-do it all.
> 
> So, at a very, _very_ rough count, I find that 97 out 100 techniques include some form of striking, so obviously striking plays a large role. However, I also counted, roughly, 137 grappling techniques, both standing and grounded. I counted 129 instances of standing technique, versus only 69 instances of grounded techniques.
> 
> Anyway, by this rough count, over half the drills end with at least one partner on the ground, and exactly 1/8th of the drills begin and end with both partners on the ground.
> 
> The primary teachers in the style come from entirely karate backgrounds, with the exception of a little Tai Shing Pekwar in one, and some Taiji Chuan and Bagua in another. I can't say if this level of grappling is typical of many karate schools, but it certainly isn't out of the ordinary around here. I personally haven't worked with anyone who teaches applications mainly of a punch/block nature, with the exception of a Shoalin Kempo Karate place I attended briefly.
> 
> I know chair-defenses extend back to early Japanese Karate with the original Shotokan. I'm assuming the car-stuff is slightly newer...
> 
> So again, my system is not terribly traditional, (I mean, it's American from Korea from Japan from Okinawa), but it's also not terribly mixed. When I've visited other schools, or otherwise interacted, I never feel like my school is more grapple-heavy, generally speaking.
> 
> And yes, it's apparent that we're more strikers than grapplers, and also that we are much more stand-up than ground, and that our ground is mainly anti-ground. But I think it's also fair to say that we _do_ grapple, and that we don't ignore the ground.
> 
> Be interesting to see some other Karate-ka TKDers give some rough breakdowns.



Thanks for the detailed info. 

I wonder how much that curriculum has evolved over the last two decades, since the advent of the UFC. Prior to that time I had seen (in books, demos, videos, and from visiting classes) plenty of stand-up grappling (throws, armlocks, and wristlocks) from practitioners of Karate and TKD, but exactly zero ground grappling. No mount/side mount/guard. No leglocks on the ground. None of that. The closest would be techniques where the karateka would be standing or kneeling over a downed opponent while applying a submission.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Tony Dismukes said:


> Thanks for the detailed info.
> 
> I wonder how much that curriculum has evolved over the last two decades, since the advent of the UFC. Prior to that time I had seen (in books, demos, videos, and from visiting classes) plenty of stand-up grappling (throws, armlocks, and wristlocks) from practitioners of Karate and TKD, but exactly zero ground grappling. No mount/side mount/guard. No leglocks on the ground. None of that. The closest would be techniques where the karateka would be standing or kneeling over a downed opponent while applying a submission.



This matches what I was taught in the 70's in TKD dojangs. Plenty of joint locks, throws, takedowns, etc. But no rolling on the ground.


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> I don't even train karate and I agree that Goju Ryu has grappling, based on what I've seen of it.


So by default Goju is Karate so Karate has Grappling


> The problem is that people are using "grappling" to mean different things and that's where a lot of the arguments are coming from*. My definition of grappling is fairly broad. Other people have more restrictive definitions. Rather than going around in circles debating definitions of very broad terms, it makes sense to communicate more specifically what sort of training we're talking about.


Grappling is grappling.  The level of advanced techniques may differ but grappling even in its most basic level is grappling. 


> *(Much of the rest probably comes from the broadness of the umbrella term "karate", which covers a multitude of different practices.)


True so when speaking of "Karate" as a whole then if a few styles have grappling like Goju the "Karate" has grappling.  If someone said a specific style dosnt grapple well thats a possibility but "Karate" in general does


----------



## lklawson

ballen0351 said:


> so your calling 3 of the top Martial Artists of the last 100 years liars......cool


Is this how you debate? I didn't call anyone a liar. In fact I specifically said that I hope it's true. What I asked for was specific details which you refuse to give and in fact have told me that I don't have the right to ask for them. Well in fact, I do have the right to ask for them. You made a claim I just want you to give me evidence of the claim. I really do hope that is true I want it to be true. The fact that you gave me a quote by some famous people doesn't give me any more actual evidence. Famous people say famous things. It doesn't prove anything.

<sheesh>


----------



## lklawson

Zack Cart said:


> Honestly, I come from a Korean Karate background,


To be honest, the fist art I studied was TSD.



Zack Cart said:


> In my own style, as in most kata based styles, the art is, to a certain extent, what you make it, so I'll take the set of 100 applied techniques that everyone is required to learn and practice and test on, rather than the 381713847183 applied techniq



Thanks. That's the sort of information I was requesting. 



Zack Cart said:


> Be interesting to see some other Karate-ka TKDers give some rough breakdowns.


I very much hope so.

Peace favor your sword (mobile)


----------



## ballen0351

lklawson said:


> Is this how you debate? I didn't call anyone a liar. In fact I specifically said that I hope it's true. What I asked for was specific details which you refuse to give and in fact have told me that I don't have the right to ask for them. Well in fact, I do have the right to ask for them. You made a claim I just want you to give me evidence of the claim. I really do hope that is true I want it to be true. The fact that you gave me a quote by some famous people doesn't give me any more actual evidence. Famous people say famous things. It doesn't prove anything.
> 
> <sheesh>


Quit crying.  You want to learn go sign up for Goju classes and learn grappling.  Or don't indont care 
 <sheesh>


----------



## lklawson

ballen0351 said:


> Quit crying.  You want to learn go sign up for Goju classes and learn grappling.  Or don't indont care
> <sheesh>


That's about enough of that. <sigh> Meet my ignore list. Congratulations, you're the only poster on MT to ever make it there.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Zack Cart said:


> Be interesting to see some other Karate-ka TKDers give some rough breakdowns.



The seems like it needs its own thread.


----------



## ballen0351

lklawson said:


> That's about enough of that. <sigh> Meet my ignore list. Congratulations, you're the only poster on MT to ever make it there.


NOOOO not the ignore list.  You basically said Kano doesn't know grappling, or Higaonna lied in his book about the meeting so your opinion means nothing to me good riddance


----------



## Skullpunch

ballen0351 said:


> You basically said Kano doesn't know grappling, or Higaonna lied in his book about the meeting



You seriously need to consider looking into a Hooked on Phonics subscription or something.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

ballen0351 said:


> In this extract from his book, “The History of Karate: Okinawan Goju” (May 1996), Morio Hiagonna tells us the tale of a meeting in the 1930s where Jigoro Kano (founder of Judo) and Chojun Miyagi (founder of Goju-Ryu karate) discussed grappling and groundwork in karate:
> 
> _“When they spoke later Kano Sensei asked, "Are there ne-waza (ground fighting techniques) in karate?" Miyagi explained that there are, along with nage waza (throwing techniques), shime waza (choking techniques) and gyaku waza (joint locking techniques). He then demonstrated some examples explaining the continual importance of harmonizing and focusing the breath. Kano was surprised to find that karate was much more than just punching and kicking techniques, but that it encompassed the depth of a complete martial art."_ – *The History of Karate, Okinawan Goju-Ryu, Morio Hiagonna*





ballen0351 said:


> so your calling 3 of the top Martial Artists of the last 100 years liars......cool



I'm not expressing an opinion either way on the accuracy of the quote from Mr. Higaonna's book, but someone certainly could question its veracity without calling anyone a liar.

To start with, we don't have statements here from Kano or Miyagi, so there's no question of calling either one of them liars. We only have what was written by Higaonno. Morio Higaonno was born in 1938, so he was certainly not a first hand witness to this conversation between Kano and Miyagi. Does the book explain exactly what his sources were in learning about the conversation between the two?

To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Higaonno is not a trained historian. He could certainly be honestly mistaken about what was said in a conversation that happened around the time he was born that he learned about second or third or fourth hand decades after the fact. Heck, even a trained historian could be mistaken about such things. Prominent martial artists make misstatements about martial arts history all the time.

BTW - I have no particular reason to doubt Mr. Higaonno's honesty, so I'm assuming that he was recounting the story as he believed it to be true. I should note, however, that prominent martial artists are no less likely to be liars than anyone else.

Personally, I would be more interested in the contents of Higaonno's series of _Traditional Karate-do: Okinawa Goju Ryu _books published from 1985 through 1991, before the advent of the UFC and the increased attention given to grappling. I would assume those would give a pretty good snapshot of Goju-Ryu as it was practiced at that time, including what sort of grappling techniques were taught. I'd be particularly interested in what they show regarding ne-waza. Do you happen to have any of those books in your collection?


----------



## ballen0351

Skullpunch said:


> You seriously need to consider looking into a Hooked on Phonics subscription or something.


Lol ok I'll gets write on it


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm not expressing an opinion either way on the accuracy of the quote from Mr. Higaonna's book, but someone certainly could question its veracity without calling anyone a liar.
> 
> To start with, we don't have statements here from Kano or Miyagi, so there's no question of calling either one of them liars. We only have what was written by Higaonno. Morio Higaonno was born in 1938, so he was certainly not a first hand witness to this conversation between Kano and Miyagi. Does the book explain exactly what his sources were in learning about the conversation between the two?
> 
> To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Higaonno is not a trained historian. He could certainly be honestly mistaken about what was said in a conversation that happened around the time he was born that he learned about second or third or fourth hand decades after the fact. Heck, even a trained historian could be mistaken about such things. Prominent martial artists make misstatements about martial arts history all the time.
> 
> BTW - I have no particular reason to doubt Mr. Higaonno's honesty, so I'm assuming that he was recounting the story as he believed it to be true. I should note, however, that prominent martial artists are no less likely to be liars than anyone else.
> 
> Personally, I would be more interested in the contents of Higaonno's series of _Traditional Karate-do: Okinawa Goju Ryu _books published from 1985 through 1991, before the advent of the UFC and the increased attention given to grappling. I would assume those would give a pretty good snapshot of Goju-Ryu as it was practiced at that time, including what sort of grappling techniques were taught. I'd be particularly interested in what they show regarding ne-waza. Do you happen to have any of those books in your collection?


I don't personally own them but I do know someone that does and have looked at them however never specifically for grappling next time I see him I'll see what they have in them.  I'm not sure the books matter either way since I train Goju with 2 different organizations and we do have grappling in both.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

ballen0351 said:


> I don't personally own them but I do know someone that does and have looked at them however never specifically for grappling next time I see him I'll see what they have in them.  I'm not sure the books matter either way since I train Goju with 2 different organizations and we do have grappling in both.


Does your grappling include newaza? That was the most interesting part to me of the original quote you posted. I've seen Goju practitioners demonstrate standup trapping, arm locks, and takedowns, but I don't recall ever seeing newaza in those demonstrations.


----------



## ballen0351

Tony Dismukes said:


> Does your grappling include newaza? That was the most interesting part to me of the original quote you posted. I've seen Goju practitioners demonstrate standup trapping, arm locks, and takedowns, but I don't recall ever seeing newaza in those demonstrations.


really basic stuff but not like Judo or BJJ what I've learned I stay up off the ground but my opponent is on the ground and I'm controling them from above with arm bars, wrist locks, there is one bunkai where you hold head of an opponent on the ground as you kinda squat down but I also have no where near the knowledge of Goju like many others especially Higaonna who put me on my butt with a finger lock during a grappling portion of a seminar i took with him.    Like I said a few pages back I'm  not entering any Naga comps and winning with the grappling we have in Goju it's more used to set up strikes or to break joints.


----------



## Hanzou

Touch Of Death said:


> Hapkido is cool, and BJJ is a sport, and a dueling art. Dueling arts are nice, but there is an assumption it is, and will always be, one on one.



No one makes the assumption that you're always going to be fighting one person. Bjj adjusts itself for multiple attackers just like any other MA would.

About grappling in Karate;



> So where does all of this leave us? The fact is that there is a huge amount of historical references to karate grappling and in writing this article I was truly spoilt for choice. It was very difficult for me to choose which references to use and which ones to leave out. Interest in karate's grappling methods was certainly greatly amplified by the rise of the UFC and MMA. However, there is no escaping the fact that karate grappling was around for a very long time before 1993. The majority of the texts referenced in this article were published many decades prior to that date. *However, we need to be 100% clear that the grappling of karate is not comparable to the highly skilled grappling exhibited by MMA practitioners. It is, by design, very crude by comparison and as I said in the year 2000 in my Karate's Grappling Methods book, “If your aim is to compete in sport grappling, or to posses the skills needed to out wrestle a trained grappler, then it would be prudent to take up a dedicated grappling art.” *- See more at: Karate Grappling: Did It Really Exist? | Iain Abernethy



That comes from Iain Abernathy (sp?). Makes sense, and explains why you don't see karate practitioners entering grappling competitions with karate "grappling".


----------



## Touch Of Death

Hanzou said:


> No one makes the assumption that you're always going to be fighting one person. Bjj adjusts itself for multiple attackers just like any other MA would.
> 
> About grappling in Karate;
> 
> 
> 
> ".


So, you know, for certain, nobody tries to grapple in a multiple opponent situation?


----------



## Hanzou

Touch Of Death said:


> So, you know, for certain, nobody tries to grapple in a multiple opponent situation?



You can grapple in a multiple opponent situation. The issue is taking someone to the ground in a multiple opponent situation. 

Throwing people onto concrete for example has a very good chance of ending confrontations very quickly.


----------



## Buka

Hanzou said:


> Throwing people onto concrete for example has a very good chance of ending confrontations very quickly.



I think a lot of folks tend to forget this, because we're all used to break fall. Yes, I know people can spring right back up.....sometimes.


----------



## Hanzou

Buka said:


> I think a lot of folks tend to forget this, because we're all used to break fall. Yes, I know people can spring right back up.....sometimes.



Yeah, even on the mat I've landed wrong a few times, and it banged me up to the point where I had to sit out a round or two.

Landing on concrete like that? I'd be out for a few days.


----------



## Paul_D

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

However broad or narrow your interpretation of "grappling" is I think you would be hard pushed to argue that not one single chapter of this book covers something which falls within your interpretation of grappling.  The conclusion therefore is that karate does include grappling. 

Chapter 1 Kata & Bunkai
Chapter 2 The Role of Grappling in Self Defence
Chapter 3 Close Range Strikes
Chapter 4 Throws & Takedowns
Chapter 5 Chokes & strangles
Chapter 6 Arm Bars
Chapter 7 Leg & Ankle Locks
Chapter 8 Neck Wrenches
Chapter 9 Wrist Locks
Chapter 10 Finger Locks
Chapter 11 Ground Fighting Skills
Chapter 12 Fighting Dirty
Chapter 13 Putting it al together
Chapter 14 Sparring
Chapter 15 Conclusion

How much of it you consider "grappling" and how much you do not, is purely a personal choice based on your interpretation of course.


----------



## Hanzou

Paul_D said:


> Karate's Grappling Methods: Amazon.co.uk: Iain Stuart Abernethy, Peter Skillen: 9780953893201: Books
> 
> However broad or narrow your interpretation of "grappling" is I think you would be hard pushed to argue that not one single chapter of this book covers something which falls within your interpretation of grappling.  The conclusion therefore is that karate does include grappling.
> 
> How much of it you consider "grappling" and how much you do not, is purely a personal choice based on your interpretation of course.



Yeah I quoted the author earlier. His statement was that karate grappling was "crude" and if your goal is defeat a skilled grappler, you should take a grappling art.

Considering that karate was supposedly designed to beat down unskilled people, if your goal is to defeat a skilled striker, you should probably take a different striking art as well.

As for grappling coming out of karate and other sources, I eagerly await the day we see Karate, Aikido,Tai Chi, Hapkido, etc. practitioners entering grappling tournaments and doing well.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> if your goal is defeat a skilled grappler, you should take a grappling art.



You mean if your goal is defeat a skilled grappler, *with grappling*, you should take a grappling art?



Hanzou said:


> if your goal is to defeat a skilled striker, you should probably take a different striking art as well.



Yeah because everyone knows that Karate doesn't have any skilled strikers right?


----------



## Hanzou

RTKWCMB said:


> You mean if your goal is defeat a skilled grappler, *with grappling*, you should take a grappling art?



Well, typically trying to punch and kick your way out of a hold or pin is a pretty bad idea, so yeah its usually a good idea to counter grappling with grappling.



> Yeah because everyone knows that Karate doesn't have any skilled strikers right?



Don't shoot the messenger. The stated goal of karate isn't to fight off skilled/trained attackers, its to fight off unskilled ruffians. That's what one of its founders specifically stated. 

So if you just so happen to run across a ruffian trained in boxing I guess you're screwed.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Hanzou said:


> Well, typically trying to punch and kick your way out of a hold or pin is a pretty bad idea, so yeah its usually a good idea to counter grappling with grappling.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't shoot the messenger. The stated goal of karate isn't to fight off skilled/trained attackers, its to fight off unskilled ruffians. That's what one of its founders specifically stated.
> 
> So if you just so happen to run across a ruffian trained in boxing I guess you're screwed.


A boxer's knee will break just like anyone else's. The founder of my Karate, did include skilled attackers. LOL


----------



## Hanzou

Touch Of Death said:


> A boxer's knee will break just like anyone else's. The founder of my Karate, did include skilled attackers. LOL





> One of the first things we need to explore is what type of grappling we are talking about when referring to “karate grappling”. In 1908 the purpose of traditional karate was clearly defined by the great Anko Itosu. In a letter to the Okinawan education authority outlining the nature of karate he wrote, “[Karate] is not intended to be used against a single opponent but instead as a way of avoiding injury by using the hands and feet should one by any chance be confronted by a villain or ruffian”. *What Itosu is telling us is that the original karate was not designed for dealing with a single skilled martial artist in a ring or in the dojo, but is instead a means of keeping ourselves safe in civilian self-protection situations.*- See more at: Karate Grappling: Did It Really Exist? | Iain Abernethy



Like I said, don't shoot the messenger.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Don't shoot the messenger. The stated goal of karate isn't to fight off skilled/trained attackers, its to fight off unskilled ruffians. That's what one of its founders specifically stated.
> 
> So if you just so happen to run across a ruffian trained in boxing I guess you're screwed.


You should know, you're the Karate expert.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> Like I said, don't shoot the messenger.


From the same article written by whoever the manager is:

"Traditional karate grappling does not address a *consensual *fight with a skilled opponent". 

"*This is not to say karate is in any way deficient*. It simply means it was designed for a certain set of circumstances and that we need to be clear on what kind of grappling we are discussing. "

"*Willingly engaging in a grapple means you are in the fight for the long haul* and escape becomes much more difficult"

Karate Grappling: Did It Really Exist? | Iain Abernethy

Maybe if you deliver the whole message then people might not want to shoot you so often.


----------



## Hanzou

RTKDCMB said:


> From the same article written by whoever the manager is:
> 
> "Traditional karate grappling does not address a *consensual *fight with a skilled opponent".
> 
> "*This is not to say karate is in any way deficient*. It simply means it was designed for a certain set of circumstances and that we need to be clear on what kind of grappling we are discussing. "
> 
> "*Willingly engaging in a grapple means you are in the fight for the long haul* and escape becomes much more difficult"
> 
> Karate Grappling: Did It Really Exist? | Iain Abernethy
> 
> Maybe if you deliver the whole message then people might not want to shoot you so often.



It's the same message, I simply cut out the double-speak and excuses.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> It's the same message, I simply cut out the double-speak and excuses.


You mean you cherry picked the parts that supported what you already concluded.


----------



## Paul_D

Hanzou said:


> So if you just so happen to run across a ruffian trained in boxing I guess you're screwed.


Only of you a) do not understand the dynamics of criminal violence, and b) don't understand how Karate is intended to be applied against it and c) are mistaking fighting for self defence.


----------



## lklawson

Paul_D said:


> Karate's Grappling Methods: Amazon.co.uk: Iain Stuart Abernethy, Peter Skillen: 9780953893201: Books


That's helpful.  I've spoken with Mr. Abernethy online several times, though never face to face.  He's reviewed my boxing book in one of his blogs/podcasts, and "recommends" it, as well as allowed me to post links for several of the republished books I've done.   While I, personally, respect his opinion, I am aware that he is something of a lighting rod in the Karate community and there are numerous Karateka who either take what he says with a grain of salt or who outright reject it.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> I eagerly await the day we see Karate, Aikido,Tai Chi, Hapkido, etc. practitioners entering grappling tournaments and doing well.


As soon as they allow kicks and punches


----------



## Spinoza

Okay, this is coming from a complete novice here, but all fighting styles are situational. This helped her in her situation . . . that's what martial arts is supposed to do, right? I don't know much about karate, but at the very least, it seems to me that it provides great groundwork for fundamental striking practices. Who cares if a BJJ fighter could have beaten her in another set of circumstances? She wasn't in those circumstances, and she wasn't fending of a BJJ fighter. Comparing different defensive arts shouldn't be about "my dad could beat up your dad."


----------



## Hanzou

Spinoza said:


> Okay, this is coming from a complete novice here, but all fighting styles are situational. This helped her in her situation . . . that's what martial arts is supposed to do, right? I don't know much about karate, but at the very least, it seems to me that it provides great groundwork for fundamental striking practices. Who cares if a BJJ fighter could have beaten her in another set of circumstances? She wasn't in those circumstances, and she wasn't fending of a BJJ fighter. Comparing different defensive arts shouldn't be about "my dad could beat up your dad."



Well, that was brought up because of the OP asking why Karate was viewed as not sufficient for self defense, while KM and Bjj were.

It had nothing to do with a Bjj fighter being able to beat her, it had everything to do with the question asked by the OP on why Karate is largely viewed the way it is.

As for it providing great groundwork for fundamental striking practices, I disagree (unless you're talking about a Kyokushin or its descendant styles). If you're looking for good fundamental striking practices, look elsewhere.


----------



## ballen0351

Spinoza said:


> Okay, this is coming from a complete novice here, but all fighting styles are situational. This helped her in her situation . . . that's what martial arts is supposed to do, right? I don't know much about karate, but at the very least, it seems to me that it provides great groundwork for fundamental striking practices. Who cares if a BJJ fighter could have beaten her in another set of circumstances? She wasn't in those circumstances, and she wasn't fending of a BJJ fighter. Comparing different defensive arts shouldn't be about "my dad could beat up your dad."


You will see the BJJ crowd likes to butt in on all topics to tell us how great they are


----------



## RTKDCMB

Hanzou said:


> It had nothing to do with a Bjj fighter being able to beat her, it had everything to do with the question asked by the OP on why Karate is largely viewed the way it is.



And the reason why the question was asked was because of misinformation and biased opinion that is presented such as in the following:



Hanzou said:


> As for it providing great groundwork for fundamental striking practices, I disagree (unless you're talking about a Kyokushin or its descendant styles). If you're looking for good fundamental striking practices, look elsewhere.


----------



## Skullpunch

Spinoza said:


> Who cares if a BJJ fighter could have beaten her in another set of circumstances? She wasn't in those circumstances, and she wasn't fending of a BJJ fighter.



I don't recall anyone saying otherwise as a basis for their opinion, and there we come full circle once again to the problem with the witch hunt against bjj/mma "fanboys" that I noticed immediately upon signing up on this board - the classic straw man fallacy.

Look, I agree that Hanzou's opinions can get kind of extreme, but if you think something is ******** the answer isn't more ********


----------



## Spinoza

I apologize for my overreaction, and it certainly was an overreaction and I stand corrected. The person in question used karate for self defense, and it was effective. It has, no doubt, been effective in many other self defense situations. All styles are going to have their strong points and their shortcomings, and every effective use of an art in self defense can be countered with some sort of "Well, if the situation had gone like [insert situations that my art excels at] instead, then [my style] would have been more effective. [Other person's style] just isn't as effective for [insert situations that my art excels at]."

Every martial art has people guilty of this, and that's my point. I'm not on any witch hunt against BJJ/MMA (that insinuation, in itself, is its own straw man fallacy). I have every respect for BJJ. I'd have the same problem if an Arnis practitioner (the only MA I have experience with) had seen a story about someone effectively using BJJ for self defense and countered with, "Yeah, well, if the assailant had a knife . . . "


----------



## Skullpunch

Spinoza said:


> II'm not on any witch hunt against BJJ/MMA (that insinuation, in itself, is its own straw man fallacy). I have every respect for BJJ. I'd have the same problem if an Arnis practitioner (the only MA I have experience with) had seen a story about someone effectively using BJJ for self defense and countered with, "Yeah, well, if the assailant had a knife . . . "



You may not be a witch hunter but you did make a somewhat witch-hunty statement.  No hate, it happens.  One post out of 14 is a much better ratio than some.  It's also worth noting that if you go back and read the op he's the one who brought up jiu-jitsu in a context that basically said "a lot of people like jiu jitsu for self defense but what about karate?"  Questions like that almost beg for someone who thinks jiu jitsu > karate to explain why they think that yet the only person who called him on it was Iklawson way back on the first page, first or second reply iirc.  After that it turned into another deluded witch hunt.


----------



## Spinoza

Skullpunch said:


> You may not be a witch hunter but you did make a somewhat witch-hunty statement. No hate, it happens.


No offense taken. It's a fair observation.


----------



## Finlay

She punched them and kicked them where it counts.... So first off karate doesn't own those particular techniques ... But anyway

The last question how can a smaller person defend against a larger.....

Bucket loads of confidence, if you train hard and you have confidence then it goes a long way to helping you in a situation. I know and know of plenty of people that never used any of their training because they were too scared or psyched out. 

No matter what style you train the techniques are not going to apply themselves, you have to have the mindset to fight.


----------



## Skullpunch

Finlay said:


> She punched them and kicked them where it counts.... So first off karate doesn't own those particular techniques ... But anyway
> 
> The last question how can a smaller person defend against a larger.....
> 
> Bucket loads of confidence, if you train hard and you have confidence then it goes a long way to helping you in a situation. I know and know of plenty of people that never used any of their training because they were too scared or psyched out.
> 
> No matter what style you train the techniques are not going to apply themselves, you have to have the mindset to fight.



There is *some* truth to the confidence argument but if you don't have skills to back them then it won't help, in fact it could easily get you killed.

And true, karate may not "own" dick attacks so to speak but her training most certainly enabled her to attack their dicks with more power and precision. There certainly is some technique to that even if it isn't a cornerstone of the style, imagine an untrained girl just flailing for balls and hoping to get lucky? We could be reading a very different story here.


----------



## Skullpunch

double post


----------



## Tom21

It is interesting that she is doing knee strikes and throws in the video. Is it a special form of karate for self-defense or are these techniques usual Karate moves? I was just wondering because a friend of mine practised karate and he mostly learned kicks and punches.


----------



## Paul_D

Tom21 said:


> It is interesting that she is doing knee strikes and throws in the video. Is it a special form of karate for self-defense or are these techniques usual Karate moves? I was just wondering because a friend of mine practised karate and he mostly learned kicks and punches.


Karate was created for self defence.  Kata is a record of the strikes, throws, joint locks, ground fighting etc for self defence.  Long story short but the block/kick/punch version of karate that became popular is essentially the children's version of karate created by Itosu when karate was introduced to school children.


----------



## lklawson

Paul_D said:


> Kata is a record of the strikes, throws, joint locks, ground fighting etc for self defence.


To you.

There is no consensus, no vast chorus speaking in unison, among experts as to the meaning and intent of kata.  There was a thread around here someone about just this issue.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Paul_D

lklawson said:


> There is no consensus, no vast chorus speaking in unison, among experts as to the meaning and intent of kata.  There was a thread around here someone about just this issue.
> Kirk


Interesting, does a large number of people mis-understdning something change it's purpose?  

If you give someone an ice cream scoop, and they have no idea what it is, and start using it for gardening does it become a trowel, or is it still an ice cream scoop?


----------



## oftheherd1

lklawson said:


> To you.
> 
> There is no consensus, no vast chorus speaking in unison, among experts as to the meaning and intent of kata.  There was a thread around here someone about just this issue.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 
IKLAWSON - Sorry about the using of your name with lower case letters in another post.  I was keying off of what it looked like under your name and in your ID in quoted posts.  I will use all caps from now on since that is what you prefer.

As to your quoted post, I think you are correct that kata/forms isn't always well defined for students.  And maybe for that reason not well understood.  I think it is also possible it is left to students to advance sufficiently to make those types of connections themselves.  I am no expert, since I have only studied one MA that had forms, and I didn't advance very far in it.  My main art does not use forms, but only what we call techniques.  Nevertheless, I thought forms were useful in learning blocks, punches and kicks if nothing else.  I also thought that forms were a way to learn multiple attacker defense.  As I said, I was never an expert.

You have probably seen Bill Mattocks' post below, but if not, and for others who haven't, I am quoting it as I think it is very informative.  I think it describes the learning and adoption of what I always thought of as the essence of martial arts.  Usually, I think it sneaks up on you and one day you realize you are immersed in and living what you have been taught.



Bill Mattocks said:


> I don't hate.  Honest.  And I do try to be polite.
> 
> When I started training, kata was just another thing.  Part of my training.  Required, along with basic exercises and the Japanese terms for our kata and exercises, for promotions.  We were taught, of course, the 'meaning' of the kata we were learning, often known as 'bunkai'.  We practiced kata with partners and without; when we practiced with partners, we practiced the bunkai, with the partner playing the part of the attacker who 'forced us' to do the attack or defense inside the kata.
> 
> It was only later, much later, that my eyes began to open to a fuller appreciation of kata.  I would say 'understanding', but I cannot claim to have any real understanding yet.  There is advanced bunkai, applications that are different than the 'obvious' bunkai for each part of the kata.  That's fun and eye-opening and I love it.  There is a depth to the bunkai that I won't live long enough to fully explore.
> 
> But it goes well beyond that, even though that would be quite enough to keep me busy forever.
> I'm trying to think of an apt analogy, and I'm drawing a blank, but here's a couple that come close.  It's like the difference between being given a mathematical formula for solving a given problem, and being given access to the whole of mathematics, free to more fully understand the solution you've been given, but also to experiment and develop your own solutions, solutions which might be more elegant or work even better for you.
> 
> It comes in bits and pieces, joyful little moments when you apply a technique from a kata, like say tipping an attacker's elbow up slightly while leveraging their forearm down, and suddenly realizing that this flows perfectly into another technique from another kata, even one that is overtly designed to do something else entirely, and it ties into your overall understanding of what the heck it is you're doing.
> 
> It's being in a meeting at work and suddenly realizing you are practicing kata when someone decides to toss and attack your way.  You find yourself accepting, redirecting, off-balancing, and defeating your opponent and only later realizing that you just used your kata to deal with a business issue.
> 
> It is that 'ah ha!' moment when you see an attack coming during sparring and you react with a kata movement that doesn't even (on the surface)  apply to the situation, but yet, it does, and holy cow, it works anyway, because the principle is solid and you've trained your body to do it.  In one specific example, there is a move in Wansu kata where just before the 'dump', you pull your right hand back to your obi, preparatory to digging in and scooping up the opponent's leg; in this case, a punch came towards me and I used that same 'put my open hand on my obi' move to slap his attack down and away from me.  That was actually automatic; I didn't think about doing it, but it worked perfectly and set me up to counter by turning my opponent's body towards me and opening them up.  The basic bunkai of that kata doesn't address any use of that hand other than to place it on your obi and *then* use it to scoop the opponent prior to dumping them.  Yeah, it works for that too.  But the act of just getting your hand to the obi is also a strike/block and boom, there it is in the kata if you spend time thinking about it, and more so if you spend time practicing it.  "It's all in there," as I hear over and over again.
> 
> For me, kata has become everything.  It's more than just my basic exercises encoded into a series of movements that train the hand-eye coordination and create muscle memory.  It is more than just a boring series of things I have to learn to get promoted (actually I don't have any more open handed kata to learn to be promoted, but I'll work on all my kata for the rest of my life and still won't be proficient at them).  Kata is moving meditation, a book of recipes, a tome or storehouse of knowledge that opens when the mind is ready to see the answers.  Kata is my friend and companion on my journey.  I can talk to my kata, my kata talks back.
> 
> It's not mystical or anything.  It's not a religion, nor is it spiritual, at least not to me.  I'm not Japanese or Okinawan, and I don't particularly identify with the culture, I'm American and I think and act like one.  But I recognize that something happened here.  Kata developed for whatever historical reasons, and I have read some things that seem to indicate about as much thought went into it as I would think about how to change the oil in my car (get a bucket, get a wrench, buy some oil, get busy).  But as time has passed, I have found something inside kata that to me represents a much deeper way to think about, well, everything.  How it got there, I cannot say, but it sure does seem to be there.  It's like reading a dictionary; it might seem like a weird pastime, but it sure is fun for those who have learned to take it as a storehouse of knowledge.
> 
> I don't think kata makes me a better karateka or a better fighter or a tough guy or anything at all specifically better, although as I illustrated, it can certainly help me and has done so.  I think kata has opened my eyes to the fact that I am on a journey, one which doesn't have an end, and one which I deeply enjoy traveling.
> 
> So when I say that kata is karate and karate is kata, for me at least, it's true.  It wasn't true in the beginning, but it is now.  Again, for me, and I accept that it's not for everyone.


Please note that I agree with his post, but that doesn't mean anyone else has to do so, and my opinion is in no way binding on anyone else.


----------



## Steve

Paul_D said:


> Interesting, does a large number of people mis-understdning something change it's purpose?
> 
> If you give someone an ice cream scoop, and they have no idea what it is, and start using it for gardening does it become a trowel, or is it still an ice cream scoop?


what if the person using the scoop as a trowel said the same thing?   In his mind, a large number of people are using a trowel to scoop ice cream.  How can you be so sure you're not the trowel guy?

And, another consideration is that if it works as a trowel as well as for scooping ice cream, is either side wrong?


----------



## lklawson

oftheherd1 said:


> IKLAWSON - Sorry about the using of your name with lower case letters in another post.  I was keying off of what it looked like under your name and in your ID in quoted posts.  I will use all caps from now on since that is what you prefer.


haha  I'm not mad, I'm just amused.  It's not the lower or upper case.  My name is Leslie Kirk Lawson.  LKLawson.  When I use it as a username (which is every time), I just lower-case it.  lklawson.  My first initial isn't i, either in lower or upper case.  But many people assume that the first letter is capitalized while the others are lower case.   I apreciate you trying to get it.  Just call me Kirk.    



> As to your quoted post, I think you are correct that kata/forms isn't always well defined for students.  And maybe for that reason not well understood.  I think it is also possible it is left to students to advance sufficiently to make those types of connections themselves.


Well, that's not it, in this case. What I'm pointing out is that multiple very highly ranked and highly studied experts from various lineages simply *DON'T AGREE* with each other on the nature and purpose of kata.  Some say it's a library of techniques, as Paul_D does above, but many others give it some other meaning such as exercise, coordination drills, flow drills, or a form of shadow-boxing.

Fukakoshi himself said of kata, "Once you have completely mastered kata, then you can adapt it to kumite" so clearly he thought it was a great deal more than merely "a record of the strikes, throws, joint locks, ground fighting etc."

So, while I concede that a great many karateka agree that the purpose of kata is that of a library of techniques, again, there most certainly isn't a consensus and I am amused by karateka who pronounce that their belief on the subject is the only correct one and that everyone else is wrong or "misunderstanding."

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson

Paul_D said:


> Interesting, does a large number of people mis-understdning something change it's purpose?
> 
> If you give someone an ice cream scoop, and they have no idea what it is, and start using it for gardening does it become a trowel, or is it still an ice cream scoop?


Apparently Funakoshi thought kata was much more than merely a "record."

Aside from that, I don't feel much like arguing with you.  I wrote that kata as a "record" of techniques is what kata is to *you*, but there are many other (often highly trained and respected) karateka who disagree.  You agree with my statement.  If you think they're wrong, go convince them.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> what if the person using the scoop as a trowel said the same thing?   In his mind, a large number of people are using a trowel to scoop ice cream.  How can you be so sure you're not the trowel guy?
> 
> And, another consideration is that if it works as a trowel as well as for scooping ice cream, is either side wrong?


Because some things just are what they are.  Most of us that actually train Karate and use Kata know its purpose. If a minority of others says its not well....sometimes your just wrong


----------



## ballen0351

lklawson said:


> Fukakoshi himself said of kata, "Once you have completely mastered kata, then you can adapt it to kumite"
> Kirk


Yes once you mastered the catalog of techniques your then able to apply them Im not sure what he saying is any different then most people


----------



## Steve

ballen0351 said:


> Because some things just are what they are.  Most of us that actually train Karate and use Kata know its purpose. If a minority of others says its not well....sometimes your just wrong


This actually made me laugh out loud.. 

Karate guys on this forum don't even agree about kata.  The only consensus ive seen around here is that hanzou is wrong.   No matter what.   Beyond that, you guys are all over the board.  Lol.


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> This actually made me laugh out loud..
> 
> Karate guys on this forum don't even agree about kata.  The only consensus ive seen around here is that hanzou is wrong.   No matter what.   Beyond that, you guys are all over the board.  Lol.


lol then your not reading close enough.  Most of the "Karate guys" on here are,pretty much the same with regards to kata.  But you would not get it anyway


----------



## Steve

ballen0351 said:


> lol then your not reading close enough.  Most of the "Karate guys" on here are,pretty much the same with regards to kata.  But you would not get it anyway


Or maybe You're not reading close enough, and are scooping your ice cream with a gardening tool.  It's really impossible to know for sure.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Steve said:


> This actually made me laugh out loud..
> 
> Karate guys on this forum don't even agree about kata.  The only consensus ive seen around here is that hanzou is wrong.   No matter what.   Beyond that, you guys are all over the board.  Lol.


I noticed that too. LOL


----------



## Paul_D

Steve said:


> what if the person using the scoop as a trowel said the same thing?   In his mind, a large number of people are using a trowel to scoop ice cream.  How can you be so sure you're not the trowel guy?
> 
> And, another consideration is that if it works as a trowel as well as for scooping ice cream, is either side wrong?


I know, it's an interesting thought isn't it.  Does it get to the point where eventually no one is really sure what something was originally for.  And if, like you say, it serves the purpose the person is using it for is it s problem.


----------



## Paul_D

lklawson said:


> Aside from that, I don't feel much like arguing with you.


It wasn't intended as an argument, although I understand why it may seem that way.  I was just asking a question, it was a thought that occurred to me reading your reply.

I'll will try to word things more clearly next time.


----------



## RTKDCMB

Steve said:


> Karate guys on this forum don't even agree about kata. The only consensus ive seen around here is that hanzou is wrong


I don't think it's just the Karate guys.


----------



## ballen0351

Steve said:


> Or maybe You're not reading close enough, and are scooping your ice cream with a gardening tool.  It's really impossible to know for sure.


nonsense


----------



## mdavidg

It works if it helps to save your life. 

There was a story in news a few years back. Two sisters who had been studying TKD for several years received an unwelcome guest. Someone broke in through their bedroom window. Not being able to see the attacker the two girls subdued the man quickly. Want to guess who the unwelcome guess was? Their martial arts instructor. He had been strapped for cash and was casing houses in the neighborhood. He had no idea the house he was breaking into was one that housed two of his students.


----------



## Phobius

mdavidg said:


> It works if it helps to save your life.
> 
> There was a story in news a few years back. Two sisters who had been studying TKD for several years received an unwelcome guest. Someone broke in through their bedroom window. Not being able to see the attacker the two girls subdued the man quickly. Want to guess who the unwelcome guess was? Their martial arts instructor. He had been strapped for cash and was casing houses in the neighborhood. He had no idea the house he was breaking into was one that housed two of his students.



Does that mean TKD is best used in self defense?


----------



## Paul_D

Phobius said:


> Does that mean TKD is best used in self defense?


Clearly not, as giving you address details to TKD instructors results in home invasion ;-)


----------



## RTKDCMB

mdavidg said:


> It works if it helps to save your life.
> 
> There was a story in news a few years back. Two sisters who had been studying TKD for several years received an unwelcome guest. Someone broke in through their bedroom window. Not being able to see the attacker the two girls subdued the man quickly. Want to guess who the unwelcome guess was? Their martial arts instructor. He had been strapped for cash and was casing houses in the neighborhood. He had no idea the house he was breaking into was one that housed two of his students.


Was he a bad instructor for breaking into his student's home or was he a good instructor for training his students to be able to beat him? .


----------



## Phobius

RTKDCMB said:


> Was he a bad instructor for breaking into his student's home or was he a good instructor for training his students to be able to beat him? .



At least he taught self defense by practise.


----------



## Tonita Rervant

Salute to the girl and respect for here. 

Every foreigner knows about this situation while going to India. I will personally prefer to teach martial arts training in Indian schools for the betterment of the girls. But if you will see the situation in the schools, students are only interested in sitting on facebook and surfing pages blatantly.


----------



## MaxRob

I respect karate in all it's variations,I have studied some and personally find Kajukembo  also having a Karate base situationally effective ,as  can be Krav Maga.
I am glad these punks were sorted.
However the situation is never the same, facing a high pain threshold person is v tricky, where it hurts, hurts much less, a rare encounter but a reality that can lead to a nightmare come true.
I would not rely  entirely on painful blows , but use them to prepare,(as many can use them to their advantage,) for follow up with knockout blows aimed at neck or head/ etc. where such dangerous opponents are put out cold.
Again the question is very situational,a trained attacker can attack so varied  an untrained attacker can throw in the unexpected because of speed and so on.
In any case I am pleased these punks were given what they deserved.
But it does not always work that way despite ones martial arts knowledge. Things can go both ways.
I remember many years ago a dear friend of mine a teacher of martial arts, I was a young fellow then and respected her, one night we were called to hospital, she was attacked by two men,intent in stealing from her, she put up a fight but lost and what they did I cannot mention here.
Things don't always workout one way.


----------



## Deleted member 34973

I would say, it is great for self defense.


----------



## Paul_D

Guthrie said:


> I would say, it is great for self defense.



I'm not sure why you bothered to dig up an old thread when your post adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.

Why would you say it's great, what brings you to this conclusion?


----------



## Deleted member 34973

Paul_D said:


> I'm not sure why you bothered to dig up an old thread when your post adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.
> 
> Why would you say it's great, what brings you to this conclusion?


#1 I didn't realize it was an old post until after I commented.
#2 It's a simple answer to a simple question.
#3 Simply because Karate teaches one to stay in the fight at close range.
#4 Why the condescending attitude?


----------



## Paul_D

Guthrie said:


> #1 I didn't realize it was an old post until after I commented.
> #2 It's a simple answer to a simple question.
> #3 Simply because Karate teaches one to stay in the fight at close range.
> #4 Why the condescending attitude?



The purpose of the forum is discussion.  It defeats the purpose if everyone just posts simple answers to simple questions without explaining their reasons for holding those opinions.

I understood your statement regarding on karate, but I do not understand the thinking behind it, because you made no attempt to explain your statement.   Hence I ask you to explain why you hold the opinion you hold.  Asking questions is how people learn, I know no other way than finding out why you hold the opinion you hold other than to ask you to explain it (well, that and the Vulcan mind meld).  I may of course chose not to agree with you, but that doesn’t mean I am not interested in understanding _why_ you hold certain opinions.  That is I believe the purpose of why we are all here?

Not everything is a challenge or an insult that needs to be met with aggression.


----------



## KenpoMaster805

Karate is just sim[y the best it works as a self defense and a weapon


----------



## Kickboxer101

KenpoMaster805 said:


> Karate is just sim[y the best it works as a self defense and a weapon


There's no such thing as a best martial art


----------



## Historyofkarate

I believe its more about the person than the style of martial art... So, yes. Karate can be very effective!


----------

