does karate include grappling

[stanly stud]

And what, precisely, are "throws and takedowns" if not grappling?

Oh, and you might be surprised as to just how familiar much of it is to judo, various jujutsu systems, and so on....

Yeah & what will you do on the floor. Most karate stricke the guy on the floor look at shotokan sweeps always ended with a punch or kick. Now in a real fight you can't always assume your going to do this one stricke killer makiwara blow..
People can fight on there are normally several blows exchanged. Especially if he's on drugs alcohol. Then He grabs you pulls you down. It's a scuffle on the cobbles your striktes go out The Windows. See what I'm saying?? Have you ever had a fight? Not like in a Dojo.

 

[Chris Parker]

Yeah & what will you do on the floor. Most karate stricke the guy on the floor look at shotokan sweeps always ended with a punch or kick. Now in a real fight you can't always assume your going to do this one stricke killer makiwara blow..
People can fight on there are normally several blows exchanged. Especially if he's on drugs alcohol. Then He grabs you pulls you down. It's a scuffle on the cobbles your striktes go out The Windows. See what I'm saying?? Have you ever had a fight? Not like in a Dojo.

Oh dear.... seriously? You're coming with "have you ever been in a fight?" Really?

Look, you're conflating terminology, and mis-applying it, as well as completely missing the question itself, and what grappling actually is.

Grappling means "methods of seizing, holding, grabbing, including controls, locks, throws, holds, pins, and so on". It is distinct from striking, which is the percussive application of impact against a target utilising parts of the body (fist/foot, head, etc). That's it. You can grapple on the ground, and you can strike on the ground. You can strike standing up, and you can grapple standing up. You can use both as transitional methods between the ranges/contexts, in both directions.

The question is "Does karate include grappling?". Not "Does karate include ground combat methods?". Nor "Does karate not strike on the ground?". Or, really, anything else you're implying. And the answer to that, if you understand what grappling actually means, is clearly "yes". There's no further aspect to it.

The deeply flawed argument of "but what are you gonna do?" (Hulk Hogan? Ha!) is frankly pointless, as it's not a part of the question at all. Saying "but there's a different context and situation that the art is not designed around" is meaningless... karate is karate, it's not whatever you want to decide it should be about.

And, to be completely clear, you have no clue who you're talking to regarding this topic.... yes, I've been in fights. No, I don't train in karate (I did when I was younger). Yes, I train in grappling systems, specifically older ones. Yes, I've trained in modern ground systems as well. Is any of this relevant? No. Do I see what you're saying? Yes. You're saying you don't know the argument or what the terminology means.

 

[stanly stud]

Oh dear.... seriously? You're coming with "have you ever been in a fight?" Really?

Look, you're conflating terminology, and mis-applying it, as well as completely missing the question itself, and what grappling actually is.

Grappling means "methods of seizing, holding, grabbing, including controls, locks, throws, holds, pins, and so on". It is distinct from striking, which is the percussive application of impact against a target utilising parts of the body (fist/foot, head, etc). That's it. You can grapple on the ground, and you can strike on the ground. You can strike standing up, and you can grapple standing up. You can use both as transitional methods between the ranges/contexts, in both directions.

The question is "Does karate include grappling?". Not "Does karate include ground combat methods?". Nor "Does karate not strike on the ground?". Or, really, anything else you're implying. And the answer to that, if you understand what grappling actually means, is clearly "yes". There's no further aspect to it.

The deeply flawed argument of "but what are you gonna do?" (Hulk Hogan? Ha!) is frankly pointless, as it's not a part of the question at all. Saying "but there's a different context and situation that the art is not designed around" is meaningless... karate is karate, it's not whatever you want to decide it should be about.

And, to be completely clear, you have no clue who you're talking to regarding this topic.... yes, I've been in fights. No, I don't train in karate (I did when I was younger). Yes, I train in grappling systems, specifically older ones. Yes, I've trained in modern ground systems as well. Is any of this relevant? No. Do I see what you're saying? Yes. You're saying you don't know the argument or what the terminology means.

Look mate.. You Sound Butt hurt here. I am not against karate you Just do not understand real ground work. Look this below is cool in a Dojo but this is assuming he lets you Keep a distance to kick or do your techniques. A grappler will close the distance fast. Trust me that's how it goes. Exactly what gracie did. All this springing around and combatitive Sport karate stuff is no use if a guy comes in fast and knows how to grapple. Trust me if you fought me i would not just stand there like a dope waiting for you to react..

 

[Chris Parker]

Son, I'm not "butt-hurt", nor am I a karate practitioner... and, yes, I do understand ground work. I also understand that ground work is a particular context for one approach to grappling, and is not the entirety of the concept of grappling... something you're missing in my comments (at least twice now).

The point is that you're applying a false qualifier to the actual question. It's disingenuous, at best. And meaningless when it comes to any kind of argument you think you're applying against me. And if we're doing the whole "if you fought me" thing, trust me, you have no idea what would happen... but that's irrelevant to this conversation.

 

[stanly stud]

Check this out. This would probably be closer to a street fight. I am not saying bjj is better or judo. I loved wado ryu but mate grappling is another world from what you're talking about.

 

[Chris Parker]

Sigh.... have you tried reading what I've actually said? "This is closer to a street fight!" So what? Who said anything about application in a fight at all? Grappling isn't just one thing, dude... and the question is only whether or not karate includes grappling itself. The answer is yes. Deal with it however you want. But trying to apply a wide array of additional contexts and definitions that don't actually come up in the question in the first place is meaningless. You may have loved Wado-Ryu, but it's meaningless to anything you've written.

 

[stanly stud]

Sigh.... have you tried reading what I've actually said? "This is closer to a street fight!" So what? Who said anything about application in a fight at all? Grappling isn't just one thing, dude... and the question is only whether or not karate includes grappling itself. The answer is yes. Deal with it however you want. But trying to apply a wide array of additional contexts and definitions that don't actually come up in the question in the first place is meaningless. You may have loved Wado-Ryu, but it's meaningless to anything you've written.

Can write long winded posts which are meaningless to me.. It is what it is on the streets.

 

[Chris Parker]

Can write long winded posts which are meaningless to me.. It is what it is on the streets.

So.... no, you can't read them... or, at least, be bothered reading. Great.

Grappling is more than ground work.

Karate has grappling (holds, locks, pins, chokes, escapes, throws, sweeps, takedowns).

End of question.

The idea of karate having ground work is not a part of it.

The idea of "I think this is what a fight is" is not part of it.

If you're not going to bother to read the other side of the argument, yours is completely without credibility.

 

[stanly stud]

So.... no, you can't read them... or, at least, be bothered reading. Great.

Grappling is more than ground work.

Karate has grappling (holds, locks, pins, chokes, escapes, throws, sweeps, takedowns).

End of question.

The idea of karate having ground work is not a part of it.

The idea of "I think this is what a fight is" is not part of it.

If you're not going to bother to read the other side of the argument, yours is completely without credibility.

Look Watch the two Videos it saves me writing long winded posts. Look at it. Maybe then you understand.

 

[Chris Parker]

I've watched the videos. Read the actual argument, and realise you're arguing against something not being said.

 

[stanly stud]

I've watched the videos. Read the actual argument, and realise you're arguing against something not being said.

If you can't see a vast difference in the Videos then you're not wanting to understand me. I am sorry i can't help you. I just hope you don't get beat up or worse teach your students your theories.

 

[Chris Parker]

Wow. Dude.

One more time.

I am not a karate practitioner.

Grappling does not equal ground work. The fact that you can't see that is your lack of knowledge on the subject.

Karate has grappling (locks, pins, holds, takedowns, throws, sweeps). The fact that you don't know that is your lack of knowledge on the subject.

There is no claim of a broad ground fighting syllabus. That's your complete lack of knowledge on the subject.

There is no discussion of what "works in a fight". That's your strawman, and not a part of the question or discussion.

This is a discussion forum.

Read the discussion.

If you're unwilling to do that, you're in the wrong place.

You have exactly no idea of what I teach (hell, I haven't even said I do teach to you yet....). You have no idea of what "my theories" would be there. You have no clue who you're talking to. And you are unwilling to take thirty seconds to learn.

 

[stanly stud]

Wow. Dude.

don´t call me Dude..ok?

I am not a karate practitioner.

probably why you are talking such rubbish.

 

[Chris Parker]

don´t call me Dude..ok?

My first instinct was to call you a child... is that better?

probably why you are talking such rubbish.

You have no idea what you're talking about, and are arguing a strawman with no basis in the actual discussion... but you think I'm talking rubbish.... right....

 

[stanly stud]

My first instinct was to call you a child... is that better?



You have no idea what you're talking about, and are arguing a strawman with no basis in the actual discussion... but you think I'm talking rubbish.... right....

I am just laughing at your meltdowns on this thread with other people too.
sound like a kid in your moms basement

 

[Chris Parker]

Then you're really clueless.... but really, a major point of advice. This is a discussion forum. If you don't want to read the discussion, leave.

 

[stanly stud]

Then you're really clueless.... but really, a major point of advice. This is a discussion forum. If you don't want to read the discussion, leave.

why because you think you´re an expert? you can´t be wrong? wow..a real meltdown.

 

[Chris Parker]

No, because that's how discussion forums work. Without it, there's no reason for you to be here. And you're talking to staff at the moment, fyi.

 

[stanly stud]

No, because that's how discussion forums work. Without it, there's no reason for you to be here. And you're talking to staff at the moment, fyi.

i don´t care who you are. you are taking a tantrum like a kid. I told you my opinion you just think you know better. are you making a threat now?
telling me not to discuss anything more because you´re upset?& a mod get a life.

 

[Chris Parker]

Sigh.... no, I'm simply suggesting that, if you can't follow the most basic of behaviours for a forum, you are not exactly adding value. Additionally, each comment you have made (video or not) has been countered, but you refuse to even read the responses... and you think I'm acting childishly? You're basically sticking your fingers in your ears and complaining that you're being told you're wrong. And you are.

And, yes. I do know better.