Does karate need to evolve?

[Barry Drennan]

As I understand karate and it’s history, there’s been a constant fluidity and evolution of karate and what would eventually be known as karate.
However it seems to me that by and large karate has stagnated.

Sure there’s some people doing some new stuff like kudo, but even that came around in ‘81.
We’ve got karate combat, but if you look at the comments there’s supposed ‘karateka’ all over their videos saying “this isn’t karate” so it’s hard to say there’s any major evolution happening within the karate community as a whole.

I was an early subscriber to the Karate Culture YT channel, and don’t hold modern karate against those who enjoy it. However the question about the lack of ‘middle age group’ people, not the young kids and not the 40+ crowd in karate shows that karate is falling behind in some metrics.
Sure targeting children will keep dojos open and the style alive as some of those kids will be lifers themselves, but that’s a survival via life support imho.

I believe for karate to have a renaissance and have a chance to thrive again, there need to be some changes that occur. Changes that require some people to become students again to learn new ways of doing things.

I think a style that offers 3 K training side by side with honest pressure testing can exist. I think pointing fighting dojos can exist while karate combat style dojos also become more common, heck I believe one dojo can successfully do both.

The one thing I believe most of all is this idea of never changing ‘traditions’ that are largely less than a century old is going to kill karate especially in the west.

Do sharks need to evolve? Hammerheads were the last of the modern shark families to evolve, and did so in the Cenozoic. Their evolution date is estimated at between 50 and 35 million years ago. Why? Because they are perfect for there purpose.

Karate (like every other method/system) evolved its approach to addressing humans (which themselves haven't evolved in over 35000+ years). It is quite feasible that for its approach it (Like the shark) has reached it's apex.

Often our desire for change in a system is actual a desire to reintroduce parts of other branches (e.g. joint-locks) back into e.g Karate.

Remember all fighting was at one time one method which over time hyper-sub-diversified into a "zillion (lol)" methods which now through the lens of MMA have started to remix again.

When querying change, one must ask themselves if it is evolution they want or some degree of reunification.

 

[GojuTommy]

Do sharks need to evolve? Hammerheads were the last of the modern shark families to evolve, and did so in the Cenozoic. Their evolution date is estimated at between 50 and 35 million years ago. Why? Because they are perfect for there purpose.

Karate (like every other method/system) evolved its approach to addressing humans (which themselves haven't evolved in over 35000+ years). It is quite feasible that for its approach it (Like the shark) has reached it's apex.

Often our desire for change in a system is actual a desire to reintroduce parts of other branches (e.g. joint-locks) back into e.g Karate.

Remember all fighting was at one time one method which over time hyper-sub-diversified into a "zillion (lol)" methods which now through the lens of MMA have started to remix again.

When querying change, one must ask themselves if it is evolution they want or some degree of reunification.

If you think modern karate as a whole is ‘perfect’ or at its apex then you’re delusional everything can improve.

 

[GojuTommy]

I would suggest making an honest assessment of your position....

You have two things that Karate needs to change. You are challenging everyone here to open our minds to see these new points, and to accept them. Hopefully, the entire Karate community will accept these new changes.

Your first change is that Karate needs to be open to new techniques. You are right. You are 100% right. Karate does need to bring in new and evolving techniques. This idea is so right and so correct.... that the founders of the different styles of Karate, made this same point. In fact, they built there styles of Karate as a framework, to be able to use those new and evolving techniques. So, this change you are asking for, is not in fact a change... it was there from the beginning. Have there been schools and teachers and students that missed this point? Absolutely. A good way to tell if someone is missing this piece in their understanding is if they view kata as a dictionary of techniques, and restrict an art to only the techniques found in the kata.

Your second change is to add more pressure testing and resistance to the training. Again, you are correct. Again, you are so right, that the founders already did this. Many, many schools have pressure testing, resistance testing in all kinds of different ways. Again, some schools, teachers or students missed or strayed from this.... The way to tell if a person has missed this part of the training, is that they think Karate does not have this type of training.

In short, you are asking us to open our minds to accept these new changes you propose. The reality is that these are not new changes at all, but core to the art of Karate already. But if it helps... you are correct, Karate should make these changes.... so much so that the founders made karate that way.

Yes the founders of various styles agreed with me 100yrs ago, and now karate has grown stagnant and sad.

 

[Barry Drennan]

If you think modern karate as a whole is ‘perfect’ or at its apex then you’re delusional everything can improve.

Thanks for the insult and attitude. Perhaps you could identify where you see further evolution is required?

 

[wab25]

Yes the founders of various styles agreed with me 100yrs ago, and now karate has grown stagnant and sad.

That is quite the blanket statement you made right there. Given the enormous number of Karate schools and practitioners out there today... I am not sure that there is any blanket statement that you could make about them that would be accurate. (aside from "they study / train karate")

Interestingly, you have heard from a number of folks here, who study Karate, and agree with the way the founders set it up. And we have mentioned the many different schools, instructors and Karateka, who feel likewise. Does your blanket statement also cover those of us that do agree with founders in these areas and who actively train in this way?

The only Karateka that have grown stagnant, are the ones that think that the Kata defines the techniques of the system and who do not understand the learning method, that kata is a part of.

 

[GojuTommy]

Thanks for the insult and attitude. Perhaps you could identify where you see further evolution is required?

I’ve stated where I see karate’s short comings in the modern world several times here now.
You can go back and reread the other posts as I’ve grown tired of repeating myself

 

[Tez3]

Thanks for the insult and attitude. Perhaps you could identify where you see further evolution is required?

His basic complaint is that karate isn't MMA.

 

[drop bear]

His basic complaint is that karate isn't MMA.

It could be if you tried.

 

[Tez3]

It could be if you tried.

I do karate and MMA why would I want to try to make karate like MMA? Why go through life with one hand tied behind your back limiting what you learn?

 

[Barry Drennan]

I’ve stated where I see karate’s short comings in the modern world several times here now.
You can go back and reread the other posts as I’ve grown tired of repeating myself

I'll pass. There are other conversations more rewarding.

 

[Darren]

Kinda sounds to

As I understand karate and it’s history, there’s been a constant fluidity and evolution of karate and what would eventually be known as karate.
However it seems to me that by and large karate has stagnated.

Sure there’s some people doing some new stuff like kudo, but even that came around in ‘81.
We’ve got karate combat, but if you look at the comments there’s supposed ‘karateka’ all over their videos saying “this isn’t karate” so it’s hard to say there’s any major evolution happening within the karate community as a whole.

I was an early subscriber to the Karate Culture YT channel, and don’t hold modern karate against those who enjoy it. However the question about the lack of ‘middle age group’ people, not the young kids and not the 40+ crowd in karate shows that karate is falling behind in some metrics.
Sure targeting children will keep dojos open and the style alive as some of those kids will be lifers themselves, but that’s a survival via life support imho.

I believe for karate to have a renaissance and have a chance to thrive again, there need to be some changes that occur. Changes that require some people to become students again to learn new ways of doing things.

I think a style that offers 3 K training side by side with honest pressure testing can exist. I think pointing fighting dojos can exist while karate combat style dojos also become more common, heck I believe one dojo can successfully do both.

The one thing I believe most of all is this idea of never changing ‘traditions’ that are largely less than a century old is going to kill karate especially in the west

Sounds to me like you don’t sweat enough and not sore enough after a good workout or training session.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

As I said much more pressure testing is one of the big ones.

I don’t see any specific tradition as harmful, I see the mindset of some in which a super strict and rigid following of tradition is harmful.
The fact that so many shy away from grappling, to focus on striking only because it’s “traditional” would be an example

I personally intend to move to a BJJ style advancement system rather than the traditional testing periods, as I have found the 2 most common testing methods to be flawed.
1. Batch testing everyone regardless of time training or in rank.- makes newer people particularly kids feel bad when they don’t pass because of lack of time training.
2. Inviting only those who are actually ready to test- if you’re giving them the opportunity to rest hopefully it’s because you believe they’re ready for the next level. In which case why not just promote them instead of making them jump through extra hoops?

Most of this is my view. I will add a response to #2: because it's harder that way. Some of what we (some of us who teach) do is not directly about fighting/martial skill. Some of it is just personal development. It could be done in sports and other areas, as wel - we just choose to do it within martial arts. So some things we do are just about what the person gains by doing those things.

 

[Steve]

Not exactly wrong but not 100% correct either. Your perception on kata is one dimensional and rudimentary. The truth is much more complicated. Kata is a structured action pattern that spans multiple levels of muscle memory that is purposely repeated in order for the brain to gain and engrain embodied knowledge. Embodied knowledge repeated overtime moves from the cognitive parts of the brain to the deeper more automated structures. It can actually change the way the mind works.
Here is something to blow people's minds.. MMA has kata so does firearm practice and a million other things that people want to get good at. It's called repetition. The only reason naysayers don't see that and think it's different is because they are too busy looking at the wrong things. Koryu kata for many styles is short one technique actions. What many people see as kata, are the long forms of Chinese styles, which by strict definition wouldn't be called kata now would it. So if I practice a katana draw and cut, it is kata. If I practice my Glock 9mm draw and fire, that is kata too. If I practice a double leg take down into an arm bar,..guess what it's kata. In fact judo used to have a structured practice of throws called (drum roll please) KATA.
Now going back to the Chinese forms, there are reasons for the long sequences of strung together techniques. On a techical level, It has to do with how individual moves link together. Like how a good BJJ practioner sets up moves and is "playing chess". One move is sequenced after another until the final move is achived. The Chinese arts in many cases were able to formalize not just the individual technique but also the transitions and available options. But that's just the technical reasoning. There is a lot more to it. Chinese forms were ment to be exploratory. It was the Japanese that introduced the "kata shouldn't change" mindset. The Japanse were in pre WWII mindset of military conforming doctrine.
In my view it's not that karate hasn't evolved and needs to change to be better. I just think on the whole the practitioners just suck and are superficial. Much like how the bulk of kids now leave high school and can't read and write. ( speaking only for the USA, I have no knowledge of other countries)
As MMA and armed self defense evoles and changes the more I look at those changes and say to myself, yeah that's not really anything new, it's been around a long time. There is nothing new under the sun.

excellent post. Overall I agree. But just on the mma and other things have kata stuff, I’m not sure I agree with that. Kata is a very specific subset of the repetitive training you mention. It’s highly ritualized. It’s definitely true that most (if not all) activities fill this need for repetitive drills in some way, I don’t think most people would call all of that kata.

Or maybe they would.

 

[Steve]

That's an odd thing to claim. What's your wrestling/boxing experiences?

Both are basically freestyle kata. It's just a sequence of events dude, using certain forms. That's how you recognize an art...its form and dynamics.

Like an etude, musicians use the same method to get really good at specific things that need to be played fast and repetitive, like arpeggios.

This is a kata developed by Chopin for strengthening the right hand.

View attachment 29212

This is

I’ve been around this forum for a long time and heard a lot of definitions of kata. This thread seems to be applying the loosest, non traditional definition I’ve ever heard.

 

[Oily Dragon]

I’ve been around this forum for a long time and heard a lot of definitions of kata. This thread seems to be applying the loosest, non traditional definition I’ve ever heard.

Oh I know. That's part of the problem, also why some CMA Quan fa "kata" (fist sets in the CMA world) are very graceful and fluid and widowmaker HIIT routines, and other kata like traditional Okiwana sets (some of which are related) look, to the modern eye, fixed and rigid, and range in energy from many karate dojos today (kids, hobbyists, etc.), to competition level athletic quality.

In other words, there's a huge spectrum that took centuries to produce, and is still evolving.

But when I practice Taming the Tiger in the Pattern 工 (a very common, basic, and physically grueling Southern Shaolin fist set), it's no different really, than this shadow wrestling drill in the pattern 十 (that's 10 in Chinese), except that I'm also throwing strikes, level changing, jumping, falling, ripping, pulling, pushing, and generally having a blast while I condition my body.

Right now I'm closing in on a 0.1 calorie burn per lb per minute doing this type of training. Which is a lot. Kata rules.

 

[hoshin1600]

excellent post. Overall I agree. But just on the mma and other things have kata stuff, I’m not sure I agree with that. Kata is a very specific subset of the repetitive training you mention. It’s highly ritualized. It’s definitely true that most (if not all) activities fill this need for repetitive drills in some way, I don’t think most people would call all of that kata.

Or maybe they would.

This is judo kata. Each throw is a different kata.

This is iaido sword kata, there are 7 different kata in this clip.
These are true japanese kata. These types of kata existed long before the term was applied to karate forms. So how can the term kata be defined as a long sequence of movements in the way most people define the word?

I'm not saying kata is not long forms, I'm just trying to point out that the long Chinese form style past down to Okinawa is not the defining characteristics. It's more about the training methodology.

 

[hoshin1600]

How is this not kata? Is it any different than the iaido practicing the cut? He explains the concepts, imagine he is talking about karate. First practice shot is at 4:30 mark if your impatient.

 

[Steve]

This is judo kata. Each throw is a different kata.

This is iaido sword kata, there are 7 different kata in this clip.
These are true japanese kata. These types of kata existed long before the term was applied to karate forms. So how can the term kata be defined as a long sequence of movements in the way most people define the word?

I'm not saying kata is not long forms, I'm just trying to point out that the long Chinese form style past down to Okinawa is not the defining characteristics. It's more about the training methodology.

Cool videos. I've seen the judo kata many times over the years, but the sword kata is fun to watch.

I don't have a problem with however folks want to define it. I will just say that most folks I know are ambivalent to kata. I am only skeptical when folks start asserting that the muscle memory imparted by training kata teaches one how to fight in lieu of application, rather than in support of application. This seems so obvious as I write it, but there are definitely some cats on this forum who train forms with a mystical reverence. And to be clear, that's totally fine, but it's probably not imparting as much benefit as they might think.

 

[drop bear]

I do karate and MMA why would I want to try to make karate like MMA? Why go through life with one hand tied behind your back limiting what you learn?

Answered your own question.

 

[drop bear]

How is this not kata? Is it any different than the iaido practicing the cut? He explains the concepts, imagine he is talking about karate. First practice shot is at 4:30 mark if your impatient.

Maybe most gun fighting is garbage. For precisely that reason.