How does the future look

[MJS]

Hello, You may have to look at the defination of Kata's VS, practicing movements like "jab, jab,duck, cross" is NOT call a Kata! Yes they can be preset training movements

BUT IS NOT CALL a Kata? ....Muay Thai practice many preset movements in the rings BUT IS NOT CALLED A Kata?

One day you will see the difference and know the difference....practicing is NOT A KATA? .....

PLease tell me your meaning and difference between the two thoughts of practicing technques and KATA training? I know they are almost the same....there is a difference "hence" call two different things......

Many times when we are taughts certain things? ...we believe it to be true? ..Kata....will the future...show it truth to our training? or is there a better way?

Again...this is my feelings.....on this Aloha

Marching bands practicing formations....this is NOT CALL a KATAS?

I think theres still some confusion here. Did you read my posts at all?? As I said, while they're not called kata, I said that they (the boxing combos) are preset patterns just like a kata. A kata is a preset series of movements. Boxing combos, again, while they're not called kata, are preset movements. When I grapple, I work on a pinflow series. I transition from one position to the next. Ex: Guard, side mount, etc. Again, its not called a kata, but its a preset pattern of movements, just like a Karate kata.

Different name, similar meaning.

 

[MJS]

Judo Kata
http://judoinfo.com/katamenu.htm

Kata
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kata

Kata (型 or 形, literally: "form"?) is a Japanese word describing detailed choreographed patterns of movements practiced either solo or in pairs.

Once again, while punches are not called kata, they are a choreographed pattern of movements.

 

[Cirdan]

Kata, form, pattern, drill.. they are all the same thing; a series of movements designed to teach techniques building upon core principles of whatever art you are doing.

Here is a typical drill I used to run my riflemen trough when I was in the army: Soldier equipped with standard gear and five clips with one round each starts the drill on one knee behind cover. On "go" he emerges from cover, advances ten yards, drops to the ground, rolls, loads his weapon and fires at the target. He then changes clips and fires another round. Repeat last step three more times. Drill over, inspect the weapon (and target). End.

This may seem very simple and even unrealistic(why would a soldier carry only one round in each clip?) but it takes you trough some very very important movements. Changing the clip must be done in a specific way to take as little time as possible while staying as close to the ground as possible. Each clip is taken from a different position on the belt, requiering different grips on the wepon. Breathing must be controlled etc. After many many times doing this drill you will KNOW how to do this and to adapt, not needing to REMEMBER it.

If this is not a kata, tell me why.

 

[Brother John]

People will realize that they're typing more about kicks, punches, locks and maneuvers than actually doing them. They'll look at their hands and realize that the only calouses left are on the tips of their fingers and the base of their palm where their typing hands rest on the desk. They'll stand up and resolve to DO more martial arts than TALK martial arts....
and they'll follow through.


The martial arts world would be re-born...


if that happened.

Your Brother
John

 

[Independent_TKD]

Boxing jab, jab, cross etc...is NOT A KATA..and is NOT call KATA or practice like a KATA? ...not too sure how to explain the difference here? HELP!

Still Learning, you are absolutely correct about kata. No matter how much evidence you present, you will never convince the die hards. Kata are only useful as an artistic element like dance, nothing more.

I choose not to emphasize forms. The typical response from TMA is that I don't understand the hidden meanings in the forms. At this point I just laugh. I practice several martial arts, but I still teach TKD. Forms are not required for promotion. Student can learn them if they choose.

If other practicioners want to devote such large amounts of valuable training time to kata, that's on them. But no matter what, they will never see your point of view on this.

 

[MarkBarlow]

Kata can be useful to explore intricate details of techniques. Mark Burton refers to kata as technique in a perfect world, the attack is expected and known beforehand, the response is practiced and relaxed. It allows a student to gain a deeper understanding of why he's doing particular moves.

The older I get, the more respect I have for it. Kata practice allows middle aged or older students to train with a degree of intensity that randori or sparring provided earlier. I'm about to turn 50 and can't/won't bang heads as often as I did 30/20/10 years ago. Doing kata, I can still toss and get tossed with power and speed but with greater safety. It's not a complete replacement for randori but it supplements the training. On the other hand, too great an emphasis on randori leaves gaps that kata can fill. A balance is ideal.

 

[exile]

Still Learning, you are absolutely correct about kata. No matter how much evidence you present, you will never convince the die hards. Kata are only useful as an artistic element like dance, nothing more.

Die hards like the people who actually know how to carry out bunkai, and apply them in combat situations? Like Geoff Thompson, Lawrence Kane, and Peter Consterdine, who have been involved in several hundered violent physical conflict each as part of their security careers, and stress the role of kata in encoding effective combat scenarios? Guys like Iain Abernethy, who can show in detail how every subsequence of the Pinan katas has combat application? Guys like the ones who I gave substantial references to, with a sample of the relevant work, in my post here?

See, the problem is, I_TKD, the only evidence on the table right now is from the people who have demonstrated, in their research and their applied careers, the utility of kata. Neither you nore S_L have done anything more than said, no, it's no use. Your arguments suggest someone who claims that a certain mathematical technique can't possibly solve a given physics problem.

`But look', someone says, `in this paper, So-and-so solves exactly that problem with that technique'

`No, no', you intone, `it can't be done, it's just hopeless...'

`And six other people have done the same thing with similar problems', the other guys protests. `Look, here are the references...'

`No, no, can't be done...'

It's always the same. We present evidence to back our arguments, and all you guys come back with is, nope, sorry, can't be done... :lol:

That's OK. You've made up your mind, and we won't try to confuse you with facts!

 

[Independent_TKD]

Neither you nore S_L have done anything

Now I am not famous or well known, but I (like many others with a similar perspective) have done plenty in out training to prove this view. I don't have to go out and write a book about it. Take the long forward stance seen in most kata systems (as just one example).

Never once have I assumed that stance in sparring or in self-defense while executing a rigid middle block or other stilted technique. In all of the real fights I've seen, I have never seen anything remotely similar to kata movement effectively employed. It just will not work in a real confrontation. I've learned this the hard way. If you don't want to believe that, there's nothing I can say.

It's like a kid who wants to learn basketball. You get him on the court and insist he run down the court with his back stiff and straight, dribbling with his elbows. This make absolutely no sense. The kid should practice exactly (or as close to it as is safe) how he will be expected to perform in the game.

Art for art sake is fine. I just have a problem with instructors claiming that kata are some how essential to learning a martial art or self-defense. They aren't. The physical combative techniques are essential. The kata and forms are simply artistic expressions. If you were attacked in real life, could you honestly say that you would employ kata? Of course not. You would rely on the techniques you use in sparring and self-defense. That fact alone proves my point clearly.

 

[still learning]

Still Learning, you are absolutely correct about kata. No matter how much evidence you present, you will never convince the die hards. Kata are only useful as an artistic element like dance, nothing more.

I choose not to emphasize forms. The typical response from TMA is that I don't understand the hidden meanings in the forms. At this point I just laugh. I practice several martial arts, but I still teach TKD. Forms are not required for promotion. Student can learn them if they choose.

If other practicioners want to devote such large amounts of valuable training time to kata, that's on them. But no matter what, they will never see your point of view on this.

Hello, Thank-you......Aloha

 

[Cirdan]

Never once have I assumed that stance in sparring or in self-defense while executing a rigid middle block or other stilted technique. In all of the real fights I've seen, I have never seen anything remotely similar to kata movement effectively employed. It just will not work in a real confrontation. I've learned this the hard way. If you don't want to believe that, there's nothing I can say.

I`ve used things I learned from Kata quite sucessfully in self defense. If you don`t want to believe this there is nothing I can do since I do not have a stick of dynamite to open your closed mind. Perhaps Kata is not for you anyway.

Kata is a tool, a great one if understood and used properly. However it is not a requirement to envolve as a student of the arts. One of the two styles I train in myself does not use Kata, the other emphasize it over all other all other aspects of the art. The well known line "Your skill should flow from the Kata" does not mean Kata are uber-deadly strings of techniques. Kata are designed to teach important principles of movement, balance, rooting, entering etc which when understood and made part of your every move will enable you to adapt to any situation. Stating that Kata are stiff and useless is very false, they should be just the oposite.

 

[terryl965]

Now I am not famous or well known, but I (like many others with a similar perspective) have done plenty in out training to prove this view. I don't have to go out and write a book about it. Take the long forward stance seen in most kata systems (as just one example).

Never once have I assumed that stance in sparring or in self-defense while executing a rigid middle block or other stilted technique. In all of the real fights I've seen, I have never seen anything remotely similar to kata movement effectively employed. It just will not work in a real confrontation. I've learned this the hard way. If you don't want to believe that, there's nothing I can say.

It's like a kid who wants to learn basketball. You get him on the court and insist he run down the court with his back stiff and straight, dribbling with his elbows. This make absolutely no sense. The kid should practice exactly (or as close to it as is safe) how he will be expected to perform in the game.

Art for art sake is fine. I just have a problem with instructors claiming that kata are some how essential to learning a martial art or self-defense. They aren't. The physical combative techniques are essential. The kata and forms are simply artistic expressions. If you were attacked in real life, could you honestly say that you would employ kata? Of course not. You would rely on the techniques you use in sparring and self-defense. That fact alone proves my point clearly.

I have to chime in here Ok, Kata can not teach you self defense: are you kidding me. Kata has so many SD principles in them, PLEASE take the time to understand what Kata's will do and will not do. I have been oer sea's to train and here in the states what Kata does is make you think what each and every techniques can do for you in any stituation.. I really on what works for me and if you really solely on your Sd and sparring techs. then you are mis-informed about that as well. Sparring techs. are just that for sparring nobody hits anybody with everything they have when sparring or in tournaments so it is worthless in real life and PLEASE again do not give me this crap you only do real life SD. Because if that is the case do you prsctice against a real loaded gun Hell no that would be like a stupid thing to do.

Now if you cannot see the value in Kata's then that is fine but do not say what you do not know. I beleive Kata is the foundation to one SD techs. and you can see them in every aspect of people when they spar or do SD movements.

This is facts and not in anyway opinion.:asian:

Have a wonderful day.

 

[Independent_TKD]

do not give me this crap you only do real life SD

That's why I said you get as "close to it as is safe". Even with the Bulletman, you aren't going to break the guy's knee. Be realistic.

Guys, I'm trying to be sensible and this argument can go round and round forever. Here is my last comments on this board:

If you want to be a dancer, you dance. If you want to be a good painter, you pant. True, you cannot actually fight full contact with no regard for your training partners safety. But, you should always make your training as realistic as is safely possible.

I view it as learning water safety. When you go in to learn water safety, your instructor isn't going to actually drown you, but he will get you very close. This is the only way you will learn what it's like and how to realistically respond. If you just go though slow choriographed movements in the shallow end only, you will never really know how to properly respond to the stress and unpredictability of a real problem.

Now, if you want to be good at kata, practice kata. That is the primary result of such practice. By practicing kata, you won't build realistic reactions to realistic attacks. You will simply be good at kata.

End

 

[MarkBarlow]

I'm more than willing to admit that some people may not receive a benefit from kata (for whatever reason) but it would be nice to have that benefit of the doubt granted back to me. If I say kata helps me, who can say it doesn't?
I've got 31+ years of training, studied under some fantastic teachers and traveled all over North America, Great Britain and the Carribbean to teach and train so it shouldn't be much of a stretch to say I might have gotten something out of some aspect of training that you missed. If your training focused on different aspects of self defense than mine, I'm sure you've got insights I don't. Just don't be disrespectful of what helps me.

 

[MJS]

Still Learning, you are absolutely correct about kata. No matter how much evidence you present, you will never convince the die hards. Kata are only useful as an artistic element like dance, nothing more.

I choose not to emphasize forms. The typical response from TMA is that I don't understand the hidden meanings in the forms. At this point I just laugh. I practice several martial arts, but I still teach TKD. Forms are not required for promotion. Student can learn them if they choose.

If other practicioners want to devote such large amounts of valuable training time to kata, that's on them. But no matter what, they will never see your point of view on this.

Well, others have chimed in, but hey, I may as well too. Its been my experience, that the majority of people who dismiss kata, is because they don't understand the meaning of it, look at it like a dance, such as yourself, and feel its useless. I was the same way for a while. My first instructor taught kata, but didn't have a clue as to what the meaning of it was. A typical conversation went like this:

Me: "What are we doing with this move here?"
Instructor: :"Well, we do this move because...because thats the way its done."

Doesnt sound like a good explaination to me.

Art for art sake is fine. I just have a problem with instructors claiming that kata are some how essential to learning a martial art or self-defense. They aren't. The physical combative techniques are essential. The kata and forms are simply artistic expressions. If you were attacked in real life, could you honestly say that you would employ kata? Of course not. You would rely on the techniques you use in sparring and self-defense. That fact alone proves my point clearly.

Hmmm...we may never get attacked with a gun or knife, but yet we still train those defenses right? As for employing kata if attacked in real life...no, you're not going to act out the kata as if you would in the dojo, however, as I said, if one understands the applications, maybe, just maybe, they can be extracted and used.

Keep in mind, just like punches, kicks, SD, etc., kata, are just one piece of the puzzle. If you choose to not put much faith in it, thats fine. However, is it fair to do your students a dis-service because you don't like them? Maybe one of your students may find them useful to them.

 

[exile]

Now I am not famous or well known, but I (like many others with a similar perspective) have done plenty in out training to prove this view.

You've done plenty to prove that something that others have actually done isn't possible?? Your training proves a negative claim—that because you haven't figured out how something could work, it therefore can't work? :lol:

I don't have to go out and write a book about it. Take the long forward stance seen in most kata systems (as just one example).

Never once have I assumed that stance in sparring or in self-defense while executing a rigid middle block or other stilted technique.

This makes my point exactly, both about kata interpretation and about your evident unfamiliarity with the past ten years of research on kata analysis. In a kata, a `long forward stance' encodes projection of your weight into a lock, or pin, or some other pivot point where you've forcibly controlled your attacker. With even a slight bit of familiarity with bunkai analysis, you would recognize that the application of weight forward and downward in such a situation, which forces the attacker's lower body downward and into range of your `down block' (downward hammerfist strikes) or `middle knifehand blocks' (now knifehand strikes to the attacker's lowered, exposed throat), is part of familiar, brutal street-effective techs that have nothing to do with poses, and everything to do with leverage to drive a trapped, controlled attacker to the ground. But since you do not have that familiarity, you take the standard kata description, the one that Itosu himself described as the `children's kata', as literally true. See... oh, hell, see all or any of the stuff I referred you to in my previous posts, so that you can finally get some idea of how it's really done.

And if you were to write the book that you say you wouldn't have to, what would be in it? What could be in it, except your report of your own failure to discover any combat utility in kata? How on earth could you possibly show, in a book of any length, that such utility did not exist? And if someone presents a detailed description of kata applications showing that such applications do in fact exist, isn't the burden of proof then on you to show what's wrong with their analysis? Yet you haven't shown anything of the sort; in fact, I_TKD, you haven't presented a single argument, a single bit of actual evidence, other than some vague appeals to supposedly self-evident facts that in reality represent just another restatement of your own opinion, with no external support. Read on...

In all of the real fights I've seen, I have never seen anything remotely similar to kata movement effectively employed. It just will not work in a real confrontation. I've learned this the hard way. If you don't want to believe that, there's nothing I can say.

I believe you, because what you say makes it clear that you have the view of kata that the people who've written about realistic bunkai, people like Abernethy, Thompson, Kane & Wilder, Patrick McCarthy and Rick Clark, hold up as an example of the unfortunate effect of the `children's interpretation' of karate kata (and as Stuart Anslow and Simon O'Neil further demonstrate, of TKD hyungs as well). You are reflecting the view of stances that Okinawan schoolchildren were taught, under Itosu's deliberate disguising of the application of kata, which he himself in his later writing acknowledged and defended as appropriate for children. But he also observed that adults had the responsiblity to learn the true applications and use of these moves, including the `stances', and Abernethy has a whole chapter in his book Bunkai Jutsu about how stances correspond to forcing projections of weight, pivots in kata actually encode the twisting components of throws, and so on. And you are altogether unfamiliar with any/I] of this work, quite clearly.

It's like a kid who wants to learn basketball. You get him on the court and insist he run down the court with his back stiff and straight, dribbling with his elbows. This make absolutely no sense. The kid should practice exactly (or as close to it as is safe) how he will be expected to perform in the game.

No. It's not like that at all. It's more like, you are given a sentence in Pig Latin, and you insist on looking up `amscray', `irlgay' and `ookbay' or whatever in the dictionary and not finding the words there, and then trying to tell this kid that Pig Latin is just a series of meaningless noises. And the kid is laughing his head off at you.

Art for art sake is fine. I just have a problem with instructors claiming that kata are some how essential to learning a martial art or self-defense. They aren't. The physical combative techniques are essential. The kata and forms are simply artistic expressions. If you were attacked in real life, could you honestly say that you would employ kata?

You bet I would. I'd employ the tactics I've trained, based on kata, to follow up a throat counterstrike to an attacker's grab (`rising block') with a kick to the knees (`middle kick') followed by a hairpull or earpull to pull the attacker's head down into range where I coud deliver a palm-heel strike to his face or jaw. That combat sequence is implict in Palgwe Ee Jang, btw. You've been doing TKD for how long? It shouldn't be news to you, and wouldn't be, if you were familiar with O'Neil's analysis of the fighting scenarios implicit in Taegeuk Il Jang, lifted in much of its content from that Palgwe. Or with Abernethy's or Kane & Wilder's versions of the kaisai no genri, referring to the theory of kata decoding that was known, from way back, to be the final level of training sophistication in dojo MA education. All of these guys present, defend and illustrate no-nonsense rules of kata-to-combat interpretation, rules you very clearly haven't encountered before. And yet you project complete certainty that such rules don't exist. Exactly like the guy who claims that a certain mathematical method cannot solve a particular problem in mechanics, when the application of the method to yield just that solution has, unbeknownst to him, been in print (in several different versions, and repeatedly confirmed) for ten years or so, just as I was saying in previous post.

Of course not. You would rely on the techniques you use in sparring and self-defense. That fact alone proves my point clearly.

Your technique here is to state what would happen according to your own—unfortunately pretty incomplete—understanding of the katas, and then cite this scenario as a fact. But it's not a fact; it's your own restatement of your own point of view, uninformed by the last decade of combat-oriented work on kata analysis. Guys who've seen more streetfighting in a month than you have likely done in your whole life, people whose applied combat careers are matters of public record, have described in detail how their fighting strategy and tactics are guided by the principles encoded in the kata... and here you are again, saying, `No, it can't work, I can't picture it working based on my understanding, so by that fact, it clearly can't work.' The alternative, of course, is that your understanding of bunkai, and the training of the oyo derived from bunkai in `alive' protocols, with nearly all-out simulation of violence is... seriously uninformed.

You aren't familiar with any of the work I've referred to, with the way in which groups like the British Combat Association have shown bunkai for classical kata to be devastatingly effective in street defense,.... any of it. Why pretend otherwise? I think it will be fairly clear to people reading this thread that you have no evidence for your point of view, that there is a vast body of experimental research on the effectiveness of kata-based techs that you're not aware of, and that your posts and still_learning's posts refuse to engage that evidence because, based on your own refusal to confront this work, it has to be be concluded that you know nothing about it. But in both Karate and Taekwando, this movement is the wave of the future, more and more work is being done on both the method of deciphering the combat applications of kata and training those applications in real time under realistic condition, and the fact that—as your posts overwhelmingly suggest—you know nothing about it, doesn't change that fact.

 

[newGuy12]

Okay, I tried to add to the reputation of user 'exile', but a dialogue box popped up in my face (right in the nose!) and rudely corrected me -- I must spread some reputation around before doing that.

So, I will say this here, and take the heat if I'm out of line (wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last).

I, for one, want to say THANK YOU SIR! for bringing this to light! I have known that there are VERY DEEP meanings in these poomse (from time to time, not too often, our SabumNeem would show a single one -- but we would not ask questions, it did not feel very appropriate to question).

I will take advantage of these resources and learn from them! This knowledge was not so open at one time. This has evidently changed (it could have been widespread all along, and I just was not aware of it). This changes things, a lot!

Wishing that I didn't shoot all my "rep rounds" already, but thats the breaks, get you soon. Yes, as soon as people become aware of this, they will be studied very intensely, you can bet on that!

This is a very interesting thread!



Robert

 

[still learning]

Hello, The many discussions on the use of Kata's is good....it shows there are many who questions it's purpose....and there is reasonable amount of of questions to ask?

One have to look what is the purpose of Kata training....and why other sports do not have them? if it teaches one to train by themselves? If it works for martial art training? then the princples should apply to other ACTIVE....boxing, muay thai, wrestling,rugby, and etc...FBI, CIA, SEALS training? .....????

Remember Kata is a preset movements.(develop for that time period)...different from practiceing your techniques in one step,two step, and so on! Which is not call Kata!

All fights are fast,furious,unpredictable,anything goes,NO RULES,NEVER IN KATA FORMS of fighting...

Remember the way you practice? ...is the way you will fight? Kata's have technques that you can use...I agree with this......100%.....BUT NO one fight like how Kata preset forms....You keep practice turning after a punch...because you done it 1000 times (Heian shodan)....What will happen in a real fight?

I will NOT be able to change you mind....nor will you be able to change mines.....

The future of martial arts will change...just like time...you see so many NEW ARTS forming and developing...for the modern world.

In the future?....sciencefic studes will prove or disaprove the princples of Kata's ...........

PS: For my next testing...in Universal Kempo...I am require to learn : Pinion NO.5 form and one bo staff Kata,nuchaku no.1 (the improve new one) Our Pinion 5 is kempo style with some nice chinese flowing movements....and also remember the others that was taught to us! (required) .....like it or not! .... need to learn it!

Aloha ....it is OK for you to disagree....I like eating chocolate Icecream...other's may perfer...Mango? ..Lichee?...(hawaiian flavors)...

IF Kata was black and white...there would be little discussions....It is NOT cut and dried.....

 

[MJS]

Remember the way you practice? ...is the way you will fight? Kata's have technques that you can use...I agree with this......100%.....BUT NO one fight like how Kata preset forms....You keep practice turning after a punch...because you done it 1000 times (Heian shodan)....What will happen in a real fight?

Can you show me in any of my posts, where I said that you will do kata in a fight just like you'd do it in the dojo? I do not believe you will see that in anything I said. In fact, I said just the opposite.

I will NOT be able to change you mind....nor will you be able to change mines.....

Hmm..well, all I and a few others are trying to do, is show you that there is more than one view. You're so set in your ways, you refuse to see anything but you still refuse to show any proof, such as exile said. You say that kata are no good, but offer no reason why.

PS: For my next testing...in Universal Kempo...I am require to learn : Pinion NO.5 form and one bo staff Kata,nuchaku no.1 (the improve new one) Our Pinion 5 is kempo style with some nice chinese flowing movements....and also remember the others that was taught to us! (required) .....like it or not! .... need to learn it!

Question for you. You say you need to learn these katas. My question is: Do you understand them? Not just being able to do the moves, but do you know what the moves are for? Has your inst. taught that to you?

 

[exile]

Okay, I tried to add to the reputation of user 'exile', but a dialogue box popped up in my face (right in the nose!) and rudely corrected me -- I must spread some reputation around before doing that.

Hey, Robert, I appreciate the thought, very much. What would give me the most pleasure, though, is if you were to explore the matter yourself by checking out some of the serious literature that has appeared on the analysis of forms, and their hard-edged combat applicability, and found a way to integrate that information into your own training. I'm just a student, trying to learn as much as I can about the technical content of my art, just as you (and most of us on MT, I suspect) are. My personal explorations in the documented history of the KMAs, and their roots in Okinawan karate, made it clear to me at one point that even over important distances in space and time, the technical thinking that led to the formation of hard-linear Okinawan striking systems (which then made their way to Japan, and ultimately to Korea and then North America, where we benefit from them) was crucial to understand, if I were to make any sense at all of the fact that the kata of karate and the hyungs of TKD have the form they have, as vs. some other. When I learned about how Anko Itosu deliberately repackaged the many techniques of the karate he had inherited and elaborated, so that a multifaceted fighting system of robust brutality had become camouflaged as nothing but block-punch-kick-pivot in order to ensure its acceptance as part of the Okinawan school curriculum in 1905, it was like a light coming on.

I, for one, want to say THANK YOU SIR! for bringing this to light! I have known that there are VERY DEEP meanings in these poomse (from time to time, not too often, our SabumNeem would show a single one -- but we would not ask questions, it did not feel very appropriate to question).

I will take advantage of these resources and learn from them! This knowledge was not so open at one time. This has evidently changed (it could have been widespread all along, and I just was not aware of it). This changes things, a lot!

Robert, don't thank me; instead, I'll thank you, if you just go ahead as you indicated and look into some of these sources. Here's my own preferred minibibliography for getting into this stuff:

• The Abernethy book, Bunkai-Jutsu: the Practical Application of Karate Kata, the single best MA book I've read (and I've read my share!)—the most clearly written and carefully reasoned, and, page for page, the most informative one ever, showing not merely a bunch of facts, but a set of interpretive principle which will allow you, given enough patience and determination, to see the combat utility of virtually any of the classic kata. Abernethy has a remarkable grasp of how the history not just of karate but of other Asian (and Western) MAs yield insights into the self-defense principles underlying kata, and how these principles can be systematically extracted by application of a small number of simple, but not necessarily obvious rules (e.g., the rule that the `retraction chambering' movement of the nonstriking hand almost always corresponds to an anchoring or dragging motion applied to one of the attacker's limbs, pulling him into your own strike or anchoring him in place, and rarely has anything to do with the standard idea of chambering as `winding up' for the next strike). The one problem with this book: it usually takes a longish time to receive after you order it. Amazon does a reasonably good job, but it still takes too long. But it's worth it. If I only were allowed to keep one book out of my MA collection, it would be that one, no contest.

• Abernethy's article in the April 2007 Black Belt issue, pp.98–103, entitled `Making kata work: three ways to boost the benefit you're getting from your kata training', which presents a condensed version of his story on both kata analysis and realistic live training of the combat principles derivable from those kata.

• Any of Abernethy's thirty-six on-line articles, downloadable for free, no strings attached at all, from his website here, along with his equally free series of articles on the street-ready SD techs inherent in the Pinan kata set. Just go and look around there to see the depth and breadth of the material he covers rationally, articulately and thoroughly... and doesn't charge you a dime for...

• Stuart Anslow's book, Ch'ang Hon Tae Kwon Do Sul: Real Applications to the ITF Tuls, an application of Abernethy-style bunkai methods to the ITF hyungs. I don't do ITF TKD, but the book is still an eye opener. Even better, I think, is...

• Simon O'Neil's great series of newsletters, Combat_TKD, which you can sign up for here; they would be worth it at three times the price. And later this year or early next year, he'll be publishing a full-scale book on the combat interpretations of TKD hyungs, covering both KKW and ITF forms. Of all the exponents of Abernethy's methods, O'Neil is I believe the most gifted. If you want to see his combat intelligence in action, get hold of the November 2005 Taekwondo Times and look at his article `Kicking in Self-Defense: a practical re-evaluation', which gives you some idea of how he approaches the problem of reconstructing the inherent SD content of a range of TKD hyungs.​

Okay Wishing that I didn't shoot all my "rep rounds" already, but thats the breaks, get you soon. Yes, as soon as people become aware of this, they will be studied very intensely, you can bet on that!

This is a very interesting thread!



Robert

Listen, Robert, I do appreciate the thought, as I say—who wouldn't?!—but if you want to make me (and, I'm betting, yourself) happy, read a couple of these sources I've mentioned and see whether or not their detailed content rings a bell in your own training. The Abernethy Black Belt article and the O'Neil TKD Times article are maybe the most accessible places to start, if you can get your hands on copies—they each have a phenomenal amount of info and insight packed into relatively few pages. Start exploring this strand of MA thinking (which more and more will come, I believe, to represent the advance guard of hard-core MA training in the future, as per the OP's query) and I'll be more than very happy....

 

[newGuy12]

You know, this leads to another angle, in my mind. Once, science and magic were kind of bundled together. Of course, science won out. Why? Because they did not engage in all of that secrecy, of course. They published their methods and findings, and knowledge then grew.

It will be the same way with the Martial Arts, I think. Instead of all of these occult aspects (the word "occult" just means "hidden" of course, that's all!), they will be explored, and shared.

There is so much good information coming out now, as evidenced by your last post, exile, that the tide is turning. Soon the day will come where knowledge of the fighting arts are freely dispensed, for all to enjoy. I myself find that to be the better way.

Then again, I am not the kind of person who has the tolerance for the "popularity contest" way of the Teacher waiting until the student is "worthy" of being taught the deeper meanings -- I am middle aged after all, I would likely be dead before I could persuade a Teacher to go to the depths!

I have been told by people who I believe know that Ed Parker's system has MANY hidden techniques -- every block is a strike, every strike is a block, a defense can be used for more than one attack, and so on.

Its one thing to simplify the curriculum so that the student will not be overwhelmed. Its quite another thing to water things down just because the student must be deemed "worthy" to dive to the depths.

Perhaps the day is coming when the DEEP Martial Arts will be shared freely, as scientists freely share their information, rather than kept secret, as the magicians kept their knowledge!