How important is fighting in the Martial Arts?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You're the one telling me that karate is some sort of grappling art, yet I have to see any grappling in it outside some demonstrations by a couple of individuals. If grappling in Karate is as prevalent as you say it is, where is it?
If you want to see it then why don't you go look for yourself?
 
If you want to see it then why don't you go look for yourself?

I have, and I've never found it. My experience with grappling karatekas is that their grappling skills are extremely low unless they've cross-trained. I know one instructor who mixes Judo with Isshin-Ryu, and he wrestled in HS, so his students are very good grapplers. However they are the exceptions.

Which I always find K-Man's claims of pure Karate grappling so interesting.
 
None of those reasons really go against the idea that someone really only joins a martial art because they're trying to improve their fighting ability. Now certainly other things matter as well, but clearly fighting would be the primary reason.

For you, it might be the primary reason. It might even have been the primary reason for my father teaching me, when I was seven or eight years old.

For my three year old son, though, 29 years ago, it was strictly about being on the mat with Daddy, and it stayed that way until he graduated from high school.......



Really? There's tons of YT videos showing exactly that.

Technical sparring, perhaps, but not full-contact, full speed free-sparring. Not in Thailand, anyway, unless it's one of those newfangled martial tourist camps. When I was there, we ran and did conditioning in the morning: four miles, maybe five rounds of bag work, and some calisthenics. Evenings, it was another run,, five more rounds of bags, maybe five of pads, clinching, knees, kicks, punches, some nights some technical sparring (specific sparring drills, like getting off the ropes, done at about 75% and increasing the tempo, repetitively) and finish up with more calisthenics. No free sparring, so no one got hurt-most of those guys were pretty poor, and fighting was how they earned money. Granted, the last time I was there was 1987, and it was to get ready to fight in Japan, but in the real places, that's still the philosophy, I'm told: fighting is for money, and you don't do it in training.
 
For you, it might be the primary reason. It might even have been the primary reason for my father teaching me, when I was seven or eight years old.

For my three year old son, though, 29 years ago, it was strictly about being on the mat with Daddy, and it stayed that way until he graduated from high school.......

So you're saying that at no point your son had a desire to learn how to fight from what you were teaching him? C'mon Elder. Even my father taught me how to box at a young age, and I wanted to learn to protect myself (and also because I thought my dad was a bad ***).

Technical sparring, perhaps, but not full-contact, full speed free-sparring. Not in Thailand, anyway, unless it's one of those newfangled martial tourist camps. When I was there, we ran and did conditioning in the morning: four miles, maybe five rounds of bag work, and some calisthenics. Evenings, it was another run,, five more rounds of bags, maybe five of pads, clinching, knees, kicks, punches, some nights some technical sparring (specific sparring drills, like getting off the ropes, done at about 75% and increasing the tempo, repetitively) and finish up with more calisthenics. No free sparring, so no one got hurt-most of those guys were pretty poor, and fighting was how they earned money.

In the real places, that's still the philosophy, I'm told: fighting is for money, and you don't do it in training.

Fair enough. However I would still argue that their goal is to fight, and their training completely revolves around enhancing their ability to accomplish that goal.
 
I have, and I've never found it. My experience with grappling karatekas is that their grappling skills are extremely low unless they've cross-trained. I know one instructor who mixes Judo with Isshin-Ryu, and he wrestled in HS, so his students are very good grapplers. However they are the exceptions.

Which I always find K-Man's claims of pure Karate grappling so interesting.
He has a bit more Karate experience than you have, maybe he knows something you don't.
 
Oh, I don't doubt that at all. I simply wish he would be a bit more forthcoming, since he talks about it so much.

Oh for heaven's sake!

Here's an image from one of Funakoshi's books, showing a throw from karate. :rolleyes:
funakoshi-karate-throw_jpeg_cf.webp

(This book is in Japanese, so it reads right to left.)
 
[QUOTE="Hanzou]You got any video examples of this grappling outside of demonstration purposes?.[/QUOTE]
Here again grappling needs to be defined, it's my impression your definition is different from many of us.

There is grappling in Muay Thai, in Pekiti-Tirsia Kali, in Wing Chun, in most Karate systems.
Grappling is to hold, grab, clinch, seize while in a physical fight or contest with another person.
Grappling techniques can be subdivided into Clinch, Takedowns & Throws, Submissions & Pins, Sweeps, Reversals, Turnovers, and Escapes.
Grappling is when one graps, seizes, clinches, etc during a physical fight or contest.
 
Oh for heaven's sake!

Here's an image from one of Funakoshi's books, showing a throw from karate. :rolleyes:
View attachment 19027
(This book is in Japanese, so it reads right to left.)

I think he's saying generally karatekas have worse grappling than 'GASP' grapplers who practice say shuai jiao wresting or judo which is true. Most martial include ti da shuai na, kicks strikes throws and locks but some focus more in one like judo in throwing and locking and karate in striking and kicking.
 
Everyone seems to have forgotten that the term 'martial art' has two words in it, the other being 'art'. So a 'martial art' can also be defined as an art form derived from fighting techniques.

A believe the word martial art is a translation from the Chinese word wushu or Japanese bujustu which are both the same and written 武术
It does not mean martial ART but rather martial techniques which obviously are techniques relating or can be used in a martial kind of way. For example, the swimming in armour is needed for samurai to use when sneaking on an enemy or running away.
 
Why else would you be improving your aim with a gun?

Ummmm... because it's fun?

Yet you're training yourself just in case you have to. I'm not seeing where the disagreement is with my statements above.

Because you said "intent", and that simply isn't true.

Isn't that just semantics? Isn't preparation itself (training) showing a certain level of intent?

We're back to muble dogface to the banana patch. If you can't tell the difference between "willing to, if I absolutely have to" and "intend to" then there's no much anybody can say to you will make sense to you.
 
So you're saying that at no point your son had a desire to learn how to fight from what you were teaching him? C'mon Elder. Even my father taught me how to box at a young age, and I wanted to learn to protect myself (and also because I thought my dad was a bad ***).

Inasmuch as I can say that I know my son's heart, at no point did he have any desire to fight. Guy hates fighting. In fact, the only thing I can really say about it is that martial arts gave him the confidence to avoid fighting as much as possible, and become a great negotiator.
 
Judo Gokyo Waza?

I don't recall anything in that group of techniques looking as impractical as that throw.

yeah, 'cause sasai tsurikomi ashi works so well on someone who isn't wearing armor! :rolleyes:
(Actually, it would work well for me against someone larger than I am, but there aren't too many of those-this is what I meant about the gokyo waza, though-some of them aren't practical for me at all because of my size, and some of them are practical against certain opponents in certain situations (this one works well off of o soto gari), , and some are practical for other people-just because two photographs seem impractical to you, doesn't mean at all that they are......)
 
Last edited:
.......

I don't know what I expected, but that looks impractical as hell.

And you do understand that it comes from the kata, and isn't really demonstrating a "technique,": per se, as much as it is a principle?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Discussions

Back
Top