Kata Critique

[Gerry Seymour]

Performance art from who's perspective, yours?

Well, clearly, since it was me posting that.

Seriously, though, my point is that when we judge kata, people are going to start adjusting the kata for what the judges award. That means they're performing to the judges, rather than using the kata for its (assumed) original purpose. Again, I don't have a problem with that - we just need to be aware of the affect that can have on the kata. Those effects are not universally bad.

The competitor may have a completely different viewpoint. I have worked out in every TKD system I am aware of state side. It is remarkable how different, and in common most are. I find this true of the other style schools I have worked out at. A lot of my experience with specific styles is limited, training while traveling for work. But, for the most part, there are commonalities across styles. Even in TKD some schools kick high and some schools kick really high. Emphasis to the point that I sometimes ask why? Then I have to step back and try to find the "why" in other things they are doing and usually find there is some method to their madness. Typically, the people being pushed to the extremes, in kicks for example, are the ones with some naturally ability to do really high kicks. Usually this is done as a way to motivate and keep a person engaged and involved. If it is never taught where/how/when/why to kick (or punch or whatever) then the school or instructor(s) are doing a dis-service.
So when I judge a form or style I am not intimate with I try to evaluate the effectiveness of individual moves, not in a preconceived idea of how the move should be done but whether it would work. Then you start adding in the fundamentals like balance and timing, etc...

I was referring to wider differences than within TKD. If we look at TKD, Wado, Kyokushin, and maybe even throw in some CMA, we start to see differences that are fundamental. So, we get back to the differences in stance, timing, and flow. I really don't understand how someone can judge a style they don't know as well as they judge a style they do know. I suspect this sometimes goes in favor of the style they know (they see what they're looking for more often) and sometimes doesn't (they are better able to see the errors in their own style). And when performing to judges from different styles, competitors will be less constrained by the actual purpose of the kata (since it will be less-understood by some judges) and some of those who figure it out will adjust their kata to get better scores. Those adjustments are why I refer to it as performance art. And, again, I don't have a problem with using kata for that purpose - I'm not using it as a derogatory term, at all.

 

[Tez3]

The ultimate authority in Wado Ryu kata, if it's not done like this it is incorrect.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The ultimate authority in Wado Ryu kata, if it's not done like this it is incorrect.

Serious question, because I don't get this, at all. Why is there ever a static point that's the ultimate authority? What if someone figures out a way to improve Wado a bit, and adjusts kata to build that principle?

 

[Tez3]

Serious question, because I don't get this, at all. Why is there ever a static point that's the ultimate authority? What if someone figures out a way to improve Wado a bit, and adjusts kata to build that principle?

This is the founder, he made Wado the way he wanted it. If you want to change it because you think you know better then don't call it Wado Ryu because it won't be.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

This is the founder, he made Wado the way he wanted it. If you want to change it because you think you know better the don't call it Wado Ryu because it won't be.

The people I know who started new styles aren't done with them when they start them. All of them continue to tweak and improve what they created. I suspect they will until they run out of time to do so. I don't believe any founder made something perfect, and building on what they created isn't departing from it (unless you change it a lot), but following their lead.

 

[Tez3]

The people I know who started new styles aren't done with them when they start them. All of them continue to tweak and improve what they created. I suspect they will until they run out of time to do so. I don't believe any founder made something perfect, and building on what they created isn't departing from it (unless you change it a lot), but following their lead.

The founder didn't make it perfect I'm sure but he did make it Wado Ryu. If someone tweaks it then it is no longer Wado Ryu but whatever they want to call it. If someone buys a Jaguar car then tinkers and tweaks it, changes the bodywork, and god forbid the engine they can no longer call it a Jaguar.
When a founder sets the standard it's a common standard, not perfect but a standard everyone understands, when people start messing with the kata, techniques etc then there is no longer a common standard and it cannot be judged fairly. One person may think putting an extra kick in is an improvement another thinks it's certainly not however with the founder's standards then you know where you are when judging which is after all what we are talking about on this thread.

 

[Yokozuna514]

My concept of ideal isn't limited to my art. If we are learning to punch, we are learning to deliver power to a target. There are some fundamental differences when the target isn't present. You are correct that adding a target makes it no longer "kata", and that's part of what I'm getting at. Kata can help develop ideal technique, but the technique in the kata cannot be the ideal version, because it has to be altered for that lack of target. If we were to try to develop an ideal punch to aspire to, we'd have to use a target. It might be a 25% punch (which solves the issue of potential injury), but the target being present allows us to fully express all the mechanics involved in delivering power to a target.

None of this is saying there's a flaw in kata - it's just an inherent limitation in the practice.

One of the things I have found to be 'interesting' since I joined this board is that some people that post have a tendency to pick apart a post to try and make 'their' point. I am not going to do that because frankly I don't think advances ANY discussion on a subject. Instead, I am going to try and find some commonalities so I can understand where you are coming from and perhaps learn something valuable that will impact my own training.

I think we both agree that learning and performing kata can be beneficial to someone's training if they understand how to use the tool. You may prefer to introduce targets when you practice. That is fine and there is nothing wrong with that if that helps you improve your training.

We may disagree on what it 'ideal' technique is and how to pursue it but we are essentially after the same thing. I will say, that from a Kyokushin perspective we do not always use targets to help us improve our punching (eg: kata) but we use other tools (eg: bear knuckle continuous sparring and tamashiwari) to assist us in finding an ideal punch but again, the punch we use for knockdown is different from the punch we use to break boards and things but only as an approach not in the coordination of the technique. The coordination remains the same even if the striking surface and kinetic force used changes to accommodate the situation.

I am a believer that the way you practice is the way you will perform so if you ALWAYS practice with little or no contact, it will be difficult to hit harder and not injure yourself, forget about your opponent. Obviously we cannot spar at full intensity all the time in our training. That is what pads and protectors help us accomplish but even hitting pads will not show weakness in the technique that a board or harder surface will bring out (eg: punching with open hands). All to say, different tools for different situations to help us improve the way we perform our techniques across a wide range of situations.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The founder didn't make it perfect I'm sure but he did make it Wado Ryu. If someone tweaks it then it is no longer Wado Ryu but whatever they want to call it. If someone buys a Jaguar car then tinkers and tweaks it, changes the bodywork, and god forbid the engine they can no longer call it a Jaguar.

That analogy is about major changes. I'm talking about evolution through minor changes. If someone puts a better set of fuel injectors in a Jaguar, it's still a Jaguar. In fact, it's entirely likely Jaguar will change what fuel injectors they use at some point if there's a set that improves performance in a way that fits their design aims.

When a founder sets the standard it's a common standard, not perfect but a standard everyone understands, when people start messing with the kata, techniques etc then there is no longer a common standard and it cannot be judged fairly. One person may think putting an extra kick in is an improvement another thinks it's certainly not however with the founder's standards then you know where you are when judging which is after all what we are talking about on this thread.

If you're considering judging, then yes, it becomes a problem. But then, judging isn't the point of most MA training. If an instructor wants to emphasize a principle in Wado Ryu, and adjusts moves in the kata to help students practice that principle, I don't think that's a variation from Wado Ryu, but a variation within Wado Ryu. There is a point at which it becomes significant enough to be a different style - I'm not talking about changes that significant.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

One of the things I have found to be 'interesting' since I joined this board is that some people that post have a tendency to pick apart a post to try and make 'their' point. I am not going to do that because frankly I don't think advances ANY discussion on a subject. Instead, I am going to try and find some commonalities so I can understand where you are coming from and perhaps learn something valuable that will impact my own training.

I think we both agree that learning and performing kata can be beneficial to someone's training if they understand how to use the tool. You may prefer to introduce targets when you practice. That is fine and there is nothing wrong with that if that helps you improve your training.

We may disagree on what it 'ideal' technique is and how to pursue it but we are essentially after the same thing. I will say, that from a Kyokushin perspective we do not always use targets to help us improve our punching (eg: kata) but we use other tools (eg: bear knuckle continuous sparring and tamashiwari) to assist us in finding an ideal punch but again, the punch we use for knockdown is different from the punch we use to break boards and things but only as an approach not in the coordination of the technique. The coordination remains the same even if the striking surface and kinetic force used changes to accommodate the situation.

I am a believer that the way you practice is the way you will perform so if you ALWAYS practice with little or no contact, it will be difficult to hit harder and not injure yourself, forget about your opponent. Obviously we cannot spar at full intensity all the time in our training. That is what pads and protectors help us accomplish but even hitting pads will not show weakness in the technique that a board or harder surface will bring out (eg: punching with open hands). All to say, different tools for different situations to help us improve the way we perform our techniques across a wide range of situations.

I think in this post you're saying the same thing I was. We're just saying it from different angles, so to speak.

 

[ShotoNoob]

Kiai or kihap literally means "expulsion of air" If you don't breathe, you die.

What I would do before I went on Youtube and posted an all-knowing video, would be to start with the direct instruction from the curriculum. Below is just a sample of doing so.

The word kihap is commonly used to refer to the "shout" that taekwondo practioners use when performing various techniques. For this reason, the word kihap is commonly translated as shout or yell. Sometimes it is translated as spirited yell, which is a little closer to the literal meaning.
-Taekwondo Wiki

Again, we have a definition of TKD practitioners "shouting." Shouting does not define kihap. A kihap may be considered a shout in form of the type of sound one hears, this is merely talking about doing something in martial arts without meaning.

Traditional martial arts, it's success and effectiveness depends on the practitioner knowing why they do what they do, and doing so correctly for purpose. Again why so called TMA persons moving to MMA get trounced; they are just regurgitating without meaning or purpose. Then when pressed, come up with some explanation to justify themselves - not understanding the art.

 

[Yokozuna514]

I think in this post you're saying the same thing I was. We're just saying it from different angles, so to speak.

Not really. I still believe kata is the search for the perfect form. That is the function of kata training, imho. Adding aids and equipment does not typically fall under the concept of training kata. I do not believe kata was ever meant to address that aspect of training.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not really. I still believe kata is the search for the perfect form. That is the function of kata training, imho. Adding aids and equipment does not typically fall under the concept of training kata. I do not believe kata was ever meant to address that aspect of training.

Again, you're not saying anything I disagree with. I wasn't suggesting using targets in kata. I was talking about them as a separate thing.

 

[Tez3]

If you're considering judging, then yes, it becomes a problem.

Of course I'm talking about judging because that is exactly what the thread is about!!



I don't believe kata is the search for the 'perfect form' as karate was expressly for the purpose of civilian unarmed self defence. That people have turned into other things is no surprise but we shouldn't forget it's original purpose even if you don't use it for that.

 

[Yokozuna514]

The ultimate authority in Wado Ryu kata, if it's not done like this it is incorrect.

Thank you for posting this video. I have never been able to find a definitive source for Wado Ryu katas. Would you have a video you can share that will demonstrate a proper Wado Ryu Jodan Uke ?

 

[Tez3]

Thank you for posting this video. I have never been able to find a definitive source for Wado Ryu katas. Would you have a video you can share that will demonstrate a proper Wado Ryu Jodan Uke ?

Pinan Shodan

Pinan Nidan

 

[Yokozuna514]

Pinan Shodan

Pinan Nidan

Thank you. I visited a school where the Sensei was teaching Wado forms and they looked a little odd to me. The jodan uke looked completely ineffective and now that I have seen your videos, I am certain this group has no real clue what they are doing.

 

[Tez3]

Thank you. I visited a school where the Sensei was teaching Wado forms and they looked a little odd to me. The jodan uke looked completely ineffective and now that I have seen your videos, I am certain this group has no real clue what they are doing.

The Jodan Uke is a little different from the way others do, I've always found it works quite nicely. There's a little twist that gives it extra 'punch' and of course used as a forearm strike it's very good.

 

[Yokozuna514]

The Jodan Uke is a little different from the way others do, I've always found it works quite nicely. There's a little twist that gives it extra 'punch' and of course used as a forearm strike it's very good.

Little differences between styles is not a big deal to me. I care about if it protects your head which your video confirms it is supposed to do.

The technique I saw was completely useless for protecting your head and the explanation I received was it was Wado Ryu which I now can see was total malarkey.

 

[Tez3]

Little differences between styles is not a big deal to me. I care about if it protects your head which your video confirms it is supposed to do.

The technique I saw was completely useless for protecting your head and the explanation I received was it was Wado Ryu which I now can see was total malarkey.

I can't imagine it not being able to protect your head so what you saw must be bad!

 

[Yokozuna514]

I can't imagine it not being able to protect your head so what you saw must be bad!

Imagine a Jodan uke with your arm pretty much straight up. I’m not a wado guy but that didn’t look right for any situation. The fact he said it was supposed to be a Jodan uke tipped me off but I figured it should have tipped him off too.