The only thing that's clear is that different people learn best in different ways.
kata?
- Thread starter senseiblackbelt
- Start date
The only thing that's clear is that different people learn best in different ways.
KenpoMaster805
2nd Black Belt
Kata is an excercise in which we practice offensive defensive again an imaginary opponent. Kata is very Important in Martial Arts Because you can used it in self defense Like like mine is long form 3 its has technique from purple blue and green and brown
lifelongstudent1
White Belt
The whole purpose of Kata (poomse), is to provide a structured way to practice the basic steps and master the fundamentals. If you want a more detailed history as to why, I can provide how it came about. Kata, is a major training aid that is over looked today, by many artist and styles. As you advance, a quality instructor will be able to explain all the "hidden techniques" that you have been practicing but didn't know. The main issue, is a huge number of people today have "lost in translation" do to lack of knowledge being past and some Kata's being changed for sport reasons. I am going to give you a free tip, that will likely help with the understanding. After, you understand and learn how to perform the kata, do it visualizing using the technique in an actual situation. See the opponent all the way from the attack to the end of the Kata. It is very beneficial watching others do the kata. Do not just watch the belt level do the kata, but the higher belts, you will likely notice suttle differences. A huge amount of movements in kata, have a self defense application, such as many of the "blocks" are not, they are an application of attacker manipulation. Kata is extremely important, I have always rated it, next to doing actual defensive techniques.
Not all styles and arts have kata, and those that do don't always have long-form kata (in my terms, more than 3-4 steps), and not all kata have hidden techniques in them.
Kata is a tool, and where it exists it should be helpful if used properly.
lifelongstudent1
White Belt
Though I agree that not all styles have "long form", but each time that a person performs a technique against a "phantom foe" this is actually a form of kata (akin to shadow boxing if you will). That is the biggest benefit of the martial arts the practice of the perfecting the techniques. For as we all know, the proper technique will appropriate timing is what it is all about.
Monday night, while doing light kumite (sparring) in the dojo, my opponent threw a thrust kick at me. Without realizing I was doing it, I reacted by stepping back into a neko achi-dachi (cat stance), accepting his incoming leg under my right shoulder, braced and locked in by my right arm, and raised and extended my left elbow into his chest.
This is directly out of one of our kata, and it's intended (overtly) to be a defense against a bear hug from the rear. The right arm I used to capture his leg and pull him into me was intended to be an elbow strike to the rear. Instead, it off-balanced my opponent and brought him into me. My stance was stable as I had my knees bent and dropping my center pulled him in towards my waiting left elbow strike to his chest.
You can see an example of this movement here, at 8:24
Following the elbow strike, I dropped the heel of my leading foot and transferred my weight forward, still holding his captured leg. He had to hop backwards, at which point I stepped behind his remaining planted leg and tripped him.
I did not think "I am going to use a move from kata now," nor did I think "this move from one of my kata can be repurposed thusly." I just did it, and only realized later what I had done. Would I have done it naturally without having learned the move in kata? No.
If you believe kata does not help with self-defense, you are correct. YOUR self-defense. It certainly informs mine.
This is directly out of one of our kata, and it's intended (overtly) to be a defense against a bear hug from the rear. The right arm I used to capture his leg and pull him into me was intended to be an elbow strike to the rear. Instead, it off-balanced my opponent and brought him into me. My stance was stable as I had my knees bent and dropping my center pulled him in towards my waiting left elbow strike to his chest.
You can see an example of this movement here, at 8:24
Following the elbow strike, I dropped the heel of my leading foot and transferred my weight forward, still holding his captured leg. He had to hop backwards, at which point I stepped behind his remaining planted leg and tripped him.
I did not think "I am going to use a move from kata now," nor did I think "this move from one of my kata can be repurposed thusly." I just did it, and only realized later what I had done. Would I have done it naturally without having learned the move in kata? No.
If you believe kata does not help with self-defense, you are correct. YOUR self-defense. It certainly informs mine.
Last edited:
lklawson
Grandmaster
I would argue that point. To me, it's only "kata" if there's a specific sequence that's supposed to happen. When I pantomime a technique against an imaginary opponent, I have full latitude in my responses. With kata, there's a "right" and "wrong" way to do it. That's sort of the point of most forms; the restriction forces us to do certain basic moves correctly, rather than avoiding them.
Tired_Yeti
Green Belt
Short answer? Yes. All karate is contained in the kata. Think of it like the alphabet. All the letters for all the words are there but you don't use them in the order presented. You use them in whatever order necessary to communicate your meaning.
"Re-stomp the groin"
Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk
Tired_Yeti
Green Belt
I would say that you've said it backward. Since self-defense includes things such as talking your way out of a fight and learning to read people and be aware of your surroundings--and kata doesn't teach that, kata teaches fighting (not sports competition). It doesn't teach the art of self defense which is psychological; it teaches the art of fighting which is physical.
Props for referencing Iain Abernethy, btw!
"Re-stomp the groin"
Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Just last week, I read about a guy defending himself on "the street" from a thug executing a proper thrust kick. Happens all the time, I bet.
And that's my last post for awhile. See ya.
Just because it's unlikely in a street encounter, that doesn't invalidate the point. The OP asked if kata would help in "a fight", and competition is one form of fighting. Besides that, there are things a "thug" can do on "the street" that give similar body mechanics. In some cases, a missed kick of any sort will present some of the same body mechanics, and some thugs will try to kick, for whatever reason. As others have said in this very thread, the principles are more important than the specific attack/defense involved.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
The point is simply that there is a bias that keeps coming up. We hear over and over that sports are not self defense, but if you believe that is true, you must also accept that thrust kicks and "light sparring" in a karate dojo is not self defense for the very same reasons.
And I wasn't responding to the op. I was responding to bill's specious connection to self defense. Light sparring isn't self defense. Or are you suggesting that it is?
Sports are not self-defense (if you define self-defense as the act of avoiding personal harm through violence). Neither is sparring. I don't think there's any reasonable argument to the contrary. Both, however, can be part of the training to prepare for self-defense and involve some of the aspects you might run into in physical self-defense.
I think this tends to get a little skewed...
Sports are not self-defense. That is true. Because they're sports, and when you're participating in them, you're doing so under a carefully predetermined set of conditions that are geared towards, first and foremost, keeping the competition as fair and safe as is reasonably possible.
Sparring, at any level of contact, is still sporting, in that it is also done under the same conditions, even if points are not being kept, a winner declared, or bling being handed out.
Now, you can take that and run with it and accuse me of saying that those who compete in sports cannot defend themselves.
But you'd be wrong.
Nowhere did I say that skills derived from competition or sparring cannot be useful in a self defense situation. I've never said that, and I don't think many people would. Those who would, I suspect, tend to be pretty inexperienced or naive.
I don't feel like drawing a Venn diagram, but I believe most people here can picture one.
Here's the set "skills used in tournament" O
Here's the set "skills used in self defense" O
Now put them together. While there are some things that are certainly inappropriate for tournament use, and some things that are certainly inappropriate for self-defense, the overlap of sets will be very large.
Is there anybody who disagrees with that, really?
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Very reasonable positions that I agree completely with. Kata may help some people train. It is one reinforcement tool among many. Were everyone so reasonable in this area, we'd have a lot shorter threads on the subject. 
And, traditional martial arts training sans competition are no more applicable to self defense than competitive arts for all the same reasons. Any argument related to a sport art applies to a larger degree to a traditional art.
And, traditional martial arts training sans competition are no more applicable to self defense than competitive arts for all the same reasons. Any argument related to a sport art applies to a larger degree to a traditional art.
I'm curious about the "to a larger degree" when referring to a traditional art. While I'd agree that the principle applies - the practice of a TMA is not self-defense, but it's entirely possible for a TMA to focus only on skills that translate to defense, while this is not practical for competition. That doesn't make one better than the other (the stress testing against unknown opponents, inherent in sport/competition, is a good tool that can be missing from TMAs, for instance), but I don't see how a TMA is by definition less self-defense related than sport.Very reasonable positions that I agree completely with. Kata may help some people train. It is one reinforcement tool among many. Were everyone so reasonable in this area, we'd have a lot shorter threads on the subject.
And, traditional martial arts training sans competition are no more applicable to self defense than competitive arts for all the same reasons. Any argument related to a sport art applies to a larger degree to a traditional art.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
I think it comes down to testing and the transition from theory to application. On a phine, so being brief. But if the context for application is theoretical for everyone invilvdd, including the instructors, end results are not guaranteed.
In a traditional karate achool, the emphasis is on learning karate, not self defense. The concern is that people like bill believe they're learning self defense.
In a traditional karate achool, the emphasis is on learning karate, not self defense. The concern is that people like bill believe they're learning self defense.
That depends upon the school. I've seen traditional Karate schools that, in fact, taught with a self-defense focus. I've seen others (in the same style) that focused on competition, and others that focused on the traditions of the art. Each has its place.
Similar threads
