kata?

[Dirty Dog]

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.

End results are never guaranteed. Full stop. There are just too many variables.

Personally, I see no reason to assume that what Bill is learning is any less applicable to self defense than what any of us are learning. Karate (in pretty much any of its various forms) is a valid system of self defense. Now, you may be able to point to a particular technique and reasonably say "I don't think that would do you any good because [blah blah blah]" but even if your objections are correct, that still wouldn't invalidate the usefulness of the system.

 

[Steve]

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.

learning one thing with a focu in another doesn't turn the first into the second. In that vinn diagram, it can perhaps enakrge the area of overlap, but that's it. If you're learning karate, you are developing expertise in that, and not something else. In the same way that when you learn aikido or bjj, you are learning that and not so wing else.

Even the concept of bunkai is the process of learning kata and then divining application of that kata. The kata is the exercise. It's the skill being learned. Any other benefits are ancillary to the physical skill. It's like a solo drill in judo or bjj.

End results are never guaranteed. Full stop. There are just too many variables.

Personally, I see no reason to assume that what Bill is learning is any less applicable to self defense than what any of us are learning. Karate (in pretty much any of its various forms) is a valid system of self defense. Now, you may be able to point to a particular technique and reasonably say "I don't think that would do you any good because [blah blah blah]" but even if your objections are correct, that still wouldn't invalidate the usefulness of the system.

to call a defending a thrust kick in light sparring "self defense" training is so far away from what the self defense "experts" around here chide others for, it's nuts. But that standard seems only to apply to a few.

 

[Dirty Dog]

to call a defending a thrust kick in light sparring "self defense" training is so far away from what the self defense "experts" around here chide others for, it's nuts. But that standard seems only to apply to a few.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I personally find it helpful to train things at lighter levels. Now, I don't advocate only training at that lighter level. I think higher levels of contact can be another useful tool. But, we do have one 1st Dan who prefers to always spar with light-medium contact. She's had her nose broken a couple times (and surgically repaired) and now that she's in her 50's she just doesn't want the hard hits. I don't doubt that she can use what we practice effectively, though. Less effectively than if she trained higher contact? Maybe, since it can reasonably be argued that getting hit hard is one of the best ways to learn to deal with getting hit hard. But effectively just the same. If that's acceptable to her, then it's certainly fine with me. And when we spar, I use the level of contact she's comfortable with.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

learning one thing with a focu in another doesn't turn the first into the second. In that vinn diagram, it can perhaps enakrge the area of overlap, but that's it. If you're learning karate, you are developing expertise in that, and not something else. In the same way that when you learn aikido or bjj, you are learning that and not so wing else.

Even the concept of bunkai is the process of learning kata and then divining application of that kata. The kata is the exercise. It's the skill being learned. Any other benefits are ancillary to the physical skill. It's like a solo drill in judo or bjj.
to call a defending a thrust kick in light sparring "self defense" training is so far away from what the self defense "experts" around here chide others for, it's nuts. But that standard seems only to apply to a few.

Are you asserting that "karate" cannot be "self-defense"? That's the only meaning I can get from your statement about learning one thing with a focus in another. I teach NGA, with a focus for self-defense. The physical skill set is NGA. The usage - the application it is taught for - is physical self-defense. The same can be done with Karate, Judo, Krav Maga, boxing, etc. There is no inherent conflict. One is the method, while the other is the application.

 

[Steve]

Are you asserting that "karate" cannot be "self-defense"? That's the only meaning I can get from your statement about learning one thing with a focus in another. I teach NGA, with a focus for self-defense. The physical skill set is NGA. The usage - the application it is taught for - is physical self-defense. The same can be done with Karate, Judo, Krav Maga, boxing, etc. There is no inherent conflict. One is the method, while the other is the application.

Well, sort of. I'm asserting that karate is not self defense training. I would never suggest that karate cannot be helpful in a self defense situation.

 

[Steve]

You're entitled to your opinion, but I personally find it helpful to train things at lighter levels. Now, I don't advocate only training at that lighter level. I think higher levels of contact can be another useful tool. But, we do have one 1st Dan who prefers to always spar with light-medium contact. She's had her nose broken a couple times (and surgically repaired) and now that she's in her 50's she just doesn't want the hard hits. I don't doubt that she can use what we practice effectively, though. Less effectively than if she trained higher contact? Maybe, since it can reasonably be argued that getting hit hard is one of the best ways to learn to deal with getting hit hard. But effectively just the same. If that's acceptable to her, then it's certainly fine with me. And when we spar, I use the level of contact she's comfortable with.

I never suggested that training at lighter levels isn't helpful. I' am saying that application of a technique in light sparring against a thrust kick is not self defense training, any more than training berimbolo is.

 

[Tired_Yeti]

You call yourself "sensei black belt," yet you don't understand why kata is done?

I call myself Tired Yeti, but I'm not actually a yeti...and sometimes I'm not even tired.


"Re-stomp the groin"
Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Well, sort of. I'm asserting that karate is not self defense training. I would never suggest that karate cannot be helpful in a self defense situation.

Karate can be trained as a tool for self-defense. If you are arguing that karate, in and of itself, is not complete SD training, I'd agree. No physical training would be. Is that your point?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I never suggested that training at lighter levels isn't helpful. I' am saying that application of a technique in light sparring against a thrust kick is not self defense training, any more than training berimbolo is.

It is, if we accept the assumption that something similar to a thrust kick can happen in a self-defense situation. Would it be as likely as a punch? No. But kicks do happen.

 

[Steve]

Karate can be trained as a tool for self-defense. If you are arguing that karate, in and of itself, is not complete SD training, I'd agree. No physical training would be. Is that your point?

Karate is trained to improve one's skill in karate in the same way that BJJ is trained to improve one's skill in BJJ. That there is crossover for self defense is incidental. People don't train karate or any other specific style of martial arts with a self defense emphasis. I believe that to be crap. People train to improve in that style, and most hope or believe their style overlaps with self defense to some degree.

It is, if we accept the assumption that something similar to a thrust kick can happen in a self-defense situation. Would it be as likely as a punch? No. But kicks do happen.

yeah. Okay. If you accept this, I really don't want to hear any more BS about anything else. If a thrust kick is self defense, then I really don't want to hear anything about how BJJ isn't realistic. If you're saying in ga thug thrust kicking is realistic self defense training, please for the love of Pete never suggest that ground fighting is unrealistic.

 

[drop bear]

Karate is trained to improve one's skill in karate in the same way that BJJ is trained to improve one's skill in BJJ. That there is crossover for self defense is incidental. People don't train karate or any other specific style of martial arts with a self defense emphasis. I believe that to be crap. People train to improve in that style, and most hope or believe their style overlaps with self defense to some degree.
yeah. Okay. If you accept this, I really don't want to hear any more BS about anything else. If a thrust kick is self defense, then I really don't want to hear anything about how BJJ isn't realistic. If you're saying in ga thug thrust kicking is realistic self defense training, please for the love of Pete never suggest that ground fighting is unrealistic.

Gotcha.

This is the Gerber parang machete. Bear grill designed this "specifically" for survival.

It is by most accounts a piece of crap.

This is a tramontia machete it is not designed as a survival tool it is a garden tool. It just happens to do everything better.

When you look at a method to achieve a task. You need to remove preconceptions of that method and observe how it performs under testing.

There is no sport/self defence distinction. There is works for the task at hand or dosent. And it is important to be mindful of that.

Honestly even raising self defence as a concept is an incredibly limited way of addressing the issue. Because we haven't defined the type of self defence we want to address.

If we were to address the specifics we would gain a much clearer idea of what we are trying to achieve.

 

[drop bear]

So training a defence against a light kick. Will give you the capacity to defend a light kick.

It may not give you the capacity to defend a powerful kick. And vica versa.

Training against a powerful kick will give you defence against a powerful kick. Training that method lightly will also give you a method against a powerful kick. But at some stage that powerful kick needs to be thrown.

This is why if you ever talk to people who have received powerful kicks they will tell you to block with both hands.

Even though in light sparring it will leave you more open to other techniques.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Karate is trained to improve one's skill in karate in the same way that BJJ is trained to improve one's skill in BJJ. That there is crossover for self defense is incidental. People don't train karate or any other specific style of martial arts with a self defense emphasis. I believe that to be crap. People train to improve in that style, and most hope or believe their style overlaps with self defense to some degree.

So before this response, I want to clarify: I do not think BJJ is unrealistic. It is not the end-all to self defense, but if someone does not know ground grappling, and they end up in that situation, they are screwed.

Now for the actual response: If a system considers itself a self-defense system, like the combatives systems or krav maga, would you consider that to have a self defense emphasis? What would be necessary for you to consider a system to be specifically good at self-defense, even if they are not good in sport fighting?

 

[drop bear]

So before this response, I want to clarify: I do not think BJJ is unrealistic. It is not the end-all to self defense, but if someone does not know ground grappling, and they end up in that situation, they are screwed.

Now for the actual response: If a system considers itself a self-defense system, like the combatives systems or krav maga, would you consider that to have a self defense emphasis? What would be necessary for you to consider a system to be specifically good at self-defense, even if they are not good in sport fighting?

What situation are you wanting the krav to solve?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Karate is trained to improve one's skill in karate in the same way that BJJ is trained to improve one's skill in BJJ. That there is crossover for self defense is incidental. People don't train karate or any other specific style of martial arts with a self defense emphasis. I believe that to be crap. People train to improve in that style, and most hope or believe their style overlaps with self defense to some degree.

Actually, I've yet to have a single student join my program for the purpose of learning NGA. They join to learn some physical self-defense. So far, none have even known what NGA is before starting. So, yeah, people do study specific arts for the purpose of SD. I've never started any art for any other purpose. I've met people who started arts for many reasons, and easily half of them start martial arts primarily to learn physical self-defense. And that includes folks who got into wrestling, BJJ (I know an instructor in South Carolina who added Gracie JJ to his programs simply to beef up the groundwork for self-defense training), karate, Judo, Aikido, etc.

Now, do folks STAY in MA to get better in the art? Sure. While I still have a self-defense focus in my training, at this point my largest motivator is simply to get better at what I do. So my personal training is more focused on getting better at NGA at this point, but that doesn't change that for many years (and upon starting every art I ever studied) my primary focus was on self-defense.

I'm not sure how you draw the conclusion that "people" don't train in any style specifically to develop self-defense skills. That's like saying people don't join a Zumba class to get fit - they do it so they can learn Zumba.

yeah. Okay. If you accept this, I really don't want to hear any more BS about anything else. If a thrust kick is self defense, then I really don't want to hear anything about how BJJ isn't realistic. If you're saying in ga thug thrust kicking is realistic self defense training, please for the love of Pete never suggest that ground fighting is unrealistic.

I've never said ground fighting is unrealistic. I think it's a bad idea to get into it in a SD situation, but a good idea to know it so you can deal with it if you have to. Nothing "unrealistic" about it - it's just not the place you really want to be (on the ground) in self-defense.

As for "BS", I think your unsubstantiated claims about others' reasons for studying MA would fall in that category.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

What situation are you wanting the krav to solve?

Ideally any situation where they are attacked/assaulted/likely to be attacked, and wish to get away safely. That is what they claim to teach.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ideally any situation where they are attacked/assaulted/likely to be attacked, and wish to get away safely. That is what they claim to teach.

That's not a claim unique to Krav Maga, of course. It's the sort of claim nearly all self-defense-based martial arts will make.

 

[Tired_Yeti]

Here's the thing, there are a lot of dangerous mimes out there on the streets. If you don't know kata, how are you ever going to win a mime fight?


"Re-stomp the groin"
Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

 

[Paul_D]

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.

Agreed. Threat Awareness & Evaluaiton and Target Hardening etc come first.

It was more to point out that when things do get physcial, the physcial side is not like fighting. Kata teaches you the physical side, it doesn't teach fighting.

 

[Tired_Yeti]

Karate is trained to improve one's skill in karate in the same way that BJJ is trained to improve one's skill in BJJ. That there is crossover for self defense is incidental. People don't train karate or any other specific style of martial arts with a self defense emphasis. I believe that to be crap. People train to improve in that style, and most hope or believe their style overlaps with self defense to some degree...

So you think ALL martial arts practice is done for sport? You've obviously never studied what the past masters, the founders, if karate have said.





"Re-stomp the groin"
Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk