Kata
- Thread starter MJS
- Start date
Kalicombat
Green Belt
MJS,
I'll give you my interpretation of the difference between fighting and self defense. The two are completly different entities.
Fighting is a choice, usually between, but not limited to 2 particapants. Both parties have made the consious decision to engage in an altercation with one another. Either party can simply walk away from the altercation. Fighting, at least outside a studio, is usually ego-based, and for the most part is avoidable. Not to mention that fighting is illegal. Also, im my experience, when police arrive at a "fight", both parties are suspect, but the bigger opponent will usually be looked on as the aggressor.
Self-defense is a completley different monster. Not all scenarios are the same, so dont go off on a diatribe of "what ifs", to diffute my post. Im only offering you some of my insight.
Self defense usually involves a predator-vs-prey type scenario. The predator can be an individual or a group, and in most instances, the attack or altercation is premeditated. A self defense act is also often a reaction to the attack. Self defense is legal and a viable defense in the event of serious injury or death to the predator.
Personally, I have engaged in alot more fights then self defense situations, but have none the less. For me, fighting was usually alcohol influenced, and had no real point except to prove who was "baddest". There is no sense in fighting when the outcome can seperate you from your family. Going to the emergency room on a friday night to have broken glass removed from your mug is not worth the hassle....and that phone call to the wife to come get you from the local PD is even worse, honest.
On the other hand, I hate people that prey on individuals for whatever reason. I refuse to be a victim, and if I am pushed into a self-defense situation, there is no moderation, no amount of force too great to protect me, my family, or those things I deem protectible.
.....thats how I see it.
Gary Catherman, Kenpoist
I'll give you my interpretation of the difference between fighting and self defense. The two are completly different entities.
Fighting is a choice, usually between, but not limited to 2 particapants. Both parties have made the consious decision to engage in an altercation with one another. Either party can simply walk away from the altercation. Fighting, at least outside a studio, is usually ego-based, and for the most part is avoidable. Not to mention that fighting is illegal. Also, im my experience, when police arrive at a "fight", both parties are suspect, but the bigger opponent will usually be looked on as the aggressor.
Self-defense is a completley different monster. Not all scenarios are the same, so dont go off on a diatribe of "what ifs", to diffute my post. Im only offering you some of my insight.
Self defense usually involves a predator-vs-prey type scenario. The predator can be an individual or a group, and in most instances, the attack or altercation is premeditated. A self defense act is also often a reaction to the attack. Self defense is legal and a viable defense in the event of serious injury or death to the predator.
Personally, I have engaged in alot more fights then self defense situations, but have none the less. For me, fighting was usually alcohol influenced, and had no real point except to prove who was "baddest". There is no sense in fighting when the outcome can seperate you from your family. Going to the emergency room on a friday night to have broken glass removed from your mug is not worth the hassle....and that phone call to the wife to come get you from the local PD is even worse, honest.
On the other hand, I hate people that prey on individuals for whatever reason. I refuse to be a victim, and if I am pushed into a self-defense situation, there is no moderation, no amount of force too great to protect me, my family, or those things I deem protectible.
.....thats how I see it.
Gary Catherman, Kenpoist
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Well, since you've asked, I'll be darned if I see how pointlessly-flashy displays of acrobatics, coupled with fake ki-ais and bad manners--and yes, I've seen this too at tournaments--can be laid at the door of tradition.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but every time I've heard or seen this crap--and the disrespectful sparring, and the lousy behavior of competitors, and the bad manners of parents, and the yelling for a six-year-old to, "kill 'em,"--it looks to me like it's been justified on the grounds that this brings us closer to "the real thing," and away from the tired unrealism of worn-out tradition.
I don't do forms that way--among other things, my *** would fall off. And frankly, I'd argue that the sorts of stuff you describe begins with the notion of abolishing traditions that are there for good reasons, to "open things up," for more crowd-pleasing and excitement.
I also don't go to tournaments much, in part because of what you describe, so I guess we can agree on that.
But what we'd disagree on, I'm afraid, is that when I think about it--I've never seen anybody who respects those forms and has struggled to do them well behave badly. Correlation does not imply causation, but given the fact that I've seen the forms' actions on at least one truly scary guy, I wonder...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but every time I've heard or seen this crap--and the disrespectful sparring, and the lousy behavior of competitors, and the bad manners of parents, and the yelling for a six-year-old to, "kill 'em,"--it looks to me like it's been justified on the grounds that this brings us closer to "the real thing," and away from the tired unrealism of worn-out tradition.
I don't do forms that way--among other things, my *** would fall off. And frankly, I'd argue that the sorts of stuff you describe begins with the notion of abolishing traditions that are there for good reasons, to "open things up," for more crowd-pleasing and excitement.
I also don't go to tournaments much, in part because of what you describe, so I guess we can agree on that.
But what we'd disagree on, I'm afraid, is that when I think about it--I've never seen anybody who respects those forms and has struggled to do them well behave badly. Correlation does not imply causation, but given the fact that I've seen the forms' actions on at least one truly scary guy, I wonder...
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Gary:
Thanks. Not only do I agree, but I think you put that very well.
Thanks. Not only do I agree, but I think you put that very well.
Well Rob, I'm certainly glad to see that we finally agree on something. I do not attend tournaments anymore either, due to the fact that I mentioned. If I'm going to do a kata, I want to do the kata as it is meant to be. I don't want to change the entire thing by adding in the crazy things that I mentioned.
Mike
Mike
K
Kenpomachine
Guest
But the problem you're writting about is not only with the flashy techniques but with judges that allow them to win tournaments instead of looking for technical quality and good rythm and all those atributes that must be there when you perform a form.
Another completely different thing is when you're performing a hard style form vs a soft style one. ..
I guess that's the reason I go to kenpo only tournaments
Another completely different thing is when you're performing a hard style form vs a soft style one. ..
I guess that's the reason I go to kenpo only tournaments
Very true. Most of the tournaments around have 2 divisions---one of them being traditional. Its too bad though that people have to take away from the idea of the kata, and add in a bunch of crap. You could go and do your best Long Form 2, but unless you drop down to a split and do a cartwheel, you are not going to win.
Mike
Mike
P
progressivetactics
Guest
i sort of disagree with that last statement. Just as you mentioned, there is usually a seperate division for people who DO WANT TO ADD IN THAT CRAP!. Let them add it. They should be judged on all the normal points of karate, but in its own division. I don't think there is anything wrong with people adding personal expression, pushing themselves to new levels in physical capabilities, even if it means acrobatics, and presentation should always be a part of your kata....So what if the presentation doesn't have the same techniques you prefer, or are capable of... If they are able to do it, make it fit the form, do it strong, and still have a kata within all the jumping and flashyness... I say go for it. As long as it is in its own division.
If it wasn't for someone saying "i like to do it this way" somewhere in the past, we wouldn't have but 1 form version between all our different arts. Right now, I see 10 different ways of doing a form like Bassai. And I like seeing all that diversity. Some I think are very applicable versions....some not so. But that diversity is a GOOD thing, I believe.
just my 2 cents.
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
Sure, fine, I guess. I suppose I'm jealous that I never could've done this stuff--and perhaps even more jealous that I never wanted to.
But the thing is--do they actually still have a kata? or do they have this thing that was designed to impress judges looking for acrobatics, leaping ability, high kicks, fancy gestures?
We can all agree or disagree about the practical value of kata. The fact remains that the forms were designed for very different purposes--their history, the intent behind them (again, I'm not passing judgment on whether or not they're useful) makes them something other than what passes for forms.
Gymnastics are wonderful to watch. Great--so let's just identify them as gymnastics...or, let's argue for the wu shu forms in which the acrobtics, leaping, etc. actually means something.
I also (now folks can get annoyed) believe that the appearance of things like the Paul Mitchell team is a good sign of just what's wrong in martial arts today--not just capitalism, but the sense that whatever gets you over is good, the sense that only winning counts, the sense that only what's really fancy matters.
I need to see a good judo tournament.
But the thing is--do they actually still have a kata? or do they have this thing that was designed to impress judges looking for acrobatics, leaping ability, high kicks, fancy gestures?
We can all agree or disagree about the practical value of kata. The fact remains that the forms were designed for very different purposes--their history, the intent behind them (again, I'm not passing judgment on whether or not they're useful) makes them something other than what passes for forms.
Gymnastics are wonderful to watch. Great--so let's just identify them as gymnastics...or, let's argue for the wu shu forms in which the acrobtics, leaping, etc. actually means something.
I also (now folks can get annoyed) believe that the appearance of things like the Paul Mitchell team is a good sign of just what's wrong in martial arts today--not just capitalism, but the sense that whatever gets you over is good, the sense that only winning counts, the sense that only what's really fancy matters.
I need to see a good judo tournament.
Well, once again, I find myself agreeing with Robert! I used to compete at many tournaments. It has nothing to do whether or not I can do a cart wheel or split, it has to do with what rob said in his last paragraph. We are supposed to be talking about kata, and what you can learn from them, not how many acrobatic moves you can do. If a kata is supposed to have moves in it in which you can use to fight, I'd really like to see someone fight by doing a cartwheel! True, they have seperate divisions for the kata, but lets look at the weapons divisions. Now, its been a long time since I've been to a tourny. but I don't think that they have separte div. for weapons, and if you watch that closely, you'll see alot of flash also. Now, is that fair for someone who is doing an excellent bo kata, to get beat by another guy doing a bo kata.....the only difference is that he adds cartwheels to his?
Once again, let me say, before this gets out of control, I am NOT talking about myself and what I am or am not capable of. I'm talking about the tournys. as a whole.
MJS
Once again, let me say, before this gets out of control, I am NOT talking about myself and what I am or am not capable of. I'm talking about the tournys. as a whole.
MJS
L
LoneWolfandCub
Guest
I agree....you see guys doing long four and getting so deep in a horse their cup almost drags on the floor or kicking a hole in the ceiling in snaking talons or protecting fans to impress the judges, why change our form to please the judges? This makes no sense to me, if its a kick to the groin it might not look as impressive but it is definately more effective.
Tournements IMHO have actually lowered the standard and purpose of why we do some of of what we do in kata and our respective arts.
Tournements IMHO have actually lowered the standard and purpose of why we do some of of what we do in kata and our respective arts.
P
Pyros
Guest
In the old times, there were stories about how Master X trained kata for 3 hours everyday for 5 years, then he beat up everybody. What people today don't understand is what "kata training" constitutes. People mistakenly think Master X stood alone in the dojo or on a beach (next to a beautyful sunset, of course) and performed the solo form until he was bored out of his wits. Traditionally, "kata training" meant not just solo practice but bunkai training too. Bunkai training means all kinds of partner exercises. You open the kata, you practice some of it. Then you open it more and practice some more. Kata training means the whole process of learning the form and learning to apply and use it on a living, breathing, resisting person. Without this, you can not speak about "kata training" only "solo training".
:asian:
... and nuff said.
P
progressivetactics
Guest
Who's fault is it that he gets beat? The cartwheeler or the judges who believed the cartwheel added enough difficulty difference to supercede the well executed first kata?
All sports have people trying harder and harder to set the standards higher, to achieve more, to accomplish more. Why is that wrong?
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that flash & trash deserves to win....But that does not mean that Tradition deserves to win because it is traditional
Everyone is complaining about how unfair it is that people do cartwheels and back flips....Why aren't we as a group hosting clinics on Judging tournaments, requiring certain credentials to be a judge, informing students before hand what the expectations are, before they compete. Not sit and complain about what it has become, and "back when I was doing it" stuff. Make a difference in the sport.
A point in sparring (in a tournament) isn't the most effective technique thrown. It is a karate technique, if had been thrown at full force and power, would have stopped an opponent THAT A MAJORITY OF THE JUDGES SEE. How often have you seen a judge award a point for a technique that everyone knows landed. Even the reciever is on the floor. But it was totally impossible for 1 or more of the judges to actually SEE it land? Should we complain about fighting rules too? Instruct students, instruct judges. Make a difference in what you believe to be correct.
I've done it. It wasn't pretty, but I was in a 7 on 3 situation and got knocked on the side of my head from someone 90degress from me. I fell off to the side, and as I was going, dropped my arms, rolled through a cartwheel, created some space for myself, and was ready to continue. I wouldn't have won a trophy for my cartwheel, as I still can't do them correctly, but I did the motion of one, created distance, and kept from landing face down on the concrete. And in the end, the good guys one....So The cartwheel is as legitamate a step as a shuffle step. It got me out of immediate danger!
R
rmcrobertson
Guest
I agree with everything--except the idea about, "sports," and, "achieving more." That, I think, is quite wrong--and not just because I don't study martial arts for sport purposes.
I think it's wrong because it defines, "improvement," or, "evolution," if you like, as tricks, techniques, gymnastics, "higher," kicks, "faster," moves, etc...
I don't think that's what, "improvement," means at all.
I think it's wrong because it defines, "improvement," or, "evolution," if you like, as tricks, techniques, gymnastics, "higher," kicks, "faster," moves, etc...
I don't think that's what, "improvement," means at all.
Ok, point taken. Reguarding the flash. I think that the main idea of this thread, was to discuss the benefits of what you can get out of kata, and the applications that are in them. Tournaments today seem to favor the person that shows up to the majority. If I went to one and was up against someone who has been going to them on a regular basis, its not going to make a damn bit of difference if we did the same kata...fact of the matter is, is that the other guy will win because he shows up to more of them. The icing on the cake, is by him adding the fancy moves.
We sit here and talk about grappling and how bad it is to go to the ground. Ok, but do you want to risk doing a cart wheel, when you have no idea what you might be putting your hands on? You said that you went with the motion of the hit, therefore, as you were falling, you went with it and did a cartwheel. Fine, but you could have planted you hands right into some glass, rocks, nails, etc.
As for the judges. I've seen many of the same judge at the different tournys. That is another point regarding the guy who rarely goes and the one who is there at every event. The judges get to know you. Is that a fair judging?? I dont think so!
Comparing sparring and kata are 2 different events. You cant compare the rules in the 2.
As for the cartwheel. Ok, it might have worked for you, but is it going to work in all situations? I'd like to see a 300lb man doing a cartwheel. Hey, maybe they can, I dont know, I'm not 300 lbs. so who am I to judge that. Just trying to think logically here.
In my opinion, doing a move like that, runs the risk of getting you into some trouble. Its in the same category of doing any jumping or spinning kicks. If you don't do them properly, you will telegraph your movement.
Mike
We sit here and talk about grappling and how bad it is to go to the ground. Ok, but do you want to risk doing a cart wheel, when you have no idea what you might be putting your hands on? You said that you went with the motion of the hit, therefore, as you were falling, you went with it and did a cartwheel. Fine, but you could have planted you hands right into some glass, rocks, nails, etc.
As for the judges. I've seen many of the same judge at the different tournys. That is another point regarding the guy who rarely goes and the one who is there at every event. The judges get to know you. Is that a fair judging?? I dont think so!
Comparing sparring and kata are 2 different events. You cant compare the rules in the 2.
As for the cartwheel. Ok, it might have worked for you, but is it going to work in all situations? I'd like to see a 300lb man doing a cartwheel. Hey, maybe they can, I dont know, I'm not 300 lbs. so who am I to judge that. Just trying to think logically here.
In my opinion, doing a move like that, runs the risk of getting you into some trouble. Its in the same category of doing any jumping or spinning kicks. If you don't do them properly, you will telegraph your movement.
Mike
K
Kenpomachine
Guest
I agree with this. Most people doing "flashy katas" just don't think about a probable use of the cartwheel or the spinning kick. They just do it for the sake of doing it, without giving it a further thought, but only because it makes you win tourneys.
IMHO, new movements in forms is not a good/bad thing by itself, it depends on the whole of the form and whether or not it has a meaning to the practitioners of that certain style (at least). If it's worthless/useless moves one after another then it's just an "empty" form, which is not the same as non traditional.
