Kataless Karate Pros & Cons

[JasonASmith]

I like the stances...
Twend, Sir, is there anything in Shotokan that resembles this?

 

[Brandon Fisher]

It looked like a Shito Ryu version but wasn't sure. Still seen it performed better. I ahve seen some of Hanshi Glenn Keeney's black belts perform Seiyunchin and it just blew me away.

 

[twendkata71]

Shotokan does not use the Shiko dachi, feet pointed out at 45o angles. The closest stances in Shotokan would be the Sochin dachi,named from the kata. And the Grounded hangetsu dachi.
Other that that Kiba dachi and hachijidachi are the side stances.
As far as kata goes Kanazawa's Shotokan international federation teaches a version of Seiyunchin. They use Kiba dachi instead of the Shiko dachi of Goju ryu or Shito ryu. The system that I am studying we use these stances. Our original style was Koei kan, which has many Shito ryu elements. We also have elements of Shotokan,which many of our black belts are Shotokan. I persononally,now that I am older, favor the Goju ryu, and Shito ryu kata and kihon. When I was younger I loved training in Shotokan. The kata were powerful and it gave me a strong base for kumite. We would spend an extra hour after class just in kumite. But, sorry got a bit off subject there.

I like the stances...
Twend, Sir, is there anything in Shotokan that resembles this?

 

[twendkata71]

I saw the video. This was the Junior Pan American games in Curacoa. The young man is pretty good. I used to coach youth teams going to international compeitions on kata. Back when the USAKF was in charge of the team. I was Madden's dojo and would help the junior team members work on their kata. We used to have a program where the junior team would have a chance to go to Japan every year to study and train at dojo's there. I do not know if that program is still running.

It looked like a Shito Ryu version but wasn't sure. Still seen it performed better. I ahve seen some of Hanshi Glenn Keeney's black belts perform Seiyunchin and it just blew me away.

 

[unity]

I like kata as it helps improve technique. You can't do much without good technique. You can argue and say that it wont help you in a defensive situation but I can spur on imagination and means you wont just stick to basic moves. not only that, there fun!

 

[kingkong89]

there are not really any pros only cons to freestyle karate because kata helps you on your tech. stances and strikes.

Sensei Coleman
'89

 

[Martin h]

That actually baffles me. You would think that the same schools would teach the same thing, especially with the whole tradition thing. Originally one teacher, would've taught the same thing to a group of students, that would go on to teach. Why should there be different interpretations? The founder had one way... his. That's where the real answers would be. At least you would think so. Truly Baffling.

Actually that is a modern way of thinking in karate. The old masters was not that strict about having one "true" way of doing things.
For examle, Chojun Miyagi, the founder of Gojuryu, was known for teaching his students not only different sets of katas but also different versions of the same kata to different students. All depending on what suited that particular student best for physique, mentality and whatever Miyagi used for base of his decisions.
Now add 20-30 years, bury Miyagi, and have a discussion between a bunch of those students about which of them was taught the "real" version. Good luck getting a concencus.

 

[exile]

Actually that is a modern way of thinking in karate. The old masters was not that strict about having one "true" way of doing things.
For examle, Chojun Miyagi, the founder of Gojuryu, was known for teaching his students not only different sets of katas but also different versions of the same kata to different students. All depending on what suited that particular student best for physique, mentality and whatever Miyagi used for base of his decisions.
Now add 20-30 years, bury Miyagi, and have a discussion between a bunch of those students about which of them was taught the "real" version. Good luck getting a concencus.

Interesting point! You wonder how widespread that kind of deliberate variation was...

 

[Robert Lee]

I looked at the Go Ju katas showed I was not real pleased with the Kata. Not that the kata are bad Just the person performing them needs more work But like it has been said different groups do different. I trained Go Ju for several years. Katas were more defined then what was shown on these clips. As long as a person is taught the movement behind the kata Then they know its application. Kata is but a chapter in a book. solo training Must be broken down to truley understand the moves in seperate action. Bunki works by show attack and defence aspects of the kata. Then on to open training. seyunchin katas has several well hiden moves At one you may be striking the second a block. break holds and such are there also. Be it open NO kata Or kata training As long as you are taught application and train hard you will improve.

 

[Zero]

Sure there are pros and cons to kata. It all depends on what your focus is and what you want out the the discipline you are training in. If you do not want to focus on actual fighting or compete in that line, then spend your time on kata be it for self development or forms competition. However, in any decent/high level of contact competition or street confromtation the kata to me have no real appreciable application.

If you want to be a great fighter then focus on your bag work, fight and train with as many sparring partners you can and forgo time doing kata for time in front of the bag or focus pads. Fighting is so dynamic and fluid that there is no point thinking you can string a kata together - sure some good well versed combos can be great but even these can't be counted on in a fight.
I don't see how kata can improve your fighting technique any better or even as good as time spent training with others to learn timing and movement, time hitting the bag to build up power and time on the focus mits/pads to increase speed.
That said I love to watch kata - for a limited time - as I truely appreciate the execution by well honed practitioners - but that is enjoying a form of art - not anything impressive regarding what is going to help you in the ring or on the pavement.

 

[exile]

Sure there are pros and cons to kata. It all depends on what your focus is and what you want out the the discipline you are training in. If you do not want to focus on actual fighting or compete in that line, then spend your time on kata be it for self development or forms competition. However, in any decent/high level of contact competition or street confromtation the kata to me have no real appreciable application.

Before you come to that conclusion, take a look at the applications that people like Iain Abernethy, Rick Clark, and a whole gang of other people who've spent years laying out the fighting applications of the kata have shown to be recoreded in the forms. The techniques that the kata encode are about the nastiest and most street-effective imaginable (not for competion, but for fighting---you'd get immediately chucked out of any competition in which you applied the kind of techs these guys are showing). The apps built into, say, the Pinan kata as IA analyzes them in his work involve eye strikes, locks and joint breaks, elbow strikes to the face and throat, and a number of other techniques that you would certainly not want to be hit with, and just as important, the kata show you how to set up those strikes. But you need to learn how to read kata. They were intentially disguised as simple block-punch-kick sequences from the time of Anko Itosu, who made it clear that those were applications for children's use, literally. They weren't the fighting applications he an Matusumura used when they were the unarmed bodyguards of the king of Okinawa, and which were the basis of the kata that Funakoshi took to Japan.

If you want to be a great fighter then focus on your bag work, fight and train with as many sparring partners you can and forgo time doing kata for time in front of the bag or focus pads. Fighting is so dynamic and fluid that there is no point thinking you can string a kata together - sure some good well versed combos can be great but even these can't be counted on in a fight.
I don't see how kata can improve your fighting technique any better or even as good as time spent training with others to learn timing and movement, time hitting the bag to build up power and time on the focus mits/pads to increase speed.

The answer to your question is that no matter how good you are at delivering individual strikes, a fight isn't a set individual strikes or other techniques delivered in isolation. So you learn to deliver power on the bag and accuracy via the use of focus mits.... now what? What are you going to do with those techs? The point of the kata is precisely to enable you to `learn timing and movement' in the way that the master fighters who created the kata found to be the most effective for combat. Each kata is a sequence of short (3-4 move) fighting scenarios that are in effect telling you how to move in response to a particular aggressive action by an assailant. Sure, it won't make any sense if you use the most obvious literal translation of the movement in the kata into combat moves. But---just taking a typical kata sequence as an example---if you learn to see that chambering retraction as part of a wrist grab and lock in response to an attacker's grab, the chambering of the followup downblock with the other arm as an elbow strike to the assailant's forearm setting up a lock at the elbow, forcing the assailant's upper body down, and the downward motion of the `blocking' arm as a strike to the opponent's lowered throat, with the followup `middle' lunge punch a finishing strike to the now-lowered neck or temple, then what you have is an efficient and flexible plan for using the various techs in a coherent sequence to end the fight asap. All the practice of individual punches, kicks, blocks and so on in the world isn't going to give you a way to implement the strategy of your art in a real situation, any more than memorizing the dictionary of a foreign language is going to allow you to put sentences together to make yourself understood in that language. Just as you need to know the syntax of that language to be able to speak it, the kata were designed to give you the syntax of combat apps---including sweeps, throws, locks and other grappling moves---for use at all combat ranges.

That said I love to watch kata - for a limited time - as I truely appreciate the execution by well honed practitioners - but that is enjoying a form of art - not anything impressive regarding what is going to help you in the ring or on the pavement.

But kata weren't originally intended to be pretty dances. That's not why Matsumura, maybe the most intimidating fighter of his time, created kata forms, or Itosu, who was said to have never lost a single one of the many fights he was involved in his lifetime. These guys designed kata to incorporate their hard-earned understanding of how to counter and defeat dangerous attacks. They designed the kata as real-time guidebooks to translating karate/TKD/CMA strategic principles into living tactics, with followups and alternatives if things don't go as planned.

Before you come to any final conclusions along the lines you've stated, take a look at Abernethy's Bunkai-jutsu: the Practical Applications of Karate Kata, especially his final chapter on combat-realistic training based on kata-guided fighting strategies, and consider what kind of effectiveness a fighter well-trained using those methods and tactical resources will have against an untrained aggressor. Like Matusumura, Ikosu, Egami and the other pioneers, Abernethy isn't interested in `pretty' in the least. He shows you instead how kata-based fighting works under the nastiest conditions anyone is likely to encounter. You don't have to buy his approach, but you're cheating yourself if you come to the kind of conclusions about kata you've stated without at least looking at the huge body of evidence out there that kata are supremely combat-effective.

 

[jks9199]

That actually baffles me. You would think that the same schools would teach the same thing, especially with the whole tradition thing. Originally one teacher, would've taught the same thing to a group of students, that would go on to teach. Why should there be different interpretations? The founder had one way... his. That's where the real answers would be. At least you would think so. Truly Baffling.

I'm jumping in on this late...

There's a story about kata that can help explain why different schools can teach the same kata differently.

It seems that one school taught a particular kata with a backwards hop at one point, before moving into a new set. As they students advanced in skill, they moved on, and started their own schools -- and they came in contact with people doing that very same kata, but without the backwards hop. Confusion and chaos resulted... Which way was right? Both ways came from recognized, known, and highly respected teachers. Someone finally asked the teacher who included the hop why it was there.

The answer? "The dojo wasn't long enough to finish the kata without moving backwards there." Of course, the students had been teaching it, even in dojos with much more room, with the hop -- because "that's the way the teacher did it!"

Sometimes people also choose to emphasize different things in different kata based on personal preference, as well. I teach with a woman who may be literally half my size. When I do some of our forms, I emphasize certain principles and stepping; she emphasizes others. Our students are lucky; they get both ways! (It's only confusing when I show one thing and she shows another... and they're just a little different.

A third thing that sometimes happens is teachers changing things for students. I can trace my lineage directly to the man who introduced my system to the US; I'm fortunate to train under one of his earliest students. I've seen forms changed because the chief instructor just gave up on getting a principle across to someone... So that person's students learned the set with this stance instead of that stance.

 

[jks9199]

Now all kata, forms in Karate and Kung-fu can be traced to the Da Mo series which was an exercise Bodhiharma taught the Chinese monks on his journey from India. Later the modifications were used by martial artist to strengthen the muscles used for the execution of fighting techniques, each exerise or combination of exercises represented a particular "style or system." This I know, but I have never heard of philosophy being taught. Tactics, strategies and principles yes but not philosophy.

I have to question this assumption. I think that if you look across Chinese systems, to Okinawan or Japanese systems, to "modern" systems, you'll find that there is so much variation in forms that you can't say that they all derived from the same source material. In fact, there are different stories for some systems; some Chinese systems claim to have been inspired by watching certain animals fight, for example. Even if you limit yourself to the concept of pre-arranged movements for health -- there are yoga systems that predate Bhuddism or are from entirely different philosophical/religious bases.

And, despite the argument that there aren't "kata" in boxing and many other systems -- there are. Boxing has a catalog of basic, fundamental techniques and combinations, which are practiced in various ways, including shadow boxing where boxers fight an imaginary opponent. Fencing has solo exercises to develop technique, speed and accuracy. Even shooting has it's own "kata" of ways to draw, brace and fire a gun for accuracy. Many "martial art katas" are catalogs of proven techniques and combinations; others are historical tales that illustrate events and principles of a system. And some are just ways to practice techniques alone or with a partner.

 

[twendkata71]

On a side note. The kata with the backward hops is Chinte. I still have no idea why the hops are in the kata and I have been practicing that kata for 10 years.

 

[exile]

I'm jumping in on this late...

There's a story about kata that can help explain why different schools can teach the same kata differently.

It seems that one school taught a particular kata with a backwards hop at one point, before moving into a new set. As they students advanced in skill, they moved on, and started their own schools -- and they came in contact with people doing that very same kata, but without the backwards hop. Confusion and chaos resulted... Which way was right? Both ways came from recognized, known, and highly respected teachers. Someone finally asked the teacher who included the hop why it was there.

The answer? "The dojo wasn't long enough to finish the kata without moving backwards there." Of course, the students had been teaching it, even in dojos with much more room, with the hop -- because "that's the way the teacher did it!"

Sometimes people also choose to emphasize different things in different kata based on personal preference, as well. I teach with a woman who may be literally half my size. When I do some of our forms, I emphasize certain principles and stepping; she emphasizes others. Our students are lucky; they get both ways! (It's only confusing when I show one thing and she shows another... and they're just a little different.

A third thing that sometimes happens is teachers changing things for students. I can trace my lineage directly to the man who introduced my system to the US; I'm fortunate to train under one of his earliest students. I've seen forms changed because the chief instructor just gave up on getting a principle across to someone... So that person's students learned the set with this stance instead of that stance.

This is highly reminiscent of material in some earlier threads, in which one poster explained---if I'm recalling this correctly---that the extreme sine wave motion some ITF instructors teach is the result of a misintepretation of one particular teacher's efforts in the early days of ITF (don't recall whether it was Gen. Choi or one of his proteges) to communicate something about stances and movement in a very noisy, disorganized dojang context where several different things were going on at once, and vocal communication was pretty much out of the question. He exaggerated the up-and-down motion deliberately, to try to make clear some small detail that he couldn't make himself heard to explain, and the senior students faithfully copied the exaggeration and started teaching it in their own schools as they reached instructor rank. Kacey also pointed out that the somewhat confined feel of many of the ITF kata reflect the actual confinement of their creator, Gen. Choi, who devised them while imprisoned by the Japanese in an 8'X12' cell.

There was a thread that ran for a while that spun off the thread I'm alluding to here; the point of the spin-off was to try to assemble some examples of practices in the MA which have attained `traditional' status whose origins were based on essentially chance factors, now largely forgotten, along the lines of the ITF cases I've mentioned. This back-jump move sound like a textbook instance of that kind of thing...

 

[twendkata71]

Was Gen. Choi imprisoned before or after he studied with Funakoshi at the Shotokan in Japan? He may have modified the forms from the original, but they were not original designs.

 

[exile]

Was Gen. Choi imprisoned before or after he studied with Funakoshi at the Shotokan in Japan? He may have modified the forms from the original, but they were not original designs.

I think that's the case---he went to Korea in 1937, studied at the Shotokan, and was detained by the Japanese after being identified as a participant in anti-occupation activities while serving as a forced conscript in the north.

And most definitely the elements in the ITF tuls, like those in the KKW hyungs, are derived from what Gen. Choi learned in his studies at the Shotokan, as I understand it. The revisions were partly intended, so I gather, to make the Korean MA he was trying to synthesize less obviously derived from the templates of GF's kata, as an expression of the General's patriotic zeal...

 

[twendkata71]

Thank you for the information. I have not done as much research into Taekwondo history as I have the Japanese and Okinawan arts.
I will add that info to my collection.

 

[exile]

Thank you for the information. I have not done as much research into Taekwondo history as I have the Japanese and Okinawan arts.
I will add that info to my collection.

My pleasure, Twendkata!

 

[jks9199]

This is highly reminiscent of material in some earlier threads, in which one poster explained---if I'm recalling this correctly---that the extreme sine wave motion some ITF instructors teach is the result of a misintepretation of one particular teacher's efforts in the early days of ITF (don't recall whether it was Gen. Choi or one of his proteges) to communicate something about stances and movement in a very noisy, disorganized dojang context where several different things were going on at once, and vocal communication was pretty much out of the question. He exaggerated the up-and-down motion deliberately, to try to make clear some small detail that he couldn't make himself heard to explain, and the senior students faithfully copied the exaggeration and started teaching it in their own schools as they reached instructor rank. Kacey also pointed out that the somewhat confined feel of many of the ITF kata reflect the actual confinement of their creator, Gen. Choi, who devised them while imprisoned by the Japanese in an 8'X12' cell.

I'm sure there are many examples that can be found with a little digging... We've all probably modified something along the way based on facilities or an injury or just what we like. What's important is to remember what was modified, and why... And to remember that some changes were made for reasons with no purpose other than to fit the space available or to please someone's numbering system, or whatever.