Katas keep them or chuck them ?

[Bushido]

I DO think that kata are important. Like any intelligent human being I am questionning some points of it. I havent and I will not bash kata. I was just seaching and intelligent reason for the fist to the hip. I really want to hear peoples opinion on that subjet.

-Bushido

 

[tshadowchaser]

I like doing most katas that I know. From the most basic forms that taught me basic stance and movement, to the most complex I have learned formthem all.
I find that I do use the techniques fighting that I learned in the forms, in fact some of my best techniques came from my forms.
Shadow

 

[arnisador]

Thw point about two-person forms--more common in kung fu than karate--is a good one.

Kata need not be all of one's practice! It aids stance and focus and helps perfect technique. I think it does much more, but even if someone disagrees, note that one can extract techniques from the kata and practice them with someone--doing that is in fact expected!

As to hand on the rib cage and all that, I suggest the seminars/tapes/books by George Dillman. Ignore the pressure point stuff for now--just look at how he interprets these techniques as locking techniques with finishes. Very realistic in most cases.

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by arnisador


As to hand on the rib cage and all that, I suggest the seminars/tapes/books by George Dillman. Ignore the pressure point stuff for now--just look at how he interprets these techniques as locking techniques with finishes. Very realistic in most cases.

I agreed with you up until you mentioned the above person. I would suggest you take a look at tapes made by Taika Oyata instead.

 

[Rob_Broad]

Originally posted by RyuShiKan





I agreed with you up until you mentioned the above person. I would suggest you take a look at tapes made by Taika Oyata instead.

I have been fortunate to attend several Dillman events and he does have some very good points. He is often looked down upon by many traditionalists because he does not follow the party line, but he does have a wealth of knowledge and has trained with many of the top masters.

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by RyuShiKan

I agreed with you up until you mentioned the above person. I would suggest you take a look at tapes made by Taika Oyata instead.

I've stopped attending George Dillman's seminars because of the bizarre directions he has gone in. Still, his basic bunkai--let's skip all issues of pressure points for now--indicate interpretations of the kata that seem much more likely to be accurate and useful than the traditional down block followed by two punches followed by a rising block and a turn. His work is also much more accessible than Taika Oyata, it seems to me--you can find his books in Waldenbooks, Barnes and Noble, Borders, etc., and his seminars across the USA. Hence, for illustrative purposes, I felt he'd serve and be practical. I doubt someone would order a tape to settle an Internet argument but they might flip through a book the next time they're at a bookstore.

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by Rob_Broad



I have been fortunate to attend several Dillman events and he does have some very good points. He is often looked down upon by many traditionalists because he does not follow the party line, but he does have a wealth of knowledge and has trained with many of the top masters.

We could debate Dillman's skill level or lack of all day........I still stay Taika Oyata is about 50 years senior on him in the study of karate/tuite/kyusho/and kobudo.

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by arnisador



His work is also much more accessible than Taika Oyata, it seems to me--you can find his books in Waldenbooks, Barnes and Noble, Borders, etc., and his seminars across the USA. Hence, for illustrative purposes,

The reason why you won't see anything written by Mr. Oyata on the bookshelf might be due to the fact that he probably doesn't believe martial arts could be learned from a book.

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by RyuShiKan

The reason why you won't see Mr. Oyata on the bookshelf might be due to the fact that he probably doesn't believe martial arts could be learned from a book.

That's great. But I don't see what it has to do with anything. I think looking at George Dillman's books is a practical way to show someone the basics of legitimate kata applications. I don't see how Mr. Oyata's lack of a book could possibly contribute to this.

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by arnisador



His work is also much more accessible than Taika Oyata, it seems to me--you can find his books in Waldenbooks, Barnes and Noble, Borders,

That's why

 

[Rob_Broad]

It appears to me this thread has drifted form it's original topic of whether kata should be kept or not. Maybe we could start another thread to discuss the merits of Mr. Oyata and Mr. Dillman.

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by Rob_Broad

Maybe we could start another thread to discuss the merits of Mr. Oyata and Mr. Dillman.

It has beeen done on another BB many times.......it's not worth the time or effort.

 

[sweeper]

why are kata so broadly mis interpreted?

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by sweeper

why are kata so broadly mis interpreted?

That is a good question.
My own personal feeling is it is the way karate training and teaching changed in the first part of the last Century.
Originally there was a 1 to 1 teaching environment which was very personal and teacher and student could spend time going over detailed information on kata and it's techniques. Since the first part of the last Century group instruction has taken over and teaching details about kata is nearly impossible in large groups. Also the emphasis and motivation has changed to a great degree as well. Profit and sport being the motivation and emphasis for some.
I have several friends in Japanese karate systems over here. They said when they are training kata 99.9% of their time is spent on training for how it looks for competition rather than what the techniques are for.

 

[asoka]

Originally posted by RyuShiKan





That is a good question.
My own personal feeling is it is the way karate training and teaching changed in the first part of the last Century.
Originally there was a 1 to 1 teaching environment which was very personal and teacher and student could spend time going over detailed information on kata and it's techniques. Since the first part of the last Century group instruction has taken over and teaching details about kata is nearly impossible in large groups. Also the emphasis and motivation has changed to a great degree as well. Profit and sport being the motivation and emphasis for some.
I have several friends in Japanese karate systems over here. They said when they are training kata 99.9% of their time is spent on training for how it looks for competition rather than what the techniques are for.

Well RyuShiKan,I agree with your friends.Most schools are like that,they concentrate on how impressive they will look in competition rather than what the techniques are for.Your friends are 100% correct.

That's the other problem with many schools.They only care about how good they will look,not how effective is what they really teach.

If katas are so effective and important to learn why is it most instructors themselves don't even know the bunkai to the katas they teach.I know the bunkai to my katas,but only because I figured it out on my own and also partly because I found books on the styles I had been taking at the time,my instructor never showed us the bunkai.

When I first did karate we did katas,sparring and weapons in every class,after a few years ,we stuck to doing only katas in class and did sparring when he knew a tournament was coming up and some weapons.He claimed katas on its own can help improve a person's fighting ability without getting hurt,but got us to sparr just to give us some extra help anyways.Other then tournaments coming up we hardly ever sparred.

He liked to claim that katas are the foundation of improving techniques which a true martial artist needs to know before he is able to defend himself whether inside or outside of martial arts and that without proper form one is unable to properly focus on his opponent and keep his balance or co-ordination,and that katas are supposed to strengthen you both physically and mentally to prepare you for any situation.

We did do some drills that I could say would be effective and came from the katas,but most didn't come from the forms because I get the feeling he didn't know the bunkai to the forms he taught ,either that or knew himself that they would be useless to teach as a drill.

From my own experience and from what I know of all my katas I have come to the conclusion that katas are meant only as a foundation,and to strengthen you physically and mentally,however they aren't really as good a foundation as claimed and are not really needed in order to be a good fighter.

So if katas aren't really needed ,then what is?

Proper movement from a regular fighting stance,focus,balance,co-ordination,speed,power (strength is not important),proper mind set (fighting mentality),knowing how to properly block,kick,punch,grappling and avoid it happening back to you.

Learning both defensive and offensive is important.In order to protect yourself you have to know what it would be like to be on the offensive side.You simply can't learn one without the other.

True speed comes from heavy bag training and recieving punchess and to avoid them as well as how to react back quickly.

Many karate people for example think that you don't need actual contact or actually blocking of tecniques to become quicker,many martial artsist have come to the assumption that katas on its own can help them develop speed with lots of practice,this is so untrue.

You can do katas for the rest of your life,but without any actual contact or practicing of avoiding a punch or kick,you will still not gain speed,you might have strong legs and good focus though.

 

[RyuShiKan]

Originally posted by asoka


Well RyuShiKan,I agree with your friends.Most schools are like that,they concentrate on how impressive they will look in competition rather than what the techniques are for.Your friends are 100% correct.

I am not sure what you mean.
Are you saying they are correct in only practicing for looks or are you agreeing that most styles only practice for looks?

Originally posted by asoka


If katas are so effective and important to learn why is it most instructors themselves don't even know the bunkai to the katas they teach.

I answered that to some degree in one of my posts above.

Originally posted by asoka

I know the bunkai to my katas,but only because I figured it out on my own and also partly because I found books on the styles I had been taking at the time,my instructor never showed us the bunkai.

I have never found learning karate or any martial art from a book to be useful. I think most arts are too complex and require "hands on" by a good "qualified" teacher to be fully understood. Plus, what do you do if you have a question...........you can't ask a book.


(The reason why I emphasize "qualified" is that there are so many bozos running around these days claiming they are qualified when they aren't and there by giving wrong or at least inaccurate information out)

 

[sweeper]

asoka sounds like you just had a bad instructor. od you have any experience with a good instructor that knows what he is doing (and teaching an art that practices forms)?

I mean if I were to go out and teach people kali and you were to come to one of my classes you would probably think kali just sucked.. it's not that it is a bad art just I don't know nearly enough to teach.

 

[sweeper]

another question.. why would an instructor be alowed to teach if he/she didn't know the bunkai to the kata?

 

[arnisador]

The makiwara served some of the purposes of a heavy bag.

The Dragon Times has numerous online interviews with karateka that address training in the old days. Here's one:
http://www.dragon-tsunami.org/Dtimes/Pages/articleg.htm

There are others, and they're very informative on this and other issues. If there's a martial arts magazine out there with higher quality content, I don't know it!

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by sweeper

another question.. why would an instructor be alowed to teach if he/she didn't know the bunkai to the kata?

A vote in favor of licensing of instructors? Count me out!