Losing love of Karate due to excessive Kata at training sessions. rant

[ballen0351]

Now that you mention it, this would be an example of 'ground fighting' without inserting the actual takedown i.e. starting from a position of disadvantage for that very reason (slipped, sucker punched, ran into a tree etc).

True but thats just apart of ground fighting just like take downs are a part. To say ground fighting doesnt include take downs is like saying I teach boxing but we dont train the jab

 

[ballen0351]

. These kata contain multiple takedowns but, to me, finish there with a strike or stomp, nothing to suggest that the fighting continues on the ground.

.

Thats part of ground fighting as well. Just because we are both not on the ground doesnt mean its not ground fighting

 

[Tez3]

if the statement is karate has a system of grappling that makes you happy then i agree with you. And there is no reason to compare styles.

Well that went straight over the top of your head didn't it? You know , the bit where I said karate is the generic term?

 

[K-man]

Somewhere in all the excitement I missed these posts.

we don't know whether karate grapples well on the street or not. It is an unknown quantity.

Not true. You think it's an unknown quantity. There is no reason for the principles of karate not to work on the street.

doesn't do well in grappling comps. Kung fu has kata. There has been some kung fu grappling wins.

Karate is not for and never has been for competition. Some karate has been adapted for some sorts of competition but not grappling. In fact grappling is excluded from most karate competition.

karate has had some striking legends in competition. The restrictions on illegal moves did not hold them back there.

So? Who is talking of illegal moves. There are no illegal moves in kata. Neck breaks, limb destruction etc is all there. Whether you are legally justified in using them is tested in court, not in the ring.

strange that they have a street system that cant. Be converted to a competition result.

Sounds like you have been paying too much attention to another poster who shall remain nameless.

i can really only judge karate's grappling by the evidence. And there is an absence of evidence.

No! What you mean is you haven't seen it on YouTube! So what? Oh, that's right it doesn't exist.

competition is a benchmark that is definable. I am not sure how else we could compare a system.

As others said, we are not comparing systems. Why would I want to compare a system? Unless you are imposing artificial parameters, all systems do what they are designed for.

because we are trying to define if karate has a comprehensive grappling system. There has to be some sort of measure.

No! You are trying to point out that karate is not a comprehensive grappling system. Karate has more than sufficient grappling for my needs.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

strange that they have a street system that cant. Be converted to a competition result.

A street system:

• Doesn't have a rule set.
• Doesn't have a referee.
• Occurs outside of a regulated, controlled environment.
• May have multiple attackers involved.
• May have weapons involved.

A competition system doesn't conform to those factors. So how could you convert one result over to fit another? You can't and after all the discussion I don't understand how you're not getting this level of understanding.

 

[punisher73]

A couple of thoughts on the whole grappling and kata thing.

First, we need to define what is meant by "grappling". Do you mean stand-up grappling or do you mean ground grappling or both? Karate, does have stand up grappling, as we know in the form of joint locks/breaks, throws, takedowns etc. Does karate have an extensive "ground grappling" system like we see in BJJ/Judo/Wrestling? Nope.

This leads to the second part, karate deals with "ground fighting", NOT "ground grappling". It was designed to take out your attacker, or put him on the ground and disable him. It was also designed to buy time until you can regain your own footing and get up off the ground. It did not deal with rolling around with both people on the ground and staying on the ground on purpose. Does that mean that a person can't apply a joint lock on the ground if the opportunity presents itself? Nope, not at all. Concepts that are effective in human movement are almost universal.

Lastly, nothing irritates me more than people taking a traditional kata and learning some BJJ move in a seminar and then saying that it is a "hidden technique" found in the kata. For example, I saw an article one time that said that the crossover step from Naihanchi kata was REALLY a hidden triangle choke. What???

Herein lies the problem with a discussion like this. Physical movement as found in the kata is devoid of ANY meaning by itself until it is assigned a meaning by somebody (just take a look at the block/punch/kick applications that persist as the only meaning because of a label). Many people look at the grappling arts like BJJ and apply concepts of karate to those movements. They may even find physical movements that look the same because there are only so many ways to bend/break/restrain a limb. But, that doesn't mean that was the original intention of the movement. If we look historically at karate and kata, we don't find references to using it for wrestling with someone. Much of what we see in karate as "ground grappling" is people assigning meanings that they have found based on looking at an outside source. So, it may be a part of the "their karate", but that doesn't mean that it was the original intent.

 

[tshadowchaser]

unfortunately we where not around to ask the people who originally made the kata what they had in mind nor where we there when the forms where changed to fit children in schools in Japan. We can only know what has been shown to us by our instructors and passed down to them by their instructors.
Some people have said that in some of the old translations of certain books we can discern moves that are not what people today think of or have forgotten through the ages because of "dumbing down" the explanation for children or what was given as an explanation to service men so they could come back with part of the art, a black belt, and a hope that they would propagate the art in various countries no matter how watered down it was.

 

[drop bear]

Somewhere in all the excitement I missed these posts.
Not true. You think it's an unknown quantity. There is no reason for the principles of karate not to work on the street.

Karate is not for and never has been for competition. Some karate has been adapted for some sorts of competition but not grappling. In fact grappling is excluded from most karate competition.

So? Who is talking of illegal moves. There are no illegal moves in kata. Neck breaks, limb destruction etc is all there. Whether you are legally justified in using them is tested in court, not in the ring.

Sou
nds like you have been paying too much attention to another poster who shall remain nameless.

No! What you mean is you haven't seen it on YouTube! So what? Oh, that's right it doesn't exist.

As others said, we are not comparing systems. Why would I want to compare a system? Unless you are imposing artificial parameters, all systems do what they are designed for.

No! You are trying to point out that karate is not a comprehensive grappling system. Karate has more than sufficient grappling for my needs.

and as i have said if those needs are sufficient for you that is fine. If you are happy then i am happy.

i train with boxers who have zero grappling. And they are happy.

i have not suggested the principals don't work on the street. I am saying there is no evidence of the principles working in competition. And there is not enough data to determine how well it works on the street.

now the street is the artificial parameter as it is not definable. Everything will work on the street under some condition you can find there because there are no rules. So even there you are technically right.

 

[drop bear]

A street system:

• Doesn't have a rule set.
• Doesn't have a referee.
• Occurs outside of a regulated, controlled environment.
• May have multiple attackers involved.
• May have weapons involved.

A competition system doesn't conform to those factors. So how could you convert one result over to fit another? You can't and after all the discussion I don't understand how you're not getting this level of understanding.

A competition system has standards and the street does not.

everything works in the street. Not everything works in competition.

some traditional styles can make the crossover to competition. Some have not.

 

[drop bear]

Well that went straight over the top of your head didn't it? You know , the bit where I said karate is the generic term?

which are the strong grappling styles of karate?

 

[K-man]

i have not suggested the principals don't work on the street. I am saying there is no evidence of the principles working in competition. And there is not enough data to determine how well it works on the street.

The principles work just fine in competition. The same principles apply across the board. Principles of balance, principles of stability, principles of striking, principles of body movement, etc. I think there is ample evidence of the principles working.

 

[drop bear]

The principles work just fine in competition. The same principles apply across the board. Principles of balance, principles of stability, principles of striking, principles of body movement, etc. I think there is ample evidence of the principles working.

and if you are happy with that then i am happy.

which competition is this exactly?

 

[K-man]

I would have said, UFC, any MMA, Boxing, Pankration, Kick boxing, etc. Principles transcend styles.

 

[drop bear]

I would have said, UFC, any MMA, Boxing, Pankration, Kick boxing, etc. Principles transcend styles.

lots of karate trained grapplers in those styles?

 

[K-man]

lots of karate trained grapplers in those styles?

Not at all. I'm not talking of styles, techniques or practitioners. I'm talking of principles that are valid in all martial arts.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

which are the strong grappling styles of karate?

Kong Soo Do Karate would be one of them. To expound on this, I grapple far more than I strike (and I've never kicked anyone outside of the Dojo). Part of this is due to my profession, part of it is personal preference. My philosophy is to be able to fight inside a phone booth. This is either standing or prone. So I pass this on to my students, who in turn have done the same. This is one of the reasons I see these applications demonstrated in various kata, they are more or less a mirror of what I've done in actual application. I always mention the opening application of Pinan Shodan as a shoulder lock. The reason is I've applied shoulder locks over the years beyond count during violent altercations. So I have a tremendous amount of experience with them and when I see those movements in a kata I can readily identify them.

 

[Zero]

My philosophy is to be able to fight inside a phone booth. This is either standing or prone.

Prone in a phone box(?!):
I take it that either (i) you come in at about 2.7 feet in height; or (ii) this involves combat amongst a travelling troop of Chinese contortionists?

 

[Zero]

My philosophy is to be able to fight inside a phone booth.

Is this with someone else or just against yourself standing on your head?

 

[Zero]

My philosophy is to be able to fight inside a phone booth.

Just make sure it's not Super Man in mid change that your decide to tussle with

 

[Zero]

Sorry KSD, for some reason I just found the phone booth comment a real side splitter, it was material just too good to pass up!! : )