Point Fighting: Is it truly Karate?

[DaveB]

You are barely understanding my posts because your capacity to understand is limited to one concept. When you get a new concept you get lost and then blame me.

I am playing chess while you are playing checkers.

That is so sweet that you think you are out thinking me with your 1 dimensional agenda and bad grammar.

Ultimately it is a martial art if it says it is. So point karate is a martial art.

Except that it doesn't. I've never heard anyone refer to point karate as anything other than a sport. Yes some folks might be uninformed and think they are engaging in an ancient samurai fight game that is tied to the essence of the art, but being misinformed (like yourself apparently) doesn't change what is.

Try it out, start a pole and see what the forum members think.

You may be confusing people's use of language with intent. As well as asking if anyone thinks point sparring is a martial art in its own right, try asking if they think they can fight on the street exactly as they do in point competition.

Even if they think point sparring is the essence of karate they will all know that the rules that give point fighting it's existence have to go out of the window in a real violent encounter.

You said a sport is defined by its rules. So I said a martial art has rules even if it is not a sport.

You then backfliped. And said.

"That we differentiate one activity.from another by rules is such a vague statement as to be meaningless."

Yet you brought up defining an activity by it rules.

Clearly you were watching my knight when you should have been watching my bishop.

I raised the defining things by rules to illustrate the point of how vague an idea you were raising. The point still stands. You can technically apply this idea of stuff having rules to anything. So by your argument karate is the same as farming because they both have rules.

When I told you that a sport is defined by its rules I was explaining the point that without the rules defining the objective(s) and all relevant details of how the objective is achieved there is nothing. The sport does not have any frame of reference in which it's activities may be brought out.

If you strip away all rules of a particular martial style you are still left with the problem of dealing with violence.

There is a context outside of the rules in which the martial art has relevance.

So then having just lost your point there you moved on to.

You perform something when you use it for its purpose. Everything else is training and what isn't training is identified by the purpose of the action.

Yes, that's not losing a point, it's explaining in detail why you are wrong.

Since rules alone are too.vague, I am explaining how we can still have an activity that is different to another despite having rules, I.e. The objective of the activity.

Again a sport's objectives are defined solely by the rules.
A martial art has real world objectives beyond its own existence.

OK. So if your purpose is self defence and you never defend yourself this idea just breaks down. Martial arts is quite often defined as specifically not to be used for its purpose. The sheathed word and all that junk.

See that is not true either. An ICBM doesn't stop being a weapon of mass destruction just because it remains in its silo. Nor does a soldier become something else in peace time even though they may be assigned non military tasks.

Note when I explained the issue of people confusing doing a martial art and training in a martial art. If you are never supposed to use your art then (a concept I think is only in movies) when you refer to it you can only be referring to the training. Building a skill is an activity in it's own right, just.like studying in relation to academics.

Then we get here.

except that your determined to turn every discussion into sport vs traditional ma for self defense.

That was you doing that.

Because I started talking about what is more effective... Oh wait that was you.

I can say that X is different from Y without needing to raise one over the other. Different is okay.

You haven't even addressed some of my most basic points. If this really were chess you'd be a move from being mated because of positions I set up early game that you never countered.

For example: the fact that a sportsman has recourse to the referee/judge etc where the martial artist does not.

Or (though I didn't express it in this way) the fact that a boxer punching an attacker on the street is not engaging in sport because he is defending himself, not trying to win a competition.

Ultimately it is a martial art if it says it is. So point karate is a martial art.

Tennis is not a martial art. Because it dosent say it is.

Point fighting doesn't say it is anything. The people who do it say it is a sport. Same with tennis. Even if they did say it was a martial art, that would change it's purpose from winning the game to dealing with violence.

If a point fighter said that he was doing martial arts by winning his sparring match and that this was either the same as how he'd fight for real rules and all or that winning the match was the essence of martial art then he and I would just have to agree to disagree. But hopefully you can admit that would be a ridiculous notion.

Self defence is a combination of martial arts and things that are not martial arts. So you can gain skills in self defence by doing both.

Again, so what? I specifically said (you even quoted it) that point sparring was useful for building certain skills. But as you point out some things are martial art and some things are not.

Check mate.

 

[drop bear]

Except that it doesn't. I've never heard anyone refer to point karate as anything other than a sport. Yes some folks might be uninformed and think they are engaging in an ancient samurai fight game that is tied to the essence of the art, but being misinformed (like yourself apparently) doesn't change what is.

Try it out, start a pole and see what the forum members think.

You may be confusing people's use of language with intent. As well as asking if anyone thinks point sparring is a martial art in its own right, try asking if they think they can fight on the street exactly as they do in point competition.

Even if they think point sparring is the essence of karate they will all know that the rules that give point fighting it's existence have to go out of the window in a real violent encounter

There are more things in the world than what you have heard.

If it is part of karate. Then it is part of karate as a martial art. As you have said they are not playing tennis they are trying to hit each other.

You never said point fighting as a martial art in its own right. It is not a separate part of karate for those that do it. Trying to suggest any section of martial arts training is a martial art in its own right. Mostly doesn't make sense.

And start your own poll.

 

[drop bear]

Yes, that's not losing a point, it's explaining in detail why you are wrong.

Since rules alone are too.vague, I am explaining how we can still have an activity that is different to another despite having rules, I.e. The objective of the activity.

Again a sport's objectives are defined solely by the rules.
A martial art has real world objectives beyond its own existence.

Yet you keep bringing up rules to make your argument then ignoring them when they don't fit. Pick one.

OK. A sport can have more than one objective. So you can have a competition where the objective is to win. That competition can be between soldiers where the objective of the competition itself is to create better warriors.

The objective can be to teach team work or discipline. Etc

If I do a competitive drill the objective is to beat my partner at a specific skill. The objective of the drill itself is to train a better fighter.

You don't have to continually state that what you are doing is for the street for it to have martial relevance.

 

[DaveB]

OK. A sport can have more than one objective. So you can have a competition where the objective is to win. That competition can be between soldiers where the objective of the competition itself is to create better warriors.

The objective can be to teach team work or discipline. Etc

If I do a competitive drill the objective is to beat my partner at a specific skill. The objective of the drill itself is to train a better fighter.

You don't have to continually state that what you are doing is for the street for it to have martial relevance.

Right and as I've stated multiple times if you are doing stuff to develop your skills you are training.

Soldiers go through those exercises because they are training.

In karate if we are point fighting then we are training. Schools that train exclusively to win tournaments are called sport karate schools and when they spar in class they are "training" towards their tournaments.

Training is an activity in it's own right.

I said check mate for a reason: you have no where to go with this.

 

[drop bear]

Right and as I've stated multiple times if you are doing stuff to develop your skills you are training.

Soldiers go through those exercises because they are training.

In karate if we are point fighting then we are training. Schools that train exclusively to win tournaments are called sport karate schools and when they spar in class they are "training" towards their tournaments.

Training is an activity in it's own right.

I said check mate for a reason: you have no where to go with this.

These point fighting only schools? And where are they?

 

[DaveB]

About Us - Freestyle Combat Karate

 

[Junbu]

Point fighting is not traditional karate, nor is karate an art it is a science

 

[drop bear]

About Us - Freestyle Combat Karate

And what about that school makes it not a martial art.

 

[Junbu]

What I ment is martial=military where does art apply to martial. It has to be a science if we are doing point fighting there are rules also things that cannot be done ,
Martial applies to battlefield there is no room for sport on a battlefield

 

[Junbu]

The original question at the top of the page was "point fighting is it really karate "

 

[drop bear]

What I ment is martial=military where does art apply to martial. It has to be a science if we are doing point fighting there are rules also things that cannot be done ,
Martial applies to battlefield there is no room for sport on a battlefield

How many martial arts do you think were designed for the battlefield.

 

[kuniggety]

What I ment is martial=military where does art apply to martial. It has to be a science if we are doing point fighting there are rules also things that cannot be done ,
Martial applies to battlefield there is no room for sport on a battlefield

I've argued the meaning of martial in the context of martial arts. I think you're making a mistake though by replacing art with science. There is science in art and art in science. It's two sides to one coin.

 

[Junbu]

Originally all of them! were designed for the battlefield.thats why they were created in styles and systems what we do in the dojo has to be battlefield tested and validated the warrior class would have nothing to do with art "on a battlefield" also originally done wearing armory

 

[DaveB]

And what about that school makes it not a martial art.

The words "Sport Karate" in large letters in the top left of the Web page.
The total lack of reference to self defense of any sort.

Please note I have no issue with this school or what they do. In fact I think they would be in agreement with me that they exist to practice and play a sport. No less valuable than a football club and just with different aims than a SD karate club.

That said I could be wrong about them and they may have a combative element for use in real world violent encounters. One doesn't preclude the other.

Now in the vain of your response to me, next time do your own googling and work it out for your self. I'm at the point of repeating myself (actually passed it a while ago) so I now refer you to my previous posts.

 

[drop bear]

The words "Sport Karate" in large letters in the top left of the Web page.
The total lack of reference to self defense of any sort.

Please note I have no issue with this school or what they do. In fact I think they would be in agreement with me that they exist to practice and play a sport. No less valuable than a football club and just with different aims than a SD karate club.

That said I could be wrong about them and they may have a combative element for use in real world violent encounters. One doesn't preclude the other.

Now in the vain of your response to me, next time do your own googling and work it out for your self. I'm at the point of repeating myself (actually passed it a while ago) so I now refer you to my previous posts.

They claim to be a SD Club. Self defence is part of their description. So regardless of how actually effective their method is. Their aim is self defence.

I did google. I went on the website that iska clubs register. And they all at least claim to be karate clubs.

And vain? I mean if you go hitting the grammar card yours really shoud be flawless.

 

[DaveB]

And vain? I mean if you go hitting the grammar card yours really shoud be flawless.

A clear example of saying it doesn't make it so. You called me a grammar nazi, yet I only mentioned it because your post was unintelligible and you were trying to defend the fact by saying that you were out thinking me.

So not a grammar nazi despite being called one.

Also that was a spelling error, not a grammatical one.

 

[DaveB]

You really never will out think me

 

[drop bear]

A clear example of saying it doesn't make it so. You called me a grammar nazi, yet I only mentioned it because your post was unintelligible and you were trying to defend the fact by saying that you were out thinking me.

So not a grammar nazi despite being called one.

Also that was a spelling error, not a grammatical one.

So we will just ovetlook the bit about that school having a self defence focus?

In modern times karate will help you in all aspects of life by developing such qualities as Self Discipline,

Improved Co-ordination, Good Communication Skills, Personal awarenes & Self Confidence, Good Moral Standards as well as being an effective form of Self defence.

 

[Junbu]

Self defense or self protection? Some of these developed traights you mentioned could be gotten by getting the book dont sweat the small stuff. What are we I mean we all doing when attending a dojo? Hopefully we are working on protecting people ourselves our loved ones and just people . Not working to earn a trophy we can show others or collect dust in the corner

 

[DaveB]

So we will just ovetlook the bit about that school having a self defence focus?

In modern times karate will help you in all aspects of life by developing such qualities as Self Discipline,

Improved Co-ordination, Good Communication Skills, Personal awarenes & Self Confidence, Good Moral Standards as well as being an effective form of Self defence.

Again, So What?!

What is it you think you are proving??

If you bothered to take in what I've said in this discussion you would know why I didn't comment on that.

That said I could be wrong about them and they may have a combative element for use in real world violent encounters. One doesn't preclude the other.

People can play sports and train to defend themselves. The two areas actually complement one another, but that doesn't make them the same thing.

Plus whatever this or other clubs choose to do in training, it is still training. The martial art is what they do when the skills are used for their purpose. De Ja vu.

Lastly, and this time I mean it, it is interesting to note how Mr "evidence based" suddenly takes it on faith that a club with nothing but images of sports events on their site and only a passing mention of self defense is self defense focused.

Well your faith won't move this mountain. You lost this game six moves ago and slipping pieces back on the board won't change that.





Re-read my posts.