Questioning the efficacy of Kata

[Zero]

The reason is that the technique is different. It is not just intent. The rules change at high intensity.

Judo is a good example. You see these static judo throws that look different resisted.

I think I might by loosing you again...

I agree that often when a style (some styles...) is put under pressure, either in the ring or on the street, what you see is completely different to the forms practiced and even drilled in the club.

But I have always had great success with judo, in ending fights (more like spats) in high school, when I have used it in brawls to throw people and when I have competed in mma or sparred freestyle. If you have good technique, then judo works and it's pretty hard to resist going over if the timing and tech is right. That said, while someone who knows what they are doing can "block" or negate judo takedowns, the same goes with someone who is an experienced grappler, so that they can avoid or escape from bjj moves.

I am struggling with what your point is about "resistance"...

 

[drop bear]

I think I might by loosing you again...

I agree that often when a style (some styles...) is put under pressure, either in the ring or on the street, what you see is completely different to the forms practiced and even drilled in the club.

But I have always had great success with judo, in ending fights (more like spats) in high school, when I have used it in brawls to throw people and when I have competed in mma or sparred freestyle. If you have good technique, then judo works and it's pretty hard to resist going over if the timing and tech is right. That said, while someone who knows what they are doing can "block" or negate judo takedowns, the same goes with someone who is an experienced grappler, so that they can avoid or escape from bjj moves.

I am struggling with what your point is about "resistance"...

A technique that is used against resistance is a different technique to one that is not used against resistance.

Which is why fights don't have that crisp look that demos do.

Why heavy sparring dosent have he crisp look that light sparring does.

They are actually doing different technique.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

A technique that is used against resistance is a different technique to one that is not used against resistance.

When

- you attack your opponent with "single leg", you have to move in toward him. When you do that, he may move his leading leg back and let you to kiss the dirt.
- your opponent attacks you, he has to move in his legs toward you. Since he is doing the "move in" for you, his leading leg will come into your hand. All you need is just to have your hands ready to catch his leading leg.

You can borrow a resistance opponent's force but you can't borrow a non-resistance opponent's force. It's the same technique. The only different may be when you deal with a

- non-resistance opponent, you have to do the whole technique by yourself.
- resistance opponent, you only have to do part of the technique and your opponent will do part of your technique for you.

In the following clip, your opponent's chest pushing arm gives you 2 free contact points so you can use it to take him down.

 

[Tez3]

When

- you attack your opponent with "single leg", you have to move in toward him. When you do that, he may move his leading leg back and let you to kiss the dirt.
- your opponent attacks you, he has to move in his legs toward you. Since he is doing the "move in" for you, his leading leg will come into your hand. All you need is just to have your hands ready to catch his leading leg.

You can borrow a resistance opponent's force but you can't borrow a non-resistance opponent's force. It's the same technique. The only different may be when you deal with a

- non-resistance opponent, you have to do the whole technique by yourself.
- resistance opponent, you only have to do part of the technique and your opponent will do part of your technique for you.

In the following clip, your opponent's chest pushing arm gives you 2 free contact points so you can use it to take him down.

That's very obvious set up for camera.

 

[drop bear]

When

- you attack your opponent with "single leg", you have to move in toward him. When you do that, he may move his leading leg back and let you to kiss the dirt.
- your opponent attacks you, he has to move in his legs toward you. Since he is doing the "move in" for you, his leading leg will come into your hand. All you need is just to have your hands ready to catch his leading leg.

You can borrow a resistance opponent's force but you can't borrow a non-resistance opponent's force. It's the same technique. The only different may be when you deal with a

- non-resistance opponent, you have to do the whole technique by yourself.
- resistance opponent, you only have to do part of the technique and your opponent will do part of your technique for you.

In the following clip, your opponent's chest pushing arm gives you 2 free contact points so you can use it to take him down.

Non resistance as in a colapso tap out monkey.

If I single leg someone I am running them across the room.

 

[Zero]

A technique that is used against resistance is a different technique to one that is not used against resistance.

Which is why fights don't have that crisp look that demos do.

Why heavy sparring dosent have he crisp look that light sparring does.

They are actually doing different technique.

Maybe, but only if you have been trained or are training incorrectly or if you have poor tech. It's the same tech my friend, if you are talking striking the only difference is it is not thrown with bad intentions. If you are grappling or shooting, the only difference is you are executing your throw with more control or warning to your uke (to avoid unnecessary injury to training partner). If you are on the ground or otherwise doing locks/bars etc, you again are simply doing with more control and less intensity to ensure not going through and damaging joints. But it is absolutely the same tech, boxing, judo, kickboxing, bjj, whatever...

Maybe you are getting extra bang for your buck and getting taught two forms of each tech? Lucky!! : )

I don't say, "hey, now check out my non-tournament kick, see, I put this little squiggle twist thing at the end, that's how you can tell I ain't really fighting"

 

[Zero]

When

- you attack your opponent with "single leg", you have to move in toward him. When you do that, he may move his leading leg back and let you to kiss the dirt.
- your opponent attacks you, he has to move in his legs toward you. Since he is doing the "move in" for you, his leading leg will come into your hand. All you need is just to have your hands ready to catch his leading leg.

You can borrow a resistance opponent's force but you can't borrow a non-resistance opponent's force. It's the same technique. The only different may be when you deal with a

- non-resistance opponent, you have to do the whole technique by yourself.
- resistance opponent, you only have to do part of the technique and your opponent will do part of your technique for you.

In the following clip, your opponent's chest pushing arm gives you 2 free contact points so you can use it to take him down.

Woa-ho-ho-hoo...
Everybody was Kung Fu Fighting, dedededededededdoo...

 

[drop bear]

Maybe, but only if you have been trained or are training incorrectly or if you have poor tech. It's the same tech my friend, if you are talking striking the only difference is it is not thrown with bad intentions. If you are grappling or shooting, the only difference is you are executing your throw with more control or warning to your uke (to avoid unnecessary injury to training partner). If you are on the ground or otherwise doing locks/bars etc, you again are simply doing with more control and less intensity to ensure not going through and damaging joints. But it is absolutely the same tech, boxing, judo, kickboxing, bjj, whatever...

Maybe you are getting extra bang for your buck and getting taught two forms of each tech? Lucky!! : )

I don't say, "hey, now check out my non-tournament kick, see, I put this little squiggle twist thing at the end, that's how you can tell I ain't really fighting"

It depends where your reference is. If you are referring back to resisted training then ou would be correct. If you are not referring back to resisted training then anything could happen.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Why does the other guy run off all the time? I mean it it 2 on 2 and you bugger off leaving your mate to get bashed.

Survival mentality?

Anyway. That scenario is competitive. You put people in a position were both sides are trying to win.

That's what I need. Some body armor, so I can go hard like that lol. The good about the scenario is that these guys aren't going to panic in a real situation where they get jumped like that. It will be something that they are familiar with, and they are probably developing some tactile sensing and awareness as well just by defending and trying to determine where the treats are.

 

[JowGaWolf]

It depends where your reference is. If you are referring back to resisted training then ou would be correct. If you are not referring back to resisted training then anything could happen.

Drop bear what the heck is that mess? No contact sparring? Might as well stand still the other guy won't hit you anyway.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Why can't a competitive mindset deescalate?

You just set the rules that if you don't fight you win.

The non competitive band wagon becomes this idea that you can either not pressure test of half test ideas. Because competition does not work in S.D.

And it is a misconception.

So we do a S. D. And you do a drill where they throw one punch and then stand there and collapse. Compliant and ego stroking.


You do a drill where you put in a token effort to attack the guy but ultimately loose due to an expectation that they should be successful in the technique they are learning. Semi compliant and ego stroking.(this is where I would place intent)

You do a drill where you attempt to attack the guy to conclusion. Their defence either works or it dosent. This is competitive.

For self defence to need to train all three methods.

Removal of the final component will make it appear that you have learned the technique. It is quicker and more personally satisfying. But it removes a vital aspect of self defence.

So by black belt level you still can't do the technique properly.

Actually ignore that one. Here is a much better example.
"Come on guys don't let them get back up" facepalm.

lol not the 3 hour black belt test again. They were kind of fresh for 3 hours worth of combat drills. I can do my beginner form back to back for 10 minutes and I'm ready to drop lol.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm so glad I missed this new conversation lol.

 

[Zero]

It depends where your reference is. If you are referring back to resisted training then ou would be correct. If you are not referring back to resisted training then anything could happen.

Of course, but the techniques are always the same. It is good that "anything" can happen in non-scripted, free sparring, because that's pretty much what you face when out of the dojo. Sure, there will be changes to how techs may end up being thrown: you may be more off balance, may have to modify footing or stance depending on ground conditions or even you own landing depending on form of takedown or throw, if you actually go for that in a street fight or SD situation...your tech might be a somewhat smothered as well, if you are caught by surprise.

In other words, things can start to look messy. But you are always talking about the same techs.

That's why, in my view, a mutually agreed street fight is different to SD. When you square off after some bad mouthing or a shoulder barge/bump, things may get a lot nastier than in a ring but you still have the time and option to use plenty of techs. But in SD, while anything can happen, most of you go-to responses to "anything" should be simple and easily/quickly executed, as you may well be on the back foot, off balance/off-guard and find yourself without the space to be able to move freely. Depending on numbers you may also have to quickly rattle off a number of strikes to several assailants, while hopefully being able to keep moving so that you are only ever directly faced by the one bad'un, using their numbers to jam each of them (Musashi 101).

I'm not going to go to ground and/or work on locks/submissions when faced with more than one assailant, it will be gross motor, heavy impact action.

 

[Zero]

It depends where your reference is. If you are referring back to resisted training then ou would be correct. If you are not referring back to resisted training then anything could happen.

I have no idea what that video is...

 

[Phobius]

Training without resistance would in my opinion feel like being shown the end of a movie and then explain the entire story for your friends.

A technique may be performed in perfect shape but if one does not know how to get into that perfect shape, one has to recreate and understand this at that instant moment when the technique is needed to save life. A perfect technique is the goal, resistance points out what is good or bad when trying to achieve your goal.

Are we discussing the use of resistance or not in total? As for sparring, if no resistance what is the point of sparring? You are then two guys doing their own individual thing without no concern about your opponent. If only the movements were scripted it would be nothing less than kata.

Reacting to an opponents movement when that opponent is not a threat will only teach someone very bad habits and will make them predictable and beaten if the day for fighting comes.

 

[drop bear]

Drop bear what the heck is that mess? No contact sparring? Might as well stand still the other guy won't hit you anyway.

Apparently non contact sparring is just like full contact without the contact.

 

[drop bear]

Training without resistance would in my opinion feel like being shown the end of a movie and then explain the entire story for your friends.

A technique may be performed in perfect shape but if one does not know how to get into that perfect shape, one has to recreate and understand this at that instant moment when the technique is needed to save life. A perfect technique is the goal, resistance points out what is good or bad when trying to achieve your goal.

Are we discussing the use of resistance or not in total? As for sparring, if no resistance what is the point of sparring? You are then two guys doing their own individual thing without no concern about your opponent. If only the movements were scripted it would be nothing less than kata.

Reacting to an opponents movement when that opponent is not a threat will only teach someone very bad habits and will make them predictable and beaten if the day for fighting comes.

To make a point of reference. OP wondered why his black belts were crap when they did self defence drills. And my answer was basically because nobody has ever actually attacked them.

 

[drop bear]

That's why, in my view, a mutually agreed street fight is different to SD.

No fundamental difference.

But probably worth its own thread.

 

[O Saru]

To be honest, I didn't feel like reading all the comments.

Come to my dojo and I can show you practical kata applications. Also check out Iain Abernathy or Ray Parker. The more "traditional" or "old" the kata is, usually it is more effective.

 

[drop bear]

To be honest, I didn't feel like reading all the comments.

Come to my dojo and I can show you practical kata applications. Also check out Iain Abernathy or Ray Parker. The more "traditional" or "old" the kata is, usually it is more effective.

Is that physically possible? Where are you?