Shadow Boxing vs Kata fallacy argument.

[drop bear]

I haven't made any arguments against either in this thread. I just pointed out what I've most often seen as the point that brought up references to shadow boxing. And, yes, the argument does apply to shadow boxing, and every other drill in existinence. The basic argument (usually made against kata and one-steps) is that you're practicing a specific progression/combo, and you can't know that's what your opponent will do next. Even if I'm just shadow boxing a jab-cross combo, the argument applies, because I'm practicing a combo, and if they - for instance - step under the jab or counter-punch, that cross probably won't be my next choice. Your reaction to it being applied to shadow boxing is rather the point, itself. That it's a sequence of moves that may or may not apply to a specific situation is not really a problem. The problem arises if too much time is spent practicing an improbable sequence that doesn't provide some other benefit.

You are not practicing a specific progression or combo. You are making up the combo as you go.

 

[Acronym]

I've no knowledge at all about Karate kata, but I will point out there is much misinformation in print. Some stuff is just wrong, and that may be the case here.

Some argue that the applications are wrong but all that matters if the de facto situation. It is a fact that they have been passed over as these applications

 

[Acronym]

Another thing is that you fight out if the same stances that you shadow box. You don't fight out of the same stances that you do kata. Whatever it is that you are trying to ingrain, it's all artificial and contextually bound to the kata practise

 

[Graywalker]

Interesting topic.

I look at kata like a manual of techniques, but the sequence of movements, as related to combat, is not set in stone. They are away to remember techniques, and they can be practiced in a manner of 'shadow boxing' if one desires.

I think one of the issues, is that some believe that shadow work, is exclusive to boxing.

I do agree with the a posters statement that, it is better to have some idea or experience in sparring, to have an effective training session in shadow boxing.

Kata are patterns, grouped together, and we should understand, that books, video and other things we take for granted today, didn't exist in the past.

Regardless, we all learn patterns while learning various strikes.

Another mistake I see, is some believe that, when engaging in combat, you will use Kata...that just simply shows ignorance of kata and its use.

Shadow boxing, is form individualized and no two people are going to be alike in their delivery. Kata being simply a manual, in my opinion, is a set sequence of movements, with not just techniques, but how to move your feet through stance changes to escape.

Boxing, as a sport, is not looking to haul butt out of the ring. Neither is sport karate, hence why in the 80's applications were largely ignored for sparring competition.

Enter, counter, close and haul butt outta there, is a principle of non sport karate. Kata helps to teach this, I believe.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You are not practicing a specific progression or combo. You are making up the combo as you go.

I agree you can be making up as you go. That doesn't contradict what I said. You're trying really hard to argue, but I'm not quite sure about what.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Some argue that the applications are wrong but all that matters if the de facto situation. It is a fact that they have been passed over as these applications

I think you mean "passed along". And in some cases, that might be true. Doesn't make them the original applications, nor even the right interpretation of the intended movements. The point: you're making claims about something as if it were universally so. Some here are telling you that's not a correct interpretation - that someone claimed so in a book doesn't make it correct or universal. If I teach a technique incorrectly, that doesn't make the technique incorrect.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Another thing is that you fight out if the same stances that you shadow box. You don't fight out of the same stances that you do kata. Whatever it is that you are trying to ingrain, it's all artificial and contextually bound to the kata practise

This appears to be the case in the Karate kata I've seen. I suspect the stances used have a secondary purpose (developing specific muscles, working on balance, forcing the use of specific mechanics, etc.). Whether that works or not is a matter of some debate.

 

[drop bear]

I agree you can be making up as you go. That doesn't contradict what I said. You're trying really hard to argue, but I'm not quite sure about what.

It directly contradicts what you are saying.

"You're practicing a specific progression/combo,"

No. You are not. You are making it up as you go. Especially unlike Kata. In that you are not making it up as you go.

If I decide to throw out a cart wheel in the middle of shadow boxing I can.

"and you can't know that's what your opponent will do next."

Also no.

You are reacting to an imaginary oponant as you are making it up as you go. As if you had a real oponant there. Contradictory to Kata that presets the oponants movements.


"You're trying really hard to argue,"

And no again as these contradictions are pretty easily evident.

The point is so far the comparison between Kata and shadow boxing as an argument to support Kata. Is not a very good one.

As the points you made against Kata. Are not really able to be made against shadow boxing.

 

[Graywalker]

You are reacting to an imaginary oponant as you are making it up as you go. As if you had a real oponant there. Contradictory to Kata that presets the oponants movements.

Imagining an opponent attacking you, is a pre-set thought, in shadow boxing by the individual, using their own imagination.
In a set pattern, planned by the individual...pre arranged.

I think the difference is, one original to individual thought, the other based on what is believed to have been a tested progression of techniques.

Maybe I am confused by your statement and possibly reading to much into it.

 

[Flying Crane]

You don't fight out of the same stances that you do kata.

We do. but I can only speak to my own experience.

Whatever it is that you are trying to ingrain, it's all artificial and contextually bound to the kata practise

This is not true. Again, I can only speak to my own experience.

 

[punisher73]

The word "kata" would roughly translate "form" or a way of doing things.

But, katas don't have to be long set of movements like most people imagine. For example, Judo uses kata in its training methods as well in certain two partner drills. Kendo uses kata with its two partner drills. All kata is, after removing our "mystical baggage" that people have attached to it, are pre-arranged movements.

So, if you are boxing and throwing out a predetermined set of movements then you are doing "kata" (for example, jab,cross, hook, short right). If you are just "making it up" as you react to your imaginary opponent, then you are shadow boxing. If you are going through your set of karate moves in a predetermined pattern, then you are doing "kata". If you are using your kata as a template and then playing around with what-ifs of what the attacker may or may not be doing and you are changing things up, then you are "shadow boxing".

Kata is a predetermined set of movements
Shadow Boxing is not a predetermined set of movements.

All martial methods use both methods in their training, but the emphasis is different in each art as to the importance of their "kata".

 

[Acronym]

Enter, counter, close and haul butt outta there, is a principle of non sport karate. Kata helps to teach this, I believe.

Huh? Sounds exactly like the principle of Point Karate. Regardless you don't use the same footwork in Kata

 

[Acronym]

We do. but I can only speak to my own experience.


This is not true. Again, I can only speak to my own experience.

Why do you assume that I know what art(s)you practise? Kata is operationally defined in this thread as patterns passed on from Okinawa Karate.

 

[Acronym]

I think you mean "passed along". And in some cases, that might be true. Doesn't make them the original applications, nor even the right interpretation of the intended movements. The point: you're making claims about something as if it were universally so. Some here are telling you that's not a correct interpretation - that someone claimed so in a book doesn't make it correct or universal. If I teach a technique incorrectly, that doesn't make the technique incorrect.

I meant passed on. Even if there were more sensible applications, you don't learn footwork for fighting in Karate Katas, which once again makes it an isolated excercise instead of a subset of a coherent, uniform system.

 

[Acronym]

All martial methods use both methods in their training, but the emphasis is different in each art as to the importance of their "kata".

Not they don't since I don't change stances depending on whether I shadow box or spar in boxing, but do so in Karate, TaeKwondo, etc. Hence why they cannot be equivalent.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Another thing is that you fight out if the same stances that you shadow box. You don't fight out of the same stances that you do kata

I can't speak for other systems but with the system I train I fight out of the same stances that I use in my forms. For me, I use a variety of stances. I just don't restrict myself to only using stances from the forms. Some systems exaggerate their stances by going super low or super wide. I like to keep things within a functional range. I can take a low stance, it's just not a super low stance.

This is about as low as I get because this is how low I need to be to defend against certain attempts and attacks. The only reason I'm this low is because my training partner is short. There is no need to be this low with one of the tall guys in the background.

The thing with kata /form, is that depending on how you train it, you'll only be in that stance for a quick second before you get into your next technique. The dramatic pauses that we see are usually for show during forms competition. Other pauses allow you to reclaim yourself to either catch your breath or refocus.

Here you can see a variety of basic stances shown

We can see similar transitions between stances in the kata here.

The faster you move your feet, the closer your kata footwork gets to fighting. Add an unpredictable opponent and your footwork will move in and out of stances.

 

[Flying Crane]

Why do you assume that I know what art(s)you practise? Kata is operationally defined in this thread as patterns passed on from Okinawa Karate.

I practice a Chinese method. Okinawan methods were heavily influenced by Chinese methods.

Meh.

 

[isshinryuronin]

The word "kata" would roughly translate "form" or a way of doing things.

But, katas don't have to be long set of movements like most people imagine. For example, Judo uses kata in its training methods as well in certain two partner drills. Kendo uses kata with its two partner drills. All kata is, after removing our "mystical baggage" that people have attached to it, are pre-arranged movements.

So, if you are boxing and throwing out a predetermined set of movements then you are doing "kata" (for example, jab,cross, hook, short right). If you are just "making it up" as you react to your imaginary opponent, then you are shadow boxing. If you are going through your set of karate moves in a predetermined pattern, then you are doing "kata". If you are using your kata as a template and then playing around with what-ifs of what the attacker may or may not be doing and you are changing things up, then you are "shadow boxing".

Kata is a predetermined set of movements
Shadow Boxing is not a predetermined set of movements.

All martial methods use both methods in their training, but the emphasis is different in each art as to the importance of their "kata".

I am in agreement with your conclusions / definition of kata and shadow boxing - kata is defined and shadow boxing more freestyle. I think this describes the two well enough for most purposes. Karate uses both - it's not one or the other. For me, working out on the heavy bag, throwing techniques as I see the bag as an active opponent is just like shadow boxing in front of a mirror, just more tiring. I think it's main purpose is cardio exercise and drilling combos. While kata has that as well, its main purpose is to pass on the techniques of the style and perfect form. Kata and shadow boxing are complementary training methods, not mutually exclusive.

 

[isshinryuronin]

I meant passed on. Even if there were more sensible applications, you don't learn footwork for fighting in Karate Katas, which once again makes it an isolated excercise instead of a subset of a coherent, uniform system.

I would say the footwork-Kata statement has some truth to it - on the surface. Most katas are stylized, with dramatic static ending positions good for some competitions. It's like looking at every fourth frame in a film. What is often missed is what's happening in those missing three frames. It is those frames that contain the meaning of that last static position.

Take a basic "low block" for example. In kata, often the movement freezes there, where the arm would strike a middle/low front kick or punch (the 4th frame). But now look at the 3 missing frames of our film: There you might find an inside block along the way, a grab before the "blocking" move, allowing you to whip the opponent's arm down thus breaking his balance and creating openings. This last point may lead to that final "block" actually being a strike (as it usually is in Okinawan karate.)

The kata stances you refer to are similar. There is stuff going on between and during the stances (actually or potentially) that are not readily seen. The path the foot takes during the step and the bend of the knee at the end. These elements position one to immobilize the opponent's lead leg, break his stance and set up a takedown, for example. I would definitely call this "footwork for fighting."

You are correct that most kata do not teach the type of things I've mentioned here. In some cases these things were purposely left out, in others, they were just lost over the years. Kata was originally designed to be taught personally from master to student. There was no writing or video. Knowledge was passed on by oral tradition. This is where those missing 3 frames of the film were explained.

It was explained that kata is a template that once well understood, can and should be deviated from in combat. Those deep stances should be shortened up a bit, those steps straight ahead should be angled off to the side, the stepping leg should strike the opponent's knee before setting down, or act as a check for a kick. So you can't judge a continuous movement by just looking at one frame of a film. You need to see the missing three that reveal the meaning. Sometimes even then, you can't "see" what is there. That's why a well-versed quality instructor, is needed to be sought out that knows how to read between the lines and pass on oral tradition.

 

[Acronym]

I practice a Chinese method. Okinawan methods were heavily influenced by Chinese methods.

Meh.

There was a side by side of katas on Youtube a few years ago and it looked very different from todays Karate