Shinkyokushin vs Shito ryu for self defence ?

[Hanzou]

What doesn't jive Hanzou is that you want to make this a BJJ thing when this incident already occurred and has nothing to do with BJJ.

I said ground fighting, not specifically Bjj. Which is why I mentioned both Bjj and MMA in my earlier response.

Not only that, the young lady fought off her attacker utilizing her training in Karate which you seem to have a problem with. I get it you love BJJ as do I but... this incident of self-defense doesn't involve BJJ. It has nothing to do with BJJ and this young lady was successful in what she did! We can assume that she might have been better off with BJJ but that is all it is an assumption. What we do know is she was successful in fighting off this criminal and we should be tipping our hats to her and the training that allowed her to fight him off!

If a third party needed to intervene to get the criminal off of her, how can you honestly say that she fought him off?

 

[elder999]

I

If a third party needed to intervene to get the criminal off of her, how can you honestly say that she fought him off?

If she hadn't resisted with the skills that she had, she might not have been around for the third party to intervene-you'd be amazed how easy it is to snatch someone off the street.

 

[Hanzou]

If she hadn't resisted with the skills that she had, she might not have been around for the third party to intervene-you'd be amazed how easy it is to snatch someone off the street.

No argument there.

As I've said before, having some skills is better than having no skills.

 

[Chris Parker]

Sparring is a fairly large training aspect.

Depends on the school, you realise… I mean… in everything I do, there's, oh, let's see… none. So… not so much a "fairly large training aspect"…

If you're not applying your techniques in a full contact environment, how can you develop proper striking power, or learn how to handle a blow to the body?

You're kidding, right? Are you genuinely so woefully ignorant as to think that there is only one way of developing power or conditioning?!? Seriously?!?!? You do know that such things have been trained without sparring, especially without "full contact" sparring in many systems for centuries, yeah? And besides, power training is often better done outside of sparring, full contact or not… as there's no need to hold back then… and trust me, you go "full contact" with me, you're going to understand why power is trained separately… when you get up again.

The same applies to grappling arts. If you're not sparring in Judo, how are you learning how to grip? How are you learning how to throw or take a throw?

Kata.

Seriously. That's what it's for (in part).

So if I get knocked down in a self defense situation, and a guy gets on top of me and I apply guard, break his posture, and sweep him to gain dominant positioning to either deal punishment, or run away, how is that "diametrically opposed" to the sparring I've done in class numerous times?

Wow, that has got to be one of the most impressive examples of showing how much you don't have a clue about the argument I've seen in a long time…

Here's the thing… you get that the actual difference is in the context and set-up, yeah? Not "what technique I use"? Cause, when all's said and done, the technique is irrelevant… contextual training is what's important. But if you really want to know what the difference is, it's in your attitude, and what you do next…

I was talking about full contact sparring in general, not only Kyokushin. Nice dodge though.

You're kidding, yeah?!? This entire thread is about (Shin)Kyokushin versus Shito Ryu!!!! You were directly referencing the OP's comments on the different sparring ideologies of the two systems… so yes, it absolutely was about Kyokushin style sparring specifically!

Dude… read.

But let's talk about Kyokushin; Taking full contact blows to the body can just be as helpful as taking full contact blows to the face.

You don't get much into biomechanics much, do you?

The same principle applies here. If you don't know how to take a hit, all that pretty striking goes out the window.

Again, how do you know that's not going on? How do you know that Shito Ryu's sparring is not "full contact"? There's no mention of it anywhere… just a "point" system…

Additionally, while they don't allow punches to the head, they do allow kicks to the head.

Yes, they do… most Kyokushin knockouts come from kicks, because the hands are held low (not needing to protect their face from punches)… that doesn't mean that they're regularly kicking each other in the head, though…

In the end the point remains; Full contact toughens up the body.

As does any number of other training methodologies, such as Hojo Undo conditioning…

You need a toughened body in order to deal with a bad situation.

Er… well… huh?

No. You don't. For one thing, it will depend on the situation. For another, you're basically saying that, unless you spend lots of time dealing with people hitting you, you can't possibly handle a "bad situation"… which is kinda disproved by everyone who's not a WWE wrestler getting through such events. You know those 7 year old girls that fight off abduction attempts? Had "toughened bodies" did they?

Wanna rethink that?

You don't consider someone invading your personal space and trying to do you bodily harm as a "violation" of your person? Interesting….

No. It's a violation of personal space, but a violation of the person involves putting something inside the person… and, in the context you used it, the common implication is some form of sexual assault, such as rape.

Again, you have a rather bizarre way of interpreting words…

Which part of my statement doesn't coincide with what occurred in the article?

Honestly, I don't think you'd recognise it if it was spelled out in flaming letters.

Except you would be wrong. There are strikes, takedowns, weapon defenses, and throws within Bjj. Granted the striking is typically a set up for a takedown or throw, but its in there nonetheless.

BJJ striking is lesser than Karate's grappling… it's weapon defences are, well, far from optimal… it's throws are minimalist and often a little sub-optimal in execution, and it's takedowns are simply a means to an end. Frankly, I don't consider any of these to be really dealing with those ranges the same way you don't consider Karate to have a real grappling range.

But you missed the point again. You make blanket statements about what is missing in other systems (which is pretty much always the one thing you guys deal most in, regardless of how much your system is missing as well), stating that they are missing "crucial ranges", and I'm pointing out that the same thing can be done with BJJ just as easily (if not more so). The aim is to open your eyes, and maybe get you to realise that your system is not the be-all end-all you keep trying to position it as.

In order to be good on the ground, we have to get people to the ground in the first place.

Yeah… look, to be frank, I'm not overtly impressed by anything shown in that video… from the mechanical issues, the possibility of back problems and strain, the poorly done hand goshi, to the limited usefulness of many of the methods shown, and it's a good thing you guys go to a double leg more often…

Um again, what part of my statement doesn't jive with the article being discussed?

No Cookies | Herald Sun

From the article;

Not good. Not good at all.

For one thing, that's a different article… so…

For another, there is nothing that supports your ideas of what would or would not have "worked better"… but the main point is that you're missing how these events actually work in the real world… you know, not in sparring/rolling/tournaments…

 

[Hanzou]

Depends on the school, you realise… I mean… in everything I do, there's, oh, let's see… none. So… not so much a "fairly large training aspect"…

Well we're not talking about your system are we? We're talking about Karate. Karate exponents who don't spar, or are trained via point fighting can't fight their way out of a paper bag.

You're kidding, right? Are you genuinely so woefully ignorant as to think that there is only one way of developing power or conditioning?!? Seriously?!?!? You do know that such things have been trained without sparring, especially without "full contact" sparring in many systems for centuries, yeah? And besides, power training is often better done outside of sparring, full contact or not… as there's no need to hold back then…

Uh yeah. The only way you're going to learn how to properly punch and kick people is to actually punch and kick people. The only way to learn how to get kicked and punched by people is to get punched and kicked by people. Grappling is no different. The only way you can learn how to throw or choke someone, or to converse take throws and chokes from someone is to actually experience it. Now you can experience that on the concrete and the hospital, or you can experience it in the relative safety of the gym.

I mean, do you seriously believe someone in Judo (for example) who has never participated in live sparring could beat someone who does live sparring at every practice? I've actually seen this happen, and its not pretty. The practitioner who wasn't sparring constantly got steamrolled.

and trust me, you go "full contact" with me, you're going to understand why power is trained separately… when you get up again.

LoL! Okay bud.

Kata.

Seriously. That's what it's for (in part).

Which is why almost none of the grappling arts practice kata right? Wrestling, Bjj, and Sombo don't practice kata. On the other hand, every single grappling system does a form of live sparring and they do that form of live sparring all the time.

That includes Judo.

Wow, that has got to be one of the most impressive examples of showing how much you don't have a clue about the argument I've seen in a long time…

Here's the thing… you get that the actual difference is in the context and set-up, yeah? Not "what technique I use"? Cause, when all's said and done, the technique is irrelevant… contextual training is what's important. But if you really want to know what the difference is, it's in your attitude, and what you do next…

That was one heck of a dodge. Bravo!

You're kidding, yeah?!? This entire thread is about (Shin)Kyokushin versus Shito Ryu!!!! You were directly referencing the OP's comments on the different sparring ideologies of the two systems… so yes, it absolutely was about Kyokushin style sparring specifically!

Dude… read.

Yeah, and the example I used can be applied to the thread about Kyokushin and Shito Ryu. In fact I pointed out exactly how my example applies to Kyokushin in my response.

Again, how do you know that's not going on? How do you know that Shito Ryu's sparring is not "full contact"? There's no mention of it anywhere… just a "point" system…

Because if it was full contact the OP would have mentioned it in his post.

Yes, they do… most Kyokushin knockouts come from kicks, because the hands are held low (not needing to protect their face from punches)… that doesn't mean that they're regularly kicking each other in the head, though…

And again the point is that getting punched and kicked full blast is more beneficial in learning how to take and give blows than doing anything else.

As does any number of other training methodologies, such as Hojo Undo conditioning…

Not as well as taking blows to the body.

Er… well… huh?

No. You don't. For one thing, it will depend on the situation. For another, you're basically saying that, unless you spend lots of time dealing with people hitting you, you can't possibly handle a "bad situation"… which is kinda disproved by everyone who's not a WWE wrestler getting through such events. You know those 7 year old girls that fight off abduction attempts? Had "toughened bodies" did they?

Wanna rethink that?

Nope.

No. It's a violation of personal space, but a violation of the person involves putting something inside the person… and, in the context you used it, the common implication is some form of sexual assault, such as rape.

Again, you have a rather bizarre way of interpreting words…

Yet it was still a violation. I never said it was on the same scale, simply that it was a violation and I had to deal with that violation or suffer the consequences. I certainly wasn't going to get raped, but I could have very easily been killed or put into a vegetative state considering that the assailant was armed with a hammer.

Honestly, I don't think you'd recognize it if it was spelled out in flaming letters.

Yeah, that response doesn't coincide with what you quoted.

BJJ striking is lesser than Karate's grappling… it's weapon defenses are, well, far from optimal… it's throws are minimalist and often a little sub-optimal in execution, and it's takedowns are simply a means to an end. Frankly, I don't consider any of these to be really dealing with those ranges the same way you don't consider Karate to have a real grappling range.

Well no one asked for your opinion. I was simply pointing out that they're there.

But you missed the point again. You make blanket statements about what is missing in other systems (which is pretty much always the one thing you guys deal most in, regardless of how much your system is missing as well), stating that they are missing "crucial ranges", and I'm pointing out that the same thing can be done with BJJ just as easily (if not more so). The aim is to open your eyes, and maybe get you to realize that your system is not the be-all end-all you keep trying to position it as.

Saying that karate is lacking ground grappling isn't a blanket statement. Further, I have yet to encounter a a in school that doesn't encourage cross training. I've encountered plenty of karate schools that discouraged it.

Yeah… look, to be frank, I'm not overtly impressed by anything shown in that video… from the mechanical issues, the possibility of back problems and strain, the poorly done hand gosh, to the limited usefulness of many of the methods shown, and it's a good thing you guys go to a double leg more often…

Well I'd love to see some examples of throws and takedowns from your system for comparison purposes.

For one thing, that's a different article… so…

For another, there is nothing that supports your ideas of what would or would not have "worked better"… but the main point is that you're missing how these events actually work in the real world… you know, not in sparring/rolling/tournaments…

It's the first article that was posted about the incident. Subsequent articles had significant changes in an attempt to make the victim look like she held her own more. I have no idea why the account was changed, but it was changed nonetheless.

As for what works in the real world; We have already discussed examples of women using ground grappling to save themselves from assailants. If this young woman had spent 15 years in Bjj, she would have been a black belt in the system. It's highly doubtful that a black belt in Bjj wouldn't be able to handle herself on the ground. Why? Because she would have had 15 years of grappling against men of varying sizes under her belt.

And yeah, actual grappling, not pretend kata/larping grappling.

 

[elder999]

Well we're not talking about your system are we? We're talking about Karate. Karate exponents who don't spar, or are trained via point fighting can't fight their way out of a paper bag.

This is too broad a generality-for hundreds of years, karate exponents trained without sparring, or via point fighting, have defended themselves successfully, fighting out of life and death situations, and against other trained-and sometimes armed-martial artists. There are several documented incidents of this.Gichin Funakoshi, Gogen Yamaguchi (who is generally credited with founding jiyu kumite in 1935-as in prior to that, there was no "free sparring" in karate), and Anko Itosu are just a few of the pioneers who fought and defended themselves successfully (and in some cases, repeatedly) without the kind of training you're advocating.After karate came to the U.S.,practitioners who trained with point sparring successfully used their skills to defend themselves for decades-in many cases they were law enforcement or corrections officers, and those incidents became public record.

Uh yeah. The only way you're going to learn how to properly punch and kick people is to actually punch and kick people

Not true-see above..
.

The only way to learn how to get kicked and punched by people is to get punched and kicked by people.

Not true. See above. ( )

Grappling is no different.

Actually, most grappling is different! You can certainly learn the mechanics and skills without a resistant opponent, but eventually you need to-and can. Unlike karate, where much more significant damage can occur from contact, grappling can be practiced at nearly full power to just short of where damage will occur (though the only way to really learn this is without resistance at first.)

Which is why almost none of the grappling arts practice kata right? Wrestling, Bjj, and Sombo don't practice kata. On the other hand, every single grappling system does a form of live sparring and they do that form of live sparring all the time.

That includes Judo.

Not really true at all-"kata" are drills, and if you think of the wrestling, BJJ and Sambo drills done in class, then you can see that they do practice a form of kata.

If it's prearranged, it's kata.

In classical jujutsu there was almost nothing but kata: a two man exercise of pre-arranged movements is a kata. Also, while those styles have some form of sparring, they don't engage in it "all the time."

I can't even begin to tell you how many judo classes I had where there was no randori...but I'm pretty sure that until I turned 16, they were in the majority

 

[Hanzou]

This is too broad a generality-for hundreds of years, karate exponents trained without sparring, or via point fighting, have defended themselves successfully, fighting out of life and death situations, and against other trained-and sometimes armed-martial artists. There are several documented incidents of this.Gichin Funakoshi, Gogen Yamaguchi (who is generally credited with founding jiyu kumite in 1935-as in prior to that, there was no "free sparring" in karate), and Anko Itosu are just a few of the pioneers who fought and defended themselves successfully (and in some cases, repeatedly) without the kind of training you're advocating.After karate came to the U.S.,practitioners who trained with point sparring successfully used their skills to defend themselves for decades-in many cases they were law enforcement or corrections officers, and those incidents became public record.

Yeah, sure they did.

What you described above is nothing more than folklore, legends, and anecdotal evidence. When we look at documented history the exact opposite is the case. Numerous fighting exhibitions throughout the 20th century show us that exponents who spar constantly plaster those exponents who don't. In the modern age, we see this happen over and over and over again. I mean, would you honestly put someone who has only practiced kata against a boxer or MMA fighter and expect them to last more than 10 seconds before their face hits the canvas?

For that matter, are there any Karate styles left today that don't practice free sparring?

Actually, most grappling is different! You can certainly learn the mechanics and skills without a resistant opponent, but eventually you need to-and can. Unlike karate, where much more significant damage can occur from contact, grappling can be practiced at nearly full power to just short of where damage will occur (though the only way to really learn this is without resistance at first.)

Okay, so which grappling style doesn't practice free sparring on a consistent basis? Feel free to list them.

Not really true at all-"kata" are drills, and if you think of the wrestling, BJJ and Sambo drills done in class, then you can see that they do practice a form of kata. In classical jujutsu there was almost nothing but kata: a two man exercise of pre-arranged movements is a kata. Also, while those styles have some form of sparring, they don't engage in it "all the time."

Semantics. When we say kata, we're talking kata. We're not talking about drills and Chris wasn't talking about drills.

Uchikomi for example is a drill, not a kata.

 

[Buka]

I had to go read the OP. I had forgotten what the hell was originally being talked about.
I wonder what the poster thinks of our friendly martial arts community, if he's even still following along. Probably thinks of us as a bunch of primadonna pussies.

I think you guys fight here more than you do in your dojos. I dunno', must be some kind of respect thing.

 

[Paul_D]

I mean, would you honestly put someone who has only practiced kata against a boxer or MMA fighter and expect them to last more than 10 seconds before their face hits the canvas?

Your argument makes no sense..

Kata is a record of techniques designed specially (and only) to deal with civilian violence/self defence They are not, and have never been, designed to be used in fighting/consensual violence/combat sports. People who practised Karate (before it also became a combat sport) used the techniques within kata to defend themselves. Self Defence has nothing to do with fighting. Your argument to disprove the fact that Karate's techniques for dealing with civilian violence/self defence would work for self defence/criminal violence is that: if you were to take someone who does not train for consensual violence/fighting/combat sports and you were to test them in the arena of consensual violence/combat sport/fighting arena against someone who trains specially for consensual violence/combat sports/fighting then they would lose.

Well yes, of course they will. That's not what they are training for, and that's not what the techniques they are using are designed to do, so of course they will lose. But fighting/consensual violence/combats sports and criminal violence/self defence are two different things. Banana's and oranges are two different things, but you don't try to make orange juice with banana's, and they when you fail, deride banana's as having no value, that would be idiotic, and yet that s the basis of your argument.

Arguing that techniques designed for self defence won't work for self defence, based purely on the fact that they won't work in the totally different environment of combat sports, is as pointless as it is stupid. Combat sports/fighting/consensual violence, are not the same thing as self defence/criminal violence. It is common sense therefore that they requires different approaches techniques and training.

 

[Flying Crane]

I mean, would you honestly put someone who has only practiced kata against a boxer or MMA fighter and expect them to last more than 10 seconds before their face hits the canvas?

Nobody else ever says "only" kata. You are the only one saying that, as a way to build an argument for the sake of argument, an argument that nobody else is having and that doesn't actually exist.

Anyone who understands kata knows that it is only one tool of many, in the training toolbox. It is never "only" kata. Only those who do not understand it or who choose deliberate ignorance in the face of repeated education, think otherwise. This is you.

 

[Hanzou]

Your argument makes no sense..

Kata is a record of techniques designed specially (and only) to deal with civilian violence/self defence They are not, and have never been, designed to be used in fighting/consensual violence/combat sports. People who practised Karate (before it also became a combat sport) used the techniques within kata to defend themselves. Self Defence has nothing to do with fighting. Your argument to disprove the fact that Karate's techniques for dealing with civilian violence/self defence would work for self defence/criminal violence is that: if you were to take someone who does not train for consensual violence/fighting/combat sports and you were to test them in the arena of consensual violence/combat sport/fighting arena against someone who trains specially for consensual violence/combat sports/fighting then they would lose.

Well yes, of course they will. That's not what they are training for, and that's not what the techniques they are using are designed to do, so of course they will lose. But fighting/consensual violence/combats sports and criminal violence/self defence are two different things. Banana's and oranges are two different things, but you don't try to make orange juice with banana's, and they when you fail, deride banana's as having no value, that would be idiotic, and yet that s the basis of your argument.

Arguing that techniques designed for self defence won't work for self defence, based purely on the fact that they won't work in the totally different environment of combat sports, is as pointless as it is stupid. Combat sports/fighting/consensual violence, are not the same thing as self defence/criminal violence. It is common sense therefore that they requires different approaches techniques and training.

If you can't fight, how in the world are you going to be able to defend yourself?

The idea that you can defend yourself with zero or subpar fighting ability is complete nonsense.

 

[ballen0351]

If you can't fight, how in the world are you going to be able to defend yourself?

The idea that you can defend yourself with zero or subpar fighting ability is complete nonsense.

well for starters sport fighting has nothing to do with self defense

 

[Hanzou]

well for starters sport fighting has nothing to do with self defense

Who said anything about sport fighting? I'm talking about fighting period.

 

[ballen0351]

Who said anything about sport fighting?

ummm you did with your nonsense about not lasting 10 seconds with a sport fighter

I'm talking about fighting period.

yeah and plenty of people knew how to fight long before the UFC and still do without sparing or competing in a sport

 

[Hanzou]

ummm you did with your nonsense about not lasting 10 seconds with a sport fighteryeah and

Ah a quote taken out of context. Gotcha.

plenty of people knew how to fight long before the UFC and still do without sparing or competing in a sport

Evidence?

 

[ballen0351]

Evidence?

evidence that people know how to fight?

 

[Hanzou]

evidence that people know how to fight?

Evidence that people know how to fight without sparring.

And nothing anecdotal please.

 

[ballen0351]

Evidence that people know how to fight without sparring.

And nothing anecdotal please.

ummm 1000s of years of history

 

[Hanzou]

ummm 1000s of years of history

Would that include Chinese martial arts?

""Those who have practiced these (edit-Chinese martial) arts twenty or thirty years have never defeated anyone who has practiced Western boxing or Judo. Why is this? It is because the practitioners of Shaolin and Wudang styles only pay attention to the beauty of their forms - they lack practical methods and spirit and have lost the true transmissions of their ancestors. Hence, our martial arts are viewed by outsiders merely as rigorous dancing."

-Liu Jinsheng author of Chin Na Fa 1936

When the Chinese army was researching and developing their hand-to-hand combat, (which later evolved into the modern San Shou/San Da tournament fighting popular today) they researched all the popular forms of martial arts, including their own. The conclusion was that Western boxing hand techniques, when it came to developing practical striking and defensive abilities in a reasonable amount of time, were superior to all others, including their own

-Tim Cantrell, noted Chinese MA teacher and researcher

Interesting how 1000s of years of fighting history fell by the wayside as soon as western boxing was introduced to China.

Of course the same thing happened when Judo was introduced in Japan.

 

[Paul_D]

If you can't fight, how in the world are you going to be able to defend yourself?

.

Because fighting isn't the same as self defence. To quote Bubba Sparks "How else can I say it? I don't speak no other languages."