Shotokan for self defence.

[Laplace_demon]

You can argue differences in technique with yourselves all day if you want. It has nothing to do with the point I made

Yes it does. He does not train follow ups. A boxer does.

 

[Hanzou]

Self-defense is not about free sparring. It's also been my experience that you don't necessarily "fight the way you train." How do I know this?

I boxed, but I never kicked anyone in the boxing ring, or punched anyone in the face in kyokushin free-fighting (which is not "sparring")......I competed at judo, but I never threw or arm-barred a boxing opponent......those are all contests-a game, basically, and one follows treh rules because one wants to play....I've done all of those things, and more, in "self defense" situations...

Self defense is about mindset, (AGAIN!!) aand mindset is not, and should not be trained by playing a game-though they do have their benefits, even benefits that extend to self-defense..

Kata training, btw, is excellent for mindset-it also encodes some basic self-defense truths. One example being that ingrains a response to the tunnel-vision effect of being adrenalized-the formulators of some kata (not just Shotokan) knew of this effect, and, though they wouldn't have usedt he same language for it, they did know how to ameliorate it's effects, and mitigate the inherent hazards...this is one of the things kata can do for us.

We now return you to your regular "MMA ground and pound" troll-fest.

So you're saying that kicking and punching air prepares you to get punched or kicked in the face, and to handle a massive adrenaline dump?

You have got to be kidding.

Boxers are pretty good at giving and receiving punishment. Probably because they spend so much time actually punching people and getting punched by people.

 

[Drose427]

Would you please stop talking about BJJ as though it was founded by some native tribe deep in the Amazonian jungle who had no contact with the outside world prior to UFC 1?

BJJ, as a style, has been around longer than Shotokan Karate. It wasn't unknown before 1993. And BJJ is "Basically Just Judo." In the first few UFCs there were high level judoka, shoot fighters and sambo practitioners, all with a firm grounding (no pun intended) in grappling.

But it wasnt nearly as known as any of the other martial arts at UFC at the time.

A lot of people had barely heard of it up till that point.

Yeah, but it wasn't the claims that made the style popular, it was the Gracies stepping up to the plate, putting it all on the line, and choking people out.



Not necessarily. The older Gracies continued to compete long after they stopped competing in the UFC. Rickson, Royce and Renzo fought a lot in Japan and other NHB events. The younger Gracies tend to compete in Bjj-only competitions, and both groups actively train MMA fighters, since MMA fighters still train at Bjj gyms to enhance their grappling.

I don't really see how we ended up talking about the Gracies, but whatever.



Which isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about someone like the author of the article in the OP showing us what pure karate can do against another trained fighter. Those MMA fighters have cross-trained heavily in Bjj, Wrestling, Muay Thai, etc. They would laugh at what that article says.



So how come MMA fighters can practice those exact same movements in relative safety?



Nice doge. Again, a shadowboxer is doing pretty much exactly the same thing you'd see a boxer do in a ring. A karateka doing a kata looks nothing like a karateka sparring. You made the comparison, now feel free to explain this bizarre discrepancy.

Plenty of Karateka in Kickboxing didnt cross train.

Benny the Jet fought several Muay Thai guys without cross training.
Andy hug, nuff said
Joe Louis
Superfoot was undefeated.

All these guys beat Boxers, and other stylists.


Machida and GSP both still regularly strike how youd see striking at a Karate Tournament (save the grappling which is MT). If MMA didnt also include high level grappling, Shotokan would be more than enough when trained with contact. There were several Successful Karate Guys in the first few UFCS.

Gerard Gordeau took second in the first UFC for example, he had several Karate BB.
Howard Harold, Ko'd a MT guy

After about UFC 4 or 5 is when people started training specifically for MMA

Free Sparring ISNT SD, it was never meant to be. Nor does it have to be if someones properly training.

So you're saying that kicking and punching air prepares you to get punched or kicked in the face, and to handle a massive adrenaline dump?

You have got to be kidding.

Boxers are pretty good at giving and receiving punishment. Probably because they spend so much time actually punching people and getting punched by people.

Are you sure you trained Shotokan?

You seem to get this idea that Shotokan is 100% kata and people are treating kata as some be all end all method

instead of the supplementary exercise it is..

its laughable really

 

[Drose427]

Yes it does. He does not train follow ups. A boxer does.

So do most Karateka....

Really, get out more....

While speed is a factor, so is driving through your target.

Never seen colored belts not know this....

 

[ShotoNoob]

Yes. He's a prime example of a natural born fighter.

According to reports, the Muay Thai fighter in this clip did not know BJJ at the time of the fight.

BJJ is easier for strikers than Greco Roman or Submission Wrestling. Wrestlers tend to be bigger, train takedowns far more than grapplers, so getting close is almost impossible.

|
Other posters are beating up on you so I don't know if I can help.
|
IMO, The Muay Thai stylist makes Hackney's technique look amateurish... . It shows the folly of assuming once the grappler closes the distance, the strikers (primary) game is nullified. I also can't help but wonder if the Muay Thai clinching helped the MT competitor tie up the BJJ opponent once they collided.
|
The issue I see, which has been unpopular here among vested posters, is looking @ Shotokan though a single window of opinion, instead of how the founders viewed it on principles. That's the whole point of the OP quoted article. Then you have, to continue a thread, posters arguing over semantics to how they way they train trumps the originators of karate.
|
I put up a few posts on kata, and was told my posts didn't apply to self defense. I get where the MT consensus stands, not in sync with the the article's author, Loren Frank. Loren Frank's position is more in sync with karate practice historically....TMU

 

[ShotoNoob]

I think Loren Frank, the benefit of his article, is in trying to promote what Shotokan karate can do to prepare you for self defense. Obviously vested posters have developed self-defense curriculum's that extend beyond the general circumstances for which traditional karate was to meant to be applied. This doesn't invalidate Shotokan karate in any way. Shotokan provides a particular base of skill, with self defense applications a part of the overall curriculum...
|
On the subject of kata, the article is proposing that kata is the fundamental backbone of traditional karate training. This mantra is & has been repeated by many karate and other TMA masters. So why are they saying this? We have a consensus [nearly] here that drilling applied skills is what best prepares one for self defense or fighting.... So what is there to resolve....???

 

[ShotoNoob]

Yes I do have a rebuttal. Any intelligent wrestler will fake (distract) an attack standing and then shoot low... leaving the striker preoccupied with getting himself untangeled instead of being able to strike him. A striker, more often than not, cannot react in time when he's just gotten distracted by fake attack. And in shooting low I can't hit him on the shin. Only possibility is kneeing him, but like I said, the wrestler will not telegraph his takedown.

|
The author of the OP Article, Loren Frank, is expressly rebutting this position. YOur statement would be correct if you said, THE WORKING GOAL OF THE GRAPPLER, then continued on. He explains in article how Shotokan provides training to overcome such physical tactics.

 

[ShotoNoob]

I pulled out of this thread long ago but I can't let this go. In another thread a member was talking about history being made up. Well Shorei Ryu would seem to back up this line of thought. It is nothing to do with Goju Ryu and I doubt it has much to do with Okinawa even. As to being hard/soft ... there was no soft in that choreographed representation..

Thanks for pointing out how flawed I am.... Steve Reisman disagrees with you....

 

[drop bear]

Plenty of Karateka in Kickboxing didnt cross train.

Benny the Jet fought several Muay Thai guys without cross training.
Andy hug, nuff said
Joe Louis
Superfoot was undefeated.

All these guys beat Boxers, and other stylists.


Machida and GSP both still regularly strike how youd see striking at a Karate Tournament (save the grappling which is MT). If MMA didnt also include high level grappling, Shotokan would be more than enough when trained with contact. There were several Successful Karate Guys in the first few UFCS.

Gerard Gordeau took second in the first UFC for example, he had several Karate BB.
Howard Harold, Ko'd a MT guy

After about UFC 4 or 5 is when people started training specifically for MMA

Free Sparring ISNT SD, it was never meant to be. Nor does it have to be if someones properly training.

They didn't free spar? Or they didn't train self defence in a similar manner to their competition training?

This is the thing about looking at competition. Benny the jet could train with his underwear on his head. And all my logical arguments in the world as to why that is a redundant training method would not be as valid as him jumping in a ring and toweling me up.

Where as my counter argument that my super secret judo chop would kill him in the street. Because I did it once to a drunk guy or that there is extra stress in a life or death fight or the numerous other unfounded stories that are used to justify what could be taken out and tested pretty easily and pretty effectively.

That is the argument that stuffs hanzous argument. That people use kata,advocate it and are quite obviously and probably wrecking machines.

But it also stuffs k mans argument that sparring/competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill.

 

[drop bear]

Provably wrecking machines. Not probably.

 

[K-man]

Thanks for pointing out how flawed I am.... Steve Reisman disagrees with you....

I'm sorry, you flatter yourself. I'm not sure where I was pointing out your flaws or why I would bother. And, secondly, I haven't the faintest idea who Steve Reisman is. There is nothing I can readily find on the internet about him. What he has to do with this thread has passed straight over my head.

But let's look at what you posted ...

Upon further investigation, I found the traditional karate style presented in this vid to be Shorei ryu karate. An Okinawan style of traditional karate which is both / similar / either a predecessor / to Goju ryu. I myself prefer the emphasis on hard / soft mixture of movement exhibited in Shorei ryu to the JKA version of Hard, hard hard physicality of Shotokan....

"Upon further investigation ... ". Well I'd like to see your source. It is customary on MT, when someone makes a claim that flies in the face of contemporary understanding, to quote the source.

Shorei Ryu is not a traditional karate style and it has nothing to do with Goju Ryu.( As to being linked to Uechi Ryu, well I can't find anything to support that either.)

( http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shōrei-ryū )

It is a made up style introduced to the U.S. by a guy called Robert Trias. ( Robert Trias - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia )

Now, please don't take it that I am saying anything against Robert Trias or the karate legacy he left behind. What I am questioning are his links to Okinawa.

It is a coincidence that I was defending karate history in a conversation with zuti car then within days he is demonstrated by you to be spot on with his assertion that much karate history is made up for self promotional reasons.

By the way, if you are at all interested in where the mix up of names has occurred, here is that article ...
Okinawa Kata Classification An Historical Overview by Mario McKenna

Part of what it contains ...

Examining the statements regarding Shorin-ryu versus Shorei-ryu that Funakoshi used throughout his works we can see that they approximate elements of the Chinese martial terminology of nei-chia or internal and wai-chia or external martial arts. According to Henning (1997, p. 11), the earliest reference to internal and external-fighting arts in China occurs in a publication known as An Epitaph for Wang Zhengnan written by Huang Zong Xi in approximately 1669. In it, the following definition is given to distinguish the two schools of quanfa:

"Shaolin is universally famous for its boxing, but it emphasizes striking a person and a person can also gain the advantage against it. There is the so-called internal school which uses stillness to overcome movement and an aggressor can be toppled upon being engaged." (Henning 1997, p. 11). It would appear that Funakoshi's concept of Shorin-ryu versus Shorei-ryu is loosely based on earlier definitions of the internal and external fighting arts of China. Unfortunately, despite the similarity of the Shorin-ryu versus Shorei-ryu dichotomy in relation to the internal versus external definitions of Chinese fighting systems, it will be shown that Funakoshi's use of such a means of classification for Okinawa karate-do kata was inaccurate and misleading. Indeed, noted martial arts historian Hokama Tetsuhiro, has also argued for the inaccuracy and inconsistency of Funakoshi's classification (Hokama 1998, p. 81). Notwithstanding this inconsistency in classification, what is more startling is that this method of classification was accepted at face value for several years.

 

[K-man]

They didn't free spar? Or they didn't train self defence in a similar manner to their competition training?

This is the thing about looking at competition. Benny the jet could train with his underwear on his head. And all my logical arguments in the world as to why that is a redundant training method would not be as valid as him jumping in a ring and toweling me up.

Where as my counter argument that my super secret judo chop would kill him in the street. Because I did it once to a drunk guy or that there is extra stress in a life or death fight or the numerous other unfounded stories that are used to justify what could be taken out and tested pretty easily and pretty effectively.

That is the argument that stuffs hanzous argument. That people use kata,advocate it and are quite obviously and probably wrecking machines.

But it also stuffs k mans argument that sparring/competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill.

????
I can't follow this reasoning at all but let me go to what you thought I said.

"Sparring/competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill."

I'm not sure I've ever said that. In fact I have never suggested that anyone training any martial art would not have the ability to defend themselves on the street. It has been others asserting that because many traditional systems don't spar in the way competitive styles spar, or don't compete against trained fighters in the ring, they are not effective, even though most of them test against total resistance in other ways.

Regardless of that, your reference here to 'self defence skill' I am taking in the widest possible way in that you are referring to that part of self defence where your self defence skills have failed and you are physically defending yourself against violence. Within the real meaning of self defence, sparring or competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill at all.

 

[drop bear]

????
I can't follow this reasoning at all but let me go to what you thought I said.

"Sparring/competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill."

I'm not sure I've ever said that. In fact I have never suggested that anyone training any martial art would not have the ability to defend themselves on the street. It has been others asserting that because many traditional systems don't spar in the way competitive styles spar, or don't compete against trained fighters in the ring, they are not effective, even though most of them test against total resistance in other ways.

Regardless of that, your reference here to 'self defence skill' I am taking in the widest possible way in that you are referring to that part of self defence where your self defence skills have failed and you are physically defending yourself against violence. Within the real meaning of self defence, sparring or competition effectiveness is not an indication of self defence skill at all.

Welcome to drop bears school of self defence.

Don't be an A hole.

Move to a nicer area.

Thank you. That will be$50

 

[RTKDCMB]

Anecdotal evidence is the best evidence right?

You mean like EVERYTHING you have ever said?

 

[Hanzou]

You mean like EVERYTHING you have ever said?

The fact that Karate kata looks completely different than Karate sparring is anecdotal evidence?

 

[K-man]

The fact that Karate kata looks completely different than Karate sparring is anecdotal evidence?

As you have been told in great detail since your first day on MT, karate kata is different to karate sparring. Karate kata has nothing to do with karate sparring, yet you continue to spout the same nonsense. Get a life. If you don't understand the difference between karate kata and the kata bunkai go buy a book or something. Obviously nothing we can offer you is getting through.

 

[RTKDCMB]

The fact that Karate kata looks completely different than Karate sparring is anecdotal evidence?

The fact that Karate kata looks completely different than Karate sparring only shows that they are not the same thing. It is like saying that a gearbox looks different than an engine therefore one of them is useless.

 

[Steve]

Okay. Just trying to follow along here, guys. Karate kata and karate sparring have SOMETHING to do with each other. Right? Just thinking through what I've learned from you guys, kata contains the universe of techniques. Bunkai is the exploration of the application of the techniques contained within kata. So, how does it not follow that sparring is the demonstrated ability to apply the techniques in a less controlled, more random situation. If Bunkai is the exploration of how techniques can be applied, then sparring is at least the initial demonstration of bunkai in action. Right? And you guys do say you spar.

Kata and sparring aren't the same thing, but that doesn't mean they are unrelated or have nothing to do with each other. And so, while you may understandably assert that sparring doesn't look like kata, it should resemble the bunkai (i.e., the dissection of the kata to explore the practical application of the techniques.) Shouldn't it? And so, my question is, does it? I don't know. When you break down a kata, can one see the bunkai demonstrated in free sparring?

 

[Drose427]

r

Okay. Just trying to follow along here, guys. K SOMETHING to do with each other. Right? Just thinking through what I've learned from you guys, kata contains the universe of techniques. Bunkai is the exploration of the application of the techniques contained within kata. So, how does it not follow that sparring is the demonstrated ability to apply the techniques in a less controlled, more random situation. If Bunkai is the exploration of how techniques can be applied, then sparring is at least the initial demonstration of bunkai in action. Right? And you guys do say you spar.

Data and sparring aren't the same thing, but that doesn't mean they are unrelated or have nothing to do with each other. And so, while you may understandably assert that sparring doesn't look like kata, it should look resemble the bunkai (i.e., the dissection of the kata to explore the practical application of the techniques.) Shouldn't it? And so, my question is, does it? I don't know. When you break down a kata, can one see the bunkai demonstrated in free sparring?

While keeping in mind how we've explained we could simply teahc the kihon instead (but you'd be training them the same anyways) and that stances are generally irrelevant outside of a few takedowns

Yes, youll see a move in sparring that correlates to a bunkai, particurly in kickboxing NHB style matches.

One good example that's common is the block to the down into punch from front stance. The Bunkai is blocking or catching the kick, then stepping in to sweep the other leg.

Another would be from our form pinan sadan, the move is a block/ knife hand combo followed by a teep style front kick to the chin(although I suppose some schools may flip instead of push). Gloves make knife hands awkward, but the combo works just as well with a punch. Although this one in particular is a common bunkai among students, its usually figured out before that they get to that form.

My last example be things like spinning the spinning backfists and elbows. Pinan samdam has a spinning backfist after a spearhand but it correlates to just about forward attack. Right hand attack into left hand spinning backfist.

But, traditional sparring bans a lot of Bunkai. It wasn't meant to recreate combat, Bunkai practice was meant to be full speed and contact. The only one of the three examples I gave you that are legal in kumite is the kick combo, but it isn't as effective with chest punching unless I'm dead on. Its easier to slip on that front kick through your guard when ive got you covering your face.

 

[Steve]

r


While keeping in mind how we've explained we could simply teahc the kihon instead (but you'd be training them the same anyways) and that stances are generally irrelevant outside of a few takedowns

Yes, youll see a move in sparring that correlates to a bunkai, particurly in kickboxing NHB style matches.

One good example that's common is the block to the down into punch from front stance. The Bunkai is blocking or catching the kick, then stepping in to sweep the other leg.

Another would be from our form pinan sadan, the move is a block/ knife hand combo followed by a teep style front kick to the chin(although I suppose some schools may flip instead of push). Gloves make knife hands awkward, but the combo works just as well with a punch. Although this one in particular is a common bunkai among students, its usually figured out before that they get to that form.

My last example be things like spinning the spinning backfists and elbows. Pinan samdam has a spinning backfist after a spearhand but it correlates to just about forward attack. Right hand attack into left hand spinning backfist.

But, traditional sparring bans a lot of Bunkai. It wasn't meant to recreate combat, Bunkai practice was meant to be full speed and contact. The only one of the three examples I gave you that are legal in kumite is the kick combo, but it isn't as effective with chest punching unless I'm dead on. Its easier to slip on that front kick through your guard when ive got you covering your face.

Okay. That all makes sense to me. But the question I have then is how do you practice the bunkai? Where does the trainee move in functional application of the techniques that are demonstrated in kata, explored in bunkai but prohibited in sparring/kumite or competition?