Shotokan for self defence.

[K-man]

That's a demonstration though.

Here's some Goju sparring, and it looks nothing like that;

Its the standard kickboxing like fighting seen in almost all karate sparring.

What Taira was doing wasn't a demonstration. It is what he had been teaching for years and I also have been teaching since I came across it years ago. What Tom Hill is showing is the type of jiu kumite we used to do. It has nothing to do with kata or bunkai and is typical of schools that engage in competition because that is the type of fighting used in tournaments. As I have said many times, you keep ignoring what I have shown many times so that you can justify your position on kata being useless.

 

[Drose427]

That's a demonstration though.

Here's some Goju sparring, and it looks nothing like that;

Its the standard kickboxing like fighting seen in almost all karate sparring.

Learn Kururunfa - Kata for Goju-Ryu Karate - Black Belt Wiki

Here is a random Goju form.

Lets run through the list of techniques/bunkai in the form that are illegal in most Karate Schools Sparring

1. Groin Strikes
2. Leg kicks (not sure about goju, but commonly illegal)
3. Elbows
4. Hammer fist

Thats four repeated movements, that arent allowed in free sparring.

So how is Free Sparring supposed to be representative?

Just for fun, heres harold howard doing 2 out of 4 of those things (That he cant do in his Dojos sparring) in UFC

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

 

[Steve]

Hi Steve,

Question for you: have you ever trained in a method that uses kata as part of the methodology? Do you have any direct experience with it? Thx.

Why, no. I haven't. Why do you ask, FC?

Thats four repeated movements, that arent allowed in free sparring.

So how is Free Sparring supposed to be representative?

Hey, Drose, here it is again. Can you explain the path to proficiency here? How does a student cover the gap from between bunkai to functional proficiency with regards to techniques that cannot be used in sparring?

 

[Hanzou]

What Taira was doing wasn't a demonstration. It is what he had been teaching for years and I also have been teaching since I came across it years ago. What Tom Hill is showing is the type of jiu kumite we used to do. It has nothing to do with kata or bunkai and is typical of schools that engage in competition because that is the type of fighting used in tournaments. As I have said many times, you keep ignoring what I have shown many times so that you can justify your position on kata being useless.

So demonstrating a technique on a compliant partner isn't a demonstration? What is it then? It certainly isn't sparring or randori. It certainly isn't drilling, because its the head instructor doing it on a compliant student during a seminar. I should also point out that I have yet to see any of this bunkai being utilized against a noncompliant opponent. I've only seen it in seminars and demos. In actual fights karatekas almost universally look like Tom Hill's people.

BTW, I'm not ignoring anything. I'm pointing out that what you're saying doesn't make any logical sense.

Learn Kururunfa - Kata for Goju-Ryu Karate - Black Belt Wiki

Here is a random Goju form.

Lets run through the list of techniques/bunkai in the form that are illegal in most Karate Schools Sparring

1. Groin Strikes
2. Leg kicks (not sure about goju, but commonly illegal)
3. Elbows
4. Hammer fist

Thats four repeated movements, that arent allowed in free sparring.

So how is Free Sparring supposed to be representative?

Just for fun, heres harold howard doing 2 out of 4 of those things (That he cant do in his Dojos sparring) in UFC

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

1. Why would Leg kicks, elbows, and hammer fists be illegal in most Karate schools? They weren't illegal in mine, nor are the illegal in many striking arts like muay thai.

2. That vid you showed doesn't look like any karate kata I've ever seen. It looks like a brawl between two guys. It certainly doesn't resemble the techniques shown in the vid Kman posted, or the vid you posted of Abernethy.

 

[elder999]

BTW, I'm not ignoring anything.

You're ignoring my post......

I'm pointing out that what your saying doesn't make any logical sense.

....which made logical sense.......of course, that's just what I've come to expect.

 

[Drose427]

Why, no. I haven't. Why do you ask, FC?
Hey, Drose, here it is again. Can you explain the path to proficiency here? How does a student cover the gap from between bunkai to functional proficiency with regards to techniques that cannot be used in sparring?

Because Bunkai practice is live drilling,

Its still someone coming at you with intent to harm, full speed full contact, and youre expected to retaliate.

Technically you could call if a form of sparring, in the sense that drilling submissions, transitions, and takedowns could be considered part of Newaza,

but it isnt continuous kumite lasting 2-5 minutes at a time,

So the techs that are barred from Kumite, are still practiced on a live opponent,

just an extra thing

 

[Drose427]

So demonstrating a technique on a compliant partner isn't a demonstration? What is it then? It certainly isn't sparring or randori. It certainly isn't drilling, because its the head instructor doing it on a compliant student during a seminar. I should also point out that I have yet to see any of this bunkai being utilized against a noncompliant opponent. I've only seen it in seminars and demos. In actual fights karatekas almost universally look like Tom Hill's people.

BTW, I'm not ignoring anything. I'm pointing out that what you're saying doesn't make any logical sense.



1. Why would Leg kicks, elbows, and hammer fists be illegal in most Karate schools? They weren't illegal in mine, nor are the illegal in many striking arts like muay thai.

2. That vid you showed doesn't look like any karate kata I've ever seen. It looks like a brawl between two guys. It certainly doesn't resemble the techniques shown in the vid Kman posted, or the vid you posted of Abernethy.

There you go again half reading

They arent illegal in the schools

Theyre illegal in Kumite

Idk why you bring up MT, unless now its a part of Traditional Karate.

And yeah, if you're expecting combat to mimc Kata to a T, you've completely ignored explanations given....

 

[Flying Crane]

Why, no. I haven't. Why do you ask, FC?

I think this is something that can be discussed intellectually only up to a point. I'm not surprised that it remains unclear after such discussions, if someone has never been thru it. It is a tremendous help if you have some level of experience with the method, to make sense of it.

I'm the first to agree, many people who practice kata do not understand it well, do not understand what they ought to be getting from it, and how to use it as a training tool. For those many people, yes it is a waste of time. Many people who teach kata do not understand it well and do a piss-poor job of teaching it. Again, it's a waste of time. Many people are poor students and fail to grasp the teachings. And for many people, it's simply a poor match for them and they ought to pursue other methods. Again it's a waste of time.

But for those who have received good instruction, who have applied themselves to the instruction, and for whom it is a good match, it is very valuable. But not everyone falls into that collection of categories.

Discussion will only get you part way there. Without proper instruction in the methodology, I suspect you will never fully understand it. That's not a judgement over you, it's just recognizing what it entails.

 

[Hanzou]

There you go again half reading

They arent illegal in the schools

Theyre illegal in Kumite

Which is what I mean: It wasn't "illegal" to do those techniques in kumite.

Idk why you bring up MT, unless now its a part of Traditional Karate.

I brought up MT as an example of a striking art that utilizes those techniques throughout the sparring process, so it's bizarre that those techs would be frowned upon in karate sparring.

Not that adding elbows or knees would suddenly make karate fighting suddenly resemble the kata.

And yeah, if you're expecting combat to mimc Kata to a T, you've completely ignored explanations given....

Not resemble it to a T, but some level of resemblance would be refreshing.

 

[Flying Crane]

Which is what I mean: It wasn't "illegal" to do those techniques in kumite.



I brought up MT as an example of a striking art that utilizes those techniques throughout the sparring process, so it's bizarre that those techs would be frowned upon in karate sparring.

Not that adding elbows or knees would suddenly make karate fighting suddenly resemble the kata.



Not resemble it to a T, but some level of resemblance would be refreshing.

And where you continue to fail is in thinking that anybody needs to justify anything to you.

 

[Steve]

I think this is something that can be discussed intellectually only up to a point. I'm not surprised that it remains unclear after such discussions, if someone has never been thru it. It is a tremendous help if you have some level of experience with the method, to make sense of it.

I'm the first to agree, many people who practice kata do not understand it well, do not understand what they ought to be getting from it, and how to use it as a training tool. For those many people, yes it is a waste of time. Many people who teach kata do not understand it well and do a piss-poor job of teaching it. Again, it's a waste of time. Many people are poor students and fail to grasp the teachings. And for many people, it's simply a poor match for them and they ought to pursue other methods. Again it's a waste of time.

But for those who have received good instruction, who have applied themselves to the instruction, and for whom it is a good match, it is very valuable. But not everyone falls into that collection of categories.

Discussion will only get you part way there. Without proper instruction in the methodology, I suspect you will never fully understand it. That's not a judgement over you, it's just recognizing what it entails.

I don't know. I have a lot of experience in training and adult education. If im an expert in anything, it's how people go from knowing nothing about a thing to being realLy good at it. What you're suggesting is that the method is ineffable, which frankly borders on mysticism.

People learn how to do things in a very simple way, and if the method can't be articulated on an intellectual level, i think we are on very shaky ground.

 

[Flying Crane]

I don't know. I have a lot of experience in training and adult education. If im an expert in anything, it's how people go from knowing nothing about a thing to being realLy good at it. What you're suggesting is that the method is ineffable, which frankly borders on mysticism.

People learn how to do things in a very simple way, and if the method can't be articulated on an intellectual level, i think we are on very shaky ground.

I disagree.

This discussion has been going on and on in thread after thread, different people have offered numerous explanations, and yet other people insist that they can't see the value in it, or it doesn't make sense to them. It's not mystical, there's no mysticism about it. But it is, apparently, a method in which you have no solid experience. Your experience is limited to talk, and to looking in at it but never experiencing and embracing the training method. So I have no recourse but to conclude that without some direct experience, you are just not gonna get it. Words don't get you there, YouTube doesn't get you there. If you aren't going to do it, then you will never really understand it.

I don't know what else to say but, those who understand it are trying to help you understand it. If you can't, then maybe you are going to need to just accept that it works for some people, but you don't understand it. That in no way invalidates your own training that does not include kata. It's just a different approach to training, that's all. If it's not for you, don't do it. If you are not interested in trying a method that uses kata, then don't. If you don't understand it, then you can take it on faith that other people do. Or not.

But at some point I kinda gotta ask, why are the same people still having this same debate? It's just become pointless. You don't understand it? Ok then. No worries.

I've suggested another factor that might help you understand it: if you had direct experience with the method. But you apparently don't see that as relevant. ok then, given the limitations inherent in an online venue, I'm out of ideas. So I guess you can just be content with your position, that it doesn't make sense to you and pursue the method that works best for you. Nobody here I looking to make conversions. In the end it actually does not matter to me if you are, or are not, convinced

 

[Steve]

I disagree.

This discussion has been going on and on in thread after thread, different people have offered numerous explanations, and yet other people insist that they can't see the value in it, or it doesn't make sense to them. It's not mystical, there's no mysticism about it. But it is, apparently, a method in which you have no solid experience. Your experience is limited to talk, and to looking in at it but never experiencing and embracing the training method. So I have no recourse but to conclude that without some direct experience, you are just not gonna get it. Words don't get you there, YouTube doesn't get you there. If you aren't going to do it, then you will never really understand it.

I don't know what else to say but, those who understand it are trying to help you understand it. If you can't, then maybe you are going to need to just accept that it works for some people, but you don't understand it. That in no way invalidates your own training that does not include kata. It's just a different approach to training, that's all. If it's not for you, don't do it. If you are not interested in trying a method that uses kata, then don't. If you don't understand it, then you can take it on faith that other people do. Or not.

But at some point I kinda gotta ask, why are the same people still having this same debate? It's just become pointless. You don't understand it? Ok then. No worries.

I've suggested another factor that might help you understand it: if you had direct experience with the method. But you apparently don't see that as relevant. ok then, given the limitations inherent in an online venue, I'm out of ideas. So I guess you can just be content with your position, that it doesn't make sense to you and pursue the method that works best for you. Nobody here I looking to make conversions. In the end it actually does not matter to me if you are, or are not, convinced

I don't think I've ever said I see no value in kata. If you insist it has value, I believe you. I just don't think anyone has ever done a very good job explaining the path from kata to application.

I don't know why you're getting defensive with me. If it doesn't matter to you whether I get it or not, why are you busting my chops about it? If you can't explain it, just say so. But I don't believe that, just because you can't articulate it, no one can. Or, conversely, if it can't be explained, that speaks volumes, in itself.

Edit to add, I'm very open to any kind of training. While I've never done, I don't think I've ever said I never would. I don't want anyone to think I'm anti anything. The reverse is much more accurate. Given unlimited time and money, I'd probably give everything a try.

 

[ShotoNoob]

I disagree.

This discussion has been going on and on in thread after thread, different people have offered numerous explanations, and yet other people insist that they can't see the value in it, or it doesn't make sense to them. It's not mystical, there's no mysticism about it. But it is, apparently, a method in which you have no solid experience. Your experience is limited to talk, and to looking in at it but never experiencing and embracing the training method. So I have no recourse but to conclude that without some direct experience, you are just not gonna get it. Words don't get you there, YouTube doesn't get you there. If you aren't going to do it, then you will never really understand it.

I don't know what else to say but, those who understand it are trying to help you understand it. If you can't, then maybe you are going to need to just accept that it works for some people, but you don't understand it. That in no way invalidates your own training that does not include kata. It's just a different approach to training, that's all. If it's not for you, don't do it. If you are not interested in trying a method that uses kata, then don't. If you don't understand it, then you can take it on faith that other people do. Or not.

But at some point I kinda gotta ask, why are the same people still having this same debate? It's just become pointless. You don't understand it? Ok then. No worries.

I've suggested another factor that might help you understand it: if you had direct experience with the method. But you apparently don't see that as relevant. ok then, given the limitations inherent in an online venue, I'm out of ideas. So I guess you can just be content with your position, that it doesn't make sense to you and pursue the method that works best for you. Nobody here I looking to make conversions. In the end it actually does not matter to me if you are, or are not, convinced

|
This is exactly where the traditional karate, specifically Shotokan karate here, debate should be heading< IMO.
|
The is a gap among posters in the understanding of what kata is as you have mentioned here, and what the traditional karate curriculum is trying to accomplish.
|
The overall challenge of traditional martial arts, as proposed by the masters of all styles, is that traditional martial arts is an intellectual undertaking.... Getting a handle on the human development brought about by proper martial arts training is an enormous task. Given this starting presumption, then the task becomes one of questioning yourself, instead of constantly questioning others--because your personal model works....
|
What we have instead, is in a competitive world, one develops a model that works for them, then says that's what works universally. The model of physical training that works for the athlete is then how Shotokan should be practiced (Athletically). The full contact fighting model that works for the full contact fighter--say the well know Kyokuhsin convention, then says that this is how Shotokan should be practiced--full contact. The JKA convention of high speed, highly mobile point sparring that works for the JKA organization, is then how Shotokan should be practiced according to the JKA. The proponent who believes in a lot of repetitive applied drills with pressure testing, then says this is how Shotokan should be practiced--drills under pressure testing. The Ian A. came along with some really good interpretations & adaptations of bunkai, and then IA followers said this is how Shotokan should be practiced in order to make Shotokan 'work.'
|
From my way of thinking, all of these viewpoints are valid, yet they are all wrong. It is the principles of traditional karate training embodied in Shotokan that dicate how all these interpretation & applications of Shotokan should be practiced.

 

[ShotoNoob]

I don't know. I have a lot of experience in training and adult education. If im an expert in anything, it's how people go from knowing nothing about a thing to being realLy good at it. What you're suggesting is that the method is ineffable, which frankly borders on mysticism.

People learn how to do things in a very simple way, and if the method can't be articulated on an intellectual level, i think we are on very shaky ground.

|
You have a model that stresses simplicity. The concept of simplicity is made clear in the Shotokan karate model. Is the Shotokan karate model simple the way you interpret & practice simple? Without a long discourse, in a word NO.
|
When we latch onto words like "mysticism," etc. your argument is valid to me because the intangible human skills of mind & spirit are difficult to comprehend & train compared to the outward physical form, acts we can all see and do instinctively to start. We can see the effects of physical movements as well. We can easily register the physical through the senses....
|
Mind, and particularly spirit, no. All traditional martial arts is founded on three basic human capabilities of body, mind & spirit. While not mystical in the literal sense, growing these in unison, doing so is NOT simple to understand, tap into & develop.
|
Poster-Practitioners trying to grasp and tap into these capabilities all have different views of what they actually are in martial arts and how exactly to tap into them. It's really up to the individual poster to reassess or re-examine their own position. Just like the idea of kata training, some are not willing or able to rethink a position, particularly if it's working. That would make little practical sense in a competitive world. What one gives up is the potential for progession that comes from open thinking & self questioning.

 

[ShotoNoob]

Ok, so first heres the best rendition of Keecho Il boo (basic form 1 in my style) that I could find.

Bear in mind stances are usually only that deep for conditioning,...

|
As a general rule, I could agree, but probably not to the extent you do.
|
The real question, to me, is conditioning for what?

Essentially these are all things one could learn without forms, but forms can help in this process and can be a good way to getting the hang of these things if youre training the bunkai properly enough.

|
Drose427, you went into considerable depth on the technical s. Fundamental fighting tactics. As a traditional karate stylist, I would again agree as a general rule--that all these can be learned without forms. So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all? Or alternatively, why have virtually all the Master's of Tang Soo Do have all these hyung / kata in the curriculum? Why is kata / hyung required and stressed in the training?

As for Karate guys disagreeing with, Im sure some would.

Again, why did the Okinawan karate styles have so much dependence on kata? Why did Funakoshi and his Japanese karate progeny carry over kata as mandate necessary for the practice of karate in Japan. Why did the orginators of Tang Soo Do carry on with the clear emphasis of kata or poomse in the evolutoinos of Tae Kwon Do and Tang Soo Do?
|
Specifically, what martial conditioning was being developed by kata/ hyung, etc.? According to all the Masters of these styles?

But hey, thats just my opinion. As long as you're drilling full speed, proper distance, and good contact they have the same effect

|
Yet that is not how the Tang Soo Do Master in your own, basic no. 1 hyung vid is practicing...... He is precisely NOT doing what you say is correct & necessary to train effectively for fighting / self defense. Yet that is how virtually all demonstrations of hyung (kata) I've ever personally witnessed, been taught, seen on YT, read about, tested for--are practiced--in precisely the manner demonstrated in your Keecho Il Boo YT vid. Even Mr. Shotokan Karate in MMA, Lyoto Machida is practicing kata in keeping with classical karate practice so described by your TAng Soo Master's YT vid..
|
What is the effect you are talking about? How does it compare to the effects sought by the practicing Tang Soo Do Master doing a simpleton form (Keecho Il Boo) that another poster lambasted me for saying I believed that the Shotokan version of that hyung was valuable? It's a solo exercise. It's not full power or speed. It' not using a resistive partner or physical resistance training / contact of any kind. It's only throwing a simple, kihon punch...."Karate's a lot more than kihon," one of my critics here said...Walking around routinely placing ones hand at one's knee is not how you fight, is it? Why do that at all? Why do that over & over & over & over & over in the hyung is it's just a technique, that seems impractical, even dangerous--for many fighting situations anyway? What effect, beside the / some cleverly disguised sweep of a kick (that we need Ian A. to show us karate dummies the true light of what actual adaptation of a simple down block is for), could all the Shotokan, every karate style--Masters be after?

 

[ShotoNoob]

Ok, so first heres the best rendition of Keecho Il boo (basic form 1 in my style) that I could find.

|
Note I didn't raise up in alarm, when you posted a Tang Soo Do YT vid in a Shotokan karate thread. Or talked about Machida who has been wildly successful in the MMA arena--when I was cautioned more than once for not keeping strictly keeping to "self defense.". IMO & IMU--No need to fall over dead, because someone wants to bring examples directly from their or another art, or from experiences they see as applicable to their success....

 

[K-man]

The real question, to me, is conditioning for what?

Kata has different relevance to everyone. If some people want to use it to develop their breathing, fine. If some people use it to condition their legs, great. Others may use it as exercise for movement and balance. However if those things are the only reason for doing kata, then I would suggest there may be other ways, at least as good to achieve those objectives as you express in the next para quoted.

Drose427, you went into considerable depth on the technical s. Fundamental fighting tactics. As a traditional karate stylist, I would again agree as a general rule--that all these can be learned without forms. So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all? Or alternatively, why have virtually all the Master's of Tang Soo Do have all these hyung / kata in the curriculum? Why is kata / hyung required and stressed in the training?

Now I am a little perplexed at what you are saying here. Sentence construction makes a huge difference.
1. So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all?
ie K-man doesn't advocate doing kata ..
or ...
2. So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all?
ie K-man advocates doing kata ...

The grammar here is beyond repair, but for the record, K-man advocates doing kata.

Again, why did the Okinawan karate styles have so much dependence on kata? Why did Funakoshi and his Japanese karate progeny carry over kata as mandate necessary for the practice of karate in Japan. Why did the orginators of Tang Soo Do carry on with the clear emphasis of kata or poomse in the evolutoinos of Tae Kwon Do and Tang Soo Do?

Answer ... within the kata is the essence of that karate style. It is arguable that without kata you don't have karate.

Specifically, what martial conditioning was being developed by kata/ hyung, etc.? According to all the Masters of these styles?

Martial 'conditioning' is hardly the right word. Martial 'understanding' may be a closer to the truth.

Yet that is not how the Tang Soo Do Master in your own, basic no. 1 hyung vid is practicing...... He is precisely NOT doing what you say is correct & necessary to train effectively for fighting / self defense. Yet that is how virtually all demonstrations of hyung (kata) I've ever personally witnessed, been taught, seen on YT, read about, tested for--are practiced--in precisely the manner demonstrated in your Keecho Il Boo YT vid. Even Mr. Shotokan Karate in MMA, Lyoto Machida is practicing kata in keeping with classical karate practice so described by your TAng Soo Master's YT vid..

So they are performing kihon kata. Do they understand the deeper meaning of the kata? Unless they tell us or show us how would we know?

"Karate's a lot more than kihon," one of my critics here said...Walking around routinely placing ones hand at one's knee is not how you fight, is it? Why do that at all? Why do that over & over & over & over & over in the hyung is it's just a technique, that seems impractical, even dangerous--for many fighting situations anyway? What effect, beside the / some cleverly disguised sweep of a kick (that we need Ian A. to show us karate dummies the true light of what actual adaptation of a simple down block is for), could all the Shotokan, every karate style--Masters be after?

That critic would probably be me. If you still don't understand what I was referring to I would suggest it just isn't going to happen, but don't worry. You have a few friends here in the same boat.

Note I didn't raise up in alarm, when you posted a Tang Soo Do YT vid in a Shotokan karate thread. Or talked about Machida who has been wildly successful in the MMA arena--when I was cautioned more than once for not keeping strictly keeping to "self defense.". IMO & IMU--No need to fall over dead, because someone wants to bring examples directly from their or another art, or from experiences they see as applicable to their success....

Hmm! I thought it was my OP but there you go.

I have never objected to interesting and relevant thread drift. I do object strenuously when my threads are hijacked. When someone has no knowledge of bukai and no interest in developing an understanding, I question the value of that person's contribution when we are discussing bunkai.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

As for the hands, this is a time where things aren't exact to the form.

Assuming you're driving deep enough to be able to step in for the trip,

You would have to change hand position to one where you could trap.

Its a something I think we've talked about before.

While some moves in forms will translate almost perfectly, other need to be interpreted and adapted for sparring. Some folks like it and have no issue seeing exactly what to do to make it work. They can just feel it when working with a resisting opponent and correct it.

Others prefer to be shown directly.

My question is, if your bunkai involves completely different body movements from those you are actually making in the kata, then how does it matter what you are doing in the kata? You could just as easily perform a Choi Li Fut form but imagine in your head that you are actually performing Judo techniques.

I have no problem with the idea that techniques in a solo drill might need to be adapted according to the contingencies of the moment in a real fight or sparring situation. This example goes well beyond that. There is nothing in the demonstrated form which matches the necessary arm movements for the proposed application. That leaves just the stepping - and "2 lunging steps forward" could cover a lot of possible applications.

If that particular form for stepping is crucial to your art, then I can certainly see the justification for drilling it on its own. Maybe it's like "shrimping" in BJJ - a fundamental movement pattern that is applied in hundreds of different techniques. Of course, then I start to wonder why I almost never see this style of stepping in Tang Soo Do sparring if it is such a fundamental aspect of movement.

As I said, if you're deep enough, you could actually neglect the punch, and instead when tripping (whether you opt for the sweep or the leg wrap) use the rechambering motion of the left hand with waist rotation to pull them off balance more making them more likely to go down, like Abernathy did.

That pulling action to finish the takedown is based on completely different footwork than what is shown in the form. If you are imagining an application for the form that relies on different footwork and different hand movement, then what's left? Can you name any application which could not be cited as an interpretation of the form if you were allowed to change around the actual movements that much?

As for point number two, our association does more of a crescent when stepping in. Sorta like the middle step in some karate styles but without the actual step. So to be honest, that could contribute to how that makes more sense to me, which is my bad for giving you an inaccurate video.

While this guys overall form isnt how we'd do it, he does the Crescent step I was talking about for getting your leg around

So something I notice talking to Tony that I hadnt caught on to before,

Our style steps in to a front stance with a crescent step like the gentleman in the tang soo do video I posts.

This lead a bunkai to work for us and make sense for me, as that motion recreates hooking an opponents leg after trapping a kick if you go inside, or sweeping the leg if you go to the outside.

But would would the Bunkai bee in styles that come straight out?

This brings up an interesting point. I can see the crescent step as a rough approximation of an inside trip. However, I've noticed that crescent stepping vs straight stepping seems to be fairly consistent within an art or association. In other words, it's not like an individual executing the form sometimes uses a crescent step when he is thinking about executing a trip and other times uses a straight step when he wants to punch as quickly as possible. He'll typically either always step straight or always crescent step.

When Hanzou first started on MT one of the first things he did was to dismiss kata as irrelevant when it comes to real fighting.

One mistake Hanzou makes, IMHO, is thinking that fighting will or should necessarily look like (a certain kind of) sparring. I understand there are reasons and circumstances why that may not be the case. What I'm trying to figure out is the discrepancy between the fundamental body mechanics and movement principles used in the kata of some systems vs those used in the sparring of those same systems.

It doesn't really answer anything for me to say "well, kata is different from sparring." Presumably both forms of training are intended to help the practitioner become more able to apply the skills of his/her art in a real situation. How does it help the practitioner to reach that goal if the body mechanics are so different?

(Note - I'm not claiming that all kata practitioners spar using totally different body mechanics from those they use during kata. I am saying that it is extremely common to do so.)

However, for those who genuinely want to understand the application of kata to fighting I will post another video of the guys I have trained with.

Very cool. I like the teacher's movement. I can see the CMA influence in the art.

Getting back to my original question - can you post some video of a) the kata those applications were taken from and b) some sparring as performed by practitioners of that system? I'll take your word that what Hanzou posted is not representative of how you spar.

Lets run through the list of techniques/bunkai in the form that are illegal in most Karate Schools Sparring

1. Groin Strikes
2. Leg kicks (not sure about goju, but commonly illegal)
3. Elbows
4. Hammer fist

As I said before, taking out some specific techniques from your sparring shouldn't change the fundamental body mechanics and movement patterns. If it does, then maybe you should consider allowing those techniques in your sparring.

 

[ShotoNoob]

Kata has different relevance to everyone. If some people want to use it to develop their breathing, fine. If some people use it to condition their legs, great. Others may use it as exercise for movement and balance. However if those things are the only reason for doing kata, then I would suggest there may be other ways, at least as good to achieve those objectives as you express in the next para quoted.

|
Thanks for answering.
|

Now I am a little perplexed at what you are saying here. Sentence construction makes a huge difference.
1. So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all?
ie K-man doesn't advocate doing kata ..
or ...
2. So why as I believe K-man advocates do kata at all?
ie K-man advocates doing kata ...
|
The grammar here is beyond repair, but for the record, K-man advocates doing kata.

|
My grammar is off there. MT posters, many excel over me in this regard....

Answer ... within the kata is the essence of that karate style. It is arguable that without kata you don't have karate.

|
Trying to be more succinct. I would agree. Okay, so what is the essence of a karate style? What is the essence underlying, behind all these styles of traditional karate (which as I wrote) that all advocated & contain kata training? Please defined karate's essence. Flesh it out please....

Martial 'conditioning' is hardly the right word. Martial 'understanding' may be a closer to the truth.

|
you corrected my grammar. Here's my correction to your position. Martial conditioning is actually what the karate training is for. So what understanding do we need in order to do that conditioning properly, to reap the benefits of kata, kihon training, kumited, etc.?

So they are performing kihon kata. Do they understand the deeper meaning of the kata? Unless they tell us or show us how would we know?

|
You are just restating the video in words. What's the why behind the how? In your opinion...

That critic would probably be me. If you still don't understand what I was referring to I would suggest it just isn't going to happen, but don't worry. You have a few friends here in the same boat.

Hmm! I thought it was my OP but there you go.

|
Yeah, but a lot of that is semantics. In person demo which has been suggested clear this up as much as possible. No substitute for such.....

I have never objected to interesting and relevant thread drift. I do object strenuously when my threads are hijacked. When someone has no knowledge of bukai and no interest in developing an understanding, I question the value of that person's contribution when we are discussing bunkai.

|
Bunkai appears in the Heian kata after one progress from the beginner level Taikyoku kata. So, from my perspective, I start looking @ bunkai when I start the Heian kata. However, I was introduced to fighting combinations of kihon technique right away at my first karate school. That's the same general concept as bunkai, IMO, TMU. I was also introduced to Ippon Kumite, 1-steps, right away. That's similar / concept as bunkai, IMO. So I don't see any controversy in looking at bunkai, fighting combinations, etc.
|
My guess is that some, perhaps yourself, are very focused on technical applications. Fine. Technical applications are a part of traditional karate training. So is kihon, kihon kata, kata in general, which does not necessarily focus on technical applications. WHY?

A. Kata has different relevance to everyone.
|
B. If some people want to use it to develop their breathing, fine.
C. C.If some people use it to condition their legs, great.
D. Others may use it as exercise for movement and balance.
E. However if those things are the only reason for doing kata, then I would suggest there may be other ways, at least as good to achieve those objectives as you express in the next para quoted.

|
A. My view is: What was the relevance of the Master's who originated traditional karate see in the training? What truths, what principles did they discover? Not start with my opinion, then decide how to make the karate master's program fit my initial opinion.
|
B. My answer: how & why is breathing trained in traditional karate? Then that's how and why you train kata, to develop the benefits of proper breathing.
|
C. My answer: How & why do we condition the legs in traditional karate. Then that's how & why you train kata, to develop the benefits of that training...
|
D. My answer, How & why do we practice for movement & balance in traditional karate, then that's how we train in kata, to develop movement & balance.
E. Same thinking for kihon, self defense applications-bunkai, kumite skills. You seem to want to change, substitute, modify your understanding of traditional karate activities as it was presented to you for the better--by your own research & thinking.
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the most important step (and most difficult) is to master the understanding of what the traditional karate model is trying to do. I think the traditional karate model is very good as presented. It's in people short-cutting the understanding part and trying to monkey with it to make it better, to jump to practical fighting before the requisite skills are built, that is the greater folly. That is the very sound point made in the Loren Frank, Black-Belt Mag article, IMO, TMU.
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TYING TO SHOTOKAN FOR SELF DEFENSE: I think if one practically master's the Shotokan base, they will have a self-defense capability above the average non-traditional martial art practitioner. The fact that I can find faults, find aspects of Shotokan karate that I could change, is secondary in importance, IMO.