I was picturing the latter - much more amusing that way. I can do the other, but it would lose the transition movements between the techniques (part of the actual purpose of the form).
Should kata be symmetrical?
- Thread starter skribs
- Start date
The former could actually be useful, now that I think about it. I did something similar when I played piano. Especially for longer pieces, I would practice/focus on the start and middle, and not always the end as much. So my piano teacher recommended, for pieces I'd be performing, play the last measure of the song. Then the last two measures. Then the last 3 measures, etc... Would be interesting to do the same thing with a kata.
That approach would keep the transition movements the same, too.
Bastards!
_Simon_
Senior Master
"Noooo no no no wait wait do it with the OTHER hand..." XDBastards!
Hyoho
2nd Black Belt
You mean do a kata of kata? If you saw what a Japanese kinder can memorize in one go you would not think any kata as complicated.
Sometime the reverse order doesn't make sense. For example, you use
1. kick to set up a punch.
2. punch to set up a clinch.
3. clinch to establish a throw.
1,2,3 makes sense. 3,2,1 doesn't not make sense. Of course if you only care about performance, it won't matter at all.
Yup. And you could separate it so it's either done with individual strikes (punch, reset. Move-punch, reset. Block move punch, reset). Or groupings of techniques (block move punch reset. Look spin kick, block move punch, reset). That could actually help narrow down exactly what parts are causing you more difficulty, and help with repetition...I may have to try this!
This is me being nitpicky, but 3, 2, 1 can absolutely make sense.
Person A is best at grappling, person B is best at kicking. They are stuck in close range. Person A wants to use a kick to set up a punch and close range, then punch to get a clinch, then use the clinch to throw. However, once they are grappling, person B now wants to position the clinch so he can break out of grappling range. Then punch to protect his transition back to kicking range. Both work, for different purposes.
What is a Japanese kinder?
It might not make sense, but doing them in reverse order might help show where they don't - a useful intellectual exercise in and of itself.
Let's use a much simpler example. You use hip throw to throw your opponent over your back. The reverse won't make sense. I also don't think the reverse of a punch or a kick can make sense.
It wouldn't be the reverse of the motion (pulling someone up over your back, or withdrawing your punch). It would be the reverse order of techniques (punch then kick instead of kick then punch).
Hyoho
2nd Black Belt
Japanese kindergarten child (Yochiensei). Kinder1, Kinder 2 etc.
To add to what I wrote about memorization. In a Japanese dojo you get two chances to correct anything. Screw up a third time? God help you. That's why it's an M.A dojo.
I think he wasn't talking about doing the technique backwards, but reversing the order (closer to what you said previously). As for doing them completely backwards, that, again, could be a useful intellectual exercise. It'd be a chance to examine movement and balance, perhaps looking for ways to get back out of positions, rather than how to get into them. With a partner, I doubt it would be feasible (weight shifts in the other direction would require different mechanics), but I could (slowly) manage to reverse the movements of most techniques. Most of it would turn into nonsense, but there would probably be some value in determining which parts are or are not nonsense.
Finlay
Green Belt
Excellent question
I think it depends on your view of kata. For performance and for excerise then symmetry is a good thing.
If you view kata as a record of techniques then symmtry is not so important. All of techniques should be applied to training partners, that is where the real combative learning will take place and be refined.
I think it depends on your view of kata. For performance and for excerise then symmetry is a good thing.
If you view kata as a record of techniques then symmtry is not so important. All of techniques should be applied to training partners, that is where the real combative learning will take place and be refined.
If you want to dig out information from your form, you should try to change your form in many different ways to make sense. For example, if your form has "front kick, straight punch", you should also train:
- front kick, hook punch.
- front kick, hammer fist.
- front kick, uppercut.
- side kick, spin back fist.
- side kick, palm chop.
- roundhouse kick, ...
- ...
- front kick, hook punch.
- front kick, hammer fist.
- front kick, uppercut.
- side kick, spin back fist.
- side kick, palm chop.
- roundhouse kick, ...
- ...
Last edited:
IMO, that's not changing your form, it's just working combinations. It's only changing the form if you assemble a whole new form from those combinations.
That's only one approach, Drop. Another way is to open up their centerline, giving you access to vital striking points, i.e. eyes, point of nose, chin, throat, sternum & plexus, low-center gut, groin all of which are prime things to put a fist into and which are generally accessible if you are successful getting to the rear and/or flank.
Granted, there's lots of stuff to put a fist into on the rear/flank, too. Just pointing out that the conclusory statement that you made above isn't the be-all, end-all of fight tactics. I personally do it that way myself, following a "close 'em up to soften 'em up, then open 'em up to finish 'em" method....
