"The Taikyoku Problem"

[isshinryuronin]

In a nutshell, I think Taikyoku, Taegeuk 1, and Chon Ji are uninteresting, impractical kata that do not encourage a fighting mindset and do little more than confuse new Karateka. I think they feel weird to practice, have little to no relation to any following kata (except maybe Meikyo?), look quite silly, and make Karate look silly to laymen.

If the kata seems "uninteresting, impractical" you may not have learned the practicality of the forms. It is hard for one to get a "fighting mindset" from a kata it one doesn't understand the fighting application and deeper meanings of the moves.

As for looking silly, karate was not developed with the uninformed layman's sensibilities in mind.

There are many systems that do not use kata to teach their basic techniques. They've dispensed with this idea all together. Would you consider these systems 'encouraging a fighting mindset' more or less because of their lack of katas.

Kata was not designed to teach the basic techniques, but how to apply and practice them in combat situations. They are not a substitute for kihon, but the next level of practice.

There is a lot to it, once you get past step, block, punch..

It's a good thing too. Imagine being limited to just these for 40 years! I'd go nuts with boredom.

Going deeper... a punch is not just a punch and a block is not just a block. Read through the text I linked above... Uke Te is not "blocking hand" it is "receiving hand." (Note that Funakoshi barely mentions using Uke Te to block a strike

Funakoshi actually taught that as a throw or take down. As a matter of fact, Funakoshi encouraged students to practice the throws and locks found within the kata. Taikyoku is no different and also contains throws and locks.

Yes, karate is more than block, punch, kick. Okinawan karate had a lot "grappling' and grabbing that sort of got phased out during the decades of teaching in the public schools to very large classes.

Also, the (Mainland) Japanese MA organizational structure discouraged teaching such moves in karate so as not to infringe on judo/jiujutsu's "territory." These arts were already entrenched and "wired" into the Japanese MA world. The organizational powers wanted to protect each art's turf, as well as provide definitive and unique sports for competition, keeping one art from bleeding into the others.

However, a 270-degree turn is very common in our throws in the self-defense curriculum. This includes various wrist locks, arm locks, and hip throws.

I would say that most kata turns over 90 degrees incorporate such moves to add torque to the lock and to execute takedowns, whether the practitioner (of whatever rank) realizes it or not.

if you want to strengthen your basics, kihon is the best thing you can do. As per my previous reply, it might be a better use of one's time to do pure kihon rather than a basic kata.

I fully agree with the first sentence. But to understand possible (advanced/"hidden" applications of those basics, kata is needed. Even basic kata contain more than first meets the eye.

So many good points made here by others that deserved to be highlighted.

 

[punisher73]

Funakoshi Sensei named the set of three Taikyoku kata developed by his son Yoshitaka “Gigō” Funakoshi Sensei. In his book "Karate-do Kyohan" Funakoshi, he explains the development of the kata and why he named them Taikyoku, which translates as "first cause".

Funakoshi wrote: “Because of its simplicity, the kata is easily learned by beginners. Nevertheless, as its name implies, this form is of the most profound character and one to which, upon mastery of the art of karate, an expert will return to select it as the ultimate training kata” (from wikipedia)

So, according to Funakoshi, he felt that they were the most important kata. But why? This is where there is a disconnect between western and eastern training methods. Look at the motions and movements, not as techniques but how to use your body. Things like, spins to learn centrifugal force, step throughs to learn to use body momentum in the techniques. These things are necessary for applications, but aren't the applications themselves.

A good teacher should be explaining why it is we are doing, what we are doing, when we are doing it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Train less and at a slower pace lol

I know a boxer who trains

- left jab, right hook, right hammer fist, right groin kick, right face punch,
- right jab, left hook, left hammer fist, left groin kick, left face punch,

combo (he had learned from one CMA form) over and over when he is older.

 

[WaterGal]

What I mean regarding this "fighting mindset" is that - at least for me - a kata like Unsu or Gankaku or Bassai-Dai is intense enough that it comes close to replicating the "feeling" of sparring with someone, whereas Taikyoku does not give this feeling. Taikyoku feel so basic that I might as well just spend that time doing kihon up and down the floor.

For whatever it's worth, I feel like white belts sparring isn't too far off from those basic forms lol. White belts tend to do mostly front kick, punch, and moving forward and back. It mostly just feels more intense because the other person is trying to kick and punch them back.

 

[_Simon_]

Ah... yeah pretty much disagree with most things in the original post... and it's unfortunate you view it that way. I feel like it's such a more basic kata for beginners to learn fundamentals in body mechanics and principles... so that they in fact feel that sense of accomplishment first. Teaching them Tekki Shodan first.. in my opinion would be horrible as a first kata...

Why do you feel all kata should have this fighter's mindset? That can certainly be addressed in other kata if you wanted, or in sparring. Or in pushups. Seriously. Kata develops sooo many other benefits that it's unrealistic to presume that every aspect of karate should contain EVERY thing you need to learn.

But also as they learn Taikyoku Shodan, they're just learning the initial pattern and basic techniques and stances, but they (should) get deeper into it and refine it through the ranks. Copying and pasting my post from this thread: Who gets to change a kata or technique…

"Starting is the ability to push out off the right foot to the left into the block. Not only that but the ability to stop your body under your control into the stance. Then driving forward with your bodyweight behind the punch, and in a big sense learning to triangulate and focus that forward intention of driven power without letting it disperse in other directions. The 180° turn into the block involves quite a bit of body control. Blocking off the opposite side/stance here too, along with the punch.

Another left into the middle line, three punches you're working to drive into and keeping them accurately placed one after the other. The 270° turn here is a whole other level of intricate body control. It's here the form repeats the previous, so it's only really repeating things twice under varying circumstances and differing levels of skill developed.

This is the issue with people looking at a form on the surface level, deciding they think it's too repetitive and thinking it should be changed. For a beginner's level form, there is a LOT to it."

 

[TenHands]

Ah... yeah pretty much disagree with most things in the original post... and it's unfortunate you view it that way. I feel like it's such a more basic kata for beginners to learn fundamentals in body mechanics and principles... so that they in fact feel that sense of accomplishment first. Teaching them Tekki Shodan first.. in my opinion would be horrible as a first kata...

Why do you feel all kata should have this fighter's mindset? That can certainly be addressed in other kata if you wanted, or in sparring. Or in pushups. Seriously. Kata develops sooo many other benefits that it's unrealistic to presume that every aspect of karate should contain EVERY thing you need to learn.

But also as they learn Taikyoku Shodan, they're just learning the initial pattern and basic techniques and stances, but they (should) get deeper into it and refine it through the ranks. Copying and pasting my post from this thread: Who gets to change a kata or technique…

"Starting is the ability to push out off the right foot to the left into the block. Not only that but the ability to stop your body under your control into the stance. Then driving forward with your bodyweight behind the punch, and in a big sense learning to triangulate and focus that forward intention of driven power without letting it disperse in other directions. The 180° turn into the block involves quite a bit of body control. Blocking off the opposite side/stance here too, along with the punch.

Another left into the middle line, three punches you're working to drive into and keeping them accurately placed one after the other. The 270° turn here is a whole other level of intricate body control. It's here the form repeats the previous, so it's only really repeating things twice under varying circumstances and differing levels of skill developed.

This is the issue with people looking at a form on the surface level, deciding they think it's too repetitive and thinking it should be changed. For a beginner's level form, there is a LOT to it."

As someone who has been doing Shotokan for a while (although admittedly not THAT long), I can appreciate the Taikyoku forms for what they teach in terms of stance, techniques, mechanics, etc. However, I speak as someone who notices that not everyone is willing to put that much effort into Karate, especially not when they're a beginner.
If I recall correctly, the Gekisai kata were developed to address this same problem with Sanchin, and many Goju-ryu syllabus' I've seen teach Gekisai before teaching Sanchin. Come to think of it, isn't this the same reason the Heian kata were developed? Aren't they just snippets of more advanced kata put into simpler patterns to be more appealing to newcomers?

 

[JowGaWolf]

Why do you feel all kata should have this fighter's mindset? That can certainly be addressed in other kata if you wanted, or in sparring. Or in pushups. Seriously. Kata develops sooo many other benefits that it's unrealistic to presume that every aspect of karate should contain EVERY thing you need to learn.

I do my forms with and without a mindset for this very reason. I've discovered that the fighter's mindset puts me in a completely different mindset. When I get out of that mindset, I become more aware about what I'm doing. I pay more attention to what my body is doing. With a fighter's mindset that same form seems to be external focused. All I think about is what I'm doing to my opponent.

 

[Flying Crane]

As someone who has been doing Shotokan for a while (although admittedly not THAT long), I can appreciate the Taikyoku forms for what they teach in terms of stance, techniques, mechanics, etc. However, I speak as someone who notices that not everyone is willing to put that much effort into Karate, especially not when they're a beginner.

Well maybe this is the problem. To train martial arts to any level of real skill involves hard work. In the Chinese methods, the term “kung fu” does not mean martial method. It means a skill acquired through hard work. It could be any skill. You can have “good kung fu” as a carpenter or as a chef or as a musician. But if you do not put in the hard work in your martial training, you will not have good kung fu.

So if your students are not interested in putting in hard work, and you are struggling to find a way to motivate them, it does not matter what forms you teach. They will not grow. People need to find some motivation within themselves in order to train martial arts. It simply is not all fun and entertaining.

 

[TenHands]

Well maybe this is the problem. To train martial arts to any level of real skill involves hard work. In the Chinese methods, the term “kung fu” does not mean martial method. It means a skill acquired through hard work. It could be any skill. You can have “good kung fu” as a carpenter or as a chef or as a musician. But if you do not put in the hard work in your martial training, you will not have good kung fu.

So if your students are not interested in putting in hard work, and you are struggling to find a way to motivate them, it does not matter what forms you teach. They will not grow. People need to find some motivation within themselves in order to train martial arts. It simply is not all fun and entertaining.

I guess this brings us to a very big problem in the modern-day Western world: people like things to be easy and entertaining. My original post was an appeal to this way of thinking and a suggestion on how to market Karate to these sorts of people.

 

[Flying Crane]

I guess this brings us to a very big problem in the modern-day Western world: people like things to be easy.

You are absolutely correct. I don’t have an solution for you. All we can really do is encourage people to embrace the training, and keep the bar at a high level. There will be a few who want to dive in deep, but most will not. That is not a judgement against those people. Everyone needs to decide for themselves what is the best way to spend their time and energy, and martial training is not inherently superior to other interests and obligations. But it is what it is.

As an instructor, you are faced with a decision: do you lower the bar and teach to the lowest common denominator, or do you keep the bar high and accept that a lot of people will not stick with it? This is mostly a problem if teaching is your livlihood.

 

[TenHands]

You are absolutely correct. I don’t have an solution for you. All we can really do is encourage people to embrace the training, and keep the bar at a high level. There will be a few who want to dive in deep, but most will not. That is not a judgement against those people. Everyone needs to decide for themselves what is the best way to spend their time and energy, and martial training is not inherently superior to other interests and obligations. But it is what it is.

As an instructor, you are faced with a decision: do you lower the bar and teach to the lowest common denominator, or do you keep the bar high and accept that a lot of people will not stick with it? This is mostly a problem if teaching is your livlihood.

One thought that I had last night while thinking about the replies is this:

If a student isn't willing to put in the work and wants to do the fun stuff, Taikyoku won't do it for them but a more interesting kata like Tekki, Bassai, etc. just might. On the other hand, if a student is willing to put some effort into Karate, Taikyoku will be useful to them, but also so will a more fun kata. To paraphrase, if a student wants to work hard at Karate, they would likely be able to adapt to a more advanced kata anyways and likely learn the same things as they would from Taikyoku.

 

[Flying Crane]

One thought that I had last night while thinking about the replies is this:

If a student isn't willing to put in the work and wants to do the fun stuff, Taikyoku won't do it for them but a more interesting kata like Tekki, Bassai, etc. just might. On the other hand, if a student is willing to put some effort into Karate, Taikyoku will be useful to them, but also so will a more fun kata. To paraphrase, if a student wants to work hard at Karate, they would likely be able to adapt to a more advanced kata anyways and likely learn the same things as they would from Taikyoku.

Well, I’m a kung fu guy and cannot comment on karate kata. However, in my system we have a basic form, the first one taught. We do not teach it immediately. There are a series of isolated fundamentals that must be worked on first, in order to begin to understand the body mechanics that go into quality technique. This is foundational and fundamental stuff. If you don’t build this first, everything else will be weak. A foundation built of sand will cause the house to collapse. Build that foundation from reinforced concrete.

Once the foundation has been built, we teach the first form. It is simple, consisting of a series of punches with stepping in a straight line. But there is a lot going on there. The mechanics of the fundamental techniques need to be there, while stepping and moving. So it raises the difficulty to the next level, above fundamentals done in isolation. But this a great training form because it keeps the movement clean and uncomplicated, so you can really focus on those foundational concepts within the form. It is always worth working on, no matter how advanced you may become, because it continues to hone those fundamentals, which simply makes everything else better at the same time.

Our next form is very long and complex, even though it is still in the beginner grouping. All of our forms tend to be long and complex once you learn those following that first one. Could I teach the second form without first teaching the simpler form? Yes, I could. But I believe it would be a mistake and would be a disservice to the student, because it would be skipping that important foundation-building step. They would have a complex form without understanding how to engage those concepts, before they are ready to digest it. Also, it sends a message to the student that training is all about being entertained and doing “cool” stuff. It isn’t. Training is about developing a skilll, and there is a methodology in the system, designed to do that. If you skip a step, your student has a harder time developing the skill. Sure, someone can learn the choreography of the form before they are ready to understand it. But choreography is empty movement without a solid understanding of the foundation. So I highly recommend against it.

Your job as a teacher is to get the student to understand what he is learning, what the process is, and how the material is specifically helping them to build certain skills. Don’t just look for application. Look for deeper body mechanics, how to engage the body to produce great power in delivering a technique, whether it is a strike or a throw or a block. Focus on body mechanics, especially at the beginner level. Once those mechanics are strong, then the application interpretations tend to fall into place and become obvious.

If a student understands this, then I think they are more likely to find the interest and are more willing to put in the effort to train that stuff. They have context, and that gives them purpose.

 

[JowGaWolf]

As an instructor, you are faced with a decision: do you lower the bar and teach to the lowest common denominator, or do you keep the bar high and accept that a lot of people will not stick with it? This is mostly a problem if teaching is your livlihood.

I find that advertising to the type of student that you want to see in the school is the best way to go. When my last school closed down after the Sifu left the country. I refer to those students as old students. The students that came after are the New Students.
When I was teaching, every New student with the exception of a 5 year old wanted to be able to use Kung Fu. This was only possible because that's the audience I marketed the classes to. This means that I didn't have to lower the training standards. They were more than happy to train hard.

I don't think you will get the same outcome if people are looking for discipline and confidence. We could have easily been a larger school as I was on the search for another school that could support a wide variety of training resources. It's also possible to market to both groups. Send out two different Ads for 2 different groups. Create 2 different sessions and different training sessions on different days or different times. on the same day.

 

[Flying Crane]

I find that advertising to the type of student that you want to see in the school is the best way to go. When my last school closed down after the Sifu left the country. I refer to those students as old students. The students that came after are the New Students.
When I was teaching, every New student with the exception of a 5 year old wanted to be able to use Kung Fu. This was only possible because that's the audience I marketed the classes to. This means that I didn't have to lower the training standards. They were more than happy to train hard.

I don't think you will get the same outcome if people are looking for discipline and confidence. We could have easily been a larger school as I was on the search for another school that could support a wide variety of training resources. It's also possible to market to both groups. Send out two different Ads for 2 different groups. Create 2 different sessions and different training sessions on different days or different times. on the same day.

Sure, that’s one way to go about it. But you are making that decision, even if you choose to try and have it both ways. I’m not sure how successful that would be, but I’ve never tried it. Maybe that’s why I only have one student. It would kill me to teach krotty daycare.

 

[TenHands]

Well, I’m a kung fu guy and cannot comment on karate kata. However, in my system we have a basic form, the first one taught. We do not teach it immediately. There are a series of isolated fundamentals that must be worked on first, in order to begin to understand the body mechanics that go into quality technique. This is foundational and fundamental stuff. If you don’t build this first, everything else will be weak. A foundation built of sand will cause the house to collapse. Build that foundation from reinforced concrete.

Once the foundation has been built, we teach the first form. It is simple, consisting of a series of punches with stepping in a straight line. But there is a lot going on there. The mechanics of the fundamental techniques need to be there, while stepping and moving. So it raises the difficulty to the next level, above fundamentals done in isolation. But this a great training form because it keeps the movement clean and uncomplicated, so you can really focus on those foundational concepts within the form. It is always worth working on, no matter how advanced you may become, because it continues to hone those fundamentals, which simply makes everything else better at the same time.

Our next form is very long and complex, even though it is still in the beginner grouping. All of our forms tend to be long and complex once you learn those following that first one. Could I teach the second form without first teaching the simpler form? Yes, I could. But I believe it would be a mistake and would be a disservice to the student, because it would be skipping that important foundation-building step. They would have a complex form without understanding how to engage those concepts, before they are ready to digest it. Also, it sends a message to the student that training is all about being entertained and doing “cool” stuff. It isn’t. Training is about developing a skilll, and there is a methodology in the system, designed to do that. If you skip a step, your student has a harder time developing the skill. Sure, someone can learn the choreography of the form before they are ready to understand it. But choreography is empty movement without a solid understanding of the foundation. So I highly recommend against it.

Your job as a teacher is to get the student to understand what he is learning, what the process is, and how the material is specifically helping them to build certain skills. Don’t just look for application. Look for deeper body mechanics, how to engage the body to produce great power in delivering a technique, whether it is a strike or a throw or a block. Focus on body mechanics, especially at the beginner level. Once those mechanics are strong, then the application interpretations tend to fall into place and become obvious.

If a student understands this, then I think they are more likely to find the interest and are more willing to put in the effort to train that stuff. They have context, and that gives them purpose.

If you don't mind me asking, what is your first form?

 

[Flying Crane]

If you don't mind me asking, what is your first form?

I’m not sure what you are asking. It is unique to our system, it’s name is Lok Lik Kuen, meaning Six Powers Fist. It is six sets of walking down and back, each time throwing different types of punches. It is fundamental stepping and punching, making sure to engage good rooting, rotation and body-connection. Foundational skills.

I don’t know that you would find it on YouTube, but I haven’t looked in a while. I do not expect you to be familiar with it, our system is somewhat rare.

 

[Flying Crane]

If you don't mind me asking, what is your first form?

Here is something I found on YouTube. They do it a bit differently, but is still the same form. For us, we do the same punch down and back before switching to the next. They switch after going down one direction. I am not terribly impressed with this example, but you can see the flavor.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Sure, that’s one way to go about it. But you are making that decision, even if you choose to try and have it both ways. I’m not sure how successful that would be, but I’ve never tried it. Maybe that’s why I only have one student. It would kill me to teach krotty daycare.

Oh I wouldn't do a daycare type martial arts. Been there with past employments and it's not a good match. The martial arts will suffer in that aspect. For example, if the parents only care about fast belts, confidence and discipline then they won't be there for you when it comes to learning how to apply what they do in the class.

For the kids, I advertised to parents who were concerned about their kids being bullied. I advertised to the parents who wanted their kids to be safe during the hours of the day when the parents aren't with their child. I wanted the kids who were being bullied. I'll have to look to see if I can find an old version of the website but I don't think I ever mentioned confidence or discipline in the marketing.

Here is an example of how I advertised the same thing to different groups.

Here's how I marketed the curriculum, (Includes video)

 

[JowGaWolf]

Here is something I found on YouTube. They do it a bit differently, but is still the same form. For us, we do the same punch down and back before switching to the next. They switch after going down one direction. I am not terribly impressed with this example, but you can see the flavor.

wow a lot of that reminds me of things done in Jow Ga

 

[Flying Crane]

Oh I wouldn't do a daycare type martial arts. Been there with past employments and it's not a good match. The martial arts will suffer in that aspect. For example, if the parents only care about fast belts, confidence and discipline then they won't be there for you when it comes to learning how to apply what they do in the class.

For the kids, I advertised to parents who were concerned about their kids being bullied. I advertised to the parents who wanted their kids to be safe during the hours of the day when the parents aren't with their child. I wanted the kids who were being bullied. I'll have to look to see if I can find an old version of the website but I don't think I ever mentioned confidence or discipline in the marketing.

Here is an example of how I advertised the same thing to different groups.

Here's how I marketed the curriculum, (Includes video)

Interesting, thanks for sharing it!