"The Taikyoku Problem"

[Kung Fu Wang]

For various reasons, this order got reversed over the past century.

All governments love to control their people. The less that people know MA, the easier that the government can control them.

This is why the communist Chinese government made Wushu into a dancing art.

 

[Grandmaster Yue men quan]

(This is a TMA issue which primarily concerns Karate and Taekwondo).

I have been doing Karate for 6 years and teaching for almost half a year. I have also done some Taekwondo and similar Korean arts. One common theme between all of these arts is that beginner students learn a very simple kata/form when they first start. In Shotokan this is the Taikyoku kata and in Taekwondo this is either Taegeuk 1 or Chon Ji. These forms are very basic patterns involving stepping and performing either a low block or a punch in a very basic sequence.

The idea behind this is that they are very basic patterns to help the student become acquainted with the art. However, in my experience, these forms are confusing and boring, and the 270-degree spin takes months for some trainees to get right.

The spin in question: (0:46)

I have seen students quit Karate/Taekwondo before progressing beyond white belt. I do not want to make any wild assumptions here but I guarantee that at least a few of them quit because of this damn kata. The basic pattern is uninteresting with limited practical application, and the footwork is, again, near-impossible for some people to get right. The footwork itself is also impractical, as nobody in their right mind would walk like that during a physical altercation. And the mundane, limited nature of these forms, in my opinion, does not encourage the mindset that one would have during a physical altercation in the same way a more complex kata would. This confusion and mundaneness is especially bad for younger practitioners who a.) have less cognitive ability and b.) have a lower attention span for boring, rudimentary things. And from what I have seen, many of these same students love watching high-level competitors perform kata like Unsu, Gankaku, Empi, etc. and sometimes excitedly ask the instructor if they can learn them. But I have never seen a student who enjoys doing Taikyoku. In other words, these students are interested in Karate, just not Taikyoku or anything to do with it.

Some would argue that before doing more complex kata, a student must have a solid foundation in basics. This is very true, but at the same time, aren't there more interesting kata that can be used to teach one basic techniques? Tekki Shodan and Hangetsu immediately come to mind (and, to my knowledge, both Naihanchi and Seisan were starting katas at one point due to their simplicity). Yes, their hand techniques are more complicated, but their footwork is far simpler and are overall more interesting and applicable katas.

My second argument against the "basics before advanced stuff" argument: some styles do teach rather sophisticated patterns to beginners. ATA Taekwondo's first form, Songahm 1, comes to mind:

Above, you see a form that has simpler footwork and more interesting techniques/combos yet is still basic enough for a beginner. Even Wushu and other Chinese arts have rather elegant patterns to teach basic techniques:

Why are these basic forms so interesting but Karate has to stick with a mundane step-block-step-punch routine?

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. I personally believe that nothing will be lost if, instead of teaching Taikyoku, new students were taught something like Tekki Shodan, i.e. a kata that is simple, teaches them proper lower body mechanics, gives them some practical self-defense ideas to build off of, feels more natural, and looks a lot better. I think the trend of teaching new students block-punch-block-punch-block-punch-punch-punch-weirdspin-block-punch-etc is counterintuitive.

I would like to hear what more experienced martial artists have to say

 

[Grandmaster Yue men quan]

Ok, I think I understand what you are trying to say. Unsu, Gankaku and Bassi-Dai are more complicated kata that have more variety of movement and make you at least 'feel' as if you are sparring. They are certainly more interesting and challenging however they are not quite sparring at all. Not continuous sparring at least.

Sparring is the opportunity to apply the techniques your learned and practice against an opponent who is simultaneously doing the same. Sparring can be cooperative and rigid in the beginning so that students are encouraged to apply their lessons but as experience and opportunity increase, cooperation decreases to mimic more realistic situations. Sparring is the practical testing of our study by ultimately using what we have learned against an uncooperative opponent.

Kata, regardless of which one you do, does not have this 'practical testing' element so I am not quite sure I can see your point about 'encouraging a fighting mindset' per se. Wab25 and Skibs have already written lengthy responses of what kata does do so there is no point to reiterate that again. I basically agree with what they are saying. Of course you can spend your time doing kihon and that is important as well. I would add that kata is simply kihon in movement. Basically another facet to work on techniques.

What I also hear you saying is that you personally find Taikyoku katas boring. The fact that you have to teach them probably brings you no joy. That will certainly rub off on your students which is probably why they are not having the best time learning it. Teaching beginners is not always easy, even if the material we are teaching is basic and easy to understand. I'm sure we all have had 'good' teachers and 'bad' teachers so think back on your own experiences and ask yourself, what made a particular teacher good. Was it the material they were teaching or was it the way they approached the subject ? If YOU can find a way to make it interesting, they will respond even if it is just turn, block, step punch…..etc. It's all in the delivery. Good luck.

It's because you haven't entirely grasped the 8 I forms think about one form being offset 45° in order 1-8 1offset 45°2 offset 45°3 and so on. Then rework your forms. It's not the instructors job to teach everything just give you enough to learn it on your own. As you are teaching this it's important to understand what is going on. When you get it you can write me a thank you note. Think pa kua.

 

[AIKIKENJITSU]

(This is a TMA issue which primarily concerns Karate and Taekwondo).

I have been doing Karate for 6 years and teaching for almost half a year. I have also done some Taekwondo and similar Korean arts. One common theme between all of these arts is that beginner students learn a very simple kata/form when they first start. In Shotokan this is the Taikyoku kata and in Taekwondo this is either Taegeuk 1 or Chon Ji. These forms are very basic patterns involving stepping and performing either a low block or a punch in a very basic sequence.

The idea behind this is that they are very basic patterns to help the student become acquainted with the art. However, in my experience, these forms are confusing and boring, and the 270-degree spin takes months for some trainees to get right.

The spin in question: (0:46)

I have seen students quit Karate/Taekwondo before progressing beyond white belt. I do not want to make any wild assumptions here but I guarantee that at least a few of them quit because of this damn kata. The basic pattern is uninteresting with limited practical application, and the footwork is, again, near-impossible for some people to get right. The footwork itself is also impractical, as nobody in their right mind would walk like that during a physical altercation. And the mundane, limited nature of these forms, in my opinion, does not encourage the mindset that one would have during a physical altercation in the same way a more complex kata would. This confusion and mundaneness is especially bad for younger practitioners who a.) have less cognitive ability and b.) have a lower attention span for boring, rudimentary things. And from what I have seen, many of these same students love watching high-level competitors perform kata like Unsu, Gankaku, Empi, etc. and sometimes excitedly ask the instructor if they can learn them. But I have never seen a student who enjoys doing Taikyoku. In other words, these students are interested in Karate, just not Taikyoku or anything to do with it.

Some would argue that before doing more complex kata, a student must have a solid foundation in basics. This is very true, but at the same time, aren't there more interesting kata that can be used to teach one basic techniques? Tekki Shodan and Hangetsu immediately come to mind (and, to my knowledge, both Naihanchi and Seisan were starting katas at one point due to their simplicity). Yes, their hand techniques are more complicated, but their footwork is far simpler and are overall more interesting and applicable katas.

My second argument against the "basics before advanced stuff" argument: some styles do teach rather sophisticated patterns to beginners. ATA Taekwondo's first form, Songahm 1, comes to mind:

Above, you see a form that has simpler footwork and more interesting techniques/combos yet is still basic enough for a beginner. Even Wushu and other Chinese arts have rather elegant patterns to teach basic techniques:

Why are these basic forms so interesting but Karate has to stick with a mundane step-block-step-punch routine?

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. I personally believe that nothing will be lost if, instead of teaching Taikyoku, new students were taught something like Tekki Shodan, i.e. a kata that is simple, teaches them proper lower body mechanics, gives them some practical self-defense ideas to build off of, feels more natural, and looks a lot better. I think the trend of teaching new students block-punch-block-punch-block-punch-punch-punch-weirdspin-block-punch-etc is counterintuitive.

I would like to hear what more experienced martial artists have to say about this.

Well, I have studied Tracy Kenpo and taught with Tracy at his studio many years ago. I then met Ed Parker and studied American Kenpo up to black belt. I then taught my version of American Kenpo for many years and still teach. I only teach men and women, no kids. I have learned alot of katas and when I began teaching, I threw the katas in the trash can. Kenpo's techniques are like miniature katas anyway. Teaching just techniques is like teaching miniture katas anyway.
I am 5'2", small boned and slim, but msucular at 130 lbs. Over the years I have been attacked seven times and it was all over with just one move and these guys were from 5'7" to 6'.

 

[AIKIKENJITSU]

Well, I have studied Tracy Kenpo and taught with Tracy at his studio many years ago. I then met Ed Parker and studied American Kenpo up to black belt. I then taught my version of American Kenpo for many years and still teach. I only teach men and women, no kids. I have learned alot of katas and when I began teaching, I threw the katas in the trash can. Kenpo's techniques are like miniature katas anyway. Teaching just techniques is like teaching miniture katas anyway.
I am 5'2", small boned and slim, but msucular at 130 lbs. Over the years I have been attacked seven times and it was all over with just one move and these guys were from 5'7" to 6'. You do not need to practice katas to have a good fighting system. I practice and teach Kenpo because it is fun and it keeps my body very limber. When you consider that I am 78, that's saying alot. Techniques are more fun than doing katas anyway. But, it's up to you to do what you want, but make sure you enjoy what you are teaching.
Sifu
Puyallulp, WA

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Teaching just techniques is like teaching miniture katas anyway.

Agree with you 100% there. It's much more fun to train combo than to train individual technique. When you train combo such as:

1. Right hook punch.
2. Right groin kick.
3. Right hammer fist.
4. Right downward parry.
5. Step in left punch.
6. Step in right punch.

You can train many techniques at the same time. After you have done the right side, if you also train the left side, you will have a short 12 moves form.

The nice thing about this approach is you can create your own forms,

 

[Hot Lunch]

ISKF doesn't use Taikyoku (thank GAWD).

In Shorin-ryu schools of Nazakato lineage, they adopted it - even though it was specifically designed for Shotokan - and they have a total of five. Even though Gigo Funakoshi only made three. And I believe Shorinkan's sandan is different from the one used in Shotokai. And here's the kicker - there are six katas BEFORE Taikyoku Shodan in Shorinkan (Kihon Ippon/Nihon/Sanbon and Fukyu Dai Ichi/Ni/San). I think they're fillers for more belt tests (cha ching!), but if I made a list of reasons why I left, this would be on it (though not at the top).

Itosu developed the Pinan katas to be the simple introductory katas. Why the need for Taikyokus? I can see the need for small pre-school aged children, maybe. But Heian Shodan is simple enough to not need a Taikyoku before it.

I believe that SKIF has Taikyoku Shodan, and if both a SKIF and an ISKF dojo existed in my town - all other factors either being equal or some from each side offsetting the other - I would have chosen the ISKF solely on the basis of it not having Taikyoku Shodan.