Training methodologies of Karate

[Tames D]

For some reason I keep having to repeat the fact that my criticism has nothing to do with style or techniques of any TMA. Pretty much everything I teach tactical wise is a strike, block, hold or throw from some other martial art. Kata isn't needed IMO and most in my profession agree with that assumption despite the fact that most of them have multiple years of TMA training WITH KATA. If it has value to a lifelong practitioner I believe you 110% but I have to get my clients comfortable with defending themselves in months not years and there is no way on earth you will EVER convince me that kata will achieve that. There is really nothing for me to understand about it or open my mind up to. If what I am instructing doesn't cut it for my clients they will stop paying me agree? And trust me I'm not cheap by any means.

How do you advertise your services? I'm very interested to see your web page or other means of advertising. I'm sure you must have something in place to attract clients willing to pay high prices. Can you send a link? And I hope you don't say it's all 'word of mouth'.

 

[SteveNC]

How do you advertise your services? I'm very interested to see your web page or other means of advertising. I'm sure you must have something in place to attract clients willing to pay high prices. Can you send a link? And I hope you don't say it's all 'word of mouth'.

I have a full time job. This is a second gig for me as of now but looking to go permanent with it this year. I have enough contacts through military connections, local leo's and security avenues. Sorry to disappoint you

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I seriously don't think you have the slightest clue what you are talking about. That or you have some sort of reading comprehension problem.

Ah see, now you're just being defensive and rude. I have nearly twice your training time Steve. And in that time I've had the opportunity to learn things you have yet to be exposed to in training. Same for many that have taken the time to discuss this topic with you. Which is why you should perhaps take a moment to learn from those in this thread who are experience in the 'training methodologies of Karate'. This obviously isn't a strong area for you and you have many misconceptions about those training methodologies. Rather than being close-minded (your words) you should seek to learn something that would be beneficial to you, at least if you're going to continue in this thread. If you're still determined to be close-minded...then why continue in the thread.

As to H2H, I would suggest some research into that area as well. If you teach military folks as you claim then you should, I would think, know of WWII combatives and the history of it's origin and instructors. Additionally, if you teach SD, as you claim, then you should do research into the systems I have mentioned above and on the other pages. I think you could learn a lot that would benefit you and your students. I'm willing to help you (as are many here) but only if you aren't close-minded and defensive.

Cheers

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I have a full time job. This is a second gig for me as of now but looking to go permanent with it this year. I have enough contacts through military connections, local leo's and security avenues.

That's great. But I hope you know the requirements that LEO's need. There are components we face that go well beyond normal SD. And please don't teach them sport or MMA style grappling and ground fighting. That's off topic but I needed to touch on that since you mentioned teaching LEO's as it is a pet peeve of mine.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Since the benefits of training kata don't become more apparent until later on in an individual's training (and I do believe that there are definite benefits that are gained from kata)...

I completely understand where you're coming from in Tai Chi, but with respect I will offer disagreement with you in regards to kata. It all depends upon how it is taught. I begin teaching the applications of kata on day one and we are completely focused on self-defense (and offense if/when it is necessary whether it be pre-emptive techniques or control etc). This way the student is exposed to the benefits of kata right from the get-go. This way misconceptions are avoided early on.

 

[K-man]

I completely understand where you're coming from in Tai Chi, but with respect I will offer disagreement with you in regards to kata. It all depends upon how it is taught. I begin teaching the applications of kata on day one and we are completely focused on self-defense (and offense if/when it is necessary whether it be pre-emptive techniques or control etc). This way the student is exposed to the benefits of kata right from the get-go. This way misconceptions are avoided early on.

Exactly!
:asian:

 

[SteveNC]

Ah see, now you're just being defensive and rude. I have nearly twice your training time Steve. And in that time I've had the opportunity to learn things you have yet to be exposed to in training. Same for many that have taken the time to discuss this topic with you. Which is why you should perhaps take a moment to learn from those in this thread who are experience in the 'training methodologies of Karate'. This obviously isn't a strong area for you and you have many misconceptions about those training methodologies. Rather than being close-minded (your words) you should seek to learn something that would be beneficial to you, at least if you're going to continue in this thread. If you're still determined to be close-minded...then why continue in the thread.


As to H2H, I would suggest some research into that area as well. If you teach military folks as you claim then you should, I would think, know of WWII combatives and the history of it's origin and instructors. Additionally, if you teach SD, as you claim, then you should do research into the systems I have mentioned above and on the other pages. I think you could learn a lot that would benefit you and your students. I'm willing to help you (as are many here) but only if you aren't close-minded and defensive.

Cheers

I have spent over 12 years in a recon unit in Iraq, afghanistan and some of the most dangerous hell holes you can imagine. I think I am more than qualified to teach people about violence and self protection. Especially weapons defense and multiple attackers. I am more than capable of fine tuning and differentiating between military combat, civilian needs and specialized LEO training. Now if you eant to preach to me about being defensive and close minded I recommend you adhere to the same advice

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I have spent over 12 years in a recon unit in Iraq, afghanistan and some of the most dangerous hell holes you can imagine.

Hey that's great. Should I mention I was in the Middle East doing the same thing when you were probably in middle school? Should I mention I commanded a S.O.G. Team? Or should I opine that I've been in L.E. now for 23 years? Or perhaps that I've trained over a thousand military, L.E., Corrections, E.P. agents both on and off duty?

I think I am more than qualified to teach people about violence and self protection.

Being in a recon unit does not necessarily qualify you in teaching self defense. Should I mention that I have six different specialized Instructor certifications?

I am more than capable of fine tuning and differentiating between military combat, civilian needs and specialized LEO training.

Being in a recon unit doesn't qualify you to differentiate between military combat, civilian or LEO training needs. Not by a very long shot. Are you now, or have you every been an L.E.O.? If not, have you received any training from a L.E.O. instructor so that you are familiar with the needs of the Officer's in your state i.e. force continuum, force matrix, restraint devices, approved agency equipment, agency policy, state statutes concerning use of force/deadly force? If not, no you're not qualified.

And all of that is beside the point of the thread (and my apologies to the OP). Being in a recon unit doesn't qualify you to speak with any legitimacy on the training methodology of karate.

You've gotten yourself in way over your head. You've shrugged off the life line several have thrown to you. Time to sink or swim.

 

[SteveNC]

Kong

You dont know a thing about me or my qualifications nor do I you and YOU seem to be taking this a little to personal. Best I back out of this foolishness so I can enjoy my time here. If I have learned anyits what type of discussion and posters to steer clear ofhing I

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Fair enough Steve. In the immortal words of Harry Calahan, " A man's got to know his limitations".

:wavey:

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Why there has been e distance between arts as still they are all close to each other on their concept.

Back on to the topic. I'd like to offer an opinion on this part of the OP. IIRC, all of the Ryus with the exception of one (Uechi Ryu) can trace back to either (or both) of Itosu Anko Sensei or Higaonna Kanryo Sensei. It would make sense for there to be a strong unity in methodology between the Ryus that followed.

Thoughts?

 

[colemcm]

I completely understand where you're coming from in Tai Chi, but with respect I will offer disagreement with you in regards to kata. It all depends upon how it is taught. I begin teaching the applications of kata on day one and we are completely focused on self-defense (and offense if/when it is necessary whether it be pre-emptive techniques or control etc). This way the student is exposed to the benefits of kata right from the get-go. This way misconceptions are avoided early on.

I also begin training on application on day one. Does that mean that the student really understands the technique and principles on day one? Absolutely not. It's not until much later that they get the REAL benefit of the form/kata. A beginning student could apply the technique, but it would most likely very forced and inefficient. Once they've gained a better understanding of the principles of style, the form becomes a much more valuable training tool.

 

[RTKDCMB]

The large majority of my clients are security professionals who can't afford to sit in a horse stance for a year and have an instructor drill them on proper kata forms in hopes that when/if they are faced with a bad situation they can handle the tactical side with confidence. I have had guys come to me with blackbelts that were so unprepared to defend themselves physically AND mentally that I had to ask these questions to understand why. I am far more expensive than a monthly rate at a TMA school so something obviously wasn't/isn't working for these folks don't you think? Were they bad TMA students? perhaps. Not credible or not experienced enough to form an opinion on the effectiveness of what they were being taught? Nope. I'm not dealing with teenagers or people looking to get in shape and get in touch with their inner self.

Usually when I am teaching a short self defence course I don't include patterns either but neither do they sit in horse stance for a year, 5 minutes maybee. Yes there are a lot of substandard students and black belts out there, I have seen it first hand. We get all sorts of people who want to train with us, including former kick boxers, Karate people and other Taekwondo stylists. I, myself, started as a teenager because I was sick of getting picked on in school and I haven't looked back since.

 

[K-man]

Back on to the topic. I'd like to offer an opinion on this part of the OP. IIRC, all of the Ryus with the exception of one (Uechi Ryu) can trace back to either (or both) of Itosu Anko Sensei or Higaonna Kanryo Sensei. It would make sense for there to be a strong unity in methodology between the Ryus that followed.

Thoughts?

I wouldn't be excepting Uechi Ryu. Uechi went to China not long after Higaonna, to the same place, Fuzhou, and even learned the same kata. If anything it is Itosu who is the odd man out, but he learned from Mutsumura who was the first of the notable karate pioneers to visit China.

Then when the pioneers were set up in Naha, Shuri and Tomari they and their students cross trained with each other. Not surprising that the methodologies are similar. I would suggest that differences have developed over more recent times with probably the major influence being the introduction of karate into the schools and the regimented style of teaching in Japan.
:asian:

 

[Flying Crane]

I think there are a few here that think I am trying to prove, disprove or convince somebody of something regarding karate, kata and self defense and really I'm not. I was simply offering "my opinion" on karate training methods in regards to SELF DEFENSE.

quite so. and there are those of us here who are simply offering "our opinions" that you don't know what you are talking about, with regard to kata.

see how that game is played? we are quite adept at it.

 

[Cirdan]

Taditional kata-heavy karate training gave me the tools to defend myself against two muggers back when I was a pretty fresh white belt. It still worked in another instance a few years ago, despite all those hours in horse stance. Maybe I am doing my ancient outdated art and all the "kata-dances" wrong......

 

[EddieCyrax]

I think these sort of posts are missing the point of the anti-kata argument. The argument is not that the techniques contained within kata are no good. The argument is that the training methodology of kata is not effective. You can agree or disagree with that point, but it helps to know what argument is actually being made.

Interesting perspective. I guess it comes down to how one is taught kata as to how effective the methodology is. If the student/instructor stop at a "follow-the-leader" approach I agree with everyone's anti-kata perspective. My experience being taught the various kata/forms has been not only learn the flow but then apply the components through other drills which include real person attacks throughout the execution of the form as well as breaking the form apart and applying various pieces. I am a kempo & BJJ practicioner, another peice of the kempo material are labeled "combinations" which are basically individual pieces of kata.

I admittedly do not have the MA resume of many/most of the people on this thread, but I unfortunately have had a few SD situation arise since I have begun training. Fortuanately my training allowed for successful outcomes.

I dont really care if others do not see value in this approach to training.

My comments to Steve were for education, not criticism or attack of him personally. His comments were presented with a lack of understanding in the kata training method.

He appears fairly set in his way of thinking, so I doubt anything others have presented will change that.

I find great value in the experience of others on this board, especially in individuals in other MAs who have differing perspectives than mine.

We all have things to learn and no one approach is perfect.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I also begin training on application on day one. Does that mean that the student really understands the technique and principles on day one? Absolutely not. It's not until much later that they get the REAL benefit of the form/kata. A beginning student could apply the technique, but it would most likely very forced and inefficient. Once they've gained a better understanding of the principles of style, the form becomes a much more valuable training tool.

I understand where you're coming from with your post. I don't mean to imply that they are death-dealing ninja after day-one of kata training. What I'm saying is that my goal as an instructor (whose goal is strictly SD related) is for the student to leave class on day-one with something useable as well as a clear idea of where the training is going. I would not say that it is 'much later' that they gain real benefit however. This is more on the students shoulders. It has been my experience that my students tend to pick things up very quickly. The reason I say this is that we keep a running tab on training that has been used in real world situations. For example, I've had a female student that prevented a date rape after VERY little training and a Corrections Officer that prevented an escape with hands-on methods against an EDP, again with very little training. Now some of this may be the type of student I have taught i.e. highly motivated professional. But I think it is also a nod to the effectiveness of kata training in-and-of-itself.

And it simply progresses from there in the training.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I wouldn't be excepting Uechi Ryu. Uechi went to China not long after Higaonna, to the same place, Fuzhou, and even learned the same kata. If anything it is Itosu who is the odd man out, but he learned from Mutsumura who was the first of the notable karate pioneers to visit China.

Then when the pioneers were set up in Naha, Shuri and Tomari they and their students cross trained with each other. Not surprising that the methodologies are similar. I would suggest that differences have developed over more recent times with probably the major influence being the introduction of karate into the schools and the regimented style of teaching in Japan.
:asian:

Ah, I see what you're saying. I didn't mean to remove Uechi Ryu from the equation due to differing methodology. Rather that the main/major Ryus such as Goju, Shito, Wado, Shudokan and Shotokan came from either one or both of these men (Itosu and/or Higaona) as far as the style founders receiving their training from one or both. I agree that Uechi Sensei would be very similar in many respects to Higaonna Sensei in methodology. This is perhaps why we see many similarities between Goju Ryu and Uechi Ryu.

It would be interesting to note why there are differences between Sanchin kata between the two though. I've never really looked into that. I've 'seen' Goju's version of Sanchin and I 'do' Uechi's version. That's piqued my curiosity. I have a book on Sanchin, mostly Goju version. I'll have to take a look at it again (been many years since I've read it).

 

[dancingalone]

It would be interesting to note why there are differences between Sanchin kata between the two though.

Higaonna Morio stated in a Dragon Times article that Miyagi Sensei made the change in Sanchin from nukite strikes to a closed fist among other alterations. Presumably the Uechi-ryu version is less changed from what Higaonna Kanryu taught.