"WFD." Isn't everybody?
heh maybe...I dunno. I just love Kenpo.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
"WFD." Isn't everybody?
TOD is a blackbelt. There is no need to go on about it. While fundamentally we may disagree on points he has a depth of knowledge that deserves respect without threatening him or demeaning him about his bag work or whatever.
I don't think people necessarily need to stand in a horse stance for a half hour or something, altho this does help to build strength and learn to relax and settle into the stance properly.
Yes, that is what I was referring to.
Flying Crane and punisher -
You are free to disagree, but boxers/kickboxers/MMA folk do not train 'stances', and do just fine. To try to "freeze" their motion belies my point about footwork. Stances are by definition static, and I can't see many times where one would want to be static in any kind of martial arts scenario (sparring or otherwise).
He was aiming his derision at me, not TOD. Thanks, tho.
But if your description of what kata is, is an accurate statement of what you honestly believe it to be, then you do not understand it.
That is correct, although I did not threaten anyone. And I was merely responding in kind to the "derision" FC aimed at me here:
I think you misunderstood what I meant. Stances are NOT static, they might be isolated in training to understand what they are for but you are not meant to just stand in them.
One of the first things you learn in a good boxing gym is how to stand.
Why? In boxing, you only have to worry about hands coming at you from the waist up. You don't have an opponent charging you, you don't have a knee coming up into your face when you bend over. Stances in MA's are meant to deal with these other variables.
Look at a martial art like Judo. They teach a specific way to stand and a way to counter throws. No Judoka would confuse that you just stand in that stance the whole time. Go to any MMA gym and they will have you stand a certain way to learn how to employ your tools. They take into consideration that you need a slightly wider base than a stand up game alone to help avoid takedowns, they also understand that you need to be slightly more squared up than a regular boxing stance to employ your leg kicks.
They ALL employ stances, it's just that MA's break it down more to understand what each one is for and when to employ it. I do agree, that many people DON'T learn to be fluid and solid in their footwork and tend to stand in place (much like a newbie to boxing).
The other consideration is MA's are designed for a civilian self-defense scenario. The assault is happening so you don't have to worry about closing the distance and jockeying for position in and out of range as you do in sparring or a match. Both combatants are right on top of each other and you need stability alot more than mobility.
As I said earlier, we were having a discussion.
You made a comment about what kata is, and I went out on a limb and assumed that you meant what you said.
My understanding of kata is that it is much deeper than your description.
Given my experiences, it is my observation that you don't understand what kata really is and how it is intended to be used as a training tool.
But given what you said earlier, I am saying that I do not believe you understand it.
So, it's a 'discussion' when you make an insulting assumption about me, but it's 'derision' when I do it back to you. Got it.
My understanding that kata is a waste of time comes from my experiences, which have equal merit with yours.
It's required for kata because that's what kata is - a bunch of stances and strikes strung together in a certain order.
So, I can make the same observations re: your comments on sparring and bagwork, yes?
I think you need to get a thicker skin. I wasn't throwing insults at you. Why do you read what I say as an insult?
If this is the sum total of what you feel kata is, then your description shows an incomplete understanding. I pointed that out. If you want to refine your kata description, then do so.
I'm here for discussion. Say what you want. I don't believe I've said much about bag work, nor sparring, other than that I don't believe they are good methods for building stances and rooting. To think so puts the cart before the horse. Rather, if your they are not well developed prior, then bag work and sparring can cause them to deteriorate even more. It's a bit like building a house without a foundation, and expecting the foundation to appear somehow once the house is finished.
If you want to comment on that, if you want to disagree and explain where I'm mistaken, go ahead. this is a discussion forum, after all. I won't be insulted if you tell me I'm wrong.
I was assuming, since you mentioned my "derision" in reply to you. "Derision" is an insult, yes? You must have felt insulted, and replied emotionally. BTW, you seem to be the only here personally insulted by my opinion on kata. Although I am awaiting response from ToD, to be certain.
I don't recall saying that was my "sum total understanding" - that was your term. If you can point out where I mentioned that, then do so.
However, my description is mechanically accurate, which was the context in which I used it in my original response when asked about stance training.
I don't agree that is putting the cart before the horse - they are two entirely separate things. How does kata prepare one for striking something? One could do umpteen strikes in the air, and still have poor alignment when finally hitting something like a bag or a person in sparring. Neither does kata "develop" the ability to root - that comes from resistance.
You see, I have spent a good part of the day, and on unauthorized breaks at work last night, trying to perfect my step throughs, using Kata; so, I guess I'm saying I am always doing some kind of Kata at some point during any given day; so, I just am not seeing your point at all; in fact, I kinda feel sorry for you.I was assuming, since you mentioned my "derision" in reply to you. "Derision" is an insult, yes? You must have felt insulted, and replied emotionally. BTW, you seem to be the only here personally insulted by my opinion on kata. Although I am awaiting response from ToD, to be certain.
I don't recall saying that was my "sum total understanding" - that was your term. If you can point out where I mentioned that, then do so.
However, my description is mechanically accurate, which was the context in which I used it in my original response when asked about stance training.
I don't agree that is putting the cart before the horse - they are two entirely separate things. How does kata prepare one for striking something? One could do umpteen strikes in the air, and still have poor alignment when finally hitting something like a bag or a person in sparring. Neither does kata "develop" the ability to root - that comes from resistance.
Again, please grow a thicker skin. I am not here to tell anyone that they are "wrong". I am merely offering my opinion - without insulting anyone first.
Well, trying to play the rank and time card looked to me like a deliberate attempt at a slight. Maybe you didn't intend it that way, but it looked that way. I wasn't insulted because I didn't care, but I think the other poster saw it as derision and perhaps inappropriate and unnecessary. He also thought you were aiming it at TOD. I just clarified that point.
I've read your profile. According to that, I've been training for about a decade longer than you. You don't list your rank, but I wouldn't be surprised if you are ranked higher than me. Many people are, including many who have trained for less time than me. Does that mean you are better? Does that mean I am better? I don't know, and really don't care. I don't think the time and rank are relevant to this discussion because it doesn't establish anything that matters to the discussion.
alrighty, finally you say so. Flesh it out, it adds to the discussion.
that's where I disagree. Your description is, in my experience, only mechanically accurate on a superficial level. I don't think it hits the real notion of what kata is. That's why I don't feel you understand kata. If you've got something to add about that, then please do so. Add to the discussion. But kata was not my intended topic of discussion here. It just came up into the picture.
I don't think people necessarily need to stand in a horse stance for a half hour or something, altho this does help to build strength and learn to relax and settle into the stance properly. But when executing technique and kata, the teacher needs to harp on proper stances within the execution. Students get lazy or sloppy and stances suffer. Doing that kata? fine, get the stances right when you are doing it. Delayed Sword? Your stance was off, do it over. and again. and again...
But kata, when understood thoroughly and trained properly, does all that you mention above.
so, I just am not seeing your point at all; in fact, I kinda feel sorry for you.
FC -
I doubt that you have been training 10 years longer than I have. The time stated in my profile was for EPAK only.
And you're right, perhaps it's no more relevant than you trying to judge my kata knowledge over the internet from one statement you took out of context.
I agree it's not the topic of discussion, but remember that I was only responding because YOU brought it up. Remember? -
Kata alone cannot work timing, or distancing, or resistance, and to suggest otherwise is specious at best. There are things that people can get out of kata, but those are not elements that one can. I never said kata was *useless* (implying that there is nothing one can gain); I said it was a *waste of time*, implying there are other things I think would be more useful to work on.
That's funny, Short Form One is supposed to teach us the timing of blocking out of a cover, but forms don't help with timing.?FC -
I doubt that you have been training 10 years longer than I have. The time stated in my profile was for EPAK only. And you're right, perhaps it's no more relevant than you trying to judge my kata knowledge over the internet from one statement you took out of context.
What kind of strawman is this?
I agree it's not the topic of discussion, but remember that I was only responding because YOU brought it up. Remember? -
If you feel it's off topic (which I did mention before, even about stances), feel free to change the subject. I did not mention it first.
Kata alone cannot work timing, or distancing, or resistance, and to suggest otherwise is specious at best. There are things that people can get out of kata, but those are not elements that one can. I never said kata was *useless* (implying that there is nothing one can gain); I said it was a *waste of time*, implying there are other things I think would be more useful to work on.
ToD -
I guess that makes two of us; I don't understand your point, either. I feel sorry for you that you feel sorry for me. I am doing just fine.
look, if you told me that a circle is a shape with four straight sides and four 90 degree angles, I know that you do not understand what a circle is. No amount of experience is going to change that fact.
I've invited you to show me where I'm wrong, convince me you understand kata. You have not done so. I don't know why. You can't? You don't want to? You are just angry at me and don't want to look for a way to have a beneficial discussion? I dunno. I don't much care at this point.
I brought up kata as an example of where one can work on proper stance development. I still believe that stances are an important part of the foundation of any martial art, including kenpo. Granted, stances are different in different systems, and the approach to training them can be different, but they are still extremely important. That's my position on stances.
Seems to me you've decided that you are gonna be offended by everything I say here.
I guess you and I just cannot have a discussion, so I won't try any longer, and I don't expect you to either. It's not worth the energy to sit and argue on the internet like this. I was actually prepared to let this go a couple pages back. It's often impossible to adequately describe and discuss things on the internet, when they really require a hands-on experience to get the real message thru. I let myself get sucked back into it because I thought I might be able to clarify some points, but either I've failed to do so, or you don't want to see it. I don't care which it is at this point.
That's funny, Short Form One is supposed to teach us the timing of blocking out of a cover, but forms don't help with timing.?
Sean
Again Kata is about you and how you move. Did you know there are seven different types of speed? Before we start a big discussion about timing, what is your defenition of timing?What timing is that showing, though? Not timing relative to someone actually hitting you, which is what I was talking about. That is the only important timing, IMHO. Kata cannot simulate that.
Please tell me how my mechanical description of kata is inaccurate.
I am not burdened by having to prove your description of kata - which you have not made, BTW. That I do not like kata does not mean that I don't understand it. For instance, you told me in the last post that kata can teach all the things I said it can't. Please explain how it can show distancing and timing and resistance. Show me that I'm wrong.
Fair enough.
I was prepared to have a discussion without you insulting me. We still can, as far as I am concerned. I don't hold grudges.
Again Kata is about you and how you move. Did you know there are seven different types of speed? Before we start a big discussion about timing, what is your defenition of timing?
Sean