When the kata is applied to self defense

[Gerry Seymour]

You asked for evidence. The fact that MMA is composed almost entirely of martial arts where kata isn't emphasized or even practiced IS the evidence you seek. The fact that we have yet to see any MMA fighter emerge from a traditional MA base loaded with forms practice further supports that evidence. The only one that comes close would be Machida, but even he wasn't breaking out Uchi-Ukes when he fought.

What he's suggesting is a search for specific kinds of evidence, that go beyond that correlation. When we are properly skeptical, we have to look at obvious evidence and ask what other evidence would be less prone to confirmation bias. We also have to look for conflicting evidence - purpose look to see what opposes our current position. If we do that with kata, it becomes reasonably clear that kata is not inherently negative (because we have good examples like kyokushin where it seems they produce similar results whether they use kata or not), but it's likely that focusing too much on it has a negative effect.

I have thoughts as to why that focus has the apparent negative effect, and I think a lot of it is non-causal correlation: people who like kata and are drawn to programs that teach using it are probably less interested in competition and strong-contact sparring. That's my theory, and it would be self-compounding, but it's hard to get any real evidence to support or counter that theory, so I'd classify it as a reasonable explanation at best.

 

[oftheherd1]

I hope the guy that was testing was the guy still standing.

Yep, but somehow I don't get the idea that was so. I must admit I wonder about a black belt test that apparently only grades a testee's ability to take punishment. I've never seen or even heard of that before. Still, I would expect it would be like other areas being repeatedly subjected to being hit to improve pain resistance.

 

[Steve]

I think his point was the use of "despite", which implies that the kata are a negative factor. If that were true, the removal of the kata (with no other substantive changes) should lead to improvement.

this might be true if kata is considered as an activity similar to yoga . If you yoga in addition to training, great. If you yoga in place of training it might negatively impact skill development . this is the logic.

The problem I have with this is that its difficult to quantify, and could just as easily go the other direction.

 

[Steve]

Agreed, for training where people are working to develop fighting skills. There are folks who simply want to learn new physical skills, with no real concern about being able to apply them. That'd be analogous to someone wanting to learn to use hand tools, with no desire to build that chair. There have been times when I just wanted to learn a cool new technique because it felt good, so I guess that'd be like me wanting to learn to buy and restore an antique plane, knowing I won't ever really want to use it where power tools give me a better result. And sometimes I grab my granddad's hand auger, though it's never a better answer for me. I have to admit, I can't really see doing all that without some practical thought in mind, though, at least part of the time.

Can we all agree that we acknowledge and respect people who train for reasons outside of learning to fight and are not talking about them in this conversation? It's combersome to re-acknowledge this point in every thread about developing fighting skills .

 

[now disabled]

Can we all agree that we acknowledge and respect people who train for reasons outside of learning to fight and are not talking about them in this conversation? It's combersome to re-acknowledge this point in every thread about developing fighting skills .

I would agree with you there

I'd add I don't think Kata were ever meant to develop fighting skills they were and are there for a wholly different reason in the arts that use them

 

[Hanzou]

Everything you have seen of Ueshiba Morihei, you are aware of his background ?

So what are you basing that on?

I'm aware of his background, and the legends surrounding him. I simply don't buy them. The no-touch stuff he was doing doesn't help matters much.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Offset. Kyokushin's full-contact sparring system is different than other types of karate. They get their reputation from that sparring system, not from their kata practice. Shotokan contains pretty much the exact same forms as Kyokushin, and it certainly doesn't have the reputation that Kyokushin has.

But does that mean that kata are a negative, or simply that they are not a defining characteristic? If two gyms use the same boxing footwork drills, and one of them generally sucks in the ring while the other does well, does that make the footwork drill a negative that the better school is overcoming? Or is it something that only produces good results when combined with other effective drills?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Except we've already agreed that an overemphasis on kata practice IS detrimental to fighting ability. So if a martial arts school focuses on kata/forms more than learning practical fighting skills, their fighting skill will be diminished.

Meanwhile, styles that have removed kata completely have no adverse effects.

I think an overemphasis (even ignoring the implication of the word, itself) on anything would do that. Spend too much time on the heavy bag - so much that it detracts from footwork drills, defensive work, and sparring - and a boxer doesn't get good results.

I don't see anyone arguing that there's no such thing as too much kata practice.

 

[now disabled]

I'm aware of his background, and the legends surrounding him. I simply don't buy them. The no-touch stuff he was doing doesn't help matters much.

You don't buy the legends ............oh ok I suggest that you do a bit a research and you might find that it not legend at all.

And the Ki stuff well I won't even bother going into that and the why's of it as you really do not have any idea of that man at all. You are aware to that the footage you are referring to was taken when he was in his 70's and later even the earliest I know of was in his 50's and that was very different to what you are alluding to ................oh and as you referred a while back about Daito-ryu ... go look at their soden (from the Hisa lineage)

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Someone’s angry?

Frankly, I'm pissed. No idea why - I think it's something @Buka said.

 

[Martial D]

It's not hidden.

There are 'arts' that focus entirely on 'kata' and don't demonstrably produce good fighters.

There are 'arts' that have no traditional kata at all, look a bit 'martial' to an outsider and don't demonstrably produce good fighters.

Kata or lack thereof isn't a deciding factor.

Yes. I get that, and I agree to a point. My point was that most of the styles known for producing competent fighters tend to not contain any katas.

Plus I don't know if taebo really counts as a style. Blanks is a karate guy that made his own karate workout to sell videos to soccer mom's, and it panned out pretty well for him.

Edit - also, taebo is pretty much all katas isnt it?

 

[DaveB]

And the system is what defines what you train. Not training enough striking in BJJ isn't my fault.

It is silly to assume otherwise.

No. That is the most fallacious nonsense I've ever heard.

The teacher determines what a class trains and as I described earlier, like any choice it is based on numerous factors.

Yes a given style will have traditions in training but they are not set in stone.

The idea that style X trains one way in every case is so laughably absurdly far from observable reality it can only be believed because of some benefit to the believer.
Perhaps the warm glow of smug superiority?

Just to illustrate the point, I have never trained at two shotokan clubs with identical training methods.

I have never been to a thai/kick boxing club that did anything I hadn't done in Shotokan.

I've never encountered a kungfu club that did not spar regularly.

The club I've seen the least free sparring in was a boxing club.

None of the above should be true if style is solely what determines training.

 

[jobo]

Can I borrow Floyd if those guys show up over here?

you need to find your own

What he's suggesting is a search for specific kinds of evidence, that go beyond that correlation. When we are properly skeptical, we have to look at obvious evidence and ask what other evidence would be less prone to confirmation bias. We also have to look for conflicting evidence - purpose look to see what opposes our current position. If we do that with kata, it becomes reasonably clear that kata is not inherently negative (because we have good examples like kyokushin where it seems they produce similar results whether they use kata or not), but it's likely that focusing too much on it has a negative effect.

I have thoughts as to why that focus has the apparent negative effect, and I think a lot of it is non-causal correlation: people who like kata and are drawn to programs that teach using it are probably less interested in competition and strong-contact sparring. That's my theory, and it would be self-compounding, but it's hard to get any real evidence to support or counter that theory, so I'd classify it as a reasonable explanation at best.

Well I have my anecdotal evidence, I was eye rolling ly sceptical about kata, but was presented with over welming first hand experiance, that it's extremely effective at changing, reinforcing movement patterns. The only way it can actually have a negative eliment, is if the movement patterns it's teaching are fundamentally flawed,

 

[Hanzou]

But does that mean that kata are a negative, or simply that they are not a defining characteristic? If two gyms use the same boxing footwork drills, and one of them generally sucks in the ring while the other does well, does that make the footwork drill a negative that the better school is overcoming? Or is it something that only produces good results when combined with other effective drills?

Comparing a footwork drill to kata is simply a bad comparison though. Drills are not held in the same level of esteem in TMA schools as kata is. It's not the "doing" that is the problem, its the emphasis placed upon them. When I sparred against a boxer and got my butt handed to me, my karate instructor told me I was outclassed because I didn't understand the nature of karate via kata. In reality, I was outclassed because that boxer was doing drills and sparring that actually reinforced his fighting methodology. Meanwhile, I was doing antiquated stances and techniques that will never be used in a fight.

You can get by with some sloppy footwork. You can't get by if you're spending a lot of time learning useless techniques.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

No. That is the most fallacious nonsense I've ever heard.

The teacher determines what a class trains and as I described earlier, like any choice it is based on numerous factors.

Yes a given style will have traditions in training but they are not set in stone.

The idea that style X trains one way in every case is so laughably absurdly far from observable reality it can only be believed because of some benefit to the believer.
Perhaps the warm glow of smug superiority?

Just to illustrate the point, I have never trained at two shotokan clubs with identical training methods.

I have never been to a thai/kick boxing club that did anything I hadn't done in Shotokan.

I've never encountered a kungfu club that did not spar regularly.

The club I've seen the least free sparring in was a boxing club.

None of the above should be true if style is solely what determines training.

By the comment DB made, each teacher has his own system, to an extent. It'd be entirely possible for someone to add some strikes into BJJ, without messing much with the core of the art. But in a standard BJJ program, strikes aren't much present, so it's not the students' fault they aren't really training strikes in that system. So, "the system" doesn't have to be the same as "the art". At least, I think that's what he was getting at.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

you need to find your own

Unhelpful bastard.

Well I have my anecdotal evidence, I was eye rolling ly sceptical about kata, but was presented with over welming first hand experiance, that it's extremely effective at changing, reinforcing movement patterns. The only way it can actually have a negative eliment, is if the movement patterns it's teaching are fundamentally flawed,

Interesting. Can you give me some more detail on how the kata helped change your movement? I've been wondering if forms might be useful for helping students work to change ingrained movement patterns (like Shotokan folks starting in my program).

 

[Hanzou]

You don't buy the legends ............oh ok I suggest that you do a bit a research and you might find that it not legend at all.

Do you have any evidence to support any of those stories? There's one story where his devoted students talk about O Sensei having telepathic powers, or hitting a golf ball through a wall. Then there's another story where he waved his hand and the guy was instantly thrown to the mat.

I would appreciate some accounts that don't come from such biased sources as his students or family members.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Comparing a footwork drill to kata is simply a bad comparison though. Drills are not held in the same level of esteem in TMA schools as kata is. It's not the "doing" that is the problem, its the emphasis placed upon them. When I sparred against a boxer and got my butt handed to me, my karate instructor told me I was outclassed because I didn't understand the nature of karate via kata. In reality, I was outclassed because that boxer was doing drills and sparring that actually reinforced his fighting methodology. Meanwhile, I was doing antiquated stances and techniques that will never be used in a fight.

You can get by with some sloppy footwork. You can't get by if you're spending a lot of time learning useless techniques.

The level of esteem forms are held in doesn't really change whether they are having an inherent negative impact. But you've clarified your position since I posted that, so I don't think we need to beat on this any more.

 

[Steve]

But does that mean that kata are a negative, or simply that they are not a defining characteristic? If two gyms use the same boxing footwork drills, and one of them generally sucks in the ring while the other does well, does that make the footwork drill a negative that the better school is overcoming? Or is it something that only produces good results when combined with other effective drills?

If you're troubleshoot an issue (any issue) you are looking to isolate problems . in this scenario, you have two gyms that both do the same thing. The problem isnt yhe footwork drills but it could be the application of the drills or something else.

In the case of kata, we see schools that use kata and don't that both reliably produce excellent fighters. We can also see styles that dont reliably prodice excellebt fighters who do kata . And finally we see that sport schools, mma schools reliably produce excellent fighters. The structure is there .

Said another way, if a kyokushin school routinely produces poor fighters, that's abberant. You could elominate the style abd start troubleshooting other things like the quality or competence of the instructor. If a ninjutsu school produces a poor fighter, no one would be surprised at all. Kyokushin and ninjutsu both have forms.

 

[Steve]

No. That is the most fallacious nonsense I've ever heard.

The teacher determines what a class trains and as I described earlier, like any choice it is based on numerous factors.

Yes a given style will have traditions in training but they are not set in stone.

The idea that style X trains one way in every case is so laughably absurdly far from observable reality it can only be believed because of some benefit to the believer.
Perhaps the warm glow of smug superiority?

Just to illustrate the point, I have never trained at two shotokan clubs with identical training methods.

I have never been to a thai/kick boxing club that did anything I hadn't done in Shotokan.

I've never encountered a kungfu club that did not spar regularly.

The club I've seen the least free sparring in was a boxing club.

None of the above should be true if style is solely what determines training.

Fwiw, when you mention that the boxing gym spars the least, that brings to mind other points ive made about the difference between training and application. Regardless of how ofteb boxers in a boxing gym spar, if you want to be a competent boxer, you will box .