Why Traditional Karate Is Not Effective for Self-Defense

[Errant108]

Look people, you can believe what you want, but Traditional Okinawan Karate has been used on the battlefield, in Allys on docks, and in the streets all over the world. the attacks were lethal and nonlethal in intent but every where used it worked well.

This is a huge fallacy.

It does not matter what karate was or where it was used.

Your training is what matters.

If you are not training for the battlefield yourself, utilizing the methods that karate's forebears were, you cannot say that YOUR KARATE is effective for battlefield combat. The same goes for "the street".

This is of course dependent to some extent on the practitioner, but then all martial arts are the same way to the same extent!

All martial arts are not the same.

Either your training is applicable in a live environment, or it is not.

Fact is that most older martial arts are extremely efficient and effective in self defense. If they were not they would not have survived.

Once removed from the necessity of live combat, it is actually very easy for martial arts to survive. They become stagnant & traditional, and exist for reasons other than combat. The Koryu of Japan are a perfect example of this.

Now there are some that are more sports such as BJJ and Judo that are not as applicable to self defense as they were designed and optimized to specific applications and uses in more controlled situations.

Kano's Judo took on all comers in open, unregulated combat & defeated the so-called "self-defense" schools of jujutsu of the time, because of the emphasis on randori & live training, rather than the dead, static training you are referring to.

the same is not as I understand it true of Bjj for example. same could be said about western boxing, where the most efficent techniques have been removed for over a century.

Completely incorrect, and why the US Army bases much of its hand-to-hand curriculum off of Brazilian JJ.

 

[TimoS]

The Koryu of Japan are a perfect example of this.

Right right, and you know this for a fact because you've seen all of them and know how they train. I actually agree with you up to a point, but your basic flaw as I see it is that you tend to lump everything that says it is traditional under one umbrella: "it just doesn't work". But if that makes you happy, then good for you

 

[seasoned]

At the risk of being even more contaversial, don't overcomplicate things. I have seen Karate used effectively by colleagues to such a degree that they simply smashed through and controlled anything a much larger opponent had to offer. I am a Judo practitioner and have used my system on regular occasions to overcome street attackers. It is'nt the art guys its the individual. I know MMA guys that train Judo and can't do anything and I have a Karate friend who regularly batters me when we train!!!

This is indeed a very excellent point. Even a club in the hands of someone not willing to use it is rendered useless.

 

[seasoned]

Completely incorrect, and why the US Army bases much of its hand-to-hand curriculum off of Brazilian JJ.

Now that you have mentioned it, does the army hand to hand curriculum train to the death, or do they go just so far so as to not kill off their fellow soldiers. You always talk about live training, how so. The army as well as LEO train to kill but never kill anybody until a certain point in time when they are called upon to follow through with what they have simulated all through training. Just like most karate dojo, right. I do think that you mentioned that it was the individual that mattered, as opposed to a style, this much I will agree with. But, a kick is still a kick and a strike is still a strike.

 

[blindsage]

After going back and re-reading the article I find it kind of interesting that Mann quotes Jon Bluming saying

"If you're up against someone who doesn't know how to fight -- yes, old-style karate can work, but if you fight an experienced streetfighter or a trained fighter, no way!"

And then goes on to use that to help 'prove' Karate is ineffective (not some, all), despite the fact the Jon Bluming is a Kyokushin fighter, which still incorporates training in much of the 'traditional' aspects of Shotokan, Goju, and other styles Mas Oyama developed it from, i.e. kata, traditional stances/punches/blocks, etc.

 

[Errant108]

Right right, and you know this for a fact because you've seen all of them and know how they train. I actually agree with you up to a point, but your basic flaw as I see it is that you tend to lump everything that says it is traditional under one umbrella: "it just doesn't work". But if that makes you happy, then good for you

I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

The Koryu train dead. Period.

If they don't, they cease to be koryu. That's the definition of Koryu. Unlike nebulous terms like "traditional", we are here dealing with a very precise, self-ascribed definition.

Koryu training is engaging in a preservation of heritage. It must, by necessity, stay exactly the same. It cannot adapt for modern needs or the realities of modern combat. Once it does so, it is no longer koryu. The goal of Koryu is not about creating fighters.

In fact, most koryu practitioners are very realistic about their training. Those that harbor dreams of using their deadly sword skills on legions of ninja assailants do not last long in the strict environment of the koryu.

The Koryu were created to deal with a completely different set of variables than modern battlefield or street combat. Thus, their applicability to modern settings will be limited.

Granted, the human body can only move, affect, and be affected in so many ways. This does not mean that all martial arts are the same and that all martial arts are equally effective.

A student of Koryu jujutsu will likely be able to defend themselves to a degree. However, they are not trained for the modern element. They are trained for a battlefield that ceased to exist centuries ago and are restricted by cultural elements that likely do not affect the majority of posters on this site. Time spent learning how to deal with sword wielding attackers will have some cross-over, but time would be better spent learning how to deal with the issues confronting modern practitioners.

The issue is not that karate "doesn't work".

The issue is that there are better ways, and when asked to recommend something for a given set of parameters, it's not going to be the karate dojo down the street when that dojo does not meet the parameters.

 

[Errant108]

After going back and re-reading the article I find it kind of interesting that Mann quotes Jon Bluming saying

"If you're up against someone who doesn't know how to fight -- yes, old-style karate can work, but if you fight an experienced streetfighter or a trained fighter, no way!"

And then goes on to use that to help 'prove' Karate is ineffective (not some, all), despite the fact the Jon Bluming is a Kyokushin fighter, which still incorporates training in much of the 'traditional' aspects of Shotokan, Goju, and other styles Mas Oyama developed it from, i.e. kata, traditional stances/punches/blocks, etc.

Bluming doesn't teach kata at all & the majority of the so-called kihon.

 

[Errant108]

Now that you have mentioned it, does the army hand to hand curriculum train to the death, or do they go just so far so as to not kill off their fellow soldiers. You always talk about live training, how so. The army as well as LEO train to kill but never kill anybody until a certain point in time when they are called upon to follow through with what they have simulated all through training. Just like most karate dojo, right. I do think that you mentioned that it was the individual that mattered, as opposed to a style, this much I will agree with. But, a kick is still a kick and a strike is still a strike.

Are you familiar with Aliveness Theorem as explained by Matt Thornton?

 

[jarrod]

I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

The Koryu train dead. Period.

If they don't, they cease to be koryu. That's the definition of Koryu. Unlike nebulous terms like "traditional", we are here dealing with a very precise, self-ascribed definition.

Koryu training is engaging in a preservation of heritage. It must, by necessity, stay exactly the same. It cannot adapt for modern needs or the realities of modern combat. Once it does so, it is no longer koryu. The goal of Koryu is not about creating fighters.

i'm only hopping in here because i just finished reading "koryu bujutsu" edited by diane skoss, & an essay in there by ellis amdur addresses this point exactly.

his position was that a koryu wasn't bound to never undergo transformation, but only had to maintain the principles & lineage of it's founding. in fact he expressly stated koryu should update with the times, otherwise they cease being martial arts altogether & merely become interesting cultural relics. he was very interested in koryu remaining relevent in today's world.

he goes on to say that many koryu practitioners, particularly in japan, don't seem to train with any sort of real martial intent, which he thinks is a great shame.

just throwing that out there.

jf

 

[Makalakumu]

He goes on to say that many koryu practitioners, particularly in japan, don't seem to train with any sort of real martial intent, which he thinks is a great shame.

Great post! It's the same with Karate. There is no need. Our world isn't ans dangerous in some respects and it is filled with different kinds of weapons. When you consider the rate of training accidents into the mix of preparing a person for battle, it just makes sense that civilians who practice MA for recreation would like to avoid those.

In all honesty, after repairing two debilitating injuries while having young children, that is not an experience I'd like to repeat a third time. My wife would kill me for one. For another, I'd like to be able to walk without a cane when I'm 80.

Some acomodations need to be made. There's no way around it.

In the same vein, you can train smarter. You can train safely and train more realistically so that you don't take it too far off the original mark. It's a matter of objectives.

 

[jarrod]

i'm with you on that. i may not be the baddest dude in town, but i'll be the baddest dude in the nursing home for sure.

jf

 

[TimoS]

The Koryu train dead. Period.

Not even a comma

 

[Sensei Payne]

I would rather go into a fight knowing something than nothing.

karate is that something, and has helped me numerous times.

 

[chav buster]

its the training not the techniques at fault in karate along with the whole secrecy thing which means most karate people even the most senior dont have a clue how to apply the techniques.

in Okinawa back in the day a student wouldnt learn the full reason for the kata's for many years until thay have proven themselfs trust worthy and even then thay may not be told the full explaination behind the techniques, multiply this over many generations and you get into the state karate is in today.
karate people are only now learning the true meaning of there art mostly from studying other arts for example the karate blocks that are considered so ineffective by many, in silat and the fma are actuelly strikes to the attacking limbs knocking the attacker of balance and opening him up for counters, the x block is actuelly used in muay thai as a cover to smash through a flurry of punches and hike uki is the same thing a swan neck catch used in thaiboxing to clinch but as these techniques are never tought in an active way and the fact thay are done in a very formal stylized way along with the fact thay have not been explained properly thay have became largely useless.

 

[TimoS]

its the training not the techniques at fault in karate along with the whole secrecy thing which means most karate people even the most senior dont have a clue how to apply the techniques

Secrecy doesn't have much anything to do with the current state. It is the advent of sport karate and focusing only on that that is to blame.

in Okinawa back in the day a student wouldnt learn the full reason for the kata's for many years until thay have proven themselfs trust worthy and even then thay may not be told the full explaination behind the techniques, multiply this over many generations and you get into the state karate is in today.

Quite simply put: not true. "Back in the day" in Okinawa the teaching started straight with kata. You would learn the moves maybe even one at a time, but you also learnt the applications there at the same time. For example, the first move of Sanchin: someone tries to either choke you or grab a hold of jacket/shirt/whatever. You step in and break the hold with the "double block". Next step is you then punch him

karate people are only now learning the true meaning of there art mostly from studying other arts

Now why would I need to study different arts to learn to use my karate when all the lessons are already there? If you want to learn to use a hammer, you sure don't pick up a saw

 

[chav buster]

Secrecy doesn't have much anything to do with the current state. It is the advent of sport karate and focusing only on that that is to blame.



Quite simply put: not true. "Back in the day" in Okinawa the teaching started straight with kata. You would learn the moves maybe even one at a time, but you also learnt the applications there at the same time. For example, the first move of Sanchin: someone tries to either choke you or grab a hold of jacket/shirt/whatever. You step in and break the hold with the "double block". Next step is you then punch him



Now why would I need to study different arts to learn to use my karate when all the lessons are already there? If you want to learn to use a hammer, you sure don't pick up a saw

i have read many anecdote conserning the secrecy around the meaning of the techniques in karate.

the sanchin example was funnily enough the same example i used for the swan neck grip. of course its subjective but the thai's use it in combat and your instructor dosnt so im going to lean towards the thai verson which further supports my stance on miss understanding of the katas although your reasoning isnt bad and more or less right i have heard some frankly ludicruos explinationd for the katas.

if you dont want to study other arts to understand karate thats fine but in my training life i have found many techniques from other arts that are almost identical to the ones in karate but are far more practical and i put this down to a lack of understanding due to secrecy, i know you dont agree with me and fair enough but if it wasnt the case there would be no need for guys like ian aberneathy and gavin muholland to spend so much time studing the katas.

the x block is a good example of my point, used as a static block like it is taught is more or less useless but if you drive it through a flurry of punches into someones face it becomes a very practical technique so really its not a block at all but a defencive and offensive weapon at the same time.

 

[Landshark]

Look into Isshinryu Karate.It uses a more natural movement,less reaction time or should I say faster.A block is a punch that kind of thing.Of course like with anything you are only as good as you practice.But I feel for the attacker that prays on a Real Isshinryu black bealt.

 

[TimoS]

i have read many anecdote conserning the secrecy around the meaning of the techniques in karate.

Don't trust everything you read about karate. There's tons of bad info out there about karate and it's history. Another popular one is that it was used by farmers and fishermen to fight the invading samurai

i have heard some frankly ludicruos explinationd for the katas.

As have I. One of my favourites is the sequence at the start of Pinan/Heian 3: the two double blocks there are supposedly against someone who attacks you not once, but twice in a row with a combined kick and punch. Based on my (limited, I'll grant you) observations the one thing that is common with those who give these applications that have more to do with science-fiction than street survival is that they don't have access to the original stuff that is passed on in at least some okinawan karate schools. Or they are too proud to admit that they don't know the stuff and make things up.

i put this down to a lack of understanding due to secrecy

Again, I don't see the reason for current state of affairs as being secrecy as the okinawans are to my understanding quite helpful in helping you understand the kata. The reason is that many people just didn't care for kata. All they wanted was to compete and if you want to compete against other people who are also learning karate, you don't necessarily need the kata anymore. It is only lately that many people have started to realize that maybe there is something to learn in these kata and that is why people such as Abernathy and McCarthy and others are popular.

the x block is a good example of my point, used as a static block like it is taught is more or less useless but if you drive it through a flurry of punches into someones face it becomes a very practical technique so really its not a block at all but a defencive and offensive weapon at the same time.

Just to be clear, which x block are you referring to? I can think of at least three different x blocks I'm fairly sure about which of those you mean, but I just want to be sure.

 

[chav buster]

i would agree with you about the sporting aspect to karate, its the same as judo which due the sport not having much grappling is not really seen as an effective martial art yet bjj is even though thay are the same thing really.

we will have to agree ti disagree about the other issue

 

[blindsage]

Bluming doesn't teach kata at all & the majority of the so-called kihon.

Strange then that his website says that "Traditional Kyokushin Karate" is part of his organization including "the traditional Kihon and Kata".
http://www.jonbluming.nl/