Why Traditional Karate Is Not Effective for Self-Defense

[TimoS]

Sorry but my reference says that he studied under Ankoh Itosu when he began training in about 1890, along with Kosaku Matsumora and Kokan Oyadomari.

http://ejmas.com/jks/jcsart_noble_0800.htm

OK, in that case, where in Kyan's karate can we see the influence of Itosu? Kyan taught these kata: Seisan, Ananku, Wansu, Passai, Gojushiho, Chinto, Kusanku and Tokumine no kun. As you can see, no Pinan, no e.g. Kusanku Sho and Dai, only one version of each kata. We know where each kata came from: Seisan and Gojushiho from Matsumura, Ananku was his own creation, Wansu from Maeda, Chinto from Matsumora, Kusanku from Yara and Tokumine-no-kun from someone who learned it from Tokumine. Also, keep in mind that the only Kyan's student to make this connection was Shoshin Nagamine. E.g. Zenryo Shimabukuro and Joen Nakazato both deny the connection. Also Itosu's own student, Chibana, said that Kyan did not study karate with Itosu. Coming back to Pinan kata, while they are in e.g. Seibukan now, they did not come from Kyan. They were taught to Zenpo Shimabukuro, along with Naihanci 1-3, Passai Guwa and Jion kata by Chozo Nakama, who was, I believe, Chibana's student.
Also, if you read the article you linked further, it says:

Kyan is usually given in karate genealogies as a student of Itosu but generally his kata are quite different from the Itosu versions so I don't think the teaching here can have been very extensive. It is notable that Choshin Chibana, in listing Itosu's students, did not name Kyan. Instead Chibana referred to Kyan as a student of Oyadomari.

So again, if Kyan's karate is very different from Itosu's karate, where is Itosu's influence to be seen?

 

[blackxpress]

These threads are so dumb. Every MA forum on the internet is covered up with posts about how this that or the other art is ineffective on the street. And, every time it comes up the standard reply is that it depends on the instructor, the student and how they train, etc., which is true of course. In my case, I was a good fighter before I ever started training in MA. I've trained in Shito Ryu, Wadoryu, Ryu Kyu Kempo, JJJ, BJJ and a little (just a little mind you) Judo. These days I train strictly in Shito Ryu and love every minute of it. I'm a whole lot better fighter now than before I started training. I'm stronger, faster, more flexible. But I didn't start training so I could be a better fighter so much as because I've always been interested in karate. I took up karate as a way to improve myself physically and mentally and I'm happy to say I haven't been disappointed. I'm 52 yrs. old and in better shape than a lot of guys half my age.

As for self-defense, I haven't had to use my karate in a real situation. I'm 6'5" tall and a little skinny at 210 lbs. There aren't very many people who would choose to attack a guy my size one on one. If it ever does happen I feel relatively confident in my ability to make him wish to God he'd picked someone else. But then, I could've done that before I started training. I'm not really all that worried about self defense. If I was, I'd buy a gun!

 

[Makalakumu]

Based on what I've heard, it is sad but true. In Okinawa, there are some excellent instructors, but also some that aren't worth anything and who will basically sell you a new higher rank.

Mind you, some things that have come from Japan to Okinawa aren't necessarily bad things. The way I see it, one thing that has come from there is the standardization of techniques, which makes it easier to teach larger classes, e.g. beginners. Of course I don't mean any "global" standard, that all the styles do things the same way, but within a school.

One of the strongest bits of Japanese influence that made its way into Okinawan Karate was the system of teach: the kihon, kata, and kumite model was a method that originated in Kendo and was incorporated into Shotokan by Gigo Funakoshi.

The model isn't necessarily bad as long as all of the elements truly connect. The problem is that in many karate-based arts, they don't. Thus, the substance of this thread, the primary criticism that "karate is not effective" is true in some cases.

The overarching teaching model can be effective if all of its elements are directed toward an objective of self defense.

 

[TimoS]

The model isn't necessarily bad as long as all of the elements truly connect

Exactly, which is why some of my friends don't talk so much about kihon, kata, kumite. Rather it's kata, kata, kata, meaning that everything is or let's say should be connected to kata.

 

[K-man]

OK, in that case, where in Kyan's karate can we see the influence of Itosu? Kyan taught these kata: Seisan, Ananku, Wansu, Passai, Gojushiho, Chinto, Kusanku and Tokumine no kun. As you can see, no Pinan, no e.g. Kusanku Sho and Dai, only one version of each kata. We know where each kata came from: Seisan and Gojushiho from Matsumura, Ananku was his own creation, Wansu from Maeda, Chinto from Matsumora, Kusanku from Yara and Tokumine-no-kun from someone who learned it from Tokumine. Also, keep in mind that the only Kyan's student to make this connection was Shoshin Nagamine. E.g. Zenryo Shimabukuro and Joen Nakazato both deny the connection. Also Itosu's own student, Chibana, said that Kyan did not study karate with Itosu. Coming back to Pinan kata, while they are in e.g. Seibukan now, they did not come from Kyan. They were taught to Zenpo Shimabukuro, along with Naihanci 1-3, Passai Guwa and Jion kata by Chozo Nakama, who was, I believe, Chibana's student.
Also, if you read the article you linked further, it says:

So again, if Kyan's karate is very different from Itosu's karate, where is Itosu's influence to be seen?

Peace brother. I have no issue here. I am happy to accept what you say. I am just passing mention of what I have read. Another article says he started with Itosu. That would make sense as how many kata would you be taught in a short time with a master? The reason I mentioned Itosu on the first place was purely to establish the man's credibility.
My initial experience is with Goju from Japan and it has suffered a great deal in the process of 'sanitising'. That is why my interest is in the Okinawan teaching.
The thread relates to 'traditional' karate and my opinion is that, in the main, Japanese karate is not 'traditional'. Basically it moved into the schools early in the 1900s and many of the more advanced applications were never taught. That is not to say there were not practitioners in Japan practising 'traditional' karate but they were few and far between. This, I believe, was when the big change from karate-jutsu to karate-do occurred. Much of the karate imported to the West came via Japan and had an intense competitive flavour as is the Western way of having to prove ourselves better than the next person. :asian:

 

[TimoS]

Peace brother. I have no issue here. I am happy to accept what you say. I am just passing mention of what I have read. Another article says he started with Itosu. That would make sense as how many kata would you be taught in a short time with a master?

But you see, that's the thing: he didn't start with Itosu, he started with his father, Kyan Chofu, who was, to the best of my knowledge, Matsumura's student. Itosu is often mentioned as his teacher, but there is no evidence to support it. Like I said, if Chibana and with the exception of Nagamine, all of Kyan's students said that Kyan didn't study with Itosu, I just have to wonder why it is still so often quoted as a fact that Itosu was (one of) Kyan's sensei. They were both Shorin stylists, but from different lineage.

 

[K-man]

But you see, that's the thing: he didn't start with Itosu, he started with his father, Kyan Chofu, who was, to the best of my knowledge, Matsumura's student. Itosu is often mentioned as his teacher, but there is no evidence to support it. Like I said, if Chibana and with the exception of Nagamine, all of Kyan's students said that Kyan didn't study with Itosu, I just have to wonder why it is still so often quoted as a fact that Itosu was (one of) Kyan's sensei. They were both Shorin stylists, but from different lineage.

Wikipedia (Not that I believe all I read here)
Kyan's father is noted as possibly having a background in karate and even teaching Kyan tegumi in his early years. When Kyan was 20 years old, he began his karate training under Ankoh Itosu, Kosaku Matsumora and Kokan Oyadomori. While at 30 years of age, he was considered a master of the karate styles known as Shuri-te and Tomari-te. The most long time student of Kyan was Zenryo Shimabukuro, who studied with Kyan for over 10 years. Kyan is also noted for encouraging his students to visit brothels and to engage in alcohil consumption at various times.
Kyan was a participant in the 1936 meeting of Okinawan masters, where the term "karate" was standardized, and other far-reaching decisions were made regarding martial arts of the island at the time.

By Graham Noble
Editor's note: An earlier version of this article appeared in Fighting Arts International and is reprinted by permission of Graham Noble. For additional information about Kyan and his methods, see Mark Bishop, Okinawan Karate: Teachers, Styles, and Secret Techniques (London: A. & C. Black, 1989), 79-82, and "The Karate of Chotoku Kyan: We Interview the Seibukan's Zenpo Shimabukuro Sensei," Dragon Times, 16 (2000), 13.
Chofu Kyan, a cultivated man with knowledge of both Chinese and Japanese literature, had been opposed to Japan's takeover of Okinawa. Hoshu Ikeda has in his possession a petition against the Japanese measures, and one of the seven signatories is Kyan. He was a traditionalist who did not want the old ways to die out, and it seems that it was he who kindled Chotoku Kyan's enthusiasm for karate. According to Gichin Funakoshi in Karate-do Nyumon, Chofu Kyan himself had some knowledge of te, but although he trained his young son in wrestling (probably Okinawan sumo) to toughen him up, he entrusted the teaching of karate forms to others. Shoshin Nagamine believes that this was because he was too fond of Chotoku to train him the correct, severe way. Anyway, at age 20, Chotoku Kyan was put under the tutelage of famous experts: Kokan Oyadomari, Kosaku Matsumora, and Ankoh Itosu.
http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_noble_0800.htm

Mississippi Isshinryu Karate
Kyan was known in Okinawa as 'Chan mig-wa' or 'small-eyed Kyan', and was known by this nickname because his eyes were small and weak. Despite this handicap, he went on to become a great master. In fact, he was one of the most knowledgeable masters of his time, as he studied both the Shuri-te and the Tomari-te styles of karate. He studied Shuri-te from Sokon Matsumura and Anko Itosu and studied Tomari-te from Oyadomari Pechin, Maeda Pechin and Kosaku Matsumora. Kyan's teaching combined the elements of both of these styles of karate, with his students originally calling his system 'migwa-te', but later it became known as 'Sukunaihayashi-ryu'.

http://www.msisshinryu.com/masters/kyan/

Okinawan Karate Research Centre
Having the recommendations from his father (who as many members of the King family took much time in practicing martial arts and had good connections with many Okinawan karate masters) Chotoku Kyan took lessons from the most prominent Masters of that time: Sokon Matsumura, Anko Itosu, Yara Chatan, Kosaku Matsumura, and also Maeda and Tokumine.
http://www.edbis.com/ekyan.htm

The International Budo Institute
It is known that Chofu Kyan (Chotoku's father) was a cultivated man having studied both Chinese and Japanese literature. It is also believed that he was the one who interested Chotoku Kyan's in karate. However, Chofu Kyan felt that his love for his son would prevent him from adequately teaching Chotoku and so left the training up to other masters. When Chotoku turned 20 years old he became a student of Kokan Oyadomari, Kosaku Matsumora and Ankoh Itosu.
http://i-budo.org/content/view/265/127/

Munndialarts
Master Chotoku Kyan (1870-1945) was born in a noble family of the island of Okinawa, Japan. Very early, his father, Chofu Kyan, who was a karate adept, imposed re-enforcement exercises on him to fortify his body and mind. Thereafter, thanks in part to the social position of his family, he received the instruction of several great masters of the time like Sokon Matsumura (1809-1899), Anko itosu (1830-1915) and K. Oyatomari (1831-1905). Master Kyan was very small in size but very effective in combat. He received the name chan mi gua (small-eyed Kyan).
http://munndialarts.com/english/?p=89

Brattleboro School of Budo
Chotoku Kyan was born in December 1870 (Meiji 3) at Shun Gihomura as the third son of Chofu Kyan the eleventh generation of King ShoSei under the fourth period of King ShoSei at Ryukyu. &nbspHis father was the important retainer of the Lord Shotai who lived in Tokyo as the final King of the Ryukyus. His father was well trained in the art of Okinawa te and was an authority of both the Chinese and Japanese classics. Choto Kyan was taken to Tokyo by his father at the age of 13. &nbspThere he studied the Chinese Classics at the Nisho School until he was 16 years old. He was small and weak compared to his father. Chofu Kyan worried about his son’s physical condition so he trained his son in the art of Sumo Wrestling.
After Chofu Kyan’s tour of service in Japan ended, he and his son Chotoku went back to Okinawa and lived in a small house at Hoko between Shun and Mawashi. When Chotoku became 20 years old, his father asked the great Shuri-te masters Sobi Matsumura and Ankoh Itosu of Shuri Yamakura-mura to teach his son Shuri-te. Chofu also sought the guidance of the great Tomari-te master Koken Oyadomari to help round off Chotoku’s training and physical conditioning.
http://www.brattleboroschoolofbudo.com/budohistory.htm

As I said before, I am happy to take your word for it as I have no great knowledge in this area. Some sites mention Itosu as his teacher, some don't. The ones that don't seem to say he trained under every great teacher available so what is to say he didn't train under Itosu for a short period, even if Itosu had no great influence. Why would his students know all the men he studied under? I'm sorry, this is all just a diversion from the thread on 'traditional' karate. Can we at least agree that 'traditional' karate, as practised by these gentlemen, is effective for self defence? :asian:

 

[IncanKa]

Sounds like somebody has an axe to grind with karate.

It's hard to start pointing out what is wrong with this analysis of the sport, since he demonstrates a very poor understanding of traditional karate practice. I make no excuses for black belt mills created by split-off schools of karate that don't practice full contact sparring, but from somebody who trains in traditional Okinawan karate and has done for several years, here are some pointers:

1. Stance - the wide stances used in karate kata are not intended for use as fighting stances. Many of these stances were adapted from yoga and are used to condition the muscles in the legs, building a stronger lower body, improving balance and economy of movement and building core strength. During kumite karate practitioners only occasionally adopt wide leg stances, for the rest the emphasis is on speed of movement in and out of range of the opponents body. Sorry pal, if you don't know this then you're not qualified to talk about karate.

2. Kata - kata is where stances are primarily employed. The point of kata is to increase efficiency of movement, balance and strength. Kata is also used to refine technique, ensuring that blocks, kicks and punches do not unbalance the practitioner or result in injury. Most dojos emphasise that students need to be *relaxed* to punch and block with maximum effectiveness, and the most frequent correction I see during kata is for tense, rigid posture. An effective kata practitioner will demonstrate fluid, liquid movements during kata, building a lightning fast, focused technique that is extremely effective in ending fights with a single blow.

3. One strike kill - A karate punch performed at full force by a skilled practitioner is easily capable of killing an individual. Kyokushin practitioners can punch through layers of tiles, bricks and ice and are perfectly capable of crushing the human skull - the main reason head punches are not allowed during sparring in this sport. Strikers to the upper neck can also be lethal. One of the reasons why karate does not always fare well in bouts between different styles is that a number of its strikes are lethal - for instance when being rushed by a brazilian jujitsu black belt, a strike to the neck would most likely end the fight, and the bjj student's life. Furthermore, in traditional karate students would often grow their toenails, allowing them to sever arteries with kicks.

4. Karate does not apply to real world situations - karate can be used to defend against knife and blunt object attacks. Knives and blunt objects have not changed in nature during the last hundred years. A quality dojo will ensure that students are prepared to deal with blocking weapon attacks.

5. Karate takes too long to learn and you still can't fight - full contact dojos encourage sparring from day one, and students are forced to take on higher graded students. I can't think of better way to learn how to fight. An experienced practitioner will do better in a fight - as is the case with any martial art.

Full contact schools also do body conditioning that prepares students to take a punch. The abs, chest, forearms, upper arms, outer leg, inner thighs, instep, shoulders are just some areas that are conditioned so that pain is not a factor during a fight.

Developing and manifesting the incredible elegance of this sport can indeed take a lifetimes study, and this is what makes it a martial art. The viper speed, economy of movement and elegance shown by the experienced practitioner is virtually unparalleled in martial arts. (

)

The key to learning karate as both an art and a viable self defence technique is finding a quality dojo rather than a black belt mill. Look out for kyokushin, full contact shotokan and goju kai dojos if you wish to have a taste of traditional karate.

 

[Tez3]

The point of kata is the Bunkai. The point of Bunkai is to have the techniques to defend yourself. That's real life. Anything else is just fooling yourself.

 

[Bruno@MT]

The year 2009 called.
It wants its thread back.

 

[Tez3]

The year 2009 called.
It wants its thread back.

LOL, you're right, I was short because I'm tired of the kata is for strengthening your legs, and stances aren't used rubbish. I'm off for a cuppa.

 

[K-man]

Sounds like somebody has an axe to grind with karate.

It's hard to start pointing out what is wrong with this analysis of the sport, since he demonstrates a very poor understanding of traditional karate practice. I make no excuses for black belt mills created by split-off schools of karate that don't practice full contact sparring, but from somebody who trains in traditional Okinawan karate and has done for several years, here are some pointers:

1. Stance - the wide stances used in karate kata are not intended for use as fighting stances. Many of these stances were adapted from yoga and are used to condition the muscles in the legs, building a stronger lower body, improving balance and economy of movement and building core strength. During kumite karate practitioners only occasionally adopt wide leg stances, for the rest the emphasis is on speed of movement in and out of range of the opponents body. Sorry pal, if you don't know this then you're not qualified to talk about karate.

2. Kata - kata is where stances are primarily employed. The point of kata is to increase efficiency of movement, balance and strength. Kata is also used to refine technique, ensuring that blocks, kicks and punches do not unbalance the practitioner or result in injury. Most dojos emphasise that students need to be *relaxed* to punch and block with maximum effectiveness, and the most frequent correction I see during kata is for tense, rigid posture. An effective kata practitioner will demonstrate fluid, liquid movements during kata, building a lightning fast, focused technique that is extremely effective in ending fights with a single blow.

3. One strike kill - A karate punch performed at full force by a skilled practitioner is easily capable of killing an individual. Kyokushin practitioners can punch through layers of tiles, bricks and ice and are perfectly capable of crushing the human skull - the main reason head punches are not allowed during sparring in this sport. Strikers to the upper neck can also be lethal. One of the reasons why karate does not always fare well in bouts between different styles is that a number of its strikes are lethal - for instance when being rushed by a brazilian jujitsu black belt, a strike to the neck would most likely end the fight, and the bjj student's life. Furthermore, in traditional karate students would often grow their toenails, allowing them to sever arteries with kicks.

4. Karate does not apply to real world situations - karate can be used to defend against knife and blunt object attacks. Knives and blunt objects have not changed in nature during the last hundred years. A quality dojo will ensure that students are prepared to deal with blocking weapon attacks.

5. Karate takes too long to learn and you still can't fight - full contact dojos encourage sparring from day one, and students are forced to take on higher graded students. I can't think of better way to learn how to fight. An experienced practitioner will do better in a fight - as is the case with any martial art.

Full contact schools also do body conditioning that prepares students to take a punch. The abs, chest, forearms, upper arms, outer leg, inner thighs, instep, shoulders are just some areas that are conditioned so that pain is not a factor during a fight.

Developing and manifesting the incredible elegance of this sport can indeed take a lifetimes study, and this is what makes it a martial art. The viper speed, economy of movement and elegance shown by the experienced practitioner is virtually unparalleled in martial arts. (

)

The key to learning karate as both an art and a viable self defence technique is finding a quality dojo rather than a black belt mill. Look out for kyokushin, full contact shotokan and goju kai dojos if you wish to have a taste of traditional karate.

I'm not sure of your background but most of what you have said I probably would have agreed with 30 years ago.

The OP states ... "Why Traditional Karate Is Not Effective for Self-Defense".
You say:

Look out for kyokushin, full contact shotokan and goju kai dojos if you wish to have a taste of traditional karate.

Not one of these is IMO 'traditional'. Shotokan is probably closest because Funakoshi studied Shorin ryu and Shorei ryu before establishing Shotokan in 1939. Kyokushin was developed by Oyama, a Korean who moved to Japan, studied under Funakoshi and established his style of karate in 1964. Goju Kai, which was my original background, was established by Gogen Yamaguchi in 1929. It is based on Okinawan Goju but like the others developed primarily as sport. None of them practise 'traditional' karate.
If you read the OP it says "There are two major but disparate approaches to karate, i.e., Okinawan and Japanese styles." The Japanese styles are quite different from Okinawan.

It's hard to start pointing out what is wrong with this analysis of the sport, since he demonstrates a very poor understanding of traditional karate practice. I make no excuses for black belt mills created by split-off schools of karate that don't practice full contact sparring, but from somebody who trains in traditional Okinawan karate and has done for several years, here are some pointers:

You say you study Okinawan karate but hold up Japanese karate as the example. What Okinawan karate do you study? Traditional karate was never sport and the Okinawans will be only too happy to point that out to anyone who will listen.

Thank you for the pointers.
Lets look at number 1.
Maybe I should ask, why do you thing the masters made up all those wacky stances? As you say, you wouldn't use them in a fight.

Sorry pal, if you don't know this then you're not qualified to talk about karate.

Ouch! Those stances are for use in fights. They can be used in the pub brawl but you need a teacher that can show you how they are applied. You see, traditional karate never had tournament sparring. It was always close range. If you were at sparring distance you didn't have to fight. And Okinawan karate doesn't move in and out of range. Once you engage you maintain contact until the fight is over. One technique if it is not blocked, one or two more if it is or if you didn't get it right. Either way the stances are all employed at the appropriate time.

Pointer number 2.
Boy those masters really knew how to waste time. All that time spent on kata when they could have been practising full contact sparring. The fact that each kata was a complete fighting system in itself may have been the reason they thought they were so important.
And as to one punch finishing the fight, look at some of the strikes in MMA. Easier said than done.

Pointer number 3.
In traditional karate the masters spent hours conditioning the hands an forearms, but toenails to sever arteries in traditional karate? Where did you read about the toenails?
One strike kill. Yes possible but not as easy as you might have thought against an opponent who has other ideas.

Pointer number 4.
Belief that you can use karate against a skilled attacker with a knife will get you killed. Unless you can't escape, don't even try. Just get away. The odds are too high.

Pointer number 5.
Most karate doesn't teach you how to fight. It teaches you how to win a tournament. In the clip you posted (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgMNL0GNGT0) the karate guy was dead twice. It took him four attempts to connect with the kick. The first two put him on the ground at his opponent's feet. It won him the tournament but in a real fight against that big bruiser, he would have died.

When you read through the article, it is not about traditional karate. He is talking about sport karate and the way most karate is taught today or as it has been over the past 80 years or so. A lot of what he has to say is unfortunately true, but I still think that he has never seen traditional karate. :asian:

 

[Tez3]

K-man you are a star! Excellent post, it said everything that was bumbling about in my brain but couldn't put down in words. It was also far more polite than was floating around in my head.

http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/article/what-traditional-karate

I lovethat Iain decribes kata is the DNA of karate.

 

[Benevolentbob]

I find it funny that he bashes Jujutsu only to turn around and somewhat praise the "sport art" of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu when in reality it came from Judo which came from Jujutsu, it's all the same idea really with different interpretations. Also a lot of his history and spelling are horribly wrong. When talking about the traditional Japanese art it's "Jujutsu" not "Jujitsu" or "Jiu-Jitsu". This doesn't help the author's case in coming across as an authority with a background in these arts. I won't argue that it takes a decent amount of time to become competent in something like Karate, but neither will most instructors if you bother to ask. That's why you often hear that attaining Shodan is only the start of your journey in so many traditional schools.

The author also complains about things such as philosophy and kata. Without aspects such as those you might as well throw the word art right out the window. It sounds like he didn't want to learn a martial art in the first place, but was more looking for a way to go kick some a**. He mentions how people get wrapped up in the concepts of what movies portray which is probably exactly what happened to the author and then his dreams were crushed when he was shown reality. Yes Karate won't turn you into Superman and allow you to take on hundreds of attackers while rescuing that cute girl, nobody ever said that it would. Get over it!

I will say however, that at least here in the states, that most Karate schools will not teach you to defend yourself. There are many imitations and frauds out there who simply want your money and have no idea what they're doing. Even many of the "legitimate" schools simply teach you how to be good at point sparring and successful in tournaments with hardly any focus on actual self defense. It's an unfortunate state of affairs but this just means that you have to look harder and know exactly what you're getting into when you sign up.

 

[Steve]

I find it funny that he bashes Jujutsu only to turn around and somewhat praise the "sport art" of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu when in reality it came from Judo which came from Jujutsu, it's all the same idea really with different interpretations. Also a lot of his history and spelling are horribly wrong. When talking about the traditional Japanese art it's "Jujutsu" not "Jujitsu" or "Jiu-Jitsu". This doesn't help the author's case in coming across as an authority with a background in these arts. I won't argue that it takes a decent amount of time to become competent in something like Karate, but neither will most instructors if you bother to ask. That's why you often hear that attaining Shodan is only the start of your journey in so many traditional schools.

I think it's worth noting that Judo and Jiu Jitsu are still relatively close, but there are significant cultural and technical differences between the two arts. While they may be derived from a common root, they are more like cousins at this point. And any resemblance between Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and almost any jujutsu is incidental. Writing it off as just differences of interpretation is a gross understatement. The arts differ philosophically, culturally and technically despite common roots.

What irritates me about threads like this is that over and over someone will complain about someone else misrepresenting their art, even as they feel free to misrepresent another art. If you're an expert on karate, I'd recommend you avoid commenting overly much about other arts.

In return, I will be careful to avoid commenting on the relationship between TKD and Shotokan Karate, or Okinawan Karate and anything else. Deal?

 

[Benevolentbob]

I think it's worth noting that Judo and Jiu Jitsu are still relatively close, but there are significant cultural and technical differences between the two arts. While they may be derived from a common root, they are more like cousins at this point. And any resemblance between Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and almost any jujutsu is incidental. Writing it off as just differences of interpretation is a gross understatement. The arts differ philosophically, culturally and technically despite common roots.

What irritates me about threads like this is that over and over someone will complain about someone else misrepresenting their art, even as they feel free to misrepresent another art. If you're an expert on karate, I'd recommend you avoid commenting overly much about other arts.

In return, I will be careful to avoid commenting on the relationship between TKD and Shotokan Karate, or Okinawan Karate and anything else. Deal?

I'm not an expert on Karate or any other art, nor did I ever claim to be. I participate in a Kempo system that integrates Danzan Ryu Jiu-Jitsu, I also go to a Judo class twice a week, and I love reading about the history and philosophy behind all arts, that's about as close to "expert" as I get. If anything I guess I would call myself an enthusiast. I replied because the author, while focusing on karate, was aiming his point of view on pretty much all traditional arts and I felt his analysis was highly biased and unfair. I never once attacked BJJ in any fashion so I don't understand the hostility here. All I said is that it came from Judo, which came from Jujutsu which is a fact. I think it's ignorant to put aside this lineage and anyone who watches the separate systems closely can easily see the similarities. See how you lumped in Tae Kwon Do, Shotokan Karate, and Okinawan Karate all together? That's exactly what I did with Jujutsu, Judo, and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. I don't even understand why we're arguing or why you're behaving so hostile. I wasn't "writing off" anything, I was saying that differences in systems are results from different ideas or interpretations being introduced which is exactly how it happened other it would all still be called Jujutsu. Granted there have been changes made over the years but as you yourself stated, they were all derived from the same root. Do you for whatever reason not like Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu being associated with the arts it came from? Or is it because I called it a "sport art"? In which case I was merely using the language that the author used and i feel that Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is just as effective as any other art. Again, I don't see the point in arguing on this.

 

[K-man]

If you had an athlete like Mohammed Ali starting out looking for a martial art. I really can't see him studying Aikido or Taijiquan, but Kyokushin, Wing Chun, Shotokan, Goju, TKD, BJJ, etc, etc, perhaps. Regardless of his choice I'm sure he would be more than able to look after himself on the street. On the other hand, take 20yo Little Billy Meek (5'7" and 120lb wet) from the downtown 7/11 and train him for 10 years in any of our karate schools that are still teaching 'traditional' 60s & 70s stuff and he is likely to be around third dan. (My reference to 'traditional' here refers to the OP definition, not mine.) I would not back him against a 17 yo punk on the street because he wouldn't have a chance. Put Billy into a truly traditional Okinawan school and give him the same 10 years of training and he would be looking to change his surname for a start. He may not be able to beat a top MMA fighter but that's beside the point. (For what it's worth, you wouldn't find me in the Octagon either, even if you gave me back 40 years. ) In the main he has been training to defend against thugs. He would have the knowledge that, if he needed to protect himself, he probably could.

All martial arts should give us self defence skills but the reality is, unfortunately, most don't. :asian:

 

[K-man]

http://www.iainabernethy.co.uk/article/what-traditional-karate

I love that Iain describes kata as the DNA of karate.

Great article Tez. Why didn't someone cut and paste it years ago?

I'll just say .... what he said!!

 

[Nicholas82555]

With all this said about "Traditional Karate". Do we consider Kyokushin traditional? Points of consideration:

1- What the founder had in mind in developing Kyokushin?
and
2- The mindset, dedication and training in Kyokushin between the Japanese and the rest of the world.

Thanks

 

[K-man]

With all this said about "Traditional Karate". Do we consider Kyokushin traditional? Points of consideration:

1- What the founder had in mind in developing Kyokushin?
and
2- The mindset, dedication and training in Kyokushin between the Japanese and the rest of the world.

Thanks

Short answer ... it depends.

How far back do you go before something is traditional? If you have an original form and then you change it substantially but retain enough that is recognisable as the original, can the new form ever be traditional?

If you answer "Yes", then Kyokushin is traditional. So would TKD be traditional, although you could disregard the Shotokan element of TKD and say it is a new traditional system based on the quans.

If your answer is "No", then they are not. Simple.

I will say why I believe the answer is "No". Karate originated in Okinawa as a basic method of self defence. Some of the Okinawans such as Higaonna went to China and learnt Kung fu to a very high level. They brought this knowledge back including a number of kata, added this knowledge to the original base, and devised new kata, based on the Chinese forms. These systems were designed to use lethal techniques to kill people if required. What we had for the first time was what was called "kara-te".

Enter Funakoshi. He is now one of the Master's and sees the future of the art is not training in secret but out in the open. He changes (sanitises) the original karate (or 'traditional' if you like) to make it suitable to teach to school children. The authorities love it because it is great to get the kids fit, especially when you have a war with China on the horizon. This takes off like wildfire in Japan. After the war, they add a sport element that wasn't in the original and we have a new system that now is based on long range techniques and point scoring. The kata evolve to look more spectacular and the original meanings were lost. These were the systems that Westerners learned and took away after the war. Many had only trained for a couple of years. Imagine now if you were a Green or Brown belt starting off your own school. How much knowledge do you have to pass on?

Meanwhile, back in Okinawa, the old masters are not happy. They are not part of the new and they don't want to change. They keep plugging away and 60 years later some far sighted Western individuals decided that what they were being told didn't make sense. They went back to Okinawa and surprise, surprise, there were still people training the old way, including the locks, throws and grappling. No distance sparring, only close in work. Eventually, they were happy to show us the traditional ways and some of the applications.
People like Iain Abernethy and Kris Wilder showed us how to interpret the kata, and I know a lot of people won't like me for mentioning him, but credit where credit is due. George Dillman also brought a lot of knowledge to the table.

To me, "Traditional Karate" is any of the original Okinawan forms, or derived from these forms, retaining the same essential elements including kata and bunkai. I should include Kyusho here as well.

Nothing here is to say one form is better than another, just that now they are different animals. For those who want to compete, go Japanese. For those who are interested in how the style was developed and the little details that made the systems work for close combat, go "Traditional", go Okinawan. :asian: