Why Traditional Karate Is Not Effective for Self-Defense

[Sojobo]

No. All you needed to say was whether you felt Wado people can defend themselves or not. Simple.

That was not how this started.

The question is not can Wado people defend themselves.

The Issue is -was Wado-ryu created primarily as a means of self defence - and the answer is a resounding no IMO!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And I think I answered that.

Not in your response to Dirty Dog, you didn't. You, whether you intended to or not, responded with a challenge of his credentials. If you don't see the issue with that, look at the tenor of your own posts in this thread. You have repeatedly come across as decrying the knowledge of others (including many you likely do not know, since it's unlikely you personally know most of the Wado-ryu instructors in the UK), you have repeatedly chosen to see questions as aggressive posts, and you have dismissed others' knowledge or experience without providing any reason why they should be dismissed.

Either you're overly aggressive in presenting what should be an interesting and informative side of a debate (one in which I have absolutely no interest other than the intellectual pursuit), or you're simply unaware of how you come across.

 

[Dirty Dog]

And I think I answered that.

If by "answered" you mean "completely avoided giving any actual answer" then you sure did.

I'll be more specific...
How long have you been training in Wado Ryu?
Under whom?
What rank do you hold, and who awarded it?

These are simple questions, and there is no rational reason for refusing to answer them, since they bear directly on your qualifications to pronounce judgement on on how very highly ranked Wado practitioners teach.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

According to the biography of Otsuka by his grandson Kazutaka Otsuka...

"When he was 31 years old, he heard of Funakoshi Sensei from Okinawa living in a Meiseijuku dormitory, which was for the university students of Okinawa and he started studying at the Meiseijuku dormitory in the dining room. Funakoshi Sensei asked Grand Master Otsuka if he knew karate before because Shinto Yoshin Ryu already included striking and kicking techniques. Funakoshi Sensei knew only 15 katas at that time and Grand Master Otsuka completed those in less than one year. Then he wasn’t satisfied with only learning order of katas, so he wanted to visit Okinawa to find out about meaning of each movement, but Funakoshi Sensei denied him going to Okinawa. Funakoshi Sensei had reasons for not wanting to return to Okinawa. Because of debts incurred by Giei, his son, he was unable to return to Okinawa. Three years later, Grand Master Otsuka visited two Okinawa senseis, Mabuni Kenei and Choki Motubu who were living in Osaka City, in order to learn more detail about Okinawan karate. He asked Motobu Sensei about details of each karate techniques and they shared techniques with each other. He then asked about the actual situation of karate in Okinawa and found out there was no further information for him there, so he decided not to travel to Okinawa but to study himself about karate and jujutsu and to create a new style"

There is little evidence to support the fact that Otsuka trained extensively with Motobu, let alone the suggestion that his main reason for doing so was because of Kumite.

An interesting disagreement between the sources. The other article implies (though I don't think it actually says so) that Otsuka actually trained with Motobu for a while, rather than just visiting with him briefly (in those days, I'd assume a visit would be measured in days or weeks). This biography speaks to what was discussed and doesn't reflect any training time (though I'd be surprised if there wasn't any). It doesn't speak to a motive other than learning more about Okinawan Karate, so it certainly doesn't imply he was there because of Motobu's reputation as a fighter.

 

[Sojobo]

You have repeatedly come across as decrying the knowledge of others (including many you likely do not know, since it's unlikely you personally know most of the Wado-ryu instructors in the UK)

I probably know or know of many of the senior grade Wado-ka here in the UK.

As I have said though - Many (not All or Most) - don't get it.

Either you're overly aggressive in presenting what should be an interesting and informative side of a debate (one in which I have absolutely no interest other than the intellectual pursuit), or you're simply unaware of how you come across.

It's Friday folks and Im about to up-sticks

Didn't intent to offend anyone (I just tell it how I see it).

I love you all really

 

[Tez3]

The Issue is -was Wado-ryu created primarily as a means of self defence - and the answer is a resounding no IMO!

Actually no, it started because we were talking about karate. You brought up Wado Ryu and said it wasn't made for self defence. We weren't talking about Wado and we weren't discussing primary or secondary purposes. You made it into a one style discussion and decided I was wrong because I told you something my instructors had said. Now they may well have been wrong, you clearly think so but unless you were there you cannot say I wasn't told that. To say I wasn't told that is to call me a liar.

 

[Sojobo]

Actually no, it started because we were talking about karate. You brought up Wado Ryu and said it wasn't made for self defence. We weren't talking about Wado and we weren't discussing primary or secondary purposes. You made it into a one style discussion and decided I was wrong because I told you something my instructors had said. Now they may well have been wrong, you clearly think so but unless you were there you cannot say I wasn't told that. To say I wasn't told that is to call me a liar.

The thread is about Karate and self defence.
I suggested that Wado was not created - for the purpose of Karate.
I am not (nor have I) called or implied you are a liar.

 

[Tez3]

The thread is about Karate and self defence.
I suggested that Wado was not created - for the purpose of Karate.
I am not (nor have I) called or implied you are a liar.

'Suggested'? well if that's you suggesting I'd hate to think how you are when you are certain.

The whole point of my original post was that karate has techniques that can and are used for self defence, these should be taught as well as things like one and three step sparring, kata and other things. Whether Wado was created originally for self defence is irrelevant because if it has the self defence techniques in they should be taught. The post really was as simple as that.

 

[Sojobo]

If by "answered" you mean "completely avoided giving any actual answer" then you sure did.

I'll be more specific...
How long have you been training in Wado Ryu?
Under whom?
What rank do you hold, and who awarded it?

These are simple questions, and there is no rational reason for refusing to answer them, since they bear directly on your qualifications to pronounce judgement on on how very highly ranked Wado practitioners teach.

I prefer a little anonymity in these things - I feel it keeps things more open.

You'll notice I haven't asked anyone else involved in the discussion for their credentials as I don't think its necessary, but if it makes you feel betters...

I have been training in Wado for over 30 years
I train with an international group affiliated to the JKF Wado-kai
I am a Senior Dan Grade, Instructor and Examiner with said group

 

[Sojobo]

'Suggested'? well if that's you suggesting I'd hate to think how you are when you are certain.

The whole point of my original post was that karate has techniques that can and are used for self defence, these should be taught as well as things like one and three step sparring, kata and other things. Whether Wado was created originally for self defence is irrelevant because if it has the self defence techniques in they should be taught. The post really was as simple as that.

Tez,

I don't disagree with that sentiment - but I'm not sure that saying Wado (as an art form) was created expressly for the purpose of self defence and saying that it CAN be used for self defence and therefore should be - is the same thing.

I would agree that you can use it (or at least the techniques found within it) to a certain degree - but the efficiency will depend on the instructor and how they structure the training to that end.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I prefer a little anonymity in these things - I feel it keeps things more open.

You'll notice I haven't asked anyone else involved in the discussion for their credentials as I don't think its necessary, but if it makes you feel betters...

I have been training in Wado for over 30 years
I train with an international group affiliated to the JKF Wado-kai
I am a Senior Dan Grade, Instructor and Examiner with said group

Anonymity on those topics only means we can't tell whether someone is speaking from experience or from some external perception. Your years, rank, and background give us a better view of where your arguments come from. It's valuable to help us see past some misperceptions. If you look around the site, you'll see a few fairly uninformed people passing along their ill-conceived conclusions as fact. It short-cuts some of our discussions if we know whether we're dealing with someone who has one month, 5 years, or 30 years of experience.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Tez,

I don't disagree with that sentiment - but I'm not sure that saying Wado (as an art form) was created expressly for the purpose of self defence and saying that it CAN be used for self defence and therefore should be - is the same thing.

I would agree that you can use it (or at least the techniques found within it) to a certain degree - but the efficiency will depend on the instructor and how they structure the training to that end.

That last point is an area of agreement among most on here when talking about training any art/style for self-defense.

 

[Sojobo]

An interesting disagreement between the sources. The other article implies (though I don't think it actually says so) that Otsuka actually trained with Motobu for a while, rather than just visiting with him briefly (in those days, I'd assume a visit would be measured in days or weeks). This biography speaks to what was discussed and doesn't reflect any training time (though I'd be surprised if there wasn't any). It doesn't speak to a motive other than learning more about Okinawan Karate, so it certainly doesn't imply he was there because of Motobu's reputation as a fighter.

Otsuka was a skilled martial artist. I think he would have recognised and respected Motobu's 'fighting' ability if not only by reputation.

I think it is also probable that he did spend long enough with him to learn Naihanchi kata (which was very much Motobu's thing) - and he obviously learnt enough from him to realise that it is "very deep" as Otsuka says in his book.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Otsuka was a skilled martial artist. I think he would have recognised and respected Motobu's ability if not only by reputation.

I think it is also probably that he did spend long enough with him to learn Naihanchi kata (which was very much Motobu's thing) - and he obviously learnt enough from him to realise that it is "very deep" as Otsuka says in his book.

I would assume he knew Motobu's reputation, as you say. My point was that it's unclear whether it was his reputation as a martial artist in general and his experience with Okinawan Karate, or specifically his reputation as one who used Karate effectively in fights (something that differentiated him from Funakoshi, for example). Either would be a valid reason for him to reach out to Motobu.

That's a good point about the Naihanchi kata. Unfortunately, it means nothing to me, since I don't know what that kata is. From your post, I assume it's something that would take some time to learn to that level, which implies he probably was there for some weeks (or at least several intense days).

 

[Sojobo]

I would assume he knew Motobu's reputation, as you say. My point was that it's unclear whether it was his reputation as a martial artist in general and his experience with Okinawan Karate, or specifically his reputation as one who used Karate effectively in fights (something that differentiated him from Funakoshi, for example). Either would be a valid reason for him to reach out to Motobu.

That's a good point about the Naihanchi kata. Unfortunately, it means nothing to me, since I don't know what that kata is. From your post, I assume it's something that would take some time to learn to that level, which implies he probably was there for some weeks (or at least several intense days).

I've read somewhere that Otsuka likened Wado to Aikido with Teeth (or maybe I just made that up ).
Either way - I think he recognised that Motobu was perhaps a practical martial artist over a scholastic one (that perhaps he came to realise that Funakoshi was)!

 

[Dirty Dog]

I prefer a little anonymity in these things - I feel it keeps things more open.

So in other words... you'll dodge direct questions and give only vague and non-specific answers. Got it. That is your prerogative. Doesn't do much for your credibility, of course, but feel free to dodge.

 

[Tez3]

I don't disagree with that sentiment - but I'm not sure that saying Wado (as an art form) was created expressly for the purpose of self defence and saying that it CAN be used for self defence and therefore should be - is the same thing.

Only you however were talking about Wado Ryu. Without knowing what the chap I directed my post at trained in there was no use mentioning any particular style. It was a far more general discussion than you made it.

 

[Tez3]

Naihanchi kata.

It's the so called ( by some) 'perfect kata, the only one you would need to know to be able to defend yourself.
Naihanchi - Karate's Most Deadly Kata? | Iain Abernethy

 

[Sojobo]

So in other words... you'll dodge direct questions and give only vague and non-specific answers. Got it. That is your prerogative. Doesn't do much for your credibility, of course, but feel free to dodge.

Martial Talk Credibility? OK I'll bear that in mind.

 

[Sojobo]

Only you however were talking about Wado Ryu. Without knowing what the chap I directed my post at trained in there was no use mentioning any particular style. It was a far more general discussion than you made it.

Noted