Why Traditional Karate Is Not Effective for Self-Defense

[Buka]

I would be curious to know what they had to say about the quality and type of training they got from Mitose.

Most were of the "a guy I know trained with Mitose" lineage. But a couple of old timers said they actually trained with him on Oahu way back in the day. I wish I could remember the stories in more detail. One guy said that Mitose was crazy, but in a conversational way, the way that we would describe any one of our more humorous and outgoing friends.

Martial Arts sure do have some characters.

 

[oftheherd1]

I almost forgot about Mitose. Definitely a "different" character than the norm. I spoke to some folks back in the nineties out here who had trained with him. They agreed with what you said about mental health.






I have to point out that Professor Jay had no idea any of this was going on, it was a large gymnasium and would only happen when he was in another part of the gym. It would take place when they wanted to show you the correct position or foot placement or whatever.....or if you asked about a particular part of the technique. They would demonstrate on you and hold you in the most painful part of the technique, with ever increasing pressure, while you tapped like crazy.

So, the second day was more of the same. Then the lunch break came. We were outside on the grass, beautiful summer day, and my group was looking at me. I said, "Okay, enough of this crap. Follow my lead."

From that point, I would ask a question, they would demonstrate and crank the hell out of me. When I was finally let up, or let go of, I would say, "let me see if I have that right" and I'd do it to them. Only I wouldn't be nice. And I wouldn't let go when they tapped. And I wouldn't let go when they screamed. And I wouldn't let go until other instructors came rushing over. I explained to the other instructors what was about to happen and that you better bring over The Professor because I still wasn't letting go. (And my boys stood by, smiling, ready to fight, my wife, too, and she's meaner than all of them.)

Wally came over and I explained, quite succinctly, STILL holding the guy down in pain. Wally nodded, gave them a disapproving look, patted my back, smiled and said, "very good". And went back to what he was doing. There was no more BS from that point forward. The rest of the seminar was wonderful, we learned a lot and had a ball. But I still HATE those sons of..

So.....yesterday I called my buddy/student and left a message about that Dillman seminar. He called me back and we talked for two fricken' hours. What a great time we had on the phone, all the memories came flooding back. My buddy has been training as long as I have and, at this point, is a more experienced Martial Artist than I am. He's trained with the folks I have, and many, many more. And he teaches full time for a living.

I had forgotten - he hooked up with Dillman and his people for about a year and a half after that seminar. Not giving up his own training, jut cutting it back some and going into the Dillman thing pretty much full time.

Dillman used to own Muhammed Ali's old training camp in Deer Lake Pennsylvania. My buddy, and four or five of his students, went to two different week long training camps there with Dillman and his people. Man, I sure wish I went with him, being a fan of Ali, that would have been just a great and historic experience for me. Kicked myself in the butt for missing it back then. Then forgot all about it. Kicking myself again now.

Anyway, he learned a lot about the body. He has more of a historic slant on Kata than I do and learned a lot about a lot of the Katas Dillman's association does. He also became friends with some of Dillman's top guys, who he assures me are really talented and knowledgeable Martial Artists to this day. I forget their names, if your interested I'll ask him again.

He also said that he was studying so much about the body so much at home, he felt like he was back in school full time. After a year and a half he left. Too much BS with the other stuff.

He also informed me that after a year or so he would be working with Dillman or one of his assistants and while doing partner work they would crank the crap out of him way beyond what was safe. My buddy is one hundred percent a gentleman, and he ain't no dummy. So he'd say, "You know, I'm giving you my arm to practice the technique, or to demo it for others, I'm GIVING it to you. You want to impress me, fight me and get my arm and do that. Go ahead, let's see what you can do." And they would back off.

And in the world of coincidence..........my buddy runs a very busy dojo, this one has been running for over fifteen years. Three days ago he had one of his assistant instructors clean out some old storage cabinets to "get rid of crap we don't use". And his assistant found a whole pile of DVDs from one of Dillman's top assistants. My buddy didn't even remember they were there. He hasn't even watched them. Dillman's assistant gave them to him to sell fifteen years ago. He had forgotten all about them.

He put them on a table for anyone who wanted them for free. I told him I wanted a set, so he's going to send them. If anyone wants to check them out after I do, I'll gladly send them to you. Might be fun to watch. Might be stuff to learn. Might be all smoke and mirrors.

What a coincidence. Been there for years, forgotten. Just came out of the cabinet when we were talking about Dillman right here on the boards. Kinda cool.

Certainly there are times when a little extra pain will get your attention. In the Hapkido I learned, it didn't take me too long to realize how important foot placement could be. When I began teaching, there were things I specifically taught rather than wait for them to learn on their own. Foot placement being one of them.

Also pain to them (with caution) when they didn't seem to be learning and applying techniques properly. I would let them do it to me and if they weren't getting it, move their hands, fingers, or whatever to where they could hurt me. It sometimes worked better that way.

But, while studying, we understood well that if we went beyond the bounds, we would get beyond the bounds. So it didn't happen often.

BTW, I would love to see the DVDs. One can never have too many tools. Thanks. for your generous offer.

 

[Buka]

These are the DVDs, which my buddy warned me he hasn't even watched so they might suck.

And here's a pic from the seminar we went to. I had never seen this pic, but it brought back a lot of memories. I am biting a hole in my lip trying not to laugh. When the pic was taken and the guy with the camera said "smile", one of the guys whispered say "Chi whiz".

That was in regards to something that was tried a few minutes earlier on one of the guys, which didn't work.

But I stilled loved the seminar. Kind of liked Sensei Dillman, too.
The man sure can talk, I'll tell you that.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

These are the DVDs, which my buddy warned me he hasn't even watched so they might suck.

View attachment 21450

And here's a pic from the seminar we went to. I had never seen this pic, but it brought back a lot of memories. I am biting a hole in my lip trying not to laugh. When the pic was taken and the guy with the camera said "smile", one of the guys whispered say "Chi whiz".

That was in regards to something that was tried a few minutes earlier on one of the guys, which didn't work.

But I stilled loved the seminar. Kind of liked Sensei Dillman, too.

View attachment 21451

I have to admit, when I get those, "Internal Workout" comes first. Gotta know what the heck that is.

And you have to be careful with Chi whiz. It tastes great, but you gotta believe in it to taste it, at all.

 

[Buka]

I have to admit, when I get those, "Internal Workout" comes first. Gotta know what the heck that is.

And you have to be careful with Chi whiz. It tastes great, but you gotta believe in it to taste it, at all.

Yes, there is a certain "he's not a believer" type thing that goes on with some of this stuff.

 

[Buka]

My buddy threw the dvds in the mail today. I'm neck deep in several projects and don't have time, so I'll mail them to Gerry, and he can mail them to DD when he's done with them.

I'll catch up with them later, no hurry at all. Gerry, PM me your mailing address.

 

[Michele123]

Was Dillman the one teaching pressure points in Martial Arts in the late 90’s? I remember my Sensei getting really interested in pressure point fighting around that time and we even hosted a seminar taught by a student of some big time pressure point fighter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Vincent]

Apologies for posting some contentious assertions and then taking a week to respond to your replies. I tried replying earlier, but kept getting pulled away by other things.

I've been interested in traditional martial arts for 35 years, intensely so for the first 20 of those years. That interest brought me to Japan (I requested an assignment to Japan when I was in the military) and again when I went back to teach English. I spent that time in Japan training in iaido, kyudo, and jujutsu. Iaido and kyudo were great fun, because those arts have much of that old Japan feeling. I think jujutsu can be good for self-defense, but I didn't get much where I trained (I'd rather not identify the ryuha, because they're good people who are preserving the art for their own reasons). I would have gotten more from that jujutsu if we all wore Japanese armor and I had to be ready to defend against Japanese sword attacks and grapple the person. I later read that the soke made a comment about the need to develop the ryuha to be more relevant for today, so it isn't just me. I'm sure there are better jujutsu ryuha for modern self-defense, and I'd put judo among the top. So all three of the arts I learned in Japan are clearly museum pieces. I of course didn't expect anything else from iaido or kyudo, but I wanted more self-defense relevance from my jujutsu training.

When somebody asks if a certain self-defense method is effective, I assume they mean certain things. I assume they want practical self-defense skills in a reasonable period of time. I assume they want to learn something that feels intuitive and natural, and that holds up under pressure. I assume they want to feel confident in their ability to protect themselves. Considering my history with Japanese martial arts, I'd be happy if karate fit the bill. But like the jujutsu style I practiced, I just don't see the proof. If anything, there's too much proof that it isn't the way to go for practical self defense in a reasonable period of time. Let's look at the impractical stances. They're said to build strong legs, but why not take the more direct approach of training with stances that people would actually use in a fighting situation (because you'll do what you practice) and complement it with exercises meant to build the desired strength - like how athletes train. The answer is that it's the karate way, but is that way practical and efficient?

Some of you said that karate isn't just about self-defense, but about discipline and a general way of life. I understand that diligent practice under a wise and motivational sensei can offer that (although the right boxing or BJJ coach could offer that too). But that's getting away from the point of this thread - effectiveness for self-defense. I'm sorry to say this, but this switch-up is typical of karate. There's no getting around the fact that karate training makes a clear claim on fighting proficiency, but so many karateka jump to the "it's not about fighting" narrative when challenged by a worthy opponent to prove themselves. I know there are some capable karateka out there, but I wonder how many of those capable karateka have cross-trained in other striking methods like boxing.

First off, we can't even go down the rabbit hole of comparing serious boxers to hobbyist Karate students

I wouldn't have made that comparison. I'd want to compare two groups who train with similar seriousness and who put the same amount of time into training. I'd also want people who hadn't trained in anything else and were as similar as reasonably possible across the board. But I don't even know if such a scientific comparison would be necessary at this point. I haven't seen many karateka prove that their art is a wise investment for practical self-defense in a reasonable period of time.

I know so many people who trained like that for a long time and can’t train anything anymore due to the toll it took.

That's true, and I'm in the same boat. I don't want to bust myself up with questionable body toughening, or subject my head to multiple all-out punches in the ring and then wait for the symptoms of brain damage to overtake me. That's counterproductive to the whole point of self-defense. But is training in watered-down method of self-defense the best alternative when other higher-probability methods are out there?

I love a traditional Japanese dojo, the feel of wearing a gi, and the aesthetic of a Japanese sword, a bamboo bow, or an oak jo. When I catch up with my American friends who trained with me in Japan, we usually reminisce about our time at those dojos. I miss it and want to get back to it. When I consider budo for modern self-defense, I like judo and jodo. For the claims that karate makes, I'd rather go with something like kickboxing. That's just me and how I see things. If somebody else wants to invest in karate (stances, blocks, kata, etc.) for self-defense, that's their choice. I know there's a minority of karateka who do have respectable skills. It's just not the right self-defense investment for me.

 

[hoshin1600]

Apologies for posting some contentious assertions and then taking a week to respond to your replies. I tried replying earlier, but kept getting pulled away by other things.

I've been interested in traditional martial arts for 35 years, intensely so for the first 20 of those years. That interest brought me to Japan (I requested an assignment to Japan when I was in the military) and again when I went back to teach English. I spent that time in Japan training in iaido, kyudo, and jujutsu. Iaido and kyudo were great fun, because those arts have much of that old Japan feeling. I think jujutsu can be good for self-defense, but I didn't get much where I trained (I'd rather not identify the ryuha, because they're good people who are preserving the art for their own reasons). I would have gotten more from that jujutsu if we all wore Japanese armor and I had to be ready to defend against Japanese sword attacks and grapple the person. I later read that the soke made a comment about the need to develop the ryuha to be more relevant for today, so it isn't just me. I'm sure there are better jujutsu ryuha for modern self-defense, and I'd put judo among the top. So all three of the arts I learned in Japan are clearly museum pieces. I of course didn't expect anything else from iaido or kyudo, but I wanted more self-defense relevance from my jujutsu training.

When somebody asks if a certain self-defense method is effective, I assume they mean certain things. I assume they want practical self-defense skills in a reasonable period of time. I assume they want to learn something that feels intuitive and natural, and that holds up under pressure. I assume they want to feel confident in their ability to protect themselves. Considering my history with Japanese martial arts, I'd be happy if karate fit the bill. But like the jujutsu style I practiced, I just don't see the proof. If anything, there's too much proof that it isn't the way to go for practical self defense in a reasonable period of time. Let's look at the impractical stances. They're said to build strong legs, but why not take the more direct approach of training with stances that people would actually use in a fighting situation (because you'll do what you practice) and complement it with exercises meant to build the desired strength - like how athletes train. The answer is that it's the karate way, but is that way practical and efficient?

Some of you said that karate isn't just about self-defense, but about discipline and a general way of life. I understand that diligent practice under a wise and motivational sensei can offer that (although the right boxing or BJJ coach could offer that too). But that's getting away from the point of this thread - effectiveness for self-defense. I'm sorry to say this, but this switch-up is typical of karate. There's no getting around the fact that karate training makes a clear claim on fighting proficiency, but so many karateka jump to the "it's not about fighting" narrative when challenged by a worthy opponent to prove themselves. I know there are some capable karateka out there, but I wonder how many of those capable karateka have cross-trained in other striking methods like boxing.


I wouldn't have made that comparison. I'd want to compare two groups who train with similar seriousness and who put the same amount of time into training. I'd also want people who hadn't trained in anything else and were as similar as reasonably possible across the board. But I don't even know if such a scientific comparison would be necessary at this point. I haven't seen many karateka prove that their art is a wise investment for practical self-defense in a reasonable period of time.


That's true, and I'm in the same boat. I don't want to bust myself up with questionable body toughening, or subject my head to multiple all-out punches in the ring and then wait for the symptoms of brain damage to overtake me. That's counterproductive to the whole point of self-defense. But is training in watered-down method of self-defense the best alternative when other higher-probability methods are out there?

I love a traditional Japanese dojo, the feel of wearing a gi, and the aesthetic of a Japanese sword, a bamboo bow, or an oak jo. When I catch up with my American friends who trained with me in Japan, we usually reminisce about our time at those dojos. I miss it and want to get back to it. When I consider budo for modern self-defense, I like judo and jodo. For the claims that karate makes, I'd rather go with something like kickboxing. That's just me and how I see things. If somebody else wants to invest in karate (stances, blocks, kata, etc.) for self-defense, that's their choice. I know there's a minority of karateka who do have respectable skills. It's just not the right self-defense investment for me.

Great post.
Having trained in Rinzai Zen, Jikishinkage Kashima shinden Ryu, Tesshu style Shodo ,and Aikido, when you speek about loving the feel of it and wanting to go back to those times , you words stir the same feeling with me. As the memories flood back in my head.
It's an experience that most martial artists do not get when training in modern martial arts here in America.
The experience is different: the feeling is different: the training is different: the result, is different.
You then comment on a lack of effectiveness of karate based on your own experience and/or the experience of those you have had contact with. While your experience is undoubtedly real and true, perhaps they are not complete. If I were to restrict my view to main land Japanese karate, such as Shotokan, I share the same observations and come to the same conclusions. However Shotokan is not ALL of karate and should not represent the entire spectrum of karate. Shotokan for various historical reasons has become synonymous with karate and this as I am sure you know was by design. But it is not the only karate, nor is it even the original Tode, and every negative attribute that can be said about the style has a contrast and opposite attribute in another style. Usually those that evolved outside of Japan or prior to the 1930s. Broad brush descriptions are not accurate in the same way Koryu is not the same as MMA or modern American karate. Different feel different result.

 

[Buka]

Was Dillman the one teaching pressure points in Martial Arts in the late 90’s? I remember my Sensei getting really interested in pressure point fighting around that time and we even hosted a seminar taught by a student of some big time pressure point fighter.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A lot of folks were, but there's a good chance he's who you're talking about. He's also synonymous with the no touch knock out thing from back then.

 

[Michele123]

A lot of folks were, but there's a good chance he's who you're talking about. He's also synonymous with the no touch knock out thing from back then.

I never heard of a no touch knockout. Just pressure points and meridians and three pressure points to knock out but five to kill. But the points had to be of the same element type or follow an order for them to be effective. That sort of thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Buka]

I never heard of a no touch knockout. Just pressure points and meridians and three pressure points to knock out but five to kill. But the points had to be of the same element type or follow an order for them to be effective. That sort of thing.

This is kind of related to that, Michelle. And what started all the controversy concerning Dillman.

 

[Flying Crane]

Apologies for posting some contentious assertions and then taking a week to respond to your replies. I tried replying earlier, but kept getting pulled away by other things.

I've been interested in traditional martial arts for 35 years, intensely so for the first 20 of those years. That interest brought me to Japan (I requested an assignment to Japan when I was in the military) and again when I went back to teach English. I spent that time in Japan training in iaido, kyudo, and jujutsu. Iaido and kyudo were great fun, because those arts have much of that old Japan feeling. I think jujutsu can be good for self-defense, but I didn't get much where I trained (I'd rather not identify the ryuha, because they're good people who are preserving the art for their own reasons). I would have gotten more from that jujutsu if we all wore Japanese armor and I had to be ready to defend against Japanese sword attacks and grapple the person. I later read that the soke made a comment about the need to develop the ryuha to be more relevant for today, so it isn't just me. I'm sure there are better jujutsu ryuha for modern self-defense, and I'd put judo among the top. So all three of the arts I learned in Japan are clearly museum pieces. I of course didn't expect anything else from iaido or kyudo, but I wanted more self-defense relevance from my jujutsu training.

When somebody asks if a certain self-defense method is effective, I assume they mean certain things. I assume they want practical self-defense skills in a reasonable period of time. I assume they want to learn something that feels intuitive and natural, and that holds up under pressure. I assume they want to feel confident in their ability to protect themselves. Considering my history with Japanese martial arts, I'd be happy if karate fit the bill. But like the jujutsu style I practiced, I just don't see the proof. If anything, there's too much proof that it isn't the way to go for practical self defense in a reasonable period of time. Let's look at the impractical stances. They're said to build strong legs, but why not take the more direct approach of training with stances that people would actually use in a fighting situation (because you'll do what you practice) and complement it with exercises meant to build the desired strength - like how athletes train. The answer is that it's the karate way, but is that way practical and efficient?

Some of you said that karate isn't just about self-defense, but about discipline and a general way of life. I understand that diligent practice under a wise and motivational sensei can offer that (although the right boxing or BJJ coach could offer that too). But that's getting away from the point of this thread - effectiveness for self-defense. I'm sorry to say this, but this switch-up is typical of karate. There's no getting around the fact that karate training makes a clear claim on fighting proficiency, but so many karateka jump to the "it's not about fighting" narrative when challenged by a worthy opponent to prove themselves. I know there are some capable karateka out there, but I wonder how many of those capable karateka have cross-trained in other striking methods like boxing.


I wouldn't have made that comparison. I'd want to compare two groups who train with similar seriousness and who put the same amount of time into training. I'd also want people who hadn't trained in anything else and were as similar as reasonably possible across the board. But I don't even know if such a scientific comparison would be necessary at this point. I haven't seen many karateka prove that their art is a wise investment for practical self-defense in a reasonable period of time.


That's true, and I'm in the same boat. I don't want to bust myself up with questionable body toughening, or subject my head to multiple all-out punches in the ring and then wait for the symptoms of brain damage to overtake me. That's counterproductive to the whole point of self-defense. But is training in watered-down method of self-defense the best alternative when other higher-probability methods are out there?

I love a traditional Japanese dojo, the feel of wearing a gi, and the aesthetic of a Japanese sword, a bamboo bow, or an oak jo. When I catch up with my American friends who trained with me in Japan, we usually reminisce about our time at those dojos. I miss it and want to get back to it. When I consider budo for modern self-defense, I like judo and jodo. For the claims that karate makes, I'd rather go with something like kickboxing. That's just me and how I see things. If somebody else wants to invest in karate (stances, blocks, kata, etc.) for self-defense, that's their choice. I know there's a minority of karateka who do have respectable skills. It's just not the right self-defense investment for me.

I appreciate your observations but want to point out one or two things. You mention not seeing proof of karates effectiveness. I wonder what proof you need, and how much you have really seen.

How many people today practice karate around the world? How many of them have used their skills to effectively defend themselves when needed? I don’t know the answer to that, these are things that we can never know because nobody is systematically collecting statistics on every fight and every encounter and what every karateka is up to in the world. So I suggest that you have seen very little and cannot make authoritative statements about all of karate.

Is it a desire to see karate effectively used in MMA competition? That in no way impresses me one way or the other. It is a very very very small percentage of the martial arts population that has any interest at all in participating in such competitions. It is most definitely not the yardstick against which all things need to be measured.

So, I disagree with your statements, even while I believe that your experiences are real and your opinions are genuine. There are skilled karateka and there are unskilled karateka. They all exist. What may be true for one is not true for another.

 

[Vincent]

I know so many people who trained like that for a long time and can’t train anything anymore due to the toll it took.

That's true, and I'm in the same boat.

Just to clarify, I meant that I too am concerned about about the long-term toll of blood-and-guts training. I don't have any lasting injuries from my training, and I'd like to keep it that way. Training should be hard, but not at the expense of health or long-term injuries.

I understand that all karate isn't Shotokan, and that there are other styles that go about things differently. I also understand that I haven't see all there is to be seen. That's why I acknowledged that exceptions are out there. I'm saying that the kind of training and technique one typically sees in karate schools in the US don't seem like a high-probably option for effective self-defense in a reasonable period of time.

It's not that I have a desire to see karate used effectively in MMA, but that "typical" traditional karate seems far outclassed by MMA and many other approaches as a method of preparing for physical confrontation in the modern world. The sensibilities of unarmed combat/self-defense have progressed, and I'm far from the only person who doesn't see traditional karate as a high-probability option. As I said above, I do realize that there are exceptional karateka. But if my son or nephew wanted to learn effective self-defense for today's realities in a reasonable period of time, traditional karate wouldn't be my recommendation. If I knew of an exceptional school that updated its self-defense mindset and training methods, without exacting an unnecessary toll, I'd of course recommend that school. But when considering the other options available today, I wouldn't say generically, "you should learn karate."

 

[Flying Crane]

Just to clarify, I meant that I too am concerned about about the long-term toll of blood-and-guts training. I don't have any lasting injuries from my training, and I'd like to keep it that way. Training should be hard, but not at the expense of health or long-term injuries.

I understand that all karate isn't Shotokan, and that there are other styles that go about things differently. I also understand that I haven't see all there is to be seen. That's why I acknowledged that exceptions are out there. I'm saying that the kind of training and technique one typically sees in karate schools in the US don't seem like a high-probably option for effective self-defense in a reasonable period of time.

It's not that I have a desire to see karate used effectively in MMA, but that "typical" traditional karate seems far outclassed by MMA and many other approaches as a method of preparing for physical confrontation in the modern world. The sensibilities of unarmed combat/self-defense have progressed, and I'm far from the only person who doesn't see traditional karate as a high-probability option. As I said above, I do realize that there are exceptional karateka. But if my son or nephew wanted to learn effective self-defense for today's realities in a reasonable period of time, traditional karate wouldn't be my recommendation. If I knew of an exceptional school that updated its self-defense mindset and training methods, without exacting an unnecessary toll, I'd of course recommend that school. But when considering the other options available today, I wouldn't say generically, "you should learn karate."

Thank you for the additional commments and clarifications.

I guess I evaluate one school at a time and decide if that school has a solid program and approach to training. Because in my opinion, the approach to training is what matters over the style. Any style can be trained with appropriate realism and intensity to yield useful results in reasonable amount of time.

I will agree that many people do not train in that way. People in MMA who may desire competition are more likely to approach their training with that appropriate intensity. Those who have no interest in competition may be less likely to do so. But any system has that possibility within it. But it depends on how it is gone about, and that depends on the school, or even on the individual.

 

[drop bear]

I appreciate your observations but want to point out one or two things. You mention not seeing proof of karates effectiveness. I wonder what proof you need, and how much you have really seen.

How many people today practice karate around the world? How many of them have used their skills to effectively defend themselves when needed? I don’t know the answer to that, these are things that we can never know because nobody is systematically collecting statistics on every fight and every encounter and what every karateka is up to in the world. So I suggest that you have seen very little and cannot make authoritative statements about all of karate.

Is it a desire to see karate effectively used in MMA competition? That in no way impresses me one way or the other. It is a very very very small percentage of the martial arts population that has any interest at all in participating in such competitions. It is most definitely not the yardstick against which all things need to be measured.

So, I disagree with your statements, even while I believe that your experiences are real and your opinions are genuine. There are skilled karateka and there are unskilled karateka. They all exist. What may be true for one is not true for another.

We really cant go of the evidence that isn't there. Only off the evidence that is.

 

[drop bear]

Just to clarify, I meant that I too am concerned about about the long-term toll of blood-and-guts training. I don't have any lasting injuries from my training, and I'd like to keep it that way. Training should be hard, but not at the expense of health or long-term injuries.

I understand that all karate isn't Shotokan, and that there are other styles that go about things differently. I also understand that I haven't see all there is to be seen. That's why I acknowledged that exceptions are out there. I'm saying that the kind of training and technique one typically sees in karate schools in the US don't seem like a high-probably option for effective self-defense in a reasonable period of time.

It's not that I have a desire to see karate used effectively in MMA, but that "typical" traditional karate seems far outclassed by MMA and many other approaches as a method of preparing for physical confrontation in the modern world. The sensibilities of unarmed combat/self-defense have progressed, and I'm far from the only person who doesn't see traditional karate as a high-probability option. As I said above, I do realize that there are exceptional karateka. But if my son or nephew wanted to learn effective self-defense for today's realities in a reasonable period of time, traditional karate wouldn't be my recommendation. If I knew of an exceptional school that updated its self-defense mindset and training methods, without exacting an unnecessary toll, I'd of course recommend that school. But when considering the other options available today, I wouldn't say generically, "you should learn karate."

It is pretty simple.

Ok. If I wanted to learn to throw a ball. I would start with a big target and put it close.

Then I would progressively use a smaller target that is further away.

And my ball throwing will increase.

I can bring up pretty much any random demo and show you that in this case karate is trained in the reverse.

So we get two white belts and one cant punch and one cant block and their Technique doesn't work and they probably punch each other in the head.

But after a while through drills and training they both learn to give the best feeds to create the best responses.

Or in the case of that ball the target is actually getting bigger and closer. So while it looks like they are increasing their ability. 9you are hitting the target more often)

The only ability that is really increasing is to be a compliant falldown monkey.

So it is not about beating the stuffing out of people. I can do that and still train dumb.

It is about training with honest responses.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is pretty simple.

Ok. If I wanted to learn to throw a ball. I would start with a big target and put it close.

Then I would progressively use a smaller target that is further away.

And my ball throwing will increase.

I can bring up pretty much any random demo and show you that in this case karate is trained in the reverse.

So we get two white belts and one cant punch and one cant block and their Technique doesn't work and they probably punch each other in the head.

But after a while through drills and training they both learn to give the best feeds to create the best responses.

Or in the case of that ball the target is actually getting bigger and closer. So while it looks like they are increasing their ability. 9you are hitting the target more often)

The only ability that is really increasing is to be a compliant falldown monkey.

The Karate folks I've sparred weren't falldown monkeys, at all. You had to actually hit them or throw them for that to happen...outside demos.

 

[drop bear]

The Karate folks I've sparred weren't falldown monkeys, at all. You had to actually hit them or throw them for that to happen...outside demos.

it is a concept. Not a reflection on your karate friends.

 

[dvcochran]

Well...besides some of what I think are innacurate details, I'd say the premise is basically wrong.

First of all, self-defense is up to YOU, not the art. Most of what you need for self-defense you need to get outside of any martial art or sports or reality-based program. Having said that, almost any martial art teaches you attributes that will help you defend yourself...particularly movement, or what I call "the language of movement". All any martial system is, is the study of movement in a CQC situation... and learning that language can be done through Karate, or any viable system with a good instructor.

So, if you know what it is FOR, karate can be a great system to be in, just like any other...

PJMOD

I take exception especially with your summary. As a lifetime Martial Artists in 3 styles; 2 traditional, 1 combative, and being a former police officer, I have a hard time seeing where your viewpoint is coming from. Your article sounds more like an advertisement for a business. Very, very one side and narrow minded. Without exception the most important aspect for anyone to learn in depth is what you call the pre-conflict stage. That is the "way of life" most all traditional styles try to teach. I feel this much more dependent on the instructor rather than style or system. I worked with officers who made a conflict out of every call. Like you, they were prejudiced to a belief that the world was out to get them, or they were just an ego freak. Presence is contagious. I remember multiple times arresting guys that always put up a fight with other officers and having little to no trouble.
A reasonable person is going to quickly figure out if they are in a program that is ineffective for them. Otherwise they are the kind of person who doesn't know enough to care. It sounds like most of your MA experience was very, very superficial. Maybe you never got over your own bad experience. Not a reason to slam everyone else's. Any MA program worth its salt is going to have a healthy amount of "reality based situation" practice. Your comment about an aggressive mindset is the problem with much of this world. Sad article.