Ah the old Kata debate. Well Kata is outstanding no matter what. I love the guys that come in and just want to spar. They say ‘but I am a fighter’. Ok well how did you learn to fight? You need to learn basics, stances, strikes, kicks, blocks, parry’s, how to move etc right? Humm I could have sworn Katas teach you that.
This gets back to something that has bugged me about MMA. Everyone says ‘martial arts’. It isn’t a martial art, in fact most MMA fighters abandon their true martial arts background to add wrestling, a couple choke moves and boxing. In reality it is just its own entity outside of what I feel is the pure martial arts realm. All the fighters train pretty much the same way, with the same moves, techniques, lifting, conditioning etc.
I have never felt an MMA fighter could truely take on a true martial artist in the street. Street = no rules. I know MMA says no rules, but you can’t poke a guys eye out, pull out a knife as he tries to put you in a hold and gut him, you can’t bite, crush his balls etc whereas with most martial arts (Tae kwon do aka korean aerobics being the exception).
So the real question is this…what are your goals? To defend yourself? Well most good martial arts can teach you that. To be an MMA fighter? Go find an MMA school and get to work.
But what do I know? I am only 41 years old and been formulating my opinion since 1980.
[quote]Toshiero wrote:
Ah the old Kata debate. Well Kata is outstanding no matter what. I love the guys that come in and just want to spar. They say ‘but I am a fighter’. Ok well how did you learn to fight? You need to learn basics, stances, strikes, kicks, blocks, parry’s, how to move etc right? Humm I could have sworn Katas teach you that.
This gets back to something that has bugged me about MMA. Everyone says ‘martial arts’. It isn’t a martial art, in fact most MMA fighters abandon their true martial arts background to add wrestling, a couple choke moves and boxing. In reality it is just its own entity outside of what I feel is the pure martial arts realm. All the fighters train pretty much the same way, with the same moves, techniques, lifting, conditioning etc.
I have never felt an MMA fighter could truely take on a true martial artist in the street. Street = no rules. I know MMA says no rules, but you can’t poke a guys eye out, pull out a knife as he tries to put you in a hold and gut him, you can’t bite, crush his balls etc whereas with most martial arts (Tae kwon do aka korean aerobics being the exception).
So the real question is this…what are your goals? To defend yourself? Well most good martial arts can teach you that. To be an MMA fighter? Go find an MMA school and get to work.
But what do I know? I am only 41 years old and been formulating my opinion since 1980.[/quote]
No kata involved, but evidently one pretty good MMA guy has respect for TMA:
[quote]Toshiero wrote:
Ah the old Kata debate. Well Kata is outstanding no matter what. I love the guys that come in and just want to spar. They say ‘but I am a fighter’. Ok well how did you learn to fight? You need to learn basics, stances, strikes, kicks, blocks, parry’s, how to move etc right? Humm I could have sworn Katas teach you that.
[/quote]
I honestly don’t think that just sparring is the best way to learn to fight, just like I honestly don’t believe that just playing actual games of basketball is the best way to get good at playing basketball. Sparring (or playing actual games of basketball) should basically be the test or actual application of the skills which you have honed and worked to perfect in training, not the actual training itself.
That said, I honestly also believe that katas don’t really do a great job of teaching you skills either. For example, practicing blocks, parries and other defenses against an imaginary opponent is very different from practicing them on an actual opponent.
When drilling/learning with a real opponent/partner you are actually visually seeing the attack coming, selecting the correct response to it, performing the response, and getting immediate feedback as to how effectively you performed the skill. In other words you are externally focused. When practicing a kata you are imagining an attack coming and are therefore internally focused, which is a bad habit to get into.
Well, technically MMA fighters are martial artists, as they learn combative/martial skills. And technically arts like wrestling and boxing are far older than every Japanese Martial art and older than the vast majority of Chinese martial arts as well. In fact, Shuai Jiao (China’s wrestling art) is one of the oldest (if not the oldest) Chinese martial art on record. There are pictures on ancient Egyptian structures depicting wrestling. Wrestling was also present in Ancient Greece as far back as the second century BC according to some sources.
Pugilism (boxing) is THE oldest martial art in recorded history. A Mesopotamian stone tablet believed to be 7,000 years old was found in Iraq depicting two fighters preparing for what is believed to be a prize fight. There are numerous other historical references from the 3rd Millenium BC and 2nd Millenium BC which depicting boxing.
So to suggest that these MMA guys aren’t learning “true martial arts” is a little misguided.
Those are all great points, and I agree that MMA is hardly “no rules” or actual combat. But, the truth is that most MMA fighters would probably annihilate most TMA practitioners in a real fight. Sure, in theory the “true martial artist” could do all the things that you mentioned, but because most TMA practitioners don’t actually put on the protective gear and actually ever train against skilled wrestlers/boxers/Thai boxers/JJ practitioners/etc… they likely aren’t going to be able to pull most of that stuff off when the crap hits the fan and they are in the heat of battle.
Now, if we are talking about someone who actually has grappling and striking skills and also trains things like biting, body handles (groin grabs), weapons and other “dirty/street” tactics, well then that’s a different story. Most TMA practitioners (that I’ve met anyway) don’t fall into that category though.
[quote]
So the real question is this…what are your goals? To defend yourself? Well most good martial arts can teach you that. To be an MMA fighter? Go find an MMA school and get to work.
But what do I know? I am only 41 years old and been formulating my opinion since 1980.[/quote]
I actually agree that if your goal is to defend yourself that you should seek out and train in a martial art specifically designed with real world effectiveness in self defense situations as it’s primary goal. That said, I also believe that MMA is a great drill, even for the self defense oriented martial artist, to develop certain skill sets (like striking and grappling). So, wouldn’t advise people to avoid training in an MMA school, even if being an MMA fighter wasn’t the primary goal. Just realize that there will be holes in your system which will need to be filled or modified.
If you have the choice between a good reality martial arts system or TMA (which actually isn’t “traditional” minded but just likes to identify itself with a TMA name) system which actually placed it’s emphasis on combative effectiveness and not things like honoring tradition, or never improving the system because “then it would no longer be (insert style) anymore” and an MMA school, then I’d probably pick the former (unless maybe the MMA school was under a very highly accomplished MMA fighter or coach). If you have the choice between a “traditional” minded martial arts system and an MMA school, then I’d honestly pick the MMA school (again, unless there was a huge disparity in the instructor’s skill/teaching ability).
I agree with everything Sentoguy has so eloquesntly written.
I would however go further when trying to understand the relationship beween KATA annd fighting.
It is not just the problem of performing techniques against an imaginary opponent which does not give you the necessary feedback to be able to replicate those techniques against a non cooperative opponent but the very techniques themselves are not those utilised in sparring.
I also go further than Sentoguy when he says that sparring is the test not the training.
In a professional sport with which I am familiar, soccer, apart from practising individual skills and tactics a lot of time is spent on playing versions of exactly what is likely to be encountered in reality . A full blown practice match is usually the culmination of this process. A lot of training in Judo, wrestling, boxing and BJJ is through sparring.
My point previously made is that in all pressured physical situations the challenge has been to try to replicate the conditions actually encountered to have a chance of performing competently in real life. Outside of those martial arts with contact where the same process takes place is this not exactly what the military, airline pilots etc do in their prepartion for extreme stress?
I have serious problems with the notion that you can prepare otherwise but can those who support KATA as prepartion for â??fightingâ??( undefined in the OP) explain how KATA as a tool appears to vlolate training principles and methods considered to be necessary where life is at risk?
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
If a beginner would ask me straight: “should I do Kata?”
I would have to tell him not to.
There are a lot of reasons and arguments both pro and contra, but the two that weigh most heavily are:
Most Katas are bs and most [TMA] teachers are full of it, too. So don’t.
There is usually only one, axact way to do a Kata, the sooner you realize that this is a copout, the better.
With shadowboxing, you learn to establish your rythm and your own style.
Most Kata are just a way of behaving like a programmed robot for half a minute or two.
Each of these arguments would completely suffice on it’s own.
That doesn’t mean Katas are generally useless.[/quote]
Something is only useless or a waste of time if you cannot benefit from it. What can have a huge impact on how much you benefit from kata, is what you are taught, how well you are taught, combined with how intelligent and creative you are in making it your own.
[/quote]
Most people won’t benefit from Kata, at all-that was my point.
The VAST majority learns shitty Kata from shitty teachers.
Then there’s also culture involved.
Asians, today, and for some part in the past, associate learning with repetition.
We don’t.
So again, if somebody would ask me directly, I couldn’t answer any way but: “Don’t.”
[quote]Sifu wrote:
The system you are learning can have a huge affect on what you are learning. Back at the turn of the last century when master Itosu was adapting karate so he could teach it to kids in the Okinawan school system as a part of gym class, he developed a new type of kata that was simplified so they could teach it to kids. Those kata were called Pinan and there are five of them. So a lot of Okinawan karate systems start new students with Pinan. When Itosu’s student Gichin Funakoshi introduced karate to Japan he taught Pinan as part of the Shotokan system. Later when some of Funahoshi’s Korean students developed a Korean karate system out of shotokan they made Pinan part of Tae Kwon Do only they call them Heian.
If you are in a system that starts new students on Pinans you have my pity. Because they are fairly simple and mindless. So I can understand why people who have studied karate get the idea that kata are useless. Because a lot of systems start students out on Pinan and them move on to other simplified kata as they move up through the ranks. So it takes a time to get to anything good in a lot of systems.
[/quote]
Sure there are good Kata that have a meaning when taught in the right context- I didn’t dispute that.
However, in over 95% of all cases, this context won’t apply and the teacher probably won’t give a damn himself.
Even asian grandmasters do their best to obfuscate this, intentionally or not.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
On the other hand the Okinawan system I study Isshinryu does not use simplified kata like Pinans. Isshinryu was originally intended to be an advanced system that was taught to black belts and was meant to take them to another level with their karate. That is why all 8 of the Isshinru kata taught from white belt to black belt are black belt level kata. So I have a different perspective because all the kata I learned have a variety of techniques in them.
So something to bear in mind in this discussion of kata is that even amongst people who have years of training there can be an extreme difference in levels of knowledge because not all systems are equal.
Which brings me to my next point. Within systems you can find a great degree of variance in the knowledge and skill levels of teachers. I got really lucky with my teachers, because they have a really good knowledge of the system and ability to teach. That is why watching youtube videos of Isshinryu katas for the most part is depressing. There are some awful kata videos out there performed by black belts who outrank me who are making mistakes I knew not to make when I was a yellow belt.
Another big factor in causing people to have a negative opinion of kata is ego. Which brings me to my two last points. Some people are just not particularly bright or creative so they are not able to come up with anything on their own from kata. Rather than admit to their own shortcomings which would hurt their pride they use the rationalization that kata is useless to explain their failing and giving up.
[/quote]
I believe I have to go deeper into the meaning of cultural context.
If you take today’s Tae Kwon Do, which is kind of a Karate ripoff (Sorry, but it’s true to a degree) you can see how it changed to an olympic sport that focuses on something I call “foot fencing”. Sure, there are terrible and spectacular knockouts sometimes. But it’s taken a completely different direction from it’s supposedly ancient, martial roots.
Today, this form of TWD it completely dominant. (There are a few hybrid forms like the TWD they teach to policemen, of course.)
The poomse/yongs are like a vermiform appendix. For the most part, utterly useless.
It has zero to do with the supposedly warlike roots, and nothing that will help your olympic career.
From an cultural POV, nothing is wrong in Asia.
Everything, however, is wrong for someone who thinks he will defend himself or generally fight better through doing poomse/yongs a couple of times, or even do them quite a bit while fighting in tournaments.
Other forms of TMA still have “Kata” which function as a repository of compressed knowledge, containing detail, but also principles of certain styles, that DO have an effect when practised hundreds of times. But you still need good teachers and an understanding to learn to apply and exercise these in sparring.
Without it, it’s just a waste of time.
And that’s something most TMA pupils do.
If someone came to me and asked me to tell him what I think of Kata in general, my answer would be different and much more elaborate.
Quote:Other forms of TMA still have “Kata” which function as a repository of compressed knowledge, containing detail, but also principles of certain styles, that DO have an effect when practised hundreds of times. But you still need good teachers and an understanding to learn to apply and exercise these in sparring.
What about the distinction between sparring,i.e. face to face squared off confrontation between 2 people who know they are in a fight, and self defense where one person is attacked by one or more opponents who aim to do him serious harm? I am a proponent of kata, but I do not think it helps with sparring. I do feel it has value in self defense however. My jujitsu teacher used to stress the difference between fighting/sparring and defending yourself. If you want to get better at sparring and fighting then you must fight, spar, and train for that or you are kidding yourself. If you are looking for self defense from street violence and armed attacks then kata has a place in that training but you do need a noncooperating opponent. If not then you are also kidding yourself.
Kata teaches movement and repetition is needed to hard wire some automatic responses. Military close quarter combat and many reality based self defense stress this. When the shit goes down, if we are lucky, we will do something and the logic behind kata is that we will do something we have practiced thousands of times and have visualized thousands of times and practiced thousands of times with an opponent in the dojo who is trying to test us as hard as we can take it.
And unfortunately Schwarzfahrer is correct in that most schools, especially karate schools, don’t teach kata correctly, making it merely a dance. And tournament kata has become a choreographed joke. Despite that, if you can find a TMA teacher who gets that then you got something good.
I’ll come out of lurking to add my perspective to the question of kata,
perhaps not entirely relevant to the OP’s question as he was asking about striking arts, and although I’ve had previous experience in a traditional striking art I don’t really have anything overly constructive to write about that experience.
So, I present to you, Nage No Kata;
Maybe not the best example of the kata, it just happened to be the first on youtube and is quite sufficient.
As you can see, in judo kata you practice/perform the kata with a partner.
And so the techniques themselves are much more literal than they seem to be in other arts kata. The actual use of these techniques in shiai (competition) or self defence may obviously not be so formal and polished, I think that’s a given.
There is also a large amount of formal “fluff” involved in the presentation of the kata. These traditional formal elements probably have very little to do with either shiai or self defence. I could go on about how the mental concentration, disipline etc. fostered through the practice of these traditional formal efforts is of vital importance to learning self defence or competitive judo but I’m afraid I wouldn’t be particularly convincing. I’m not saying it has no carry over, but then I would also say bouncing a tennis ball against a wall can also grow traits that help in “fighting”. It may be true but perhaps not particularly efficient.
These formal elements do indeed have benefits, though, if you believe that judo (or any art) is not just about sport, fighting, self defence etc., but is also a system of moral advancement/development. Or we could have tradition for traditions sake, not such a bad thing; think Christmas and Easter for non-Christians.
It’s also not a bad way of cataloging techniques in a formal way. I like that in judo, no matter where you go, techniques are all called the same thing, and, in the case of kata, are performed in the same way.
Or you could believe one of my sensei, who says that kata is poofy dancing bullshit. Although I do like the way our kata looks.
Regardless of whether it will make me a better fighter, or competitor, or if it does or doesn’t make me bullet proof, or if it improves my techniques towards these ends, I’ll practice kata to learn things about myself and to become a better judoka.
I think it’s a terrible shame that in many other traditional arts there is much more of a disconnect between the performance of the kata and the application and/or interpretation of techniques, movements etc., and less consensus on the value, importance or role of kata.
So, that is my rather inconclusive view on the matter, I hope something in there makes sense to somebody or that it offers a fresh perspective.
@ Anon
The formal benefits are largely for someone who’s happily asian.
the Judo Kata, even though it’s pretty realistic in so far that factual technique is delivered, is a fine example of the formal aspect of japanese budo.
Why care about it if you don’t live in Japan?
You’re making a fool out of yourself.
If you think Kata will make you a better man, you should, depending on your amount of spare time, chop some wood or travel the world.
Even the best Kata is still weak as a character builder. That cannot be an argument here.
And in the 21st, when students can play films on handheld devices, it’s not a good way to catalogue knowledge.
You have to make a better case for deeper meanings of Kata.
What about the distinction between sparring,i.e. face to face squared off confrontation between 2 people who know they are in a fight, and self defense where one person is attacked by one or more opponents who aim to do him serious harm? I am a proponent of kata, but I do not think it helps with sparring. I do feel it has value in self defense however. My jujitsu teacher used to stress the difference between fighting/sparring and defending yourself. If you want to get better at sparring and fighting then you must fight, spar, and train for that or you are kidding yourself. If you are looking for self defense from street violence and armed attacks then kata has a place in that training but you do need a noncooperating opponent. If not then you are also kidding yourself.
Kata teaches movement and repetition is needed to hard wire some automatic responses. Military close quarter combat and many reality based self defense stress this. When the shit goes down, if we are lucky, we will do something and the logic behind kata is that we will do something we have practiced thousands of times and have visualized thousands of times and practiced thousands of times with an opponent in the dojo who is trying to test us as hard as we can take it.
And unfortunately Schwarzfahrer is correct in that most schools, especially karate schools, don’t teach kata correctly, making it merely a dance. And tournament kata has become a choreographed joke. Despite that, if you can find a TMA teacher who gets that then you got something good.
[/quote]
I think you are confusing one thing:
[Self defence] drills aren’t Kata.
The videos that, for example, Sifu posted are.
I wouldn’t say a thing against practising appropriate drills dilligently,
Anon, I am afraid that I am not clear about what you are saying.
You say that KATA will not improve competitive Judo but then say that you will practise KATA to learn
things about yourself and become a better Judoka-whatever that means. Quite how you think it will do so and what things will be revealed are not made clear.
The significance of KATA in Judo is that it exists as a historical relic and as as a training tool in developing fighting ability it plays NO part whatsoever. Does it not seem strange that top Judo players would disregard such a valuable asset if it did what KATA adherents seem to believe it does. The fact is that it cannot survive contact with non resisting sparring reality.
I any case we know as Josann has admitted that KATA does not help with sparring- which I again remind everyone was the original point. Whether it is helpful in self defence is another subject although I await some comment on how transfer of ability to that scenario takes place.
Schwarzfahrer- my post was written before I saw your previous two posts.
Perhaps I would not have been so tough on Anon but I fully agree with the sentiment.
I also agree with the confusion that you have highlighted: are we talking about KATA as a tool for sparring or are we talking about what best prepares for a real encounter.
I think you severely mis-judged the tone and intention of my post, I certainly don’t appreciate being told I’m making a fool out of myself.
I notice that you are from Germany, perhaps English is not your first language and this will explain the mis-interpretation.
You offer no justification for your attacks on my post, however you present them as facts.
Where did I say anything about kata making me a better man?
I did say, “These formal elements do indeed have benefits, though, if you believe that judo (or any art) is not just about sport, fighting, self defence etc., but is also a system of moral advancement/development.”
I said “have benefits”, I didn’t mention that this was in any way superior to any other way of building character or making myself a better man. I was also referring to judo in a general sense, as far as moral development goes, and kata is only a very small part of judo. I’d say I’ve probably spent less than 5% of my practice time with kata, and it has probably had a proportional effect on my character.
I also said, “I’ll practice kata to learn things about myself and to become a better judoka.”
It is indisputable that I will learn things about myself, as learning the nage no kata takes a lot of perseverance, team work, patience, concentration etc. Whether the actual kata itself means anything or has any practical use is irrelevant in this regard, if you want to have that kind of existentialist argument then I think there are more appropriate boards/web sites.
As far as becoming a better judoka, well, if you practice judo you practice kata. It’s as simple as that. Being a judoka certainly encompasses more than just randoori/shiai or bar fights.
You said “…chop some wood or travel the world. Even the best Kata is still weak as a character builder. That cannot be an argument here.”
Well, I’m not really very interested in chopping wood, although I do many other things to build my character. I never suggested that kata was the most efficient way to do so, but infact alluded to the fact that it’s rather a by-product of practice. If you disagree with that, that is your prerogative.
“And in the 21st, when students can play films on handheld devices, it’s not a good way to catalogue knowledge.”
And what films exactly will they be watching? Perhaps a film where the sensei show a wide range of techniques, performed slowly and technically correctly, both left and right? In an order that others can replicate so as to be able to compare the execution of these techniques? As a tool to teach a set of techniques the kata are invaluable. Patterns and repetition are proven ways of learning and remembering something. Look at the karateka, they remember the movements even if they don’t remember why they’re doing them.
I believe I covered the first question in my previous post.
In regards to your second question, I would like to know your source on the claim that “it plays no part whatsoever”, here in the Judo Federation of Australia you MUST perform the kata in order to get your dan grade, I am quite sure it is the same in many other federations. Therefore it is impossible to say whether it plays NO part in building technique. Again, I never claimed that kata is the most efficient way to build “fighting ability”, as you put it. I’m not claiming that now, either, just wondering who you personally know that is a “top Judo player” who does not or has not practiced kata. I actually do believe it’s quite possible, but I also believe kata has some value, and it would be a shame to dismiss it completely and lose it.
I’m not sure who the “kata adherents” you refer to are. They sound like a cult that I don’t want to meet. I’ve certainly never met a judoka who claimed any magical effects from kata, and I can’t and won’t speak for any other arts, clubs etc.
Where is the proof of the “fact” that it “cannot survive contact with non [sic] resisting sparring reality?” Every day in randoori and also in shiai we perform those techniques against resisting opponents. I quite clearly stated that the techniques would of course not be as formal or polished, [EDIT FOR EXAGGERATION, apologies] in many sports the practice and application is quite different. In judo, at least, there is not such a wide gap to bridge. There are degrees in the free-ness, or formality, of practicing our techniques; formal demonstration, dynamic demonstration, demonstration with resistance, formal drills, dynamic drills, drills with resistance, free practice, competition. Each have their place and some may be more effective or efficient that others but they still co-exist, they are all a part of judo.
EDITED; from “any technique in any sport the” to “in many sport the”.
You really must be living in some Judo bubble in the outback to post what you have. It is entirely clear that you have no experience of training Judo in any of the major Japanese universities or with national team players.
Apart from that experience, we have had in the UK world and Olympic champions from Neil Adams to Yasuhiro Yamashita and other Japanese greats incluing Katsuhiko Kashiwazaki and Kosei Inoue. Guess what- I have never seen any of them teach or practise KATA.
I have not seen them train but I would be hard presed to believe that the Russianss and former Soviet bloc nations train using KATA. And no, it is not a requirement for beccming a black belt.
The proof that KATA cannot survive contact with reality is obvious by the very fact that it is not employed
as a training method to produce national or international class players. If it had value it would not be discarded. The fact that KATA is largely the preserve of older non competitive Judoka testfies to that fact.
It is totally untrue that practice and application of technique within ANY sport are different but you
are muddying the argument by talking about degrees of formality and freedom in the expression of techniques. We are talking about KATA. What KATA is in Judo is clearly defined and is shown in the video you poted. That form of practice does not have any part to play in developing fighting ability.
[quote]peterm533 wrote:
I agree with everything Sentoguy has so eloquesntly written.
I would however go further when trying to understand the relationship beween KATA annd fighting.
It is not just the problem of performing techniques against an imaginary opponent which does not give you the necessary feedback to be able to replicate those techniques against a non cooperative opponent but the very techniques themselves are not those utilised in sparring.
I also go further than Sentoguy when he says that sparring is the test not the training.
In a professional sport with which I am familiar, soccer, apart from practising individual skills and tactics a lot of time is spent on playing versions of exactly what is likely to be encountered in reality . A full blown practice match is usually the culmination of this process. A lot of training in Judo, wrestling, boxing and BJJ is through sparring.
[/quote]
Well, first I didn’t say that you should never spar, or that some portion of your training shouldn’t be sparring. But I’ll stand by my statement that sparring is where you test the skills/attributes that you’ve developed through technique practice, drilling of techniques (which resembles isolated sparring, and makes up the majority of skill practice in most good boxing, wrestling, and other “live” combat sport training) against varying levels of resistance, and bag/pad/dummy work and not where you seek to develop them.
[quote]Josann wrote:
Quote:Other forms of TMA still have “Kata” which function as a repository of compressed knowledge, containing detail, but also principles of certain styles, that DO have an effect when practised hundreds of times. But you still need good teachers and an understanding to learn to apply and exercise these in sparring.
What about the distinction between sparring,i.e. face to face squared off confrontation between 2 people who know they are in a fight, and self defense where one person is attacked by one or more opponents who aim to do him serious harm? I am a proponent of kata, but I do not think it helps with sparring. I do feel it has value in self defense however. My jujitsu teacher used to stress the difference between fighting/sparring and defending yourself. If you want to get better at sparring and fighting then you must fight, spar, and train for that or you are kidding yourself. If you are looking for self defense from street violence and armed attacks then kata has a place in that training but you do need a noncooperating opponent. If not then you are also kidding yourself.
[/quote]
There is indeed a difference between real self defense and sparring, but I still don’t think that kata is a very good method of teaching someone how to effectively defend themselves. Now, if performing kata simply meant “shadow fighting” or practicing fighting without the need for a partner, then I think it would have more relevance. It would still allow you to practice techniques which would therefore help to build skill through repetition. But even then I think there are far superior training methods in most cases.
But, most kata practice is very rigid in nature, generally involves the movements working every time (and therefore doesn’t help to develop adaptability or “back-up plans”), and is often presented as unrealistic defenses against unrealistic attacks (Jim Carey skit anyone?) which the student will probably only ever encounter while practicing their kata in their dojo. They also tend to teach bad habits like chambering the fists by the hips, holding the chin upright (making one very susceptible to being knocked out), always assuming that your strikes/defenses will have the desired effect, etc…
Kata is not necessary to developing automatic responses though, nor is it the only method or repeatedly practicing a technique. Even just hitting bags or pads would be a better option in many cases because at least the bag/pad will give you some actual concrete feedback as to how squarely you hit it, whether you were in a strong position to generate force from (your stance if you will), how much force you actually generated (by how much you displace the bag), how your timing was in terms of kinetic linkage, etc…
Hitting a bag or pad 100 times will teach you more about hitting than practicing 1,000 air punches. Just like getting into a pool and practicing the breath stroke will teach you exponentially more about the breath stroke than practicing it on dry land/in the air.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Another teacher my teachers studied with who taught a lot of really good joint locking and other techniques was Arnis Grandmaster Remy Presas. These next videos will show some of the levels that you can take Chin Na to beyond simple empty hand and also give some idea of where you can go with Arnis. Something to notice in these videos and the previous Jwing Ming videos is how they use stances and movement between stances to enhance their techniques or even make them work. Stance work is a very important yet under appreciated aspect of kata that you aren’t going to get just bouncing around on your ties shadow boxing or practicing footwork.
[/quote]
Shihan Lysak trained under Master Presas in Modern Arnis, and I’ve learned and practiced many of the stick disarms that he showcased in those videos. There is also some pretty cool stick stuff found in Ninjutsu. But you know what? Most of those disarms are not going to work in real time. Interesting that you posted a Dog Brother’s video, as I recall one of them saying that in all the years they’d been stick fighting, the only successful disarm that he had ever seen was when someone hit their opponent on the hand/fingers with their stick.
[quote]Josann wrote:
Quote:Other forms of TMA still have “Kata” which function as a repository of compressed knowledge, containing detail, but also principles of certain styles, that DO have an effect when practised hundreds of times. But you still need good teachers and an understanding to learn to apply and exercise these in sparring.
What about the distinction between sparring,i.e. face to face squared off confrontation between 2 people who know they are in a fight, and self defense where one person is attacked by one or more opponents who aim to do him serious harm? I am a proponent of kata, but I do not think it helps with sparring. I do feel it has value in self defense however. My jujitsu teacher used to stress the difference between fighting/sparring and defending yourself. If you want to get better at sparring and fighting then you must fight, spar, and train for that or you are kidding yourself. If you are looking for self defense from street violence and armed attacks then kata has a place in that training but you do need a noncooperating opponent. If not then you are also kidding yourself.
[/quote]
There is indeed a difference between real self defense and sparring, but I still don’t think that kata is a very good method of teaching someone how to effectively defend themselves. Now, if performing kata simply meant “shadow fighting” or practicing fighting without the need for a partner, then I think it would have more relevance. It would still allow you to practice techniques which would therefore help to build skill through repetition. But even then I think there are far superior training methods in most cases.
But, most kata practice is very rigid in nature, generally involves the movements working every time (and therefore doesn’t help to develop adaptability or “back-up plans”), and is often presented as unrealistic defenses against unrealistic attacks (Jim Carey skit anyone?) which the student will probably only ever encounter while practicing their kata in their dojo. They also tend to teach bad habits like chambering the fists by the hips, holding the chin upright (making one very susceptible to being knocked out), always assuming that your strikes/defenses will have the desired effect, etc…
Kata is not necessary to developing automatic responses though, nor is it the only method or repeatedly practicing a technique. Even just hitting bags or pads would be a better option in many cases because at least the bag/pad will give you some actual concrete feedback as to how squarely you hit it, whether you were in a strong position to generate force from (your stance if you will), how much force you actually generated (by how much you displace the bag), how your timing was in terms of kinetic linkage, etc…
Hitting a bag or pad 100 times will teach you more about hitting than practicing 1,000 air punches. Just like getting into a pool and practicing the breath stroke will teach you exponentially more about the breath stroke than practicing it on dry land/in the air.[/quote]
I probably should have stressed the importance of bunkai in the study of kata. I disagree with some of what Sentoguy has said. Bunkai with noncooperating partners is where you find what you can transition to next, where to go to grappling, locks, knees or whatever.
Not sure of what style you are thinking of, probably shotokan, when you talk about chambering. In uechi ryu, the style I have done for 20 years, we have no moves in any of the kata or bunkai where we chamber the fist. I agree that that is stupid. Most of the moves in uechi bunkai are open handed strikes to targets where a hard punch is great to hve, but a throat, eye, or groin strike doesn’t require Dempsey like power. Obviously Sento you are correct about hitting things. We recently have added a BOB dummy to our dojo and you are indeed right about striking things and power. Many of our senior students shy away from hitting it, possibly due to embarrassment that it makes little sound when they hit it. Some of these same seniors don’t like to do bunkai. To each his own I guess.
For the most part the anti kata crowd is right in that kata and bunkai is misunderstood and incorrectly practicedby the majority. I agree with Sifu that it can be very useful if practiced dillegently and as part of a well rounded regimen. Combining it with locks, sweeps, and throws,makes it relevant.
No comments on the Anderson Silva-Steven Seagal video? What are your thoughts on it? To be honest I was surprised that Silva was so impressed with Seagal’s instruction. Tried aikido a while back as cross training. Talk about a noneffective style.
Would posters be willing to mention what styles they have trained? That would at least give an idea of where we are coming from. I have done uechi ryu 20 years, and have a couple of years cross training in small circle jujitsu as well as some sparring and grappling with my son who is 21 and has trained in muy thai and BJJ. And yeah he can kick my ass!
[quote]Josann wrote:
I probably should have stressed the importance of bunkai in the study of kata. I disagree with some of what Sentoguy has said. Bunkai with noncooperating partners is where you find what you can transition to next, where to go to grappling, locks, knees or whatever.
[/quote]
Bunkai is pretty much like “drilling” in other arts like boxing, wrestling, judo, etc… and I’d agree that drilling techniques against a noncooperating opponent (different levels of resistance are beneficial for different purposes) is a good practice and important. I still don’t think that you need the kata portion of practice though. I know quite a few very skilled martial artists (many who are primarily interested in reality self defense) who do not practice kata, and do not advocate that their students practice it either.
Actually I wasn’t thinking about any particular style of Karate. I’ve seen quite a few Karate katas from several styles which involve chambering their rear hand (Shorin Ryu, Isshin Ryu, Shotokan come to mind). Uechi Ryu is better about that from what I’ve seen, but it still doesn’t teach a good rear guard hand position for actual combat.
Well I’m not saying that someone couldn’t incorporate it into a well rounded regimen and be successful. All I’m saying is that it’s not necessary to incorporate it into a well rounded regimen.
[quote]
No comments on the Anderson Silva-Steven Seagal video? What are your thoughts on it? To be honest I was surprised that Silva was so impressed with Seagal’s instruction. Tried aikido a while back as cross training. Talk about a noneffective style.[/quote]
Well, Anderson Silva already has a very high degree of skill and effectiveness when it comes to combative skills. If he wants to continue to learn new and different things and cross train in different arts like Aikido, then good for him. I’m all for people keeping an open mind and not being afraid to experiment with different philosophies/systems to try to expand their knowledge base.
I doubt that after training with Seagal he found much that he truly felt would be effective, but I’ll bet he found a few little tweaks, or principles, or set-ups the he’ll take from his Aikido exposure and incorporate into his training. That’s pretty much how all of the good systems of martial arts came along; the founder trained in some other system, took from it what they felt was effective/worked for them, modified it and/or added material from another source, and eventually called it a different name. That’s also one of the reasons why I prefer non “traditional” martial arts systems, as there is generally much more freedom to modify, improve, or change things in order to make the system as effective as possible. In other words, they’re usually progressive, while many TMA’s are not.
