Karate without kata

Discussion in 'Karate' started by mani, Jul 13, 2003.

  1. kerling

    kerling Hidden haito style

    Here I kind of disagree with you!
    If you train karate as a traditionally for life and death type of matches jumping upp and down won't help you a bit.
    Gettin a tap on someone cheak is not going to make him go flat down.

    Traditional kumite if I may call it that. If more into the point of showing that your techinque was in there and would have worked. Not TKD style jumping.

    Not many clubs have traditional tournaments like this. So the diffrence you talk is modern and sport like not heavy damage killing like.

    So you should practice your kumite as kata like if you want it to be as strong and as effective as that.

    Regards Kerling
     
  2. Matt_Bernius

    Matt_Bernius a student and a teacher

    Actaully Kerling, I think we just said the same thing.

    I should note that when I use the phrase sparring, I tend to mean more traditional Kumite rather than modern point sparring. Unltimately I was simply questioning why some practioners of different arts practice their forms and movements one way and spar another. I tend to think, as Mike put it, this is causing you to train in two conflicting directions (or at least non-complimentary directions).

    The way you describe Kumite it's clear that you're talking about fihting the way you practice. And personally (and perhaps a bit snobbishly) I think that's they way things should be done.

    - Matt
     
  3. Mike Flanagan

    Mike Flanagan Valued Member

    I actually think that the techniques in the kata are on the whole incompatible with just about any sort of karate sparring I've seen. The main problem seems to be the non-tactile nature of sparring. To be anything like real violence then sparring should allow such supposedly non-karate tactics as grabbing and barging.

    I remember basically being disqualified the last time I took part in any proper karate sparring - I grabbed my opponents arm and punched him 3 or 4 times in the head and body (each time with control and appropriate restraint). At least 2 of the techniques found their mark but I did not score any points:-( Instead the match was stopped on a technicality (my slightly bleeding lip).

    The movements in the kata were originally designed for dealing with real violence. The movements in most karate sparring were designed for a sporting environment. Its as simple as that in my opinion.

    Mike
     
  4. Matt_Bernius

    Matt_Bernius a student and a teacher

    Mike,

    I think it all comes down to how a school spars. I can say that what you described (grabbing and punching) is totally within the bounds of how we spar at our school. It's my assumption (probably incorrect) that this type of sparring is similiar to traditional Kumite.

    I do agree that the staccato rythm of point sparring makes it difficult to access "traditional" techniques. I would also argue that that modern point sparring is inherental more of an artificial creation than any traditional kata (but that' just me getting "hoity toity").

    - Matt
     
  5. Tosh

    Tosh Renegade of Funk



    Hi Mike, i was playing Devil Advocate there!:D in step sparring you always see student trying to usethis block to block punches. I was using that example to illustrate a block out of context. P.s I teach downward strikes in step sparring in my TKD class but I get your point! :D


    I agree with you here to an extent. This really depends on your defination of "beginner" here. I mean as far as I am concerned it's only after black belt (in my syllabus style) that you actually start following these moves through to conclusion (wether that be a throw, control position.

    I know that this is not the case in a lot of schools and instructors are not realising what they are doing due to "Yes Sensie"ism. But i mean that does not mean the it has to stay that way. I mean the more people realise the problem surely the situation gets better?

    What do you think?
     
  6. Noodle

    Noodle New Member

    My understanding of the history of karate is that kata was introduced as a method to teach karate to groups of people. This became a stronger need around 1901 when karate was no longer only taught in secret and moved into the school system of Okinawa. This implies that at one point karate did not have kata. When? I do not know.

    The other side of this argument is that since karate evolved from chinese kung-fu, and since kung-fu has maintained forms as part of its training since inception, it would be hard to imagine karate not starting with at least some of these forms or variations.

    My personal feeling is that karate had a large influence taken from the hsing-i forms combined with some hard style. Karate could exist without kata, but then it would be taught in a different manner. I suspect it would prolong the time required to convey the essence of karate to the student. Most things evolve for a reason, so without any other consideration, I would be lead to suspect that kata may have been introduced (or exists) simply because it is an efficient (though perhaps not complete) method of teaching some principles.

    Followers of O'Sensei Hohan Soken and Taika Oyata Sensei (perhaps other?) might claim that much of Okinawan karate has degenerated into sport karate and that the true understanding of kata is lost on most students (and teachers).

    This type of discussion usually mentions Master Bruce Lee's opinions. To be fair I believe Master Lee was mainly focused on efficient and effective combat and was already a consummit martial artist. To be fair to most martial styles, most transcend combat. Many of the aspects, kata being one, is not only a method to convey martial techniques, but also a method to transcend the individual to a higher level of understanding (take this to mean what you will based on your religion/beliefs).

    To answer the question, there could be karate without kata, but it would be something different. It would look more similar to something like JKD, something combat oriented. I would not say that it would not be karate, because karate-jitsu would probably be the same, but I would probably agree that it would no longer be karate-do.

    Just my 3 cents (i'm a good tipper),
    noodle
     
  7. Matt_Bernius

    Matt_Bernius a student and a teacher

    Wowzers, lots of great points...

    Think there were existing forms/Kata prior to the mainstreaming of Karate. What I expect is that the initial Kata/Forms were closer to Chinese training sets and short forms. There is evidence that Karate went through a number of rapid changes when it "went above ground." My understanding was that steps were taken to make the movements look less "Chinese" and to alter beginning forms to make them "safer" to teach in schools. (There was an article on this in the Journal of the Asian Martial Arts either last year or early this year.)

    As you said it yourself, it's hard to believe that those forms weren't there due to the roots of the system.

    I also have to agree on Hsing-i's "quiet" role in the development of Karate. Since I began studying Hsing-i I've noticed a number of parallels.

    Also agree that Kata represents the "syllabus" for teaching Karate. In side the forms are:
    a. Movements and techniques
    b. Attitudes
    c. Theory
    So using the Kata a teacher could easily select a subset and dedicate an entire lesson to those concepts.

    I kinda cringe when Master Lee is brought into these discussions (though not inthis case). It's important when discussing him to keep in mind that his life was cut radically short. I think it's dangerous to use his name/words as a sole position for the removal of forms. To suppose that at the age of 32 his ideas and philosophies had evolved to their logical conclusion is a very risky assumption. He's a great source of ideas, but I wonder how much his veiws on things like forms/trainings sets would have altered is he was still alive today.

    I think all of this was worth more than 3 cents! Those are great ideas and points. Espeically the "karate-jitsu" vs. "karate-do"! All around great post noodle!

    - Matt
     
  8. Mike Flanagan

    Mike Flanagan Valued Member

    When I was kid doing Wado Ryu in the 70's you were allowed to grab the arm and punch, but you had to let go immediately, whether you'd scored or not.

    Most clubs I've seen since then don't allow any grabbing at all. Maybe its also my personal style of defending myself (I'm not going to say sparring) that causes me difficulty to stay within the rules. Having closed with the opponent I want to stay close to him and in physical contact with until he has been completely subdued. This for me means that a confrontation will be over in the first couple of seconds, through the succesful use of striking techniques or we will close and go to a combination of grappling and striking. This makes it very difficult for me to 'spar' in the traditional sense and stay within (or even anywhere near) the rules.

    Mike
     
  9. Mike Flanagan

    Mike Flanagan Valued Member

    I'm not sure what your point is here to be honest ??

    Mike
     
  10. Mike Flanagan

    Mike Flanagan Valued Member

    Hi Noodle

    Maybe there was a time when okinawan martial arts didn't have kata, but I'm sure it will be have been a lot earlier than 1901. There are plenty of examples of kata existing before then. For example, Funakoshi learnt the 3 Naihanchi kata during the 1870's/1880's.

    Mike
     
  11. Tosh

    Tosh Renegade of Funk

    Point I was making was that a lot of the reasons for doing things have been lost only to be replaced with "Because that's the way it's always been done".

    I know in TKD I've been to countless classes who's instructors couldn't give me any of the reasons (or even worse didn't understand the actual reasons) why certain training tolls are used.

    But then I rarely see any method of evaluating instructors on a regular basis like any other teaching/training/coaching practice does.

    At the end of the day a lot of "Instructors" are really just black belts of arts how are told to move on and open schools rather than being trained in the material they are actually teaching.
     
  12. Noodle

    Noodle New Member


    I'm not implying that kata started in 1901. I state that I don't know when it started or if it was just always there. What I DID mean to imply was that 1901 was a significant point in karate history that may have had a large impact on kata. This impact may be in the form of increased number of katas, or more likely modified versions of the original katas. There are plenty of examples of history that support the idea that not all kata was taught to the public. Even Funakoshi was refused a certain kata that he requested.

    Personally, I buy into the theory that kata was the natural interpretation of the chinese forms.
     
  13. Matt_Bernius

    Matt_Bernius a student and a teacher

    After a littl ebit of searching I came up with that article I started to cite earlier. It appeared in the Journal of the Asian Martial Arts, Volume 11, Number 4, 2002.

    It's entitiled:
    Hopkins, G. "The lost secrets of Okinawan Goju-ryu: What the kata shows"

    The author goes into great detail talking about the changes that occured to Karate at the turn of the centure and the long term effects that those changes have had. If you can track it down it's a great read and supports a number of Noodle's points.

    - Matt
     
  14. PlasmaShock

    PlasmaShock Valued Member

    A couple of words my friend. American Freestyle Karate. They do katas but it just looks like a dance. they have no focus on the key points and important factors of what katas should be like.
     
  15. elektro

    elektro Valued Member

    Exactly. And yeah I tend to find myself grabbing a lot too. I do a lot of Kata.

    Without Kata on a more simple level it would be hard to catalogue the different techniques.
     
  16. Moosey

    Moosey invariably, a moose Supporter

    I wish!!!!
     
  17. Pete Ticali

    Pete Ticali Valued Member

    Karate without Kata?

    walking without crawling?
    Armies without basic training?

    Can you tell me of a martial arts without stances, without strikes, without techniques? And, if you learn those stances,strikes,techniques, how do you incorporate them into situational movement?

    I believe there is a famous phrase that goes something like: If there were no god, man would hav a need to invent one.

    Call it what you like, but Kata is mandatory to good training. Those who disagree are probably questioning the timelessness of particular kata(s), not the need for kata itself. Anyone who has ever put two techniques together into a "combination", reinforces that Kata is mandatory.

    Has anyone ever been on a beach whan a Guy with huge arms & chest walks by with skinny legs?. Human nature makes people do what they do well, rather than do what they need. That is what Kata prevents. You must perfect the entire thing, not just the parts you think apply. After all, how can you (and I) assume we're competent enough to decide these issues. WE are simply the students (regardless of our rank). No martial artist is greater than the martial art itself.

    If you don't understand...it simply means you don't understand yet. Keep working, it will become clear when you are ready!

    just my .02

    Pete Ticali
     

Share This Page