"Kata" - an amateur's perspective

Kata isn't necessary for any of these goals.

 

... and you don't need to lift weights to get big muscles. Lifting weights does work though doesn't it?

 

What then, might I ask is Kata for?

I have specific (and often posted) ideas, but I'll hold off while I wait for folks to respond.

- Matt

 

Yes, but unlike kata it's actually the most effective way of reaching its intended goal.

 

Like I said, look at kata as one of a range of holistic training methods that help to produce a 'complete' martial artist.

Don't forget that just because a method for doing something is less effective (in the opinions of some), doesn't mean it's irrelevant. Kata is a method that suits a lot of people.

 

I think you just asked Timmy to justify Kata (LOL ) - he sees little point in it, and those that can see value have already posted - the most recent being jonmonk on the last page

 

I think that Timmy does force us to think about it though (which I guess is the point of having a debate). This is obviously a good thing and I really enjoy reading about other people's views.

 

I'm not looking for justification... simply clarification. If Timmy or anyone states "that's not Kata's function" then that implies that it has a set function (something I firmly believe is the case).

And so again I ask, getting away from the question of optimal/non-optimal... what is the function of forms?

- Matt

 

Sorry - I understand I ask the occasional pertinent question to understand their thinking, but they tend not to be answered.

One such was "How many moves from a kata must be performed in sequence to show a person is 'fighting via kata'" - never got an answer on that one.

 

You know, when I first read this post I was a bit confused but you know, the more I think about it, it's actually a really good question.

 

It's an important one for folks one both sides of the arguement. Especially for those using forms as a teaching tool.

My personal feeling (without getting into my specific view on forms... at least not quite yet) is like most things, misunderstanding and lack of communication about them has led us to the current state that we are in.

- Matt

 

This thread has moved on somewhat since I last wrote, so I'll play a bit of catch up - and I apologise if I don't reply to all comments made!

Hmm, I see your point. If you were a beginner I would teach you exactly what each technique is for in the kata. You wouldn't need to investigate it at all. However at more advanced levels, you should do some investigating of your own - its good for assisting in developing 'tactical' thinking skills.

That depends on your method of Oyo. Some instructors teach absolutely horrendous applications (Nakayama's Best Karate Series comes to mind). Many of the proper applications you already know or have seen. For instance in kusanku, there is a cover followed by takedown in defense against a heavy puncher. I'm quite confidant you'll see that combination pulled off successfully at any MMA event.

Also I'm not just pulling the application out of a hat. The technique comes straight out of the Bubishi.

To quote Kyoshi Patrick McCarthy: If it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and walks like a duck - it must be a duck!

My take on it: It's a solo exercise that helps the karateka remenber, maintain and polish skills/techniques hard won through partner work. It also has holistic non-combative benefits - it essentially helps us cope with the pressures of modern life -'Moving Zen'.

I agree there wholeheartedly. Thats why its so important for instructors to keep researching their uses - reverse engineering and pure historical research have proved very useful.

Movements can quite legitatly have multiple applications. For instance the opening arm movement from naihanchi can be used as a strike or a block and not lose effectiveness in either application. I don't see a problem with that. Other martial arts have this multiple use idea in their techniques. A good example are some boxers who jam there elbows as they cover - effectivly turning the movement into an elbow strike- when the ref protests they just claim to be covering - an old trick that one! There is no reason why I can't do the same.

Have an excellent Easter all!

 

Do you mind if I ask what style you train in? We are doing the same forms. I agree that there are multiple applications to any movements from a Kata. They are designed to deal with different self defense situations. I have worked the opening of Chinto Kata and with just the first movement come up with at least 8 different applications.

 

Correctly or incorrectly, I like to think of the kata itself as a template rather than simply a list of techniques. From the kata we derive / learn the Bunkai and Oyo and it is there that we can find the individual techniques, combinations etc of the fighting style. It also give us a reason to study Kihon because kata can give us a "top down" approach to variations, combinations etc whereas Kihon will provide a "bottom up" approach to the same learning by starting with individual techniques.

Of course I also think there's much, much more to be gained from studying this way but my opinions on this are plastered all over the previous pages already.

 

Right you are. Do individual schools take that application and train it in real time? I think that's my big concern. That we expect people to take a very big leap from theory to application in the heat of the moment. Instead of filling in the intermediate steps. If people routinely took sequences from the katas and put them to the drill to bridge that gap to application, I think other people would have far fewer issues with the practice.

I believe ya.

Clearly, Kyoshi McCarthy hasn't twigged to the ninja observing him cunningly disguised as quacking, swimming, walking ducks.

As I said earlier, I think that if everyone who teaches and trains kata were applying that level of consideration, others would probably have far fewer issues.

Thanks for reasoning it out with me.


Stuart

 

Article: Kata Training and Aikido

From koryu.com
Although it was written for Aikidoka, it apply pretty much to all Japanese (Karate, although having Japanese styles is from RyuKyu culture) arts.

 

I'd like to think this is true, but a number of us (from different backgrounds and arts) have said we train in this way and the reply keeps coming back "then forget about kata and just drill". You will have noticed that on one side of the argument we are inclusive (everything including kata has benefit) whereas in other quarters there is a more 'exclusive' tone (kata can be replaced by other things - so forget kata).

My take on Matt's question: What then, might I ask is Kata for?

1. A physical exercise
2. A learning tool to teach techniques in perfect conditions (nobody pulling you about or hitting you)
3. A textbook of individual techniques
4. An indication of good combinations of techniques
5. An exercise of the mind in memorisation
6. An exercise of the mind in visualisation
7. An environment to quickly demonstrate that ALL techniques have been learned
8. A method of passing on a complete art from one generation to the next
9. A method of practice that an individual can carry out almost anywhere
10. An adaptive tool that can have weapons added to maximise on existing learning
11. A proof that a move is 'of the art'. While drilling, my teacher will ask "Which form?"
12. A start point for the question "What if...."

That is off the top of my head, I should probably think a bit harder before responding to questions like that.

 

To be clear, I'm personally not taking that exclusive tone. Personally, I believe my training time is better spent without forms. But I'm not going to tell anyone else how to spend theirs unless asked.


Stuart

 

No argument there Stuart - that is exactly how you come across. You also seem to read deeper than just the words on your screen, so have a genuine feel for the thoughts we are all trying to put forward - whether you want to follow them or not.

 

I'm glad to read that mate. I appreciate that.

Cheers!


Stuart