Why? I don't think you can prove that it is. It's an invitation to compare KB and karate, with the premise that kata is the only thing that separates them. The OP himself has yet to actually "bash" kata. In fact the language of his posts indicates someone simply using the Socratic method. The only person on this thread making accusations of whether something is good or bad or not is... you. Why can't you do KB when you're not "fit enough"? Surely as long as you can move you can shadowbox or hit the pads.
Callsign-san I can understand your question and yes I agree that when you get to an age where your body can't do the things it used to you could Shadow box etc, but it doesn't give the mind anything to work with. Kata keeps the mind active. all the little details positioning of hands etc. and all the effects of Zanshin etc when you are a maturing Dan grade.:hat:
Karate without kata is not karate…. AND… Kick-boxing is just that… a boxing with a few kicks. I have personally competed in multiple arenas… boxing, kick-boxing, full contact- karate, Koshiki as well as point karate (I’m to old for the MMA would have been fun)… they all have different “rules” and by definition, governing rules makes them all a game, a sport, simply that! You are the sum total of everything you to the “game”, nothing more… nothing less. As Vince Lombardi put it “on any given day”… someone my have your number. Keep in mind it’s just a game. As for all the debate regarding Karate training without Kata… you can train in the “martial arts” without Kata. However, if you are not running Kata… you are NOT Karate-ka! You are not studying Karate! You might still be a good fighter… but you are not studying Karate. Look at it in literary terms… What happens to a good book when it becomes the idea behind a screenplay and ultimately makes it to film? Due to time constraints so much of the intricacy of the story is left on the cutting room floor. If you have never read the book (only seen the 90 minute film) you cannot compare the two. Those of us that have read the book (and continue to read the book) know the difference between a watered down screenplay and a literary work of art. In literary terms… you have to read to become a scholar. If you are the type that will “wait till the movie comes out”… that’s totally cool. Just DO NOT bash those of us that would rather read the book first. If you claim to study KARATE, first understand what that means! Know your art… read, study… know your kata and their origins… practice kihon’s… work your drills, your ground work… joint locks and pressure points. Don’t take shortcuts… become a well rounded Karate-ka.
Although I can understand where the premise of the thread comes from; in practice, good quality karate and good quality kickboxing look naff-all alike. The "bad kickboxing" look is what you get when inexperienced karateka spar and don't know how to control distance and timing sufficiently to throw decisive techniques and avoid just swatting at each other's heads. The "bad karate" look is what you get when inexperienced kickboxers spar and don't have the confidence to close the distance and throw combinations, so just swat at each other from arm's length. Good kickboxers and good karateka can control the distance between themselves and their opponents sufficiently to choose when to throw a decisive attack. The nature of that decisive attack they choose is likely to vary depending on the art in question.
I am lucky enough to have seen master Sken thai boxer (I know it's not kickboxing) and masters Enoida and Kanazawa in their prime. The arts looked different BUT they both looked deadly. Why is that people MUST look for the differences and attempt to decide which one is "best". Find what is best for you and get on with it. regards koyo
Why is that people MUST look for the differences and attempt to decide which one is "best". Find what is best for you and get on with it. I wasn't deciding'' which one is best''. I dont think KB is better than Karate and vica versa.
I don't think Koyo meant to single you out. He made a general statement about the nature of people. The reality is that differences tend to stand out, so those are what people focus on, when really, in martial arts, we should be looking at the things that are in common, because that is generally the stuff that really matters. Joe Lewis, I believe, set up two different black belt ranking systems. One rank was for fighting and the other was for the rest of stuff. You could not get a black belt in fighting without actually fighting (in the ring or equivalent). At least this is how I remember reading it... I could be off. The point is that if you break down the fighting aspect of karate, it comes down to the same stuff that works in kickboxing also. Fighting stuff, may look different, but at the heart of it, it uses the same principles and fighting spirit, etc. Stuff in common. You can go to your friend, and give him this answer from me... kickboxing and karate do share a lot in common. But to give your friend something to really think about, one the reason there are differences, however, is because of the differences between fighting barefisted and fighting with boxing gloves on. Karate can be a very precise art, open handed strikes for hard targets and knuckle/elbow strikes to softer targets... with gloves on and limitations of the rules on what techniques are allowed, a lot changes with it.
He knows the difference,he's had more fights than hot dinners. Anyhow it's only an opinion it doesn't matter that much I guess. Cheers.
Now lets change things a little bit. If you have a kung fu person fighting a karate person its probably going to look totally different (if the kung fu person was trained correctly). The karate person will look more like he's kickboxing while the kung fu stylist will be more than likely using all sorts of crazy hand strikes that immitate animals such as leopard paw strikes, tiger claw strikes, crane beaks, eagle claws, etc..... Also the kung fu stylist might take on the physical charactoristics of that particular animal, mimicking how it acts. For example if he/she practiced monkey style kung fu then they might move around like a monkey and be crouched low to the ground. Again this is assuming that the kung fu person is going to fight like he was trained. A lot of times this doesn't happen though and reflects back on the teacher. When sparring the instructor/teacher should have the students use what they learned in class but instead it ends up looking a lot like kickboxing instead of kung fu.
When sparring the instructor/teacher should have the students use what they learned in class but instead it ends up looking a lot like kickboxing instead of kung fu.[/QUOTE] All roads lead back to the undiluted pure art of Kickboxing.
All roads lead back to the undiluted pure art of Kickboxing.[/QUOTE] Kickboxing really isn't that pure if you think about it. Kung Fu on the other hand is, what could be more purer than going back to nature for survival techniques which is what the animal styles of kung fu does. Me too.
