Kihon usefulness?

Is a footballer practising kicks a football match?
No.
Is it useful to do in preparation for a football match?
Yes.

Is shooting at a target the same as fighting in battle?
No.
Is it useful in preparing for battle?
yes.

And so-on...

Basics are just that.
Not even a darn fool is going to get into a fight and step back into zenkutsu-dachi gedan-barai and shout ki-yaiiiii!, are they?
Basics are part of the training system, but are not the entire training system.
They are like learning words in a language; they serve a purpose, but it takes a bit more to be able to write a novel.
In fact, if you think about it, pretty much every skill has its basics to perform.

 

I would say line drills as described are more for the benefit of the teacher than the student.

A trained eye can catch things that should be improved when a student goes through line drills and isolated movements.

As for learning for the student, repetition in the air helps but only the most at the beginning stages, to progress it needs to be reinforced by actually hitting or trying to hit something and having someone trying to hit back.

Something to note: One of the Grandmasters above me was a rookie police officer more than forty years ago (if I got the timing right). Anyway he started in karate and one of the first times a criminal attacked him with a knife, he used Age Uke (rising block) to stop the knife attack and then proceeded to punch the perpetrator out. The rising block worked for him because he tells me he had done it so many times that it was instinctive for him. Yes, he did it thousands of times in training... but at the same time, some teacher had to make sure he was doing it right and not just repeating something done wrongly thousands of times.

 

Did I not say that repetitions in the air were beneficial mostly only at the beginning stages? After that it needs to be reinforced hitting or trying to hit something and with someone trying to hit you back.

On a related note, I've found a completely different value to "line drills" and that is to do them at slower speeds, sometimes with tension and sometimes with more flow. Of course this works best when allowed to move the feet too.

Full speed strikes in the air can't be all that good on the joints anyway.

Maybe this is related to the Tai Chi I've been working on but we also move up and down the floor in Muay Thai throwing knees and elbows and such at slower speeds, along with deep squats and other conditioning.

 

one thing i've found, is that striking a resisting target usually deforms technique, so if you don't remind someone constantly of the proper way to do X move then they start getting sloppy, and even if they try they won't really advance. in that sense i'd use line work to correct technique, then work with resistance(bagwork & co.) to see how my technique changes, and in which part of the movement, then concentrate on that part of the movement, then go back to bagwork, creating a sort of "feedback loop". that's just the way i do it, though. my ideology is basically: learn, practice, train with resistance, then practice what went wrong, train with resistance some more, repeat until i get it right, then start to adapt once i can do the correct movement. or something like that(i suck at explaining)

 

Now this is an interesting point. You see when you work against thin air you are not getting the resistance of a real hit. And this will affect every part of the action across the skeletal frame. The mechanics of kicking through someone in real life and kicking to tap them are very different at the crucial end stage, because to make significant impact you have to over-commit in a way that looks sloppy against thin air, because at a crucial point the body requires the stability created by the impact. I've had lots of problems drilling TKD and Karateka from other styles out of the vertical spine that is appropriate for non contact and long range work to the slanted spine that is appropriate for close range work in order to brace against the weight and force of someone moving into you while hitting them so that you don't unbalance.

Generally changes in technique due to impact are a good thing. Reversing those changes is poor practise. You are undoing the lessons your body is teaching you about appropriate posture for impact.This is why if you went to a karate dojo 100 years ago you would see far more time spent on impact training than on line work (in fact you probably wouldn't see any line work as Kata would be used).

 

It's interesting you say that, jwt. Our club is fairly 'traditional' - we do lots of line work and kata and the like, but we're also lucky that we get the kick shields out alot. And (funnily enough) you can really see the difference between the lower grades who kick the bag, especially when they're doing a kekomi or something similar, and almost bounce off the bag because their weight distribution is all wrong, and the higher grades (especially our ex goju contingent) who steam through the bag. What kicking the bag taught me was the idea of pushing through instead of snapping back. And really that's something you can only learn when there's something there to resist.

With upper body I've found it a bit different. Obviously with empis you pile in because it feels good . But lets take gyaku tsuki as an example: to punch the bag properly takes good form and technique, otherwise your shot does nothing, or you injure yourself. But if your back is aligned, your stance is strong and your technique is correct, you can make a real dent in the bag. Same goes with punching from kiba dachi.

 

Yet while punching is a mainstream activity in classical karate, in traditional karate it is a minority strike - look at the kata. Now the question is - what do you mean by aligned? Hit something static (ie not coming into you) with an upper body technique and a back that is aligned with the front shin and you wil be fine - hit something moving into you at speed with force behind it - you need a back aligned with the rear shin - like a boxer. Try pushing a car with a vertical back - or resisting a tackle with a vertical back. Close up against pressure the back needs to align with the rear shin - angled into the attack.

 

By aligned I mean low stance, straight back. However I must profess that I haven't tested this against an object moving towards me. Furthermore, in such a situation I doubt I would be in such a stance...

I'd be interested to know how you incorporate twisting hip rotation in to the techniques. I would have thought that aligning your back differently would change the angle of your hips and therefore the amount of rotation possible. Would you advocate pivoting on the back foot to increase range of motion in the hips? Or is it simply the case that changing the alignment of your spine in such a way doesn't affect the hips' range of motion?

 

i think with line work it could very much vary on style. for example shotokan in line work would go into a very low strong stance, whilst something like wado ryu not so much. (i too am proberbly thinking out loud as well)

 

Wow.... talk about missing the point...

(1) the punch or kick... "Is the ball" (just fyi... the opponent = the other team)

(2) Shooting targets with no bullets..... WHAT?

(3) I will NEVER strike a fellow Karate-ka as hard as I strike in Kata/Kihon applications. (and Yes, I do makiwara training, heavy-bag work... full BALLANCED training)

"Kata is Karate"
Yes... Kihon's are a form of Kata.
Application of kata is Kumite. That application takes many forms.

I loved "prowla's" analogy regarding language. Consider Kata the VOWELS (A,E,I,O,U & sometimes Y) Taking the vowels out of the alphabet is the same as taking Kata/kihon’s out of Karate.

 

agreed. what i mean is, taking what you learn from the resistance training and applying it to your kihon, more than the other way round. and i don't punch with a straight spine either. i always try to have core tension and tuck my chin a little when i'm doing kihon, which folds my spine that little bit that ensures than an incoming strike won't snap my torso in half. a goju ryu 9th dan once told us at a seminar, IIRC, that your torso alignment should be so that your chin is directly above your navel, and that's more or less what i try to do(much to the chagrin of the shotokan guys i train with )

 

No Kumite is not the application of Kata. It is turning pseudo Karate - linework combinations of Karate techniques taken out of context and range from Kata performed for health benefits (ie what kihon is for the majority of akrateka in some styles) - and turning it into pseudo fighting for matches.

Itosu (who seems to be the originator of modern linework) said that Karate is not for a one on one duel bet for fighting 'ruffians'/ ie street confrontations that you cannot talk your way out of. Funakoshi disliked Kumite because it was not Karate.
Kihon is not Kata. To a beginner they might appear similar, or to someone who does not understand Kata, but they are quite different.

Application of Kata is bunkai and oyo. This differs from kumite significantly in the type of techniques used and targets hit.

 

Hip twist is equal if not greater since the legs are bent. To twist the hip the knee simply drops more. However I rarely punch these days and focus on the more core techniques of uchi uke, ude uke, age uke, shuto uke and gedan barai.

 

Is it valid training for a boxer to do tippy-tappy on a speed ball?
It's certainly not training for body contact, but it makes sense in the context of an overall system.

And that's what karate is; it's a system for learning to fight (or not), just as sure as there is a system for learning a language.
And it starts from the very beginning, telling you how to walk, how to hold you hands, which way to move your legs; kind of like learning the letters of the alphabet.
You learn to combine them into single movements; like learning words.
You then string movements together in basics; like learning sentences.
You learn some kata; well know tales and rhymes that may hold a story and a lesson that may have been passed down through the ages (eg. the psalms, or a nursery rhyme like three blind mice which is a story about the black death).
You do limited sparring; like writing an essay.
And so-on; just like some writers get to become novelists.

 

Clearly... you are correct regarding Kata -vs- Kihon. My point was simply that on a high level they are both similar empty hand, non-contact fundimentals.

The original post was questioning thr revelency of Kihon's.

As for Kumite being "the" application of Kata... you are correct! I will re-phrase Kumite is "an" application of Kata (or at least it should be).

btw... "JWT" (well spoken)

 

Not a boxing coach, but I know a large number of well respected coaches in the fields of combatives, firearms etc who would say that if you don't intend to use it - don't drill it. There are better ways to work. I share their opinion.

There are systems for learning languages. And what most modern studies seem to be pointing towards is the best way to learn a language is like a baby does - in phrases and through exposure. Not by learning vocab, tenses and tables. That is a longer and less effective path - but, crucially, one that is easier to teach!

You are confusing learning to read with learning a language. Mixed metaphors my friend.
Rather consider learning to swim an appropriate analogy. Every so often it is good to break a stroke in two and learn with a float or by holding the side of a pool, to correct specific errors - but all the learning takes place in the water. You spend more time learning in the water than lying on a board practicing against thin air - and the feedback curve is better.
Linework is akin to practising mixed up bits of different strokes at random out of the pool rather than actually swimming in the pool. I'm referring here to linework as opposed to kihon as that is what the OP was originally talking about. Kihon - isolation of a technique can be good - but is best done in the water as it were.