Steve Morris says all forms of Karate are useless

Discussion in 'Karate' started by ronki23, Mar 7, 2018.

  1. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool the merc with the mouth MAP 2017 Moi Award

    Again it's just a ruleset, and a very wide ruleset at that, if your capable of being effective in "real life" then you should certainly be effective in MMA.
  2. Pretty In Pink

    Pretty In Pink Moved on MAP 2017 Gold Award

    I suppose it depends on your definition of "effectiveness in combat". For me I always mean it to mean a 1 vs 1 no rules scenario. For others it might mean a weapons system only etc etc.

    Again though, it's a rule set and not a style. If you can whoop ass then you should be able to do it in the context of MMA. If you can't defend against wrestlers or jujuitsu players then clearly you are lacking in something. The rule set is minimal to ensure nobody is permanently disfigured really.
  3. Guthrie

    Guthrie Member

    As the rules in sport, should be. But, MMA doesn't determine absolute abilities.

    I believe that the "no ground game in karate" is another myth. It is something that was and still is practiced in a few systems of karate.
    It being in MMA combined with other modes of combat, isn't really anything new. It wasn't when it first began and it isn't today.
    I do see where you are coming from...but I disagree that MMA, is the ultimate place to test your skills, maybe the safest, but not the ultimate.

    If that is where people feel comfortable doing that test, fine. Is it the closest thing, no.

    If we are talking about testing skill, the bikers pit, is probably the best place for that. Of course that is not a sanctioned event.
  4. Guthrie

    Guthrie Member

    You should be yes. But, you would also be effective in any other sport format, not just UFC.

    A question, can anyone enter local matches for MMA or is it exclusive to just, practitioners of MMA?

    Also, am I to understand that MMA, is simply a training method and not a style?If this is the case, my arguments might have been different.

    Mixing different modes of combat is inherent in the martial arts and always has been.
  5. Pretty In Pink

    Pretty In Pink Moved on MAP 2017 Gold Award

    Are you insinuating that fighting a fat/steroid out of shape biker is somehow harder than fighting a prime athlete with years of experience in actually learning to fight? Or that fighting a massive group of bikers is harder?

    Also, anyone can enter an MMA fight. It's just a rule set. Hasn't really changed in that regard since the first fighters in the UFC. Nowadays though everyone tends to be "well rounded" and able to fight at every range competitively.

    Also lol @any ground karate being remotely competitive against any other actual grappling style. Knowing a few holds does not constitute having knowledge of grappling.
    David Harrison, axelb and Mitlov like this.
  6. Guthrie

    Guthrie Member

    It's not designed for competition, so no. But, capable for the few seconds needed on the ground to escape, yes.

    If I was to grapple competitively, American Wrestling will suffice, as would, Catch Wrestling, BJJ, JJ, etc...

    Me myself, I haven't competed in Wrestling since high school, I do not claim any expertise, but what I have learned through grappling from this system and the Wrestling days, I am knowledgeable enough to defend myself in the moment.

    But, Karate (Kwon Bup) does incorporate stand up grappling, takedowns and ground work.

    As do a few other systems in Karate and some of those systems have, for longer than most of us have been alive.

    But no, in competition I would say that it compares.

    And, that is the personal knowledge I speak of, I have wrestled and understand your side considering grappling..

    But I haven't trained in MMA, I asked for videos recommendations, and am looking..if it's a method training, it's worth a look.
  7. Mitlov

    Mitlov Shiny

    "Proficient" is a malleable term. What I meant was given, say, one year of training with an equal amount of training time per week, and something like boxing or wrestling is going to turn out a tougher scrapper than karate. Karate has a longer learning curve, and the more you focus on forms, the longer that learning curve gets.

    Discussions of what is or is not “real karate” or “actual karate” are the biggest No True Scotsman fallacies ever. If you think that Superfoot Wallace, Benny Urquidez, Chuck Norris, and Mikio Yahara do fake martial arts, well, I’m fine with doing “fake” martial arts. Judge all you want, I don’t care.

    Huh? Kyokushin and its offshoots don’t, but the dominant karate rule set (WKF) does, as do most other point sparring rule sets.
    Grond and axelb like this.
  8. Mitlov

    Mitlov Shiny

    If you are chasing the "ultimate place to test your skills," would you agree that MMA rules are closer to this "biker pit" you describe than researching the bunkai of kata?
    David Harrison, Grond and axelb like this.
  9. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    Depends what you think good "bunkai" is IMHO.
    Take a look at a lot of the very high grade JKA guys like Kanazawa. He has bunkai for some of the shotokan kata (look on Youtube) but it's all pretty much the 3k flavoured, 4 guys at the 4 points of the compass doing oi zuki from 5 foot away stuff (as far as I can see).

    This is also the type of bunkai you see in competitions too.

    It's not realistic bunkai, it doesn't represent how real violence plays out and doesn't "work" outside of very scripted demos. It's post hoc, "modern" bunkai created when what the kata were for wasn't properly passed on.

    So does Kanazawa (a 10th dan remember) "know" bunkai for his kata or not?

    Personally I would say that he doesn't (much like Gen. Choi didn't know that stuff when formulating TKD either). I would say that any fighting skill he possesses is despite him doing kata and not because of it. His fighting skill comes from the sparring side, the tough training, going through the mill of the JKA instructor system.

    So there are kata applications out there but up until about 20 years ago (a very rough time frame) they were, by and large, fanciful nonsense IMHO.

    How the techniques in kata are intended to be used was not faithfully passed on from the time of the people that created most of the kata and it's only recently (in martial arts terms) that a more realistic and effective take on kata has been rediscovered. But even then we can never fully know if what we do today is "right" or not.
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019
    Mitlov and Grond like this.
  10. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    But if you go even further back than the 80's (in the kata for example) this "stance" isn't used or recorded.
    In effect that stance was stolen from boxing when kickboxing/fullcontact was created (when karateka realised the hands down ippon kumite, guard, stance and footwork didn't work that well in a full contact ring sport) by combining karate kicks and boxing hands. It's just been in karate long enough that it seems like it was there from the start. Which is no bad thing as it is a useful stance and worth having.

    The reason that stance is not used in kata is because the kata aren't designed for sport or ring fighting. They are for civilian self protection which is very aggressive and close range and where there isn't generally things like back and forth footwork, feints, fakes, set ups, subtle combinations, give and take, etc*
    In that type of environment your hands are better employed working together controlling limbs, covering, flinching, clearing, indexing targets, unbalancing, gripping, ripping, disrupting, etc.
    Being pro-actively used rather than in a static "guard".
    And that's what is recorded in the kata.

    *Note that does not mean I think sport martial arts like MMA/Thai/Boxing etc can't be used to defend yourself if needed. :)
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2019
    Grond likes this.
  11. Mitch

    Mitch Lord Mitch of MAP Admin

    Ooh! Ask me! Ask me!

    They rock :D
  12. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    Yes and no, in my opinion. Modern UFC doesn't resemble the first UFCs for sure, but I don't think UFC has changed that much aside from the early years. Some rule changes and a few sea change events over the hundreds of UFCs but for the most part, what's changed about MMA is the unique dynamics brought by individual fighters. Not so much the arts themselves, because those have been around for centuries in some cases. People have added their individual treatises and contributions to the arts outside of competition, but at the end of the day, competition is still where all ideas are tested, including "What would work in a street fight". At the moment, UFC/MMA is the pinnacle of all martial arts, bar none, because that's where the fighters go. That's their weapon of choice, so to speak.

    But I feel most of this is hindsight and not a 20th century thing or anything novel. Fighting, with or without rules, and effectively, is prehistoric. MMA is not a new invention, it was the rediscovery of real martial competition, a gathering of like minded people that produced something we already knew: boxing and grappling, trained effectively and especially together, wins fights. Whether that means kicking someone's butt, running away, or both. We have always known boxing works in a fight, and I'm sure karate can work too. I know what doesn't work: not sparring and being out of shape.

    Combat sports have always been about individual personalities. I've always felt this is what is parodied as Professional Wrestling, the idea that fighting sports stay interesting as long as new players come forward, not so much their underlying skillsets, which are usually pretty common. I've quoted Virgil about martial arts before, and the Aeneid sums up the spirit of MMA or karate or number of other sports for sure. "“Now whoever has courage and a strong and collected spirit in his breast, let him come forward, lace on the gloves and put up his hands.”"
  13. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    How people talk about MMA these days is through changes in the "meta-games" of MMA rather than wholesale massive changes or shifts. Small stylistic changes or nuances often driven by the success of an individual which then, in turn, drives further changes in the meta.
    One such example would be Khabib's success with wrestling "rides" and control and the way he uses ground and pound.
    His success hasn't completely subverted the idea of the BJJ positional hierarchy but added additional concerns. It doesn't change the basic criteria of needing a stand up, clinch and ground game.

    More than likely his "meta" will now drive people to...

    A - Adopt what he does for themselves. Less strict adherence to mount/side control/taking the back/etc and more focus on maintaining control during scrambles and "riding" the person.

    B - Avoiding the clinch and takedowns by more awareness of octagon position and footwork rather than sprawling or counter grappling once the takedown is in progress.

    And so it goes on.
    axelb, Grond and Pretty In Pink like this.
  14. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    Just wanted to quote this as it's very good.
    It's also very in line with what Iain Abernethy says about why he does karate (talking about him again!).

    It suits him. It's something he can tell he will be able to do into old age (he doesn't do the athletic kata versions or compete in kumite), he draws useful self protection skills from it, it suits a wide range of students, it's applicable in modern times but is also rooted in the past, it provides a scalable training matrix without the need for repeated head trauma (something becoming increasingly a concern), it includes solo training drils and partner work, etc etc.

    I used to be a big MMA fan (much less so now) but it ain't the only game in town and there are useful things in other areas too.
    Mitch and Grond like this.
  15. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

    Good points. Still, Khabib is not doing anything particularly revolutionary, just reminding people how diverse fighting skills can be displayed with great optics. You don't need any fancy 20th century Brazilian jujitsu, some old school Russian bear wrestling works just fine :)

    Very similar to how Machida did this for karate. It worked and would work almost anywhere. I don't like how some people tend to claim that only a handful of martial arts work in MMA. I think there are many, including karate. Pankration is something most people have probably not heard of unless they follow the fighting scene, but it's a LOT older than karate and still very effective and applicable in combat sports. At the end of the day we're just bloody apes trying to quantify our approaches to things that are instinctual when they become necessary, like in a no escape self defense situation.

    Karate is in the mind and heart, not the waist (Miyagi-Do). To me this has always been a metaphor for honor and courage. Few living people have exemplified that ideal better for the entire realm of karate than Lyoto Machida, for sure. Khabib, wrestling, judo, sambo, and so on.
  16. Grond

    Grond Valued Member

  17. Pretty In Pink

    Pretty In Pink Moved on MAP 2017 Gold Award

    Okay, if you knew you were going to fight another person and there was very few rules, what would you do? Would you spend hours on katakana and very specific drills, or would you fight as close to the rule set as possible and eliminate your mistakes?

    Don't think if MMA as a solid style. Think of it as the scientific method applied to fighting. We have these specific parameters to follow:

    1 vs 1
    Minimal rule set
    Up to fifteen minutes of fighting

    It does not cover all aspects of violence. It covers one specific facet of it which is the physical part. It does not cover weapons or any pre-emptive things. It covers all 1 vs 1 fighting with no weapons. I'm saying in this specific parameter, MMA fighters will beat any other person on the planet who does not follow that methodology of fighting. Other famous martial artists would fail under those conditions because they do not train like that. They think they will win in 3-5 seconds with their unstoppable block-punch combo and a swift kick to the groin. They neglect utterly timing and distance which is the real "alive" part of martial arts. Black belts from all styles have tried to prove themselves and they always fall short because the truth is that MMA is closer to the scientific method and practical application of fighting than there's is.
  18. Guthrie

    Guthrie Member

    This is difficult for me to grasp, as the block punch combo example...and the one punch concept, really is not an ideology found in kwon bup. As for your MMA concept...until I those training methods over..that for me, is still open ended.

    As for a MMA, guy defeating everybody...that would depend on the ruleset...I think that was seen in the recent Mayweather match with Conner.
  19. Guthrie

    Guthrie Member

    I should have been specific, it is more in line with the earlier bare knuckle stance from boxing. Since the current stance evolved with the use of gloves.

    Yes I agree that, the modern version, would be from boxing, if gloves are used.
  20. Guthrie

    Guthrie Member

    This one is tough as shotokan was definitely changed to suit the political landscape that time. I believe that all the Karate Instructors of the time went through this.

    Karate by Jesse, has a great article concerning 10 differences, between Okinawan and Japanese Karate. Okinawan Karate tends to cover bunkai more.

    I agree with your statement concerning JKA demos...was never a big fan of prearranged demo bunkai.

    But, I have been doing bunkai from the Kata's we practiced for over 30yrs...they are there, but it is less likely to be found in the JKA or Shotokan.

    Kata is basically a manual of techniques. Those techniques are then combined with the strikes. Do you use kata in a fight be it street or competition, no. Can you use the bunkai within Karate successfully yes, I would from experience that some are very usefull.

Share This Page