If you try to find a form that use kick, punch to set up a clinch. You then use that clinch to execute your throw. You may start from the - striking art (such as CMA, Karate, boxing, MT, ...) that contains kick and punch. But you can't find throw there. - throwing art (such as Chinese wrestling, western wrestling, Judo, BJJ, ...) that contain throws. But you can't find kick and punch there. No matter how hard that you may try to find your form, you will never be able to find it. What will you do then? How about something like this? You won't be able to find it in any tradition form either.
That's why I was saying they aren't good for beginners. It's not necessary to learn extended set sequences of techniques to get those benefits. Like I said, I can see their use if you want students to have uniformity of style I can see the use, but I see that as putting the system above the students. Another problem with set forms is stagnation - who is brave enough to change them or come up with better ones? There appears to be a veneration of people who've come before over people who are training now. Setting a system in stone is a sure way for it to become irrelevant. IMO, a good instructor will be able to come up with better targeted, bespoke sequences to address student's needs, rather than trying to find the relevant parts in a set sequence. As I said, the one exception to that would be specific sequences that hold more esoteric mechanics in them, but that is pointless for people who can't function or have good body awareness yet.
essentially what you are saying is you have access to real masters and real fighters so know better than others although you cant prove it... to be honest it's the same thing people always use the I have access to the real deal you don't response...its the standard response from TMA guys when there methods are questioned and they cant defend them evidence and I really expected better If it works for you fine but the reality is there are better ways to produce fighters than concentrating on forms and ufc1 onwards proved which methods are better... And also the whole sports is finite arguement you brought up is plain wrong and miss leading and you know it
Its a discussion about training methods and which is more effective that's all, it's not personal if you enjoy forms then it really doesn't matter what others say but if your interest is the most effective way to train then it might matter. Take weapons for example this is no reason you can't spar with them, modern protective equipment and foam weapons make that fairly easy, if you are interested in historical reenactment that's great but if you want to learn how to use weapons you can safely these days
I know, but maybe I am wrong here, but it sounds like to you who say kata is useless (more or less), you take as the only goal of learning MA to fight in the UFC. Yes, of course, if I want to be able to use staff (probably most useful of the old weapons nowadays), sure, I can learn by sparring. I just need to either wrap the staff in foam so it becomes a different weapon, sort of, or I can get a kendo-style armor just so I can spar. And spar from the beginning without learning the technique into detail first against people who are the same. And therefore only train when a partner is available and when I have the armor with me. It is less like it in karate, but kata still has other purposes and as Hannibal says, it is perfect for a short solo training. And no one is forcing anyone to learn them. I am not sure if I can explain myself well, so let me compare kata to handwriting. If your purpose is to write in a way that is easy to read and is fast - therefore more effective, learning handwriting is pointless because it is outdated and everyone has their smartphone, notebook, PC, printers and whatnot. But in my opinion, if you want to express yourself, or enjoy yourself, do art, do something that will let you "switch off" or to note down something quickly, or are out somewhere without equipment, handwriting as the old method is still very useful. There are of course some differences, but I just want to say that even outdated methods have their purpose now and I will gladly learn them because they are nice and I don't only have that one purpose I am aiming for and simply because I want to. And I won't call the outdated stuff useless. If you don't want to learn it, that's your call, but why spoil it for everyone else? -> that is why I really don't get these discussions about what is useless and what is the best. Just do what works for you.
I know it is not personal, I don't really want to offend anyone, either, but the discussion doesn't seem about what is more effective. Or right - if you want to fight UFC, use UFC methods. If you want to learn karate as a complex art, use karate methods. It is strange to discuss which is more effective - is it kata? is it sparring? is it partner drills? pads? shadow boxing? I would say the most effective thing is those combined. You may like one more than the other, but you won't spar if you don't learn to punch first. Those are all methods that are somehow useful in their own right, IMHO. Of course I won't magically learn to fight if all I do is kata... I think we all agree there.
Who is spoiling anything for anyone? If you train from fun and because you like it others opinions really shouldn't matter, now if you train because you want to fight or defend yourself questioning training methods and finding the best just makes sense otherwise you find out the hard way what you train doesn't work (see ufc1 and any gracie in action film...there are a few). I like to do both from time to time
The question seems to be is Kata the best way to transmit techniques and principles for you to then use in sparring and fighting and I'd argue judging by how few people look like there forms when sparring it might not be, especially when you then go look at a boxing gym and see how there drilling compares to there fighting
It has nothing to do with the UFC. It is about allowing space for training methods and techniques to evolve in a system. If you want to be a curator and custodian of a martial art system as a cultural and historical artefact, then strict adherence to immutable kata makes perfect sense. If you find doing kata fun, then go for it. If you are looking for a functional approach to learning how to fight, then I think that exploration, questioning everything, keeping up with research, and having your training personally tailored to you as an individual is the way to go. Everyone dancing through the same routines is the style making the individual, whereas I believe the other way around is a lot more efficient and effective. I'm not against solo practice at all - I just don't see the benefit to the individual practicing set long-form sequences. I also am not including two-person flow drills when I'm talking about kata.
Looks like everyone has completely ignored the purpose of this thread. Steve Morris claims karate in its entirety is useless and that his students would destroy the UFC and Pride. He's making a bold claim that 30 minutes with him would teach you better than 30 years karate.
Sorry, that was just a rhetorical question, that wasn't my main point. What I meant by spoiling it for others was by how kata is called useless. It is like someone called your job pointless. Or mine. That is just an example, not meant as an offence. This approach of kata having no point is for you personally now at this time as you want to learn to fight etc. Maybe it wouldn't be as much pointless for you in 40 years, when your chances of fighting someone off won't be as high and your - or mine, this is meant "you" as in genera, not aimed toward you¨) health wont't permit you to spar etc. The traditional karate is meant to be for people of old ages, as I understand it. While sensei Higaonna, the chief instructor of my style, for example, may not spar anymore, he can well demonstrate his techniques and can practise them in exercises like kata and so on. I agree this may be my mistake in adding the "karate in its entirety and kata are useless" or something along those lines in the first post. You were advocating the usefulness of kata for fighting, where it is more appropriate, but there can still be different approaches. That is true. However, even if you have a training tailored for yourself, it doesn't mean that if kata doesn't work for you, it won't for anyone else. As I said, learning to fight by only doing kata is of course, nonsense, but it is just another tool. We, for example, make kata into sequences (the kata as a whole) practised in pairs and in my dojo, there is a big emphasis on that. It is basically a way to chain bunkai that are partner drills of techniques specific to the style. In a self defence scenario, maybe one kick and one punch is enough to save your life, but if I want to learn more of the style, there are those techniques too. Hm, ok, I got carried off a little here, but as I said, and what we apparently agree on is that everyone can do what works for them. Questioning is fine, as well as discussion, I'd say. That is why I wrote my opinion in the first place, from a different perspective. I don't need to fight anyone seriously and if I ever do in self defence and it is a guy bigger and heavier than I am, I still don't trust myself enough to say awesome training would save me. So I am happy to work on a broader skillset including fitness, coordination, being a bit more confident, level headed etc. by simply doing what I like, just like everyone else here. It's just why I don't really like the discussions about how this style and this method are useless. Although these weren't your words, so sorry for that.
No the question is are they useless...the answer is no, but they aren't the best oe be all and end all
Ok, so this is precisely the statement my argument was against! I don't know who Steve Morris is, but I don't really even care,especially if he makes claims like these
I am saying they have value amd YMMV...which is what you also said And the "sport" paradigm is finite...the training method isn't, but training as a full time fighter is because the demands are so high on the body No fighter trains as hard post retirement And you know it
You don't need immutable long-form sequences of techniques to do any of that. It has to be going somewhere before it can be hijacked I'm not sure what else is to be said about Morris' comments...
I don't want to break the ToS, so I won't write what exactly I think of somone who could write something like this. I therefore don't really care about his opinion, but as to your opinion in the ways you agree with him, what I wrote before stands.
