Discussion in 'Karate' started by mani, Jun 18, 2003.
And anyway, what's traditional? When does traditional start?
Then there are not many traditional dojos.
"traditional" dojos will either do no, or sports kumite from what I've seen.
Perfection of Form comes from Kata. Proper transfer of energy for optimal power comes from balance; understanding your own center and controlling that center. Until you can effectively control your own center… you can never effectively control that of an opponent. If you (sport karate-ka) cannot control the starting and stopping point of any given technique without a target/opponent… you simply have no control. Seasoned traditional Karate-ka know the optimal power range of any given technique… they have run them (full power) 1000’s of times perfecting every aspect of the delivery of a single technique. No wasted motion.
There seems to be two “schools” of thought here… Kata –vs- Kumite… This is a futile argument… we might as well be arguing which is more important “Food or Water” The simple fact is… we need both!
Kata is Karate… Bunkai is the analysis of kata… and Kumite is the application of what we have learned. If you are training at a dojo that is not providing a complete system, not running a proper kata class, you are not studying Karate. You shouldn’t even be posting in this KARATE section. Hell ANYONE can throw together a few kicks & punches and “create” a fighting system. Well Damn! Maybe I should start a web-based Kata class… write me a check and I’ll teach you Kata via e-mail…
Kata /Bunkai: Those who can… Do; Those who can’t… argue!
Personally, I can't understand this argument.
Boxers, Thai boxers, Judoka, Brazilian jiu jitsu dont do "kata", yet they still do alot better on average in "fighting" compared to most TMA. So how do we need kata if they can do without?
One argument is 'kata as a story'. That's how teachers passed on info, and the closest most karate-ka have to a textbook (speaking for Shotokan here) are the odd reference book here and there and funakoshi's works.
Some of the arts you mentioned are fairly new, and I would argue that those arts are also specifically for fighting, with self defense becoming a desirable by-product. Sorry to be cliché, but I'd argue that arts like karate are for self defense first. You could even argue that they're not for fighting at all.
Oh, and I do believe Kyokushin has katas. That doesn't do too badly, does it?
Anyway, this is a cyclical argument; we've been here before
Thai boxing is a new sport?...
The point here is that these sports train at fighting rather than "theory" and thus making the training more effective. Training against a resistant partner beats kata anyday.
You mention Kyokushin do very well, and I agree. They also do kata true... but what are Kyokushin more known for compared to other karate styles? Yes, that's right.. They focus a hellofalot more on sparring.
I said some of the arts mentioned. Not all of them. Although I suppose argument is all about being selective with your information.
Like I tried to insinuate in the last post, I'm not prepared to be drawn in to this debate. I think my point with kyokushin kata was why do them if they're pointless? And that's my last word on the subject.
Why do them if they are pointless?
Cuz of tradition probably? Most kyokushin fighters focus on sparring rather than kata.
Do we not have enough new threads in the karate section?
but does focusing on kata more make a style traditional? i personally consider Kyokushin a traditional style purely for the tradition and ettiquite they put into everything.
Bad question: You can't compare: "traditional karate" is a group of organizations and the way the train; "fullcontact karate" is just a type of tournament or, in traditional karate, a type of contact during training.
In other words: if you train mainly fullcontact karate, then you probably can't easily train traditional karate; but if you train traditional karate, you can easily heat up and train fullcontact too.
Argh I so want to rant as I have just read this whole thread and think to my self what a silly argument. It gets me a little riled up and I end up almost saying silly things.
As far as a am aware Oyama trained from Funakoshi or from the same person that trained him so how can it be traditional when it was founded in 1964!!! Not sayin Shotokan is all that traditional either.
I know this thread is dead but I need to vent a little steam lol. I was attracted to this forum as I am writing an article on this. I want it to be as honest as possible on both views and I'm not saying one is better than the other. Its about Style if you ask me.
I do Shotokan and my Sensei's were also close friends and they would give me a good dunt every now and then. This toughened me up and I learned how to take a hit if you can call it that as its quite easy to stand still and take a hit so more about learning to deal with the pain and body conditioning.
I dont believe any would do full contact in my style because we punch to the face. Its scientifice fact that a punch is more powerfull than a kick. Why because E=Mc2 . A punch has less mass but more speed than a kick FACT. Kick has more mass than a punch but has so much less speed than a punch its less power. You need 4 x the power if double the mass our bodys just cant do it. Dont get me wrong kick are good as the plant there energy deeper and more dangerous and many other reasons im digressing .....
You are insane if you would take a Full force shotokan punch to chin from some of my students and all the instructors I know . There is to much speed rigidity and kinetic linkage in the body for you not to be seriously hurt. Its like joining the army and learning how to take a bullet your mad !
Im a great believer in do what works for you. If full contact makes you feel comfortable thats great. You have more chance of becoming a better fighter doing that than joining a style that may hypothetically be better but you not enjoying. (not saying my styles better than yours just saying if it defiantly was better you would still be better of doing full contact)
I calmed and controlled my self now and im ready to reply calmly lol. oops
was just about to say that.
It certainly can be it just puzzles me how kyokushin gets considered traditional yet it was founded in 1964 by someone a lesser grade of shotokan than me, though he was taught by the founder so probably much better. Supposingly most Karateka in fuedal okinawa would go down the docks and poorer parts with lots money on show to encourage an attack and practice. They would then compare what did and didn't work afterwards. You can't get more full contact than that!
The question was actually regarding full contact karate, not necessarily Kyokushin. But since you asked, Oyama also had an 8th dan in Goju Ryu if you want to judge off rank alone and not skill.
You do know many styles punch to the face in full contact sparring, including Shotokan, right? A simple Youtube video will reveal that.
Sorry, but that's called opinion, not scientific fact.
I'd say that depends on a lot of things, including the skill of the kicker.
I'm pretty sure getting hit full force in the chin by any trained martial artist won't tickle either.
What we need is a definition of what is defined as tradtional and what is defined as full contact. Shotokan's no more traditional than Kyokushin is by some standards, yet both can be considered traditional by other standards. Just because it was around 25 years prior to Kyokushin does not make it "more traditional".
Separate names with a comma.