Long stances where not used by people like Funakoshi Sensei but by one of his sons for that purpose but the problem now is that people will not see pass this or that it should change as you go up to you Black belt. From what I understand that is
it should not change as you go up to blackbelt - you should never be taught that stances are anything other than 'snapshots' within a dynamic movement - designed for generating power in different directions, at any level - you will just get better at it...
The problem is not every one does the train or exercise that they should so it is one way of doing this, not a great way but one while you are training This is not from me but from Paul Perry sensei http://www.jinseikai.co.uk/
Well you did seem like an intelligent sort of guy... Ah - but surely we are comparing like with like here. There are some Karate clubs that go full on into applied bunkai and scenario training, there are others that go full on into competitive fighting and produce top notch fighters, there are others who just do aerobic training. It sems to me that kickboxing is pretty similar except it is less likely to have the Kata based street element. It is one thing to compare the top competitive fighters of each sport with each other (they are not really any different in ability), what we shouldn't do is fall into the trap of comparing the best of one with the most average of the other. Define realistic. Is the person right in your face swearing at you before punching or asking you a sucker question, or pusihing you before the punch? Or is he bouncing up and down 2m away? Very few clubs teach attacks in a realistic way - that tends to be more instructor policy rather than style policy. If you are justified in saying that most Karate is crap (for the reasons you have given) then I expect I am also justified in saying that most of everything else is also crap. Every time you want to get things real you have to compromise somewhere. If you break all your toys today you can't play with them tomorrow.
Ah yes! Do the words "Not now Kato!" mean anything to anyone here? Seriously, we're not in feudal Japan and we all have to go to work/college etc, the next day so "real" training really isn't an option in regular sessions.
And let us not forget that the way that you were likely to be attacked in feudal Japan or 19th C Okinawa bears very little relation to how you are likely to be attacked now. The biomechanics of the attack may be similar but the prefight sensory experience (which often determines the outcome of the fight) will be far apart (and also far removed from the prefight experience of any competitive fight in any martial sport).
I'm not arguing with that. My point is that if the emphasis was put more strongly on to the misunderstandings of teachers and students (and indeed the general public), rather than the argument that 'most karate is crap' taking primacy, alot less embelishment would have been needed. Unless I read the posts wrongly.
Hi All This thread seems to have extented into the realms of political posturing. Pity, it could have been a very useful tool for analysing Karate in some depth. I would still suggest the following: Advocates of the "Karate is Crap" School - Why is Karate crap? Which techniques do you feel don't work and why? Which training methods are inappropriate and why? Advocates of Karate - Why does Karate work for you? Which techniques work and why? Which training methods are appropriate and why? I think that it is also well worth bearing in mind that comments about a system being "crap" without substantiating the reason are not too helpful in any debate. Furthermore, it is very well known and accepted that in any art, the real depth of knowledge comes after Black Belt. So, with that in mind, it would be useful to know what level of expertise the critics have in Karate, if any, in order to establish the strength and validity of their views. Likewise with the advocates of Karate. Respectfully Peter
Hi Peter, You have some good points there and I will say I have been traning for about 12 years. I am now a 3rd dan in Shotokan karate I first started training in kickboxing but my two bothers have training for years ( brother up from me still does, Lau gar kung fu ) After a 10 year break I went back to traning and started karate and have trained in Jin Sei Kai for 8 years ( still learning )
Yes and no. No-one to my knowledge has mentionned any particular associations on this thread and linked them with good or bad karate. There has been debate about waht constitues good karate though and the merits of the sporting approach versus other approaches. While this could be considered political I would argue it is integral to what your personal karate training is for. Good idea. I repeated the term as I was pointing out that Timmy boy seemed to be branding Karate as 'crap' by concentrating on only certain aspects of it to compare witht the 'best' aspects of other systems rather than comparing like bits with like. In my opinion all styles have the possibiity to be 'crap' - whether they are or not depends upon the knowledge and teaching ability of the Instrcutor and the attitude and aptitude of the student. My bio is available through my profile on my website. I've been training in Karate since 1991 and have been fortunate through work and instructors to have had more time training than normal since I started. I've cross trained extensively in a range of other martial arts. I write articles on aspects of Karate for Traditional Karate Magazine as a regular columnist. I hold Dan grades in Shotokan and Ao Denkou Jitsu and now teach my own self protection system. Of the people on this thread I've trained with Moosey.
I will probably regret this, but... In what way has this thread been taken over by political posturing? At the moment, I'm more convinced by JW's argument.
Good motto to follow: "If you are likely to regret saying something, then don't say it in the first place!" Basically, as soon as people start to rubbish other systems, the debate is already in the realms of politics. Problem is, often people don't have supportive statements to justify their argument. All arts can be "Crap" but is it "really" the art??? We have all seen or heard of awesome fighters that can't teach, or awesome teachers that can't fight. Neither necessarily reflect on the art, but more on the persona of the instructor! Hence, my attempt to suggest a little structure so that we can all benefit of analysis and debate. I no longer teach karate and haven't for 10 year, but I am still proud of my roots and know that it will still work if and when needed. Resspectfully Peter
If we take that definition as 'politics' then the thread was supposed to be politcal since the original question was why do people rubbish karate.
Well spotted, but they doesn't mean that we stay political. I am trying to tease out some more informed comments about "Why" Karate may or may not be crap in the streets. Let's try a different approach. Karate has kicking, punching, finger jabs, palm strikes, knifehand, slapping, elbows, knees, head butts, locks, throws, strangles and chokes. So, which area / s are strong and which are weak? My view, with reference to street ability is that karate is weaker than some arts when it comes to understanding weapons defence. That is mainly because some arts, like Kali / Arnis / Eskrima and the Silat styles specialise in weapons tactics and have taken it to a very high level. Respectfully Peter
My honest opinion on effective self defence martial arts has nothing to do with the art. I predict that 90% of altercations will be won by the pre-emptive strike. If someone walks up to you a knocks you out, without you knowing what was happening, no boxing stance or karate kick is going to be much good when your asleep!
Point taken; but as I said in my first post in this thread, every style gets criticised. I'm merely talking about why karate gets slagged off here, I'm not saying all kickboxing is better. By "realistic" I mean using techniques you will actually use against resistance in order to ingrain skills you will actually use. Yes but it's a question of extent. It's funny how boxing and muay thai clubs aren't generally accused of being too soft and lacking live training. Even with kickboxing, OK there are bad clubs out there, but far more kickboxing clubs train hard and train live simply because there is the element of full contact competition; far less karate organisations use it (because of the "we're a tr00 martial art not a sport" idea/excuse). To me, if I'm more likely to find a good club for style X than style Y then it's fair to say that style X is better. I'm not disagreeing with that (see my signature), I'm just saying there's better ways of sacrificing realism for safety than you get at most karate clubs.
