Page 5 of 7 First 1234567 Last
  1. #41
    Rivington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    East Bay, CA
    Posts
    4,808
    Style
    Taijiquan
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Don't you know that the karates that don't suck aren't karate, because karate sucks?

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    The Badlands of Ohio
    Posts
    310
    Style
    Wrestle, Kickbox, Aikido
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by PDA View Post
    Your feet must have been touching the floor.
    Of course, I grounded myself out! I knew I had Chi powers...I just need to levitate first!

    Boy, am I going to be embarrassed when I go back to the Cosmic Dojo...

  3. #43
    Permalost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    13,742
    Style
    street paddleboarding
    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Rivington View Post
    Don't you know that the karates that don't suck aren't karate, because karate sucks?
    Aren't the karates that suck called krotty?

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    14
    Style
    Karate
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Cuddles View Post
    .
    I know a lot of you will argue that as long as a style trains with aliveness, it'll become a perfectly good/valid form of fighting.

    However, I think that even with alive training, there are some styles that are bad.

    But let me define what I assume as a "bad" style:
    Any style that does not allow you to (restricts you from) fight to the best of your abilities in whatever situation you're training for (i.e. Stand-up, Clinch, Grappling)

    Why is this so?

    Because, in my humble opinion, once a "bad" style starts being pressure tested, it looks a lot less like itself and a lot more like a tried-and-true style such as Kickboxing, Muay Thai, or the various forms of grappling. Thus, the style itself disappears.
    I agree, more or less. If you made a bunch of guys who practice (for example) exotic kung fu styles fight each other a lot, they'd all eventually fight the same, and it would look like rudimentary bad kickboxing and nothing like their individual styles.

    A great example is Karate. I doubt any of you would argue that traditional Karate does not teach to fight with one's side facing one's opponent. Thus, if restricted to fighting with one's side facing one's opponent, the Karate user will be at a severe disadvantage when compared to another style that squares up, such as Muay Thai.

    And under pressure testing, the Karate starts looking less and less like Karate and more and more like Kickboxing. Kyoukushin Karate is the perfect example of this, where you see kickboxers in karate uniforms beating each other up under slightly modified kickboxing rules and calling it "Karate".
    Oyama's been teaching since the early 50s and founded the Kyokushinkai in '64. This is as "traditional" as most of the other lineages claiming to teach "traditional karate," so the line you're drawing doesn't make much sense when closely examined.
    This is completely different from the traditional idea of "Karate" users "killing" each other with "one punch, one kill".
    I agree completely...Kyokushin isn't karate, according to this silly definition of karate you just invented.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    16
    Style
    Wing Chun/Rex Kwon Do
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    If little Jimmy is a 2nd dan at the age of 10 Im sure its a great style he's learning something useful...
    cough.. ATA cough...

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    780
    Style
    Koryu
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    The one punch one kill thing, wasn't that propagated mostly in the JKA, and that idea itself strongly influenced by kendo?

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Southeast WI
    Posts
    892
    Style
    aikido
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Moenstah View Post
    The one punch one kill thing, wasn't that propagated mostly in the JKA, and that idea itself strongly influenced by kendo?
    Yeah, my understanding is that is a Japanese thing that didn't find its way into karate until after karate came to Japan from Okinawa. OP needs to read up on his karate history.

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Norn Iron
    Posts
    234
    Style
    Jujitsu Aikido Bodycombat
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    A side on stance is fine for long range but as the distance closes it needs to become more and more square on (think fencer - kickboxer - boxer - judoka/wrestler).

    As for deep stances, I am wondering if somewhere along the way exercises done solely to develop leg strength and endurance slowly became part of the fighting side of the style when they were never meant to be?

    While we're on wild theories I also suspect Wing Chun was the first pure self-defense style. And by this I mean designed to take on untrained thugs and drunks but not anyone with real fight training or experience.

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,271
    Style
    血鷲
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by OwlMatt View Post
    Yeah, my understanding is that is a Japanese thing that didn't find its way into karate until after karate came to Japan from Okinawa. OP needs to read up on his karate history.
    True dat.

    Also, though, I've found people who do the deep-stance thing, once they start crosstraining in nage-waza, have some advantage. Tai-otoshi, for example, might be easier for those who have a lot of practice with zenkutsu-dachi, while kokutsu-dachi is a good base for knee-wheels and kiba-dachi, side-on to the opponent, is a good start to such techniques as o-goshi.

    Getting used to dropping your c. of g. below your adversary's is a benefit, and those low Shotokan stances--essentially useless in pure striking--can give a good base for nage-waza from the clinch under proper crosstraining conditions.

    As for one-punch-one-kill and anything else that's swordfighting-based but has no swords...**** it. It ain't Karate.

  10. #50

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Austin, Texas, United States
    Posts
    103
    Style
    Hapkido
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Vieux Normand View Post

    Getting used to dropping your c. of g. below your adversary's is a benefit, and those low Shotokan stances--essentially useless in pure striking--can give a good base for nage-waza from the clinch under proper crosstraining conditions.
    Did you really just abbreviate center of gravity to c. of g. ???

    I can't decide if that is hilarious or horrible.

Page 5 of 7 First 1234567 Last

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO