Misguided style basher
Posted On:12/13/2005 7:36am
Traditional; it’s this new thing I just created…..
Anyone else get jacked off when you are trying to have a rational debate about say krotty or TKD and some forumite with T3H R34L krotty/TKD, which of course has every aspect of MMA in abundance, jumps in and starts telling you how krotty has mount escapes….
If you were to comment on a forum about the lack of grappling karate, you get 1000s of krottyka start telling you how they roll every week in karate. Yet bloody try walking into any krot dojo up and down the country and surveying how many really do meaningful grappling… why are these people the only krottyka on the internet?? And why do they also congregate on Okinawan styles, usually some ultra traditional Goju or Shorin Ryu? In fact, every damn internet TKDer does grappling, full contact face punching, adrenaline training etc at their dojang... where do these fuckers train?????? It sure as hell isn’t my local dojang.
And then there’s the whole revisionist TMA approach that if you go back to the REAL karate/TKD as practiced x years ago, it has loads of grappling… so by taking modern krotty and adding some grappling you are suddenly more traditional than the main organizations. Don’t get me wrong, I have respect for some of the notable individuals in this craze, but you have to wonder why they are so desperate to cling to krotty or whatever. It’s like they desperately want to believe that their art is complete, but they don’t actually want to put the effort into grappling or whatever. And don’t get me on the “it’s all in the kata”…
Why why why why why?????
You are a total Douchbag. Train more, post nevermore.
FickleFingerOfFate -08-21-2007 08:59 AM
just die already. Plasma - 08-20-2007 11:45 PM
Best MA website ever!!!!!: http://www.dogjudo.co.uk/
Posted On:12/13/2005 8:27am
because there's only so many different ways for the body to move - so a karateka can look at a movement from a kata and look at something like a double-leg and say "karate has always had takedowns, they've just been forgotten". It's the only way a lot of them are going to be able to stay current and viable - the bullshido-ing of grappling has been underway for a while. Luckily the places that compete will always be somewhere safe to hide :)
Everybody was Kung Fu fighting
Posted On:12/13/2005 8:33am
Style: Tai Chi
My standard answer to the 'secret shotokan grappling bunkai' argument:-
I never heard of Shotokan having grappling hidden in the katas until after the UFC televised the fact that grapplers didn't explode into a shower of confetti if you punched them on the shoulders and top of their skull as they came in for a takedown.
It's great that people want to get into grappling now they know how useful it is, but if I want to learn how to wrestle with somebody, or submit them on the ground, I'd rather study an art that has always had wrestling and/or groundfighting as a regular part of its curriculum rather than learn it from some goofy krotty dude who spent most of the last 20 years doing 'Heian Nidan' over and over again and point sparring once a month.
To be fair, it's my understanding that Goju and Wado Ryu do have some throws/sweeps in the curriculum and always have, although I've never trained in those styles.
!!RENT SPACE HERE FOR 10 VBUCKS PER LINE PER MONTH!!
!! PM ME FOR SPEEDY SERVICE !!
Sponsored by our first customer: Repulsive Monkey
I <3 Sirc.
Posted On:12/13/2005 8:55am
I did wado for four years and they aren't what I would call good - my instructor had a couple of Judo BB's in his class who put together a "throwing kata" which was a bit better in as much as you got to throw another person at least. He integrated it into the Kihons and stuff but ultimately (as you know) no randori = no grappling/throwing ability
Posted On:12/13/2005 8:59am
Style: Shi Ja Quan
The first DBL leg takedown I saw was in Okinawan Goju.
No ground work, but tones of standing grappling and sweeps and even GnP !!
Anyone the says ANY type of Trad. karate had ground work is full of ****.
1% Shark is better than you.
Posted On:12/13/2005 10:29am
My karate really does have grappling... :(
Posted On:12/13/2005 10:31am
Your krotty doesn't claim to be older than John the Baptist and acknowledges its roots, so that's OK.
Posted On:12/13/2005 11:31am
Originally Posted by Ronin
The first DBL leg takedown I saw was in Okinawan Goju.
No ground work, but tones of standing grappling and sweeps and even GnP !!
Anyone the says ANY type of Trad. karate had ground work is full of ****.
After researching this on my own it looks to me that most Okinawan arts assumed that you already practiced Okinawan folkstyle wrestling ("tegumi"). Okinawan wrestling is now called "Okinawan sumo" for some bizarre reason, despite the fact that the rules sound like a (bare or jacketed) version of Greco-Roman and aren't nearly as formal. The objective is to get the opponent's back on the ground, not just any body part above the knee.
Many early karateka were such wrestlers. See:
Karate has some standup grappling tricks, for sure, but it looks to me that "traditional" karateka ought to take up Greco-Roman.
Artemis BJJ Co-Founder/Instructor
Posted On:12/13/2005 12:38pm
Artemis BJJ | Brazilian Jiu Jitsu in Bristol Style: BJJ
Iain Abernethy is the name that springs to mind - as some of you may be aware (I know kickcatcher has heard of him), he's very keen on the idea that there are grappling methods and the like in kata. Not having read much of his work or taken karate, I can't judge; has anyone read Karate's Grappling Methods?
He quotes a chapter on his website:
Originally Posted by [url=http://www.iainabernethy.com/books/chapter_karates_grappling_methods.asp]Iain Abernethy[/url]
Karate is most commonly thought of as a kicking and punching system. The scientific principles involved in karate’s striking methods make them very powerful. But what are we to do if our opponent gets inside punching range and we begin to grapple, or worse still, end up fighting on the floor? Karate, as it is commonly practised, is at its best when applied at middle to long range. The unfortunate but true fact is that most fights begin close up and almost always include some form of grappling. Are we to assume that a system designed specifically for unarmed civilian self–defence is lacking when it comes to real situations? Of course not, karate possesses a great many close range techniques but they are rarely practised. The main reason for this is that close range techniques will not score points in the competitive environment.
The type of karate sparring that forms the basis of modern day competition was originally designed as a training method to emphasise the importance of quickly disabling an assailant through well-placed strikes to weak points. By fighting in this way the karateka may be able to assure their safety as quickly as possible and hopefully avoid grappling all together. This type of sparring is undoubtedly important, but as time has passed it has evolved into a well-regulated sport. Competitive karate is now specifically a karateka verses karateka affair and the accurate striking of weak points is no longer a requirement due to large scoring areas. That is not to say there is anything wrong with competitive sparring as it requires great skill and many people enjoy it, both as spectators and competitors, but it must be understood that many of its practises run in direct opposition to what is required in a self-defence situation. At present, competitive sparring and its values are over emphasised to the point where few karateka prepare for the very real possibility of strikes failing to stop an opponent and the fight entering close range. Real fights tend to begin at punching range, a few punches are thrown, and if none should stop the fight then it quickly collapses into grappling. The masters of old knew how real fights occurred and this is reflected in the katas they created.
In the book ‘Karate-Do Kyohan’ Gichin Funakoshi (founder of Shotokan) wrote, “…in karate, hitting, thrusting, and kicking are not the only methods, throwing techniques and pressure against joints are included.” A little later he writes, “all these techniques should be studied referring to basic kata.” Karate-Do Kyohan also includes photographs and instructions on a number of karate’s throwing methods. The Bubishi – an ancient and profound text that is often referred to as ‘the bible of karate’ – has an entire chapter devoted to grappling and escapes. The Bubishi also contains forty-eight self-defence diagrams; many of these illustrate grappling techniques. The Bubishi’s grappling techniques can also be found within the katas. Shigeru Egami in his book ‘The Heart of Karate-do’ writes, “There are also throwing techniques in karate… Throwing techniques were practised in my day, and I recommend that you reconsider them.” The grappling techniques that are found within the karate system are derived from of the Chinese art of Chin-na, the Aiki-Jujitsu of the Minamoto Samurai, the Jigen-ryu Bujitsu of the Satsuma Samurai, the indigenous Okinawan grappling methods of Tegumi, and many other fighting systems imported into Okinawa by the martial artists of the day. Karate was developed to be an effective and complete method of empty hand combat. It is simply inconceivable that its founders would totally omit grappling – It is the modern day practitioners who are to blame for this omission in many of today’s dojos. The founders of our art fully understood the need for grappling skills. They practised grappling, taught grappling and recorded their grappling methods in the katas they created. Even if they are not part of regular practise today, we can see that grappling techniques were part of karate practise and that these techniques are recorded within the katas.
The katas are a vast library of close range fighting techniques and if you study the katas deeply enough it is possible to become a competent grappler. Most karateka simply do not spend enough time studying the katas in the belief that training time is best spent sparring (competition style). Sparring has a vital role to play in the development of the karateka, but it should be based upon the principles contained within the kata. Gichin Funakoshi (Karate-Do Kyohan) wrote, “Karate, to the very end should be practised with the kata as the principle method and sparring as a supporting method.” The majority of the techniques and methods used in free sparring today have only came into existence within the last few decades. They are sporting methods and must not be confused with the original karate techniques.
The kata are often undervalued, in particular the application of the kata’s movements are rarely practised, and when they are it tends to be in a fashion that bears no resemblance to actual combat. The katas and their applications must be practised so that they can be used in real situations. Gichin Funakoshi in his book ‘Karate- Do Kyohan’ tells us, “Once a form has been learned, it must be practised repeatedly until it can be applied in an emergency, for knowledge of just the sequence of a form in karate is useless.” The katas contain a vast variety of techniques that when correctly understood and applied can make the karateka effective at all ranges, including grappling and ground fighting.
Not only will the katas give you the techniques for use at close range, but more importantly they will also give you the principles behind the techniques. It is vital that you get a good grasp of the principles or you will be a very limited fighter. What if the fight does not unfold in exactly the same way as specified within the kata? If you just understand the specific techniques you will be unable to apply them if anything should alter. If you have a good understanding of the principles involved, you will be able to adapt the technique, in line with the principles behind it, for use in many other situations. This is reflected in Gichin Funakoshi’s eighteenth principle of karate-do, “In spite of actual fighting always being different, the principles of kata never vary.” This application of the kata’s principles is behind the statement that it is only necessary to master one kata in order to be able to defend ourselves adequately. The old masters would know very few katas, but they would fully understand the principles that the katas contained. It is this deep understanding that made the founders of karate so formidable.
At first you practise the kata’s techniques, from practise of the techniques you can gain an understanding of the principles upon which they rest, you can then practise applying those same principles in different ways and even in sparring & live grappling to further enhance your understanding and skill. You should adapt and experiment with the kata’s techniques, not rigidly stick to the exact way they are performed within the kata. When viewed in this way the katas can open the door to a vast range of differing methods. Hironori Otsuka (founder of Wado-ryu) encourages this approach to kata in his book ‘Wado-Ryu Karate.’ Otsuka tells us, “It is obvious that these kata must be trained and practised sufficiently, but one must not be ‘stuck’ in them. One must withdraw from the kata to produce forms with no limits or else it becomes useless. It is important to alter the form of the trained kata without hesitation to produce countless other forms of training.” In the same book Otsuka also writes, “Kata must be correct, unlimited and most of all alive. Martial arts progress from kata to kumite, kumite to combat and so on. Kata is a fundamental aspect of martial arts and hence is unyieldingly important.” This is a profound statement on the importance and nature of kata. Otsuka (like Funakoshi) wished for us to be able to apply the knowledge contained within the katas – just knowing how to perform the katas is not enough. The Katas should not be a dead archaic ritual but be alive, unlimited and pragmatic.
The following guidelines are offered to help you approach your katas in this way:
1, Practise and continually improve your performance of the katas.
2, Gain an understanding of the applications. All applications should be practised with real fighting in mind and not as choreographed karateka Vs karateka battles.
3, Practise the applications with a partner, who will become less and less co-operative as your skill increases.
4, Look behind the techniques for the principles, e.g. arm bars – forcing the opponent’s joint outside its range of motion using your own body in a way that creates maximum leverage.
5, Experiment by applying those same principles in differing situations, e.g. with the opponent in a different position, on the floor, on partners with differing physical builds etc. Be sure to look at how other martial arts apply the same principles and adopt those methods into your training if appropriate.
6, Spar using techniques that follow those principles in order to enhance understanding and skill in application.
Throughout this book I will give examples from the kata and show how they can be applied, adapted and developed in line with the principles the katas contain. Hopefully, this will help you to look at your own katas and extract further techniques and principles. The kata should remain the reference point with all other techniques merely being extracted from them. This will mean that every time the kata is performed, your understanding of its applications and principles will be further advanced and hence so will your fighting skill. I hope to show you just how useful kata can be in preparing you to fight efficiently, regardless of the distance or situation.
Then there's also this article:
Originally Posted by [url=http://www.iainabernethy.com/articles/article_1.asp]Iain Abernethy[/url]
As the majority of those reading this article will be aware, Karate was developed by the civilian population of Okinawa. Karate is a civil system of fighting and was never intended to be used on a battlefield or in a rule-bound sporting contest. Karate was formulated to enable the civilians of Okinawa to defend both themselves and their loved ones. It was in 1669 that the Japanese invaders issued an edict that forbade the Okinawans from bearing arms. This meant that only those who enforced the laws, and those who broke them, would be in possession of weapons. The remaining citizens, who obeyed this edict, would have no option but to learn effective empty handed fighting skills if they were to assure their safety.
As a civilian living in a country that also forbids the carrying of weapons, one would think that the karate system would be ideal for self -defence. After all, that is what karate was originally created for. However, phrases such as, "95% of real fights end up on the floor" are frequently recited throughout the martial arts community at present. The importance of possessing skills at all ranges is now well understood, after all, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. If karate is designed for real fighting, then why do the vast majority of karate clubs totally omit ground fighting (and for that matter grappling in its entirety)? Did the past masters get it wrong?
If you study -as opposed to just practising - your katas, you will know that karate does contain a vast amount of grappling (see my book & videos "Karate's Grappling Methods"). Techniques such as Close Range Striking, Throws & Takedowns, Chokes & Strangles, Arm Locks, Leg & Ankle locks, Neck Cranks, Wrist Locks, Finger Locks etc. are all included within the karate katas. But what about Ground fighting? If ground fighting is so important, where is it in the katas? There are a significant number of ground fighting techniques within the katas if you know where to look. One problem that the modern martial artist faces is the difficulties that arise from failing to appreciate the difference between sport ground fighting and real ground fighting. Remember that civilians designed the techniques recorded within the katas for use in the instance of violent and unprovoked attack. No sporting techniques will be found within the katas, nor will you find the sophisticated methods needed to out wrestle a trained grappler.
In a mixed martial arts tournament (such as the Ultimate Fighting Championship) it is quite common to see contestants opt for the fight to go to the ground. This is a sound strategy if the contestant knows that they possess superior ground fighting skills to their opponent. In today's society real fights are rarely one on one for any length of time and hence opting for a ground fight is a sure way to get 'a good kicking' from your assailant's colleagues (or anyone else who fancies a 'free shot'). In the UFC, techniques such as biting, crushing the testicles, gouging the eyes etc. are banned. And yet these are the norm (and a highly effective 'norm') in a self-defence situation. Possibly the most significant difference between sport ground fighting and real ground fighting is the 'intent' behind the fight. In a sporting contest your aim is to win the tournament. In a real fight your aim is to assure your safety. In my dojo, the ground fighting practice revolves around the regaining of an upright position so that student can flee. In a competition match the strategy may well be: A, Take the fight to the floor. B, Keep the fight on the floor. C, Weaken and tire the opponent. D, Get the opponent to submit using the techniques allowed in the rules. In a real fight (and hence the method used in the katas) the strategy would be: A, Avoid going to the floor at all costs. B, If the fight does go to the floor, regain your feet as quickly as possible. C, If getting up is not immediately possible, then hurt the opponent using simple (probably brutal) techniques. D, Once back to your feet, escape and seek shelter or help.
The majority of ground fighting methods taught within the martial arts at present are sporting methods derived from match fights. It is often the simplest methods that are the most effective, e.g. seizing the testicles. But if these methods are banned - as in a sporting contest - then an alternative needs to be sought. An interesting example of this is the ground fighting methods found within contest Judo. The art of Judo is effective in the extreme; they are without doubt the premier grapplers of the martial arts community. But it is a little known fact that before 1900 Judo did not possess the ground fighting methods it is so renowned for today. The Kodokan (Kano's Judo School) had gained a strong reputation for itself through its numerous victories in Randori Shiai (competition) when challenging other Jujitsu schools. In 1900, the Kodokan arranged a match against the Fusen Ryu of Jujitsu. At this time Judo did not include the same ground fighting methods that it has today. Kano had based much of his Judo on the Tenshin Shinyo Ryu & Kito Ryu systems of Jujitsu. Both of these styles were well know for their excellent striking skills and effective throws. Tenshin Shinyo Ryu & Kito Ryu were battlefield arts, designed by samurai, and as such aimed to spend as little time on the ground as possible. A samurai would, in all probability, be decapitated by the sword of a member of the opposing army if they remained on the floor for any longer than a few seconds, and hence the jujitsu of the samurai did not contain the sophisticated ground fighting associated with the art today. The representatives of the Fusen Ryu realised they stood little chance against the Kodokan and decided to adopt an unusual strategy. When the fights began, the Fusen Ryu men laid down on the floor. Confused by what would be a suicidal movement on a battlefield (or in the street), the Kodokan men joined their opponents on the floor and were promptly beaten by the locks and chokes of the Fusen Ryu practitioners. This was the first loss Kano's men had suffered in eight years. If the Kodokan were to continue to dominate other Jujitsu schools then they needed to develop a full set of ground fighting techniques for use in match fights (which, as we now know, they did to great effect). So we can see that many of Judo's ground fighting methods stemmed from competition fighting, as opposed to the methods that would be employed by a samurai on a battlefield. This does not mean they are ineffective, far from it, just that the samurai would avoid ground fighting and would use more brutal methods (such that they would be unsuitable for a sporting contest) if a ground fight could not be avoided.
Just as ground fighting holds and locks were spurned by the ancient samurai, they were also considered to be unsuitable by modern warriors such as the great W.E. Fairbairn. In case you don't know, Captain W.E. Fairbairn developed a system of unarmed combat that was so effective it became a part of the training for the Shanghai Municipal Police, The British Commandos, The American Marine corp., The British Special Operations executive and The American Office of Strategic Services during world war two. Captain Fairbairn is a practical fighting legend. In his 1942 combat manual entitled, "Get Tough!" Captain Fairbairn wrote, "You will have noted that no holds or locks on the ground are demonstrated. The reason for this is: THIS IS WAR." Captain Fairbairn goes on to explain that an individual should aim to regain their feet as fast as possible, is very vulnerable to attack whilst on the floor, there is a vast difference between fighting on mats and on rocky ground or a road, and that the most important thing is to remain on your feet in the first instance if at all possible.
Please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that ground fighting holds, lock, submissions etc. do not have a place. It is just that the more simple, direct and practical methods must be given priority in a real fight. In my own club we regularly drill the holds and utilise ground fighting submissions (adapted from the katas) in our training. But the emphasis firmly remains upon avoiding going to the ground in the first place and regaining our feet as quickly as possible should the worst happen (as it so often does).
Karate as it was originally practised was a brutal and violent system, and it is this version of karate that is recorded within the katas. Throughout the katas the majority of close range techniques begin with an attempt to seize the throat, gouge the eyes or crush the testicles (sometimes a combination thereof). Any of these techniques will end a fight almost instantly (and that is why the katas favour them). Should these techniques be thwarted, the katas contain numerous locks, strikes, throws etc. that flow on from these initial techniques. It is important to understand that the katas record the key strategies and fighting principles of their creators. These strategies and principles are far more important that the techniques used to demonstrate them. When a fight hits the ground, the same strategy as used when vertical would be adopted by the karateka - if you can't get up instantly, then seize the throat, gouge the eyes or crush the testicles (obviously, these techniques are only justified in extreme circumstances - which is what kata is all about). If that is not possible then attack the opponent using the locks, chokes, strangles contained within the katas. The kata rarely demonstrates these techniques on the floor (although it does on occasion), as the preferred option is to remain vertical. However, the principles upon which the techniques rest are consistent whether the techniques are utilised vertically or horizontally. This is reflected in Gichin Funakoshi's eighteenth principle of karate-do, "In spite of actual fighting always being different, the principles of kata never vary." That is not to say that there are no ground techniques in the katas. Pinan / Heian Godan executes a cross-strangle to a thrown opponent who is now on the floor, Kushanku contains a takedown into a floor fighting neck crank etc., but these are exceptions rather than the rule. The kata prefers to demonstrate its grappling principles from a vertical position, as being vertical is the preferred option, and the katas always endeavour to encourage the correct strategy.
The katas tell us how the various joints, arteries etc. can be manipulated to best effect. Whether these weaknesses of the human anatomy are manipulated when in a vertical or horizontal position is not relevant. To quote Gichin Funakoshi once again, "In spite of actual fighting always being different, the principles of kata never vary." (See the KGM books & tapes for numerous examples of kata techniques being used on the floor).
I would like to make it clear that kata practice alone will not enable the karateka to develop effective fighting skills. The katas are simply the method by which the strategies and principles of the art are recorded. You must try to utilise the kata's methods (grappling and ground fighting, not just striking) in sparring. In his 1926 book, "Ryukyu Karate Kempo" Choki Motobu (who was one of Okinawa's most feared fighters) wrote, "Kumite is an actual fight using many basic styles of kata to grapple with the opponent." From Motobu's statement we can deduce that: A, the katas contain many grappling techniques. B, Kumite should be based upon the techniques recorded within the katas (as opposed to being based upon modern sporting methods.) If you wish to be able to use the kata's techniques in a live environment, you must practice using the kata's techniques in a live environment (seems obvious, so one wonders why so few do it). In my book, "Karate's Grappling Methods" I suggest a number of different ways in which you can practice kata techniques in this way and I would urge you to read it for further guidance.
Ground fighting is a part of Karate - as one would expect with the art being specifically designed for civilian self-defence. The katas contain the correct principles, techniques and strategies to enable the karateka to defend themselves during a real fight (but not a sporting contest). The reason so many karateka omit ground fighting (and grappling in general) is that the katas are often insufficiently studied and competition sparring does not allow fighting at close range or on the floor. If we wish to practice Karate as an effective and complete art then we must study the katas (not just practice them), extract the techniques and concepts the katas contain and then utilise these methods in live sparring. We should also adapt and experiment with the katas techniques such that we are able to utilise them in numerous situations. Hironori Otsuka, in his book 'Wado-Ryu Karate' wrote, "It is obvious that these kata must be trained and practised sufficiently, but one must not be 'stuck' in them. One must withdraw from the kata to produce forms with no limits or else it becomes useless. It is important to alter the form of the trained kata without hesitation to produce countless other forms of training." Similarly, the great Choki Motobu once said, "Learn to apply the principles of the katas, such that you can bend with the winds of adversity." So when discussing ground work, in addition to the brutally simple methods contained within the katas, we are also encouraged to adapt the kata's vertical grappling methods for use on the floor. As mentioned earlier, the same weaknesses exist in the human anatomy weather the opponent is vertical or horizontal. The katas record these weaknesses and give examples of how to exploit them. If we study "why" a technique works such that we understand the principles upon which it is based, we can then adapt the technique - in line with the principles upon which it rests - so that it can be used in may different circumstances. Techniques are very specific, but concepts and principles are essentially unlimited. It is the principles of the kata that are of most importance, not the techniques used to demonstrate them.
Karate (as contained within the katas) is a highly effective art that possess methods and strategies for use at every range. It is a complete system of fighting that was specifically developed for use by unarmed civilians. If you study the original karate (as contained within the katas) you will develop effective fighting methods regardless of distance, and that includes ground fighting.
Last edited by slideyfoot; 12/13/2005 12:42pm at .
BJJ Beginner FAQ, Artemis BJJ, GrappleThon.org (BJJ for Charity)
Posted On:12/13/2005 12:51pm
"...karate possesses a great many close range techniques but they are rarely practised. The main reason for this is that close range techniques will not score points in the competitive environment."
This is what I meant by 'goofy krotty dudes who have spent most of the last 20 years doing heian nidan over and over again and point sparring once a month'. It's great that people want to rediscover this stuff, but most karateka would be better off learning to do it for real at their local judo club.
Articles and Reviews
Tools and Info