The depressing state of karate

[JohnPJones]

LOL of course we don't want to ruin your list

1. Is Karate still Karate if we don't practice kata? - That's a hard one and really subjective. IMO - no. Kata is what links Karate to it's historical roots - it's meant to act as a bridge between Kihon and Kumite when done right. If you don't practise the forms where most Karate techniques are derived from - are you really doing Karate? You could basically say via the no kata definition - that boxing and a few other arts are also Karate. I think the forms are an intrinsic aspect to what Karate is and removing them basically means that you are disconnecting the library of techniques from the art and not just that but disconnecting Karate from it's history and evolution from what it was.

2. Depends on how far back before is. If it's Te - it wasn't Karate - it was Te. I separate those two because they are clearly different arts despite the fact that Te is an earlier precursor to Karate. I'd even say that Te from what I've read also had it's own forms but I wouldn't call it Karate. Karate has evolved significantly and changed from what Te was - enough so that I wouldn't describe them as the same thing. Karate was pretty much a mix of different things as I'm sure you know - and according to what I've read forms were present very early on - as I remember reading in Funakoshi's autobiography that he was learning forms from his teachers (so they were already present). It's just that more kata were added to simplify the learning process for schoolchildren - which is great for children but terrible for adults.

3. That's also a hard one. Kata is still good as a solo training tool (especially if you don't have tools/equipment) but I'd argue that the way it's taught currently means that it's pretty much useless as a training tool. It's currently fixed shadowboxing without the functionality. If the functionality is added to it - then yes it makes sense to keep practicing it. If your doing Kata without any thought for functionality or purpose - then it's pretty useless IMO. But I'd question how much Kata would you arguably want to do - I think it's something that most karateka should focus less time on and more on drills/sparring.

4. Practice of bunkai drills by a country mile - but in a way where you extract the technique/application and allow for variations in combinations in an environment where you can experiment.

Is 19th century boxing boxing? If it is should modern boxing be renamed because of how different it is from what it once was?

I don’t think there’s any real reason to differentiate between Te and Karate, particularly when there’s such variations in what is trained in modern karate, and how it’s trained in modern karate.

I think there should be a distinction should be made similar as to how different types of metal rock music has distinctions made between them when referring to Te and Karate.
Te had katas, the old katas were taken from Kung fu in China and then in the early 20th century some new kata were created.

 

[Azam]

Is 19th century boxing boxing? If it is should modern boxing be renamed because of how different it is from what it once was?

I don’t think there’s any real reason to differentiate between Te and Karate, particularly when there’s such variations in what is trained in modern karate, and how it’s trained in modern karate.

I think there should be a distinction should be made similar as to how different types of metal rock music has distinctions made between them when referring to Te and Karate.
Te had katas, the old katas were taken from Kung fu in China and then in the early 20th century some new kata were created.

No but the distinction is quite clearly made in boxing - that earliest forms of boxing do not really resemble the modern art.

It's not about renaming but understanding that the two differ from one another - just like Te and Karate differ from one another. This is why I separate Te and Karate from one another because despite sharing commonalities the trajectories of each were very different because of where they were along the evolution process.

Simple question - does your karate mirror Okinawan Te? I'd argue that most karate styles do not - this is why it's best to separate them in the context of answering @Hotora86 questions.

The fact that our kata's barely resemble the older katas from southern styles - should give you an idea on how much divergence there has been from Te all the way to modern karate.

It's an inevitable fact that as arts evolve they branch of into different trajectories.

Jujutsu and Judo share roots through Jigoro Kano - but there has been enough evolution over time that despite sharing roots they are described as different arts in today's context.

 

[JohnPJones]

No but the distinction is quite clearly made in boxing - that earliest forms of boxing do not really resemble the modern art.

It's not about renaming but understanding that the two differ from one another - just like Te and Karate differ from one another. This is why I separate Te and Karate from one another because despite sharing commonalities the trajectories of each were very different because of where they were along the evolution process.

Simple question - does your karate mirror Okinawan Te? I'd argue that most karate styles do not - this is why it's best to separate them in the context of answering @Hotora86 questions.

The fact that our kata's barely resemble the older katas from southern styles - should give you an idea on how much divergence there has been from Te all the way to modern karate.

It's an inevitable fact that as arts evolve they branch of into different trajectories.

Jujutsu and Judo share roots through Jigoro Kano - but there has been enough evolution over time that despite sharing roots they are described as different arts in today's context.

It’s almost impossible to say what old Te looked like since there’s no video, few if any photos, and very limited literature on it, but my karate was roughly 25-30% grappling of some sort, so based on what I know of Te I’d say it’s about as similar as you can expect from a 200 year difference.

The comparison to judo and jujitsu is apples and oranges. Judo was created with the intent to be a new separate style.
Te and Karate was simple evolution in both name and substance.

Aside from just going based on names changed or were adopted it’s quite difficult to pinpoint a time in history to say when what we’d recognize as modern karate actually came into existence. for example when did goju ryu become what we’d recognize as goju ryu today?
1930’s when the name was adopted? 1950’s when we created point fighting? Or was it recognizable as such in 1900? Or 1890?

the term karate wasn’t adopted until 1936, so any training done before that was Te or Toudi, thus any training done today that is closely related means karate would still have strong links to Te.

 

[KOcounter]

Pretty much agree with nearly everything you've said here.

I'd add that if Karate did have grappling elements as research suggests - then it's quite highly likely that there were some basic incorporation of ground fighting techniques - specifically referring to submissions here. They probably would have been very basic fundamental stuff - nowhere near as advanced or as evolved as BJJ is. I doubt though that many earlier practitioners actually understood the functionality of most of the Kata's they learnt - it's quite evident from even recent testimony that many in the senior hierarchy of the Karate universe pretty much have no idea what they're doing as far as Kata is concerned but are too bogged down in the joojoo juice to admit they don't know what they're doing.

I think in many aspects Karate has evolved and hybridised like you said (more room for more of this) but it has also regressed equally in certain areas - especially in the kata area as evidenced from instructors telling us age-uke (jodan-uke) is a reasonable way to defend a straight punch - which it isn't and why we don't see it applied in any sparring/competition scenario.

I'd argue Kudo is even less Kyokushin now though. Some dojos you might get a more Kyokushin flavour when striking (generally with kicking technique - punching in Kudo is exclusively boxing based) but I think generally across dojos this isn't the case. The budo aspect is definitely there. But I'd argue at this point it's more Judo based than karate right now.

There's evidence of standing grappling and the odd thing like hitting someone who is grounded from a standing position or wrist locking then from a similar postion standing over them. Not really sure there was any real ground grappling tho or many if any modern subs.

As for kudo I still notice a bit of kyokushin favour generally but I know what you mean about a lot of that stuff being edged out.

My impression it kudo generally is its a very good alternative to mma. Compared to its main alternative in Combat Sambo however it seems less grappling orientated.

One thing I've also noticed is that when kudo guys go for the aggressive route they are very aggressive in a way that is sightly more Japanese brawler flavoured as they seem more in line with the swarmer archetype (a swarmer-brawler specifically) when they turn up the pressure.

It looks a bit different to me compared to combat Sambo. Both kudo and combat Sambo have a more, in the more traditional sense of the term, "technical side" of course but from what I've seen with combat Sambo there's a lot more emphasis on falling into big stirkes in a more slugger like way than with kudo .

This is partly due to the rules of combat Sambo where strikes don't score in of themselves and only "takedowns" (which includes knockdowns from striking) score. Combine that with the fairly limited time limit and its obvious why there's an emphasis on hitting hard But I also think there's a cultural element at play, particularly in the way this is expressed as there's almost a flowy, drunken element to the striking in Sambo that is quite Eastern euro flavoured and they throw a lot of looping, Russian style hooks and casting punches.

Additionally the grappling in combat Sambo has more slavic style dynamic lifting throws due to the sport Sambo roots, from what I've seen. Kudo has a bit of that, maybe through the Russian influence since kudo is popular in Eastern Europe and has seemingly been influenced in its modern form by Russians, but to me it's much more apparent in Sambo.

 

[panamaican]

Well, it has "evolved" from Karate so there's that connection - but of course I see your point. I'm still counting it as Karate for my list tho.

But let me ask a few questions just to pick your brain:
- is Karate still Karate if we don't practice kata?
- was it Karate *before* kata were invented?
- since kata were a means of transmission when books weren't feasible - do they still make sense to practice now that we have all kinds of media to accurately describe techniques and application?
- what's more important - the practice of entire kata or the practice of bunkai drills?

1) Not really. We know what karate is when it's separated from kata. It becomes kickboxing, an effective fighting art all by itself. But the kata are the library of techniques from which karate is derived and, just as importantly, they are the training tool for committing those techniques to your physical tool box. Without the kata, you still have a martial art (maybe even a more effective one), it's just not karate because you don't have the components that the training tool is meant to impart.

2) Depends on how you view the history. If we're talking about kata as allegedly derived from Chinese martial arts then, prior to kata, you didn't have karate. You have Chinese martial arts and you had Okinawan tegumi. That merger of Chinese hand and Tegumi is how we get to the various te's that comprise karate. And that merger was facilitated by the incorporation and proliferation of kata.

3) Yes but not for the techniques themselves. IMO, the primary benefit of the kata is in the transitions between techniques. Anecdotally, I recently started teaching my son Bassai Dai, I think the primary benefit, for him, lies in moving from technique to technique realizing how his balance has to change and finding out where there are gaps in his physical development. It's the same conversation that they talk about in my son's travel soccer team. They want kids playing other sports because there are physical movements, transitions, etc. that you don't encounter just practicing the game of soccer. Overall physical movement patterns and familiarity with them is as important as the technical skills of the game.

Going back to kata. The various katas ask the student to move differently from each other. They're all their own "style" with different physical set ups and exits. You can drill the core techniques without the kata but are people also drilling the transitions between those techniques without kata?

To make a boxing parallel, one of the things I always enjoy about watching old Tyson training videos was how different they trained the set ups, the entries and exits from the techniques. Anyone can train to throw hooks and straights and upper-cuts but without D'Amato's specific physical movement training, they're never going to duplicate or match Tyson's style. Can someone be a boxer without D'Amato's physical movement training? Sure, but they won't be a peekaboo style fighter.

4) See above. They're both important but for different reasons.

 

[Mick Dojang]

If it's any consolation to the depressed karateka itt, TKD is in an even worse state imo.

At least Karate evolved in directions like Kudo, Shidokan etc (i.e. full contact sparring, sometimes adding grappling for completeness). This never happened in TKD, it just devolved into no hands foot fencing (WTF) or light-contact kickboxing (ITF).

A lot could be done to save TKD as well. Even just going bare-knuckle with continuous sparring like Kyokushin would be a big improvement. Or alternatively, formally blending it with hapkido and adding some grappling to the ruleset. Some old-school clubs do occasionally do some hapkido, and I have been at seminars where body-conditioning/hardening exercises are taught, but they're an extreme rarity in my experience.

TKD really screwed itself with its own competition ruleset - e.g. knees and elbows are pretty prominent in patterns (katas) but are never trained because they're banned in competition. It's a shame, it could have been so much better.

 

[Kowboy On Sherdog]

Students are being trained all wrong these days

 

[SandisLL]

If it's any consolation to the depressed karateka itt, TKD is in an even worse state imo.

At least Karate evolved in directions like Kudo, Shidokan etc (i.e. full contact sparring, sometimes adding grappling for completeness). This never happened in TKD, it just devolved into no hands foot fencing (WTF) or light-contact kickboxing (ITF).

A lot could be done to save TKD as well. Even just going bare-knuckle with continuous sparring like Kyokushin would be a big improvement. Or alternatively, formally blending it with hapkido and adding some grappling to the ruleset. Some old-school clubs do occasionally do some hapkido, and I have been at seminars where body-conditioning/hardening exercises are taught, but they're an extreme rarity in my experience.

TKD really screwed itself with its own competition ruleset - e.g. knees and elbows are pretty prominent in patterns (katas) but are never trained because they're banned in competition. It's a shame, it could have been so much better.

TKD in it's core isn't bad and even does have technique by using open bare hands for medium - close range....Google up Grandmaster Donato Nardizzi .... demos...
While due to scoring rules and other stuff it is more turned into stuff where kicks, especially kicks in jump ( also punch in jump ) are valued higher and a lot of things are banned to do.
Clubs also does have sponsors and investors. They might get next clients if their students get medals and cups etc....therefore training often is tailored according to sport rules....like with these semi contact karate styles. It isn't karate in it's core at all.

 

[WDSTK]

In think there are 6 Shidokan schools in USA with all East of the Mississippi. Major schools are in Chicago and Atlanta but the Chicago school (Shonie Carter) is not doing much national and international competition anymore so I am told. Atlanta is pretty active in international competion where larger tournaments are. Did find these fights on the internet which I think are traditional MMA. The Shotokan link must be very old and I think what Kertoll was referencing.