Grappling in Kata?

[Melanie]

There was grappling in kata? I didn't think there was...but posts on another forum reckons there was...

Does anyone know more about this?

If there was, why were they removed?

What were they?

I'm intrigued...

[Andrew Green]

Sure there was, and still is and I know you already knew that...

[Melanie]

Not to the literal sense my dear Mr Green. I am showed one application at the moment that I can explore, but as I wasn't deliberately aware or grappling in Shotokan Kata...it wasn't an avenue I explored. :)

Can you give me an example?

[Andrew Green]

Last couple of Shoto Journals should grappling applications for bassai dai and Jion.

[Melanie]

Ah...bit advanced for me at the mo Andy...but I will look :)

[Freeform]

Mel, pick up Iain Abernethy's 'Karates Grappling Methods' (or something like that might be techniques, its on Amazon.com) and you'll find grappling techniques from the Heian/Pinian katas. Nidan, Sandan and Godan are full of grappling. Also Martial Arts Illustrated recently published a series of articles dissecting these kata. I'm currently trying to study bunkai related to Tekki Shodan, any good material out there?

Thanx

[Andrew Green]

Shawn Jefferson's webpage is back up at http://24fightingchickens.com/

I can't speak for the applications, as I haven't gone through it yet, but it might be a good place to start for Shotokan applications.

[wayofthedragon]

I have read this in a martial arts magazine. That in katas, there are throws, locks, and other grappling techniques that are usually not paid any attention too. So yes. All this reconfirms that there is grappling in katas

[Freeform]

Well, they are paid attention to if you train in a decent school. To many Instructors are tied up in perfecting the kata, you could spend your who life doing that and still not know the applications!

I was fortunate to have a Sensei who taught the kata bunkai.

Up on my high horse

Thanx

[Ozebob]

Hi Freeform,

I was fortunate to have a Sensei who taught the kata bunkai.

But then-

I'm currently trying to study bunkai related to Tekki Shodan, any good material out there?

I found these two posts a bit confusing, could you clarify?

Regards,
Ozebob

[Freeform]

I don't just take information from one source, one persons interpretation of a kata could be completely different to someone elses. I have applications for some kata (which I feel are practical) that my Sensei doesn't use or teach, just a different point of view. Also I haven't been able to train with him regularly over the last year (we live about 60/70 miles apart) so I'm trying to learn alot of the bunkai for myself. I've been systematically tearing apart kata and was just looking for some new material, 'for a different point of view'.

Any help would be greatly appretiated!

Thanx

[Ozebob]

I don't just take information from one source, one persons interpretation of a kata could be completely different to someone elses. I have applications for some kata (which I feel are practical) that my Sensei doesn't use or teach, just a different point of view. Also I haven't been able to train with him regularly over the last year (we live about 60/70 miles apart) so I'm trying to learn alot of the bunkai for myself. I've been systematically tearing apart kata and was just looking for some new material, 'for a different point of view'.

Hi Freeform,

Fair enough then. What I have found helpful is to look at older versions and the same kata in other styles. I have seen applications for Naihanchi from Vince Morris, Patrick McCarthy, Taika Oyata and George Dillman. There is a fair amount of information out there to help you determine what suits your own situation.

Cheers,
Bob

[Freeform]

There are 3 Tekki katas (to my knowledge) and it was my understanding that Naihanchi was Tekki Shodan, but saw it performed by an English 3rd Dan (sorry can't remember his name, bad me! Remeber the kata, can't remember the guy ;) ) and there were some differences, such as no stamping kicks and the cross hand trap and strike were different.

Thoughts?

Thanx

[Ozebob]

Hi Freeform,

There are 3 Tekki katas (to my knowledge) and it was my understanding that Naihanchi was Tekki Shodan, but saw it performed by an English 3rd Dan (sorry can't remember his name, bad me! Remeber the kata, can't remember the guy ) and there were some differences, such as no stamping kicks and the cross hand trap and strike were different.

There are 3 Naihanchi as well although there has been speculation that there was originally one that was separated into 3 parts by Itosu. Other points of viewhave been that Itosu created 2 and 3 or just 3. No one seems to be able to prove anything as usual.

Murakami Katsumi states in his terrific book about Okinawan arate and Kobudo, that the swing of the leg and other changes occurred in Tokyo and later were also adopted by some in Okinawa. He did not approve at all as some important points were left out and the kata became lesser for it.

As this used to be the first kata learned in the karate that developed around the Capital of Shuri, it makes sense to see it as developing the foundation for further progress. I use it as a vehicle to teach defense against being:
held by both wrists from the front and from the rear;
a straight punch;
a hook punch;
a groin kick and follow up punch.

In doing so the responses are linked to tegumi drills as taught by Patrick McCarthy and after intercepting incoming, we apply elbow and knee strikes, arm bars, foot sweeps, back knuckle and kicks and punches of our own. I have learned to keep the responses simple and effective against likely common assault situations.

Cheers,
bob

[Melanie]

Hiya Freeform,

Patrick McCarthy is doing a seminar soon on these very Tegumi Drills. I have sent you a PM with the details. If anyone else is interested in attending, please look in the Events/Calendar area under Thursday 21st November 2002.

http://www.chilternkarate.co.uk/

[Mike Flanagan]

Hi Melanie

Originally posted by Melanie
There was grappling in kata? I didn't think there was...but posts on another forum reckons there was...

Does anyone know more about this?

If there was, why were they removed?

What were they?

I'm intrigued...

You're a little tinker, aren't you!

You know full well that kata is jampacked full of grappling. What have you been doing with Zoltan for these last however many months? How many grappling applications has he shown you for gedan-barai? Lots I'm sure. Well extrapolate that a little. He's shown you all that from just 2 movements in kata. And there are a lot more movements in kata, each of which will have a number of different meanings. That adds up to a hell of a lot of grappling! Have you looked at the kata section on Zoltan's website?

As for why its commonly not taught. Basically because the Japanese never learnt it from the Okinawans. In the early 20th century karate was turned from a brutally effective jutsu art into a 'do' designed to be taught to the masses for self-improvement. Ask Zoltan for his opinions on the subject.

Mike

[Melanie]

Ok, ok, ok! I admit it!

The conversation was lean for a time here...I wanted to get things moving a wee bit so decided to talk about something I knew a weeny bit about...kinda didn't work though :)

I always ask Zoltan questions! :D I question everyone....whoops...

[Mike Flanagan]

Originally posted by Melanie
I question everyone....whoops...

Good, and so you should:) Only problem is, you start to realise that no-one has all the answers.:eek:

Mike

[Ozebob]

Hi Mike,

Only problem is, you start to realise that no-one has all the answers.

Now Mike that's not true. There are at least two on the CD that seem to know it all.. and a couple on the Sabaki List. Actually are they on both lists :o

Regards,
Ozebob :D

[Levo]

Ok, this may not make me very popular.

Yes, there are grappling techniques in Karate (especially standing locks and throws).

Yes, many of these grappling techniques appear in the kata.

No, most of the groundwork techniques being shown in popular new karate books and videos are not in the kata, despite the err...interesting *cough* interpretations of some of the movements.

Training kata will not teach you how to grapple.

Most karate instructors I've seen showing grappling bunkai were not very good grapplers.

If you want to learn to grapple, learn from a grappler.

Despite the proven effectiveness of cross training, many traditional martial artists still want one art to hold all the answers.

Just my opinion of course.

[binski20]

This ties in with a thread I started about sweeps and throws in shotokan.
How present are they? Do they actually get trained?
I am considering shotokan after boxing, and I was curious mainly about this.

[Kosokun]

Originally posted by binski20
This ties in with a thread I started about sweeps and throws in shotokan.
How present are they? Do they actually get trained?
I am considering shotokan after boxing, and I was curious mainly about this.

Sweeps are an integral part of the typical Shotokan freesparring arsenal. Throw's ala Judo, typically aren't trained much, if at all.

Rob

[Kosokun]

Originally posted by Levo
Ok, this may not make me very popular.

Training kata will not teach you how to grapple.



Just doing repetitions of the kata, doesn't train much, if anything.

However, if one extracts the defensive ideas and techniques contained within the kata and works those with a partner, then you've got something.

Rob

[Freeform]

I've always found it quite amusing when Senior Karateka claimed there was ground mounts in kata.

Considering that most of the techniques were designed to be used against untrained assailants in self defence (hit them hard then run away) I'd be suprised if there really was any groundfighting!

Colin

[Levo]

Yep, I agree with most of that.

"# I don't think you can definitely say what is a karate move and what is not. Okinawan karate had many toride (restrainsts and throws, etc.) and did not name them all because of the infinite number of variations possible."

Maybe. I pretty much know a modern variation of a grappling technique (such as kneebar) when I see it or read the details in a book. I also often know where some of these guys learnt it from (not Karate sources), but that just comes back to what you said about them declaring their training.

"I say blame the individual, not the art. Just IMO."

Fair point. I annoyed some people recently by naming names on this very subject so was trying to keep it a bit general :)

Btw, I'm not trying to make out everyone teaching grappling applications from Karate is dodgy. I'm sure there's many instructors out there who teach the grappling applications in Karate well and admit when they are adding moves from other arts instead of pretending (or implying) they are in the kata.

Regards

Nathan

[pgm316]

I don't know a lot about kata's but I'd never thought there was groundfighting in them. Only the occasional standing lock or hold etc.

Would you say there is enough for what you need, or have people cross trained with Judo for example to get what they feel they need ?

[Kosokun]

Originally posted by Levo

Kosokun,

"Just doing repetitions of the kata, doesn't train much, if anything. "

Good point, so why do people do it?




I wonder the same. Kata done that way is just dancing. For me, if I'm going to be dancing, I want to be holding Melanie! :love:
;)


Why not just train the "the defensive ideas and techniques" with a partner straight away (which you seem to suggest is the important part)?

Many of us do. Let me ask you something? Why, if you're training the defensive ideas and techniques contained within kata, and time isn't an issue, should you dispense with kata altogether?

Your basic point is solid, though. If you'd like to learn grappling techniques, it makes sense to consult someone who specializes in grappling. Karate, imo, never was intended to wrestle with someone on the ground.

Rob

[Terry Matthes]

From what I understand Kata is a way of practicing movments that help your body to become accustumed to moving certain ways. Each part of a kata is not just supposed to show a single strike/grapple/lock ect, it just puts you in a position where a move of that sort might be optimal to perform. We arent supposed to say this move in this part of the kata is done to show the arm bar or whatever, but rather that an arm bar could come from that position as could an assortment of other moves. By practicing kata you reinforce these postions in your brain so they become automatic and more fluid in your fighting. I am just new and this is my take on it that was somewhat influenced by my sensai (Andrew Green), he understands kata a lot more than I do.

[YODA]

Originally posted by Terry Matthes
From what I understand Kata is a way of practicing movments that help your body to become accustumed to moving certain ways.

That makes a lot of sense. However, when I see Karateka spar or fight, why does this "certain way" not manifest itself?

[Kosokun]

Andrew and I have differing views of what kata is about.

Rob


Originally posted by Terry Matthes
From what I understand Kata is a way of practicing movments that help your body to become accustumed to moving certain ways. Each part of a kata is not just supposed to show a single strike/grapple/lock ect, it just puts you in a position where a move of that sort might be optimal to perform. We arent supposed to say this move in this part of the kata is done to show the arm bar or whatever, but rather that an arm bar could come from that position as could an assortment of other moves. By practicing kata you reinforce these postions in your brain so they become automatic and more fluid in your fighting. I am just new and this is my take on it that was somewhat influenced by my sensai (Andrew Green), he understands kata a lot more than I do.

[Kosokun]

Originally posted by YODA


That makes a lot of sense. However, when I see Karateka spar or fight, why does this "certain way" not manifest itself?

Would kind of argue against the magical properties of kata, in that regard.

Interesting perspective, that of practicing kata reinforcing these postions in your brain so they become automatic and more fluid in your fighting, given the pictures of a young Chojun Miyagi and Juhatsu Kiyoda practicing some isolated defensive ideas taken from particular kata movements. I would think that for Terry's perspective to be correct, one would need to also practice two person forms. Two person forms are conspicuously absent in Okinawan/Japanese karate kata.


Rob

[Andrew Green]

Originally posted by YODA


That makes a lot of sense. However, when I see Karateka spar or fight, why does this "certain way" not manifest itself?

This could happen for a couple of reasons:

The rules of the sparring, most karate schools use a form of pointfighting which favors high kicks and doesn't allow grabbing.

Kata are just a training aid, many of the motions are exaggerated in many ways. Sort of like training an "ideal" method from a mechanical point of view. But when it is applied other things have to be considered.

Consider an arm bar from the guard and the way it is usually drilled as a basic excercise. It doesn't usually come out quite like that against a resisting opponent. But it teaches you the basic form and develops other attributes such as mobility.

A karate kata does the same sort of thing. It helps develop the initial "structure" and body mechanics that will make other things easier.

So you could think of Okinawan kata in the same sort of way as Sil lim tao or the basic form of hubud or referance point trapping or any other fixed drill. It's just a drill to develop certain attributes. But on its own it is incomplete.

Another reason is many karate folk train to do kata, and train to do point fighting as seperate things. Rather then train using kata to get better at fighting. (Not point fighting) Imagine training Wing Chun forms and sparring WTF style, the two aren't compatable.

Rob, two person forms are present in some sense. But they are not standardized or "fixed". They are short and often created on the spot. But are still as much a kata as the "Nage no kata". They just don't have names, standard forms or any other restrictive elements.

But as soon as you introduce a basic prearranged skill against an attacker what you are doing has no real difference from a two person kata, minus the formalization.

Solo kata are for solo practice. Partner work starts with what are essentially a kata, but without the formalities, and then resistance is added which leads to isolated sparring and then sparring with everything.

There have been attempts to formalize two person kata in Okinawan karate. Motobu's 12 drills, for example. More so with the kobudo perhaps. But many of the Kobudo ones are rather impractical and no one seems to deny this. Block a Bo strike with the handle of a tekko is not going to happen. But it can develop accuracy and timing as well as handling of the weapon.

I don't like the idea of trying to standardize two person sets. It just holds things back as those skills that are standardized become the focus. The focus should be on developing what works, not what worked for someone else, or worse what someone else thought should work.

[Terry Matthes]

Also to add to what I said earlier; What I get out of Kata might not be what the man beside me gets out of it. We could be doing the same Kata , but since out styles are slightly diffrent we might precieve movements presented in that Kata diffrently. When I say our style is diffrent I mean that we are both practicing karate, but I have more favoured moves/positions as compared to him. I also might throw some wrestling moves into the mix, whereas he might use whatever he has as past knowledge. I like to bridge :) ask Andrew he has seen me do it (I think he's still weirded out that my spine moves in such a direction :D )

[Levo]

Originally posted by pgm316
I don't know a lot about kata's but I'd never thought there was groundfighting in them. Only the occasional standing lock or hold etc.

Would you say there is enough for what you need, or have people cross trained with Judo for example to get what they feel they need ?

Depends what you feel you "need". If you "need" grappling in your game then go to a grappling club coz they'll be better at it.

Originally posted by Kosokun
Many of us do. Let me ask you something? Why, if you're training the defensive ideas and techniques contained within kata, and time isn't an issue, should you dispense with kata altogether?

Since when has time not been an issue? :confused:
Since when is there enough time for non productive training?
Can your jab/double leg takedown/rear naked choke etc etc not be improved?

If you've got free time find some to drill and spar with!

Like I've said before, if people want to do non productive training for fun then that's up to them. But when they start calling it the "core"/"essence"/"foundation" of productive training I just have to speak up :D

Originally posted by Kosokun
Your basic point is solid, though. If you'd like to learn grappling techniques, it makes sense to consult someone who specializes in grappling. Karate, imo, never was intended to wrestle with someone on the ground.

Agreed.

But there's several people out there trying to make out Karate kata does teach you how to grapple. IMO they realise that grappling is effective and a must addition to your game, but know that many Karateka will not go to a grappling club, so they pretend and/or imply it's in the katas.

Originally posted by Terry Matthes
From what I understand Kata is a way of practicing movments that help your body to become accustumed to moving certain ways.

Err...what Yoda said.

Good point made by Rob too.

If it's about making you "accustumed to moving certain ways" this should be freeform and in the way you would use it in a fight (ie shadowboxing) if you really have to do it by yourself IMO. Practicing the moves with a partner should always be the priority (ie drilling) coz it's never the same doing it by yourself. You also need to make it "alive" as you don't develop the most important attribute: timing.

Originally posted by Andrew Green
So you could think of Okinawan kata in the same sort of way as Sil lim tao or the basic form of hubud or referance point trapping or any other fixed drill. It's just a drill to develop certain attributes. But on its own it is incomplete.

Oooopps...looks like we are going to get in to the "dead" vs "alive" drill debate.

I don't go as far as Matt Thornton, I do believe there's place for "dead" drills. However, it shouldn't be the "core" of you art and they need to made alive once you've got the basic drill.

To save my fingers check out this article:

http://sfuk.tripod.com/articles_02/thorntonforms.html

and this thread:

http://www.inosanto.com/cgi-bin/YaBB/YaBB.cgi?board=general;action=display;num=10253989 14

Later

Nathan

[Terry Matthes]

If it's about making you "accustumed to moving certain ways" this should be freeform and in the way you would use it in a fight (ie shadowboxing) if you really have to do it by yourself IMO. Practicing the moves with a partner should always be the priority (ie drilling) coz it's never the same doing it by yourself. You also need to make it "alive" as you don't develop the most important attribute: timing.
If it was freeform then it wouldn't teach you anything. You guys are missing the point. Kata is not just about combat situations. Kata is also a solo exercise so drilling with a partner is not what it is meant for. Your are all trying to classify it using your own experiences, but in truth Kata is in a class of its own. It's not shadow boxing or combat drills, it's Kata. Kata also does other things, like teach you to keep your arms in the right positions, learn to balance ect. You really have to go and do it for a while to get a good idea of how it helps you. When I tried kata for the first time I was off balance, clumsy and couldn't do half of the moves properly. As your progress you learn better balance and coordination. You learn flow and how to put your moves in a string without tying yourself in a knot. All these things kata helps you with also help you in your kicks and puches, grapples, and everything else that you do in your MA.

[Andrew Green]

Originally posted by Levo

I don't go as far as Matt Thornton, I do believe there's place for "dead" drills. However, it shouldn't be the "core" of you art and they need to made alive once you've got the basic drill.


I would never say they should be the core. They are a solo drill which supplements partner training. For the most part I do agree with what Matt Thorton says, but I think he's taken it a little to far.

Kata cannot replace partner training or freeform solo training. But it can provide benefits if it is used to support those training methods.


Like I've said before, if people want to do non productive training for fun then that's up to them. But when they start calling it the "core"/"essence"/"foundation" of productive training I just have to speak up


I don't find them non productive. But I certainely wouldn't call them the core of what I do. Are they a neccessary part of training? Of course not. Are they useful? I think so, when they are used to support other methods. Is it the best use of time? Thats a trickier question, I think it depends on the person in question.


But there's several people out there trying to make out Karate kata does teach you how to grapple. IMO they realise that grappling is effective and a must addition to your game, but know that many Karateka will not go to a grappling club, so they pretend and/or imply it's in the katas.


I agree to that fully. I don't think kata should teach techniques. Now the movements of kata can be applied in various ways, but you should learn the techniques first, then seeing them in the kata will be easy.

Now I can take sections of kata and show how the same basic movements can be applied on the ground. Do I think that I could have learnt that from the kata alone? Nope. It certainely wasn't intended to be used in that way either. But the movements are similar.

Personally I think anyone claiming that kata contain grappling is full of it as well. Kata are just a movement and structure drill. You could "extract" anything you want from them if you know how to look for it. But that doesn't mean its "part" of the kata.

Kata are just a supplementary drill. They are usefull when they supplement additional drilling and sparring. But to focus training around kata will limit the practitioner and create a non-effective system.

[jonny]

Originally posted by Melanie
There was grappling in kata? I didn't think there was...but posts on another forum reckons there was...

Does anyone know more about this?

If there was, why were they removed?

What were they?

I'm intrigued...

Someone is making this up to say that they were the founder of this. Kata is a one man sequence therefore you can't grapple with yourself. Unless you are doing bunkai.

[pgm316]

There are moves that relate to grappling techniques. Nothing like BJJ, maybe the odd grab or lock here and there. To think that will be much use in a ground fight is another thing.........

[Melanie]

I have since seen BB doing a two man kata - basically becoming the opponent we imagine during our kata. In doing this they can then find further moves - which I have to admit still didn't go to the ground but did have elements of grappling and not just dong further blocks, etc...

[Kwan Jang]

-According to George Dillman, the original purpose of kata was to map out the ways to attack pressure points by striking(kyusho) or manipulate joints(tuite). In Dillman's books and seminars, he gives a history of ryukyu kempo-jitsu before Master Itosu created the "school children's art" that his student Funakoshi took to Japan and became karate-do(which in turn was a major influence on tae kwon do). Dillman goes on to say that the original combat art that is shown in the katas was designed to shut down an opponent nearly instantly whether striking or grappling, but the for most practitioners the original intent was lost. The kyusho and tuite of ryukyu kempo closely matches Prof. Wally Jay's Small Circle Jujitsu, to the extent that Prof. Jay sent his son and successor, Soke-Dai Leon Jay to study w/ Dillman and is now an 8th dan in Dillman's organization. -I personally feel that when you go back to the combat roots of most trad. systems, you will generally find a "complete" system. It's when you get to the sport versions that you get so much specialization. Now I'm a master instructor in a mixed MA system which includes submission grappling, jujitsu(both Small Circle and Braz.) as well as integrating the Dillman method of pressure point work. I have trained w/ some of the best ground fighters on the planet and can hold my own(being in the 600lbs bench press range doesn't hurt, but I'm a technician first), but I know first hand that when the tuite points release the joint or cause a cross-flexor rreflex action, all the ground grappling goes out the window(because your motor control is shut down). So my experience is that the kata undoubtably contain very effective grappling techniques; as effective as anything out there today and this does noyhing to diminish the value of groudwork, they are all part of the same whole. However, very few people still train or teach the bunkai of the tuite, yet that was one of the things that made the original combat art of the Ryukyu islands.(just as chin na and dim mak-the Chinese equivalents- made the Chinese systems and the keupso made the Korean combat systems) so formidable.

[Knight_Errant]

If it was freeform then it wouldn't teach you anything. You guys are missing the point. Kata is not just about combat situations. Kata is also a solo exercise so drilling with a partner is not what it is meant for. Your are all trying to classify it using your own experiences, but in truth Kata is in a class of its own. It's not shadow boxing or combat drills, it's Kata.

Oh yeah? Tell me, if you can't incorporate it into your own experience, then what earthly good is it?

Noone doubts that a lot has been lost. However, if you look at hironori otsuka's explanations, you'll find them extremely vague. He says 'jodan defence', not 'block, grab, punch'. Possibly, Funakoshi said something in private to otsuka about this. Funakoshi fascists have a way of claiming that it's all very deep and important and that it depends on your own interpretation. Rubbish! An instructor needs to know what is being conveyed. If you want my very blunt and honest opinion, I think it was all forgotten and they don't have the balls to say so.

[Oyatafan]

Ryu Te (Oyata sensei's art) Is basically a comprehensive study of kata, and our bunkai is broken down to the point where basically every inch of the kata contains 10 techniques. We don't do bunkai in the order of the kata, but rather each technique is explored in different situations, different angles, etc.