You don't you can break them apart. But if there are a lot oftechniques to learn and you are interested in knowing those techniques, kata is a good way to remember and practise them. And the transitions between them, too.
... I would add this is an edit, but there is no edit, so: You of course, don't need a super long sequence, but can practise like ten of shorrt techniques - which is what bunkai are. But that is one of the ways? Does it really matter if it is one longer sequence or many smaller?
Yes the bull was tied and sedated but Oyama still chopped the horn off Morio Higanno can break rocks just like Oyama and he's still alive. Morris himself could break bricks without spacers in between
What matters, to me, is that I get more out of considering these things for myself, my own body, and the present point in my training. For it to be specifically targeted to my needs, rather than hoping that I can find what I need in a set sequence I've learnt by rote. I also don't think that repeating the same techniques in the same order continuously is particularly great neuromuscular conditioning. I'd much rather get as much variety in there as possible. For teachers who wish to preserve a system as a way of moving, like a living historical snapshot, then I can see the use but I see it as more of a sacrifice than a benefit.
True, that is what is good for every single person. I enjoy this method, for example. And everyone can find bits they suit them well in that sequence. You always need to start learning somewhere and only with some experience can really tell what works for you well. Probably. Of course, the order is the same, but still can't see the problem why you couldn't learn techniques that way. It doesn't mean we only ever drill techniques by means of kata, of course. But you drill them this way, you use bunkai to drill them separately and you can practise anything else or any particular technique in any other way possible like you do. I think kata is a plus for those who enjoy them and I don't think it will teach you bad habits, if done correctly. You can also still practise techniques in a more relaxed manner, when you don't feel like doing hard training etc. But that has already been said.
In those early stages I think that isolation and repetition works a lot better than remembering sequences. The student is at a double disadvantage, because they are having to remember both how to perform the techniques as well as learning the sequence. It doesn't provide that repetitive grind that really gets technique burned-in. If you enjoy them then more power to you, but purely in terms of effective training for rank beginners I don't think there is a valid argument for kata. Of course, enjoying something is good enough reason to do it, but it doesn't make it an effective or necessary method.
I would think that is part of the reason why karate and similar arts are a long-term journey, intended to be with you for the whole life. Once you learn the katas, it is easier to recall all the techniques becasue you remember the kata than to remember all the isolation exercises. Like for a kata I learned, there are 12 main bunkai we learn. And it is quite hard to not forget one. But by reviewing the kata, you think of every technique, even hidden ones there are and they stay with you. It is easier to remember a sequence. And I would say this what you write mainly works for specific goals - like learning to fight someone and learn it fast. If that was my goal, I also wouldn't do traditional karate, I think, but that is still only that one purpose yo seem to have. It sounds more like a short term goal - learn to fight fast, then fight and likely accumulate injuries by engaging in lot of fights. Rather then to improve your ability and health throughout your life. This is a bit of an extreme, I am aware of that, but I still just want to say there are more purposes people can see in MAs. You do, what you like, too, of course.
Exactly Ironically given my spirited defense of kata here I don't do them - well maybe about 2, but they represent less than 5% of my training regime. However, the small isolations I DO perform have upped my game massively - to the point where I can pummel with Harry without being overhwhelmed (thank you Siu Lim Tao) I spar, I drill, I roll, I hit people with sticks, I do conditioning...and in that I find time for some solo work and THAT is where the 5% sneaks in as a convenient go to where I can hone rather than simply sharpen...form 1 is my current go to, which was created by one of the best FIGHTER escrimadors today. Do you need forms? Nope Are the panacea? absolutely not! Can you get results without them? Betcha booty! But useless? That tells me the person simply does not "get" the idea
Not at all, longevity of training and carefully balancing risk/reward so that training is beneficial to health and fitness is a prime concern of mine. Having said that, the beginner stages are a short term goal for me. I want to get people able to function as quickly as possible, bound by instilling correct form and not allowing any bad habits to sneak in that will take work later to eliminate. It is a delicate balancing act. Most people don't get to intermediate-level training, let alone beyond that, so my goal with beginners, even if they only attend one session, is to have them leave more able to deal with violence than before. This is a difficult distinction to make, , but I'll give it a go... Why do you have to memorise 12 bunkai taken from that kata? Please correct me if I'm wrong, because I haven't trained Karate, but I get the impression that you have to learn them in order to turn you into a karateka. So that your choice and application of technique looks like Karate. It is about preserving the system, not giving you the most efficient training tools to become competent at dealing with violence. Like I said, if that appeals to you, then I'm glad you found it!
When I read or hear any stories of old martial artists I have a whole salt mine on hand, not just a pinch. No doubt Oyama was a hard geezer. Strenuous training and tough. But he was also a rampant self publicist (as many old martial arts people were...including Steve Morris) and embellished his stories and achievements. Just looking at the bull fighting clips you can see it's more like "bull bullying" than fighting. It's basically animal abuse. He's pulling the bull around by the ring through its nose, it's scared, in pain and wants no part of any "fight". I've a fair bit of time for Steve Morris. People that I know that have trained with him rate him highly. He was also rated highly by old school people that are themselves well rated. I like his no nonsense attitude and at a time when there was deference for authority in martial arts I'm sure he was like shot in the arm or kick up the bum for many.
If you take it from that perspective, then of course. From the perspective of a student that only wants to learn to fight a little and doesn't want to invest much time, karate is not the perfect answer probably. But any beginner would first learn technique. You won't learn kata in your first lesson. And when you do, the first katas are fairly short and easy in all the karate styles from what I learned. Nothing overly compicated and only giving you the basic techniques you are focusing on anyway. Your goal for the students who only show up once is a nice one, though, I like that approach Yep, you could probably say that. They are what defines that style as it was invited to defend yourselves. As I said, they would preserve the system and you wil benefit by knowing many techniques. You are likely not going to use them al in a self-defence scenario, as I said. In that situation, maybe one punch would be enough, or maybe all the techniques in the world won't save you. I will speak for the system I learn, not sure if it is like this in all karate styles, but I suppose it could be. We have 10 kata (discounting breathing ones). Originally in days past, each student had one kata they learned to perfection, maybe adding their own flovour to the techniques. They could do it backword and knew it perfectly and used the techniques they drilled. Only those, who were the inheritors of the style learned all the kata to be ablet o pass them down. Each student then only learned one. It is yo could say a privilege that today everyone learns all of them, but at a cost that we won't be as good in all these techniques. As you learn them, though, some suit you more then others and the experienced karateka usually still choose one they favour and work on the most, so even if you learn all the kata to broaden your horizons, you still have personal techniques. I was told as the katas are made, there is a complex system of techniques in each of them, you can extract a lot of techniques from them, so in theory one kata should be enough. So you learn a lot, but specialize in what you find most suitable for you. This is more or less what I was told, I don't have enough experience to make such claims.
Why does Morris feel the need to go around saying karate is useless when UFC fighters and K-1 kickboxers credit their success to karate? Peter Smidt did karate, Lyoto Machida and Mirko Cro Cop did Shotokan, Andy Hug; Francisco Filho and Semmy Schilt did Kyokushin, Bas Rutten and GSP did Kyokushin (GSP even comes out to his fights wearing a gi). I think Conor McGregor has a black belt in karate too. I also don't like how he says his students would tear through UFC and Pride and how 30 minutes with him is more beneficial than 30 years karate
Ok so there's a big difference between being good fighter because of their training and being a good fighter in spite of their training. In many ways the fighters you mention were good fighters in spite of a lot of their training not because of it. If a fighter does lots of pad work, sparring, conditioning and then 10 minutes of kata, the kata is having minimal impact on their success. Even more so if they are generally a hard nut anyway. The time in karate Morris is talking about (60's, 70's, 80's, etc) he's absolutely right that a lot of it was useless and the fighters it produced also did a lot of meaningless repetition of kata and set sparring that had minimal impact on their success. Some people still train that way of course. But that is changing. There is a way to train Karate where the kata is front and centre, informs the training, informs concepts and tactics as well as technique and contributes to being an effective fighter. But in general karate is still not trained that way (mock traditional "3k karate" still being the norm) so Morris is right in a lot of what he says IMHO. Someone like GSP did Kyokushin as a child but anyone that knows martial arts that sees him fight can see there's very little of it in how he fights. He has a ram-rod jab and uses that to force people to try and counter it. If they stay at long range he snipes them with it. If they attempt to move in or counter with strikes he double legs them to the floor and then GnP's them. Good luck finding instruction on how to do any of that in Kyokushin dojo. He wears a gi because he likes the martial arts culture, the honour and respect and like to pay homage to how martial arts helped him as a bullied child.
I don't do karate; I've tried Wado Ryu and it wasn't for me. Doesn't mean I'll say all karate is bad though
Look at how Peter Smidt fights in the ring; that's karate, not kickboxing. Or how Lyoto Machida uses karate movements. Andy Hug's kicks are also karate kicks
I know ronki's been banned but thought I'd chip in. Machida is a good example of someone that does kata but also how that kata does not influence his fight style. His stand up fighting style is sport/ippon kumite karate. Something that was bolted on to the kata and something that does not reflect the fighting "style" recorded in the kata (instead being more linked to Kendo and Judo sport rules). An example of being good in spite of doing something (kata) not because of it. Same with Hug. Known for his axe, high and spinning kicks. Things that don't appear in any traditional kata at all because, again, they are bolt-ons added at a later date when sporting sparring was introduced. Being able to use one aspect of modern karate (ippon kumite footwork in Machida's fighting for example) doesn't then validate "karate" as a whole when the other aspects don't contribute to that success.
Forms as we are talking about are not the same as drilling moves with a partner though and the best Kali guy I have ever seen personally with the best form and function also holds multipul championships and national and world level in armour and light armour fighting. And what the dog brothers discovered I believe was that there forms/drills they did before heavy limited armour sparring weren't realistic so they had to change
