What are the most important techniques in karate according to the kata?

You assert that I do not understand your point. I actually think you aren't getting your head around what I am saying. Perhaps another poster will and be kind enough to rephrase it.

 

So for the karateka on the left, geri waza is just as important for him as the karateka on the right?



(NOTE: This is not an attempt to slight disabled martial artists.)

 

Osu,


I wish it was that simple and "natural" ---- I am not as talented as you my friend; I had and have to work hard for every single technique that works for me to make it my own, even the ones that seem better suited to my body type, age (and wooden leg )

No matter how hard I train domomawashi geri (arguably not in any kata), I will have dismembered & killed myself before any opponent has any chance to do me harm... Even in the unlikely chance that I could survive the ordeal, there are many many more important techniques that I would use before rolling over on the curb in the hope of decapitating my assailant(s)
Training your weaknesses harder could, under certain circumstances, be a good thing... but not always.
More often than not, building on strength is more efficient (but not always )

In the end, the only good enough answer is:"It depends..."

I do not think that Kuma and others are putting forth the notion that kata should dictate which technique is going to be more important to someone... but, maybe I did not completely understand what they really meant?


Osu & thank you for the argument, it forced me to re-examine aspects of my training - it was worth it.


Osu!

 

What you are naturally good at, only comes out after much sweat.

 

LOL - viewed that way, I can only agree...


Osu!

 

Well said. Going back to Superfoot, if he had split equal amounts of time between his left leg and his right leg, if he didn't further injure himself to the point where he had to quit MA altogether his left leg wouldn't be where it was and we probably wouldn't even know who he was. Instead, he took advantage of his strengths, trained his left leg hard, and made a name for himself.

Claiming the only technique that matters is the one you are currently doing sounds very esoteric and all, and it's probably good for impressing white belts and the like, but the technique you will be currently doing may be dramatically different from what another person will be doing. And that goes to training and utilizing your strengths. If you can think of the dozens of different responses against an opponent throwing a simple reverse punch, this is obvious.

 

I can assure you that both Marciano and Wallace trained their butts off with many different techniques before the discovered their "signature" techniques. Rocky did not say I think I will develop my right hook to be the best, it only started to come out with much hard training. Most likely he realized that this technique just felt better, more effective and natural for him at one point and then started to develop it more and a strategy to use it more effectively in a fight. That said, each and ever technique was equally important to his using his signature technique and I am sure he trained them all hard. This to me is the exact opposite of what the thread's hypothesis is.

 

It is not esoteric at all. You are making it this. From my view it is actually the single most practical way to train. Think about a bodybuilder. They train multi-joint movements like the squat and bench press. From this work, some body parts naturally rise as signature to their body. They will then train their "weaker" parts to try to bring them up to that level. However, when they are doing the bench press, the bench press is the single most important lift.

 

That is a flawed analogy as a bodybuilder by definition is building symmetry - this does not apply in the same mannert to combative arts

 

Osu,


Yes, no doubt about that and I agree with you here.
However, it was not my impression that this thread promotes the exact opposite; to the contrary, it seemed to me that in the argument with Kuma, etc..., you are sort of saying the same thing from different points of view.
............. which is all fine with me BTW...

I am not so sure about the validity of the BB parallel you are making... training a body part is different from training to execute a technique.
To execute a technique, you need the various body parts to work well in conjunction to each other - there cannot really be one "weaker" that the next, or the technique won't be properly executed... You might at some point need to specifically work a body part to eliminate a weakness in order to properly execute a technique.
However, working on your stronger techniques vs your weaker ones, might make perfect sense in some (most?) cases...

(of course, in the end, it depends )


Osu!


PS: Are we starting to split hairs here?

 

Isn't nekoashi saying nothing more enlightening than "the most important technique is the one that is most important".
Which is essentially saying nothing.

 

Not at all. What I am saying is the most important technique is the one you are doing. I don't think there is anything mystical, esoteric or fundamentally revolutionary in it, only practical advice.

 

Not sure about Marciano, but Superfoot injured his knee in Judo prior to beginning Shorin Ryu. For what it's worth.

And actually, I think it goes perfectly with what the thread means. Think of these following points:

(1) Why does Uechi Ryu karate look so different from Shotokan Karate?
(2) Why does Matsubayashi Shorin-Ryu have several different kata than Goju Ryu?
(3) Why do some martial artists break off from their teachers and adopt their own system?

Systems are founded by an individual adopted a doctrine of strategy and tactics to apply techniques they found especially favorable for them. This is why if I stood in front of you and blasted a reverse punch at your jaw, the way how you as a Shorin-Ryu practitioner would react will often be very different from how a karateka from a different system would act. If your opponent is off-balance and exposing several weak points, the way how you would attack as a Shorin-Ryu practitioner will often be different to how say I would react as a Kyokushin practitioner. It's approaches like these that basically created different martial systems. If all techniques were important for everyone and nobody specialized, we wouldn't have so many different systems that we do today.

 

That doesn't tell me anything.
Doesn't further my understanding of the style.
Doesn't make me better at fighting.
Sounds like something you'd say to kid to shut it up when it keeps saying "Why?"

 

Why should anything else matter when I am throwing a punch at your face? I suggest that if you are thinking about your mortgage at that moment, you are going to get hit hard and if I am thinking of mine, you won't get hit hard enough.

 

What does this have to do with anything? We are discussing kata. The basic concept put forth is that if the kata has a technique more often, then that technique is more important, right? Think back to the last photo you posted, zenkutsu dachi is all throughout the first kata in Matsubayashi.

 

As Moosey said in the first post: So, karate folk of various styles: do you find that the most valuable techniques you find in your style equate to the ones that the originators of your kata find to be most worthy of repetition?

Your system has different kata than my system does. Why is that? Why did Mas Oyama decide our collection of kata was important? Why did Shoshin Nagamine decide your collection of kata was important?

 

Quite honestly, I think Kuma is trying to make two different concepts the same. As for bodybuilding, the analogy works. In fact, all athletes work to make their weakest part stronger, it is a core of modern sports training and I would like to think I know a little something about this especially in terms of martial arts.

 

The question wasn't "what's the most important technique RIGHT NOW!".
That obviously changes every microsecond of an altercation.
It was an enquiry that was looking into a better understanding of the style/s as a whole. An overview to better see what the originators of the style/s had in mind.

I have to say that if this was the BJJ forum and the same question was asked you wouldn't get cryptic answers you'd get solid advice and find out what are the most important aspects of BJJ.
Someone would say..."As a white belt you should be looking at good posture, escapes, understanding the interplay of positions and ultimately surviving on the ground".
They wouldn't say "Whatever you need as you are rolling at the time". There's zero information in that answer.
Equally they wouldn't say "The most important part of BJJ is X-guard and mounted gogo-plata set ups".