Why Traditional Karate is Not Effective for Self Defence

about attacking people first: that is not self-defence, that is being a meat-head.

 

So, how much are classes in "reality" fighting?

 

A pre-emptive strike is not "attacking first", since the other person instigated an aggressive action towards us. We take the best tactical option and KO them, or at least stun them to allow our escape. We are still defending ourselves.

 

Self defence is not actually as it is spoken - it is also defence of others and defence of a situaton where you or another feel threatened/ You do not have to wait until you are hit.

alienlovechild I would suggest you do some looking up on this as it could well help you out of a sticky situation before it becomes a mess.

 

I found a list of Articles in Black Belt magazine that deal with traditional martial arts in real life situations.

TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT by Steve Petermann
AIKIDO FOR THE STREET by Sara Fogan
GRABBED FROM BEHIND by Jane Hallander
LOST GLORY by Robert W. Young
SELF-DEFENSE THE WALLACE WAY by Russell Gray
SHOTOKAN STREET STRATEGIES by Loren Franck
BACK TO THE FUTURE by George W. Alexander

"Shotokan Street" and "Self-Defense The Wallace Way" are two of the best because one deals specifically with this thread's topic the other focuses on Superfoot Wallace, who was very successful fighting in the ring and working as a bodyguard.

 

I agree that it is better to "attack an attack" than "defend" in the traditional sense - i.e. block then counter, though I don't think it is a good idea to "attack first," as your attack would make you open to being attacked. Of course this is only a problem if you are attacking someone who knows how to attack an attack.

Also, I am not a Karate practitioner, though I thought I read in the Guiness Book that the Karate type punch is the most powerful. You say the opposite. Does anyone out there have this info? I would say though that such a punch is incredible impractical. A kick to the head sure would hurt, though dammed if I could pull one off.

 

Blocking as a single action is slow, inefficient and wasteful. Why should you wait anyway? He has no right to CONSIDER laying a hand on you. You know what's gonna happen, take him out before it starts.

There is no Guinness World Record of karate atemi being the most powerful striking methods. You are thinking of brick-breaking records etc, which are usually set by karateka. This does not mean they hit harder than anybody else.

 

The Gueness world record for pounds of pressure per square inch generated by a punch (aka most powerful punch) was set by a karateka.

 

All well and good being able to drop a bomb from a static position and have time to prepaire for it. It is the delivery system that is often the problem with Karate and a few other arts.

Yes good punches and kicks but its static and very telegraphed. A trade off with power and delivery are what is needed.

 

If somebody could direct me to where exactly the Guiness Book of World Records states the most powerful punch comes from a Karate practitioner, I'd be much obliged, because I can't find it.

 

As a Karateka I practice a quick solid punch Sonshu, and there is no compromise. That ONE SOLID PUNCH will settle the fight, no discussion. If you are grappler going against someone who is well rounded then you have already lost the fight imo

 

That's a pretty gutsy assumption dude. How many people have you dropped with "no discussion"?


Stuart

 

I agree...pretty gutsy.

Adrenalin will keep many guys up after many punches/kicks, Ive even seen guys punching with broken forearms (really nasty mess after).

Rare is the occassion one punch is all required, particularly if you miss it then the grappler has you!

 

i think the one punch, one kill goal of karate is exactly that, a goal. The idea is that you should keep training and trying to get stronger until you can kill a man with one punch, which in effect, means you will keep on training your whole life and not stop, because you will never reach the point where you can kill in one punch dunless tomebodyestands ctill ant lets y.u hit tsem, but even th n, it if very ullikely)gIt is ahmisconcrption w en peopwe thinkiyou shonld be a,le to kill withtone punrh when lou do ktrate. Tt even ktock somobody oud/incapaiitate s mebody an a fig t with ne punc would fe a fea .

 

I've heard of people getting killed with one punch. Not by karateka, or even by martial artists - just due to some wierd coincidence that they happened to get hit in exactly the right way.

 

yeah, that's what i mean, people have died from punches, but they're freak accidents more than anything.

 

Let's put it this way - punches don't kill people, kerbs kill people.

 

I read the original article and the majority of the posts and there is a lot of different views on both sides. When one sits down to think about it, it is unfair to generalize a martial art in the way that the author did.

However, one must take into concideration that learning the technique of a traditional martial art is not the same as learning how to fight. At my MA school one of our Sifu is a former combat trainer for the chinese military, I train in Shaolin White Crane and my first "Combat and Self Defence" class under his tutilage was totally different from what I was learing. While he incorporated my training in Shaolin White Crane into his lessons, he made it painfully clear that he was there to teach me how to fight...and win.

Contrary to the article, TMA can be a highly effective means of self defence, you simply need to learn how to fight. It is a misconception to think that a martial art teaches you how to fight, it is an artform, without combat training, it is all content with no context.

In our Combat & SD class, he blended my White Crane (with a smaller stance that is still relatively true in it's form and function; protecting the groin from direct assault and rooting) with a very no nonsense approach to combat.

First we learned how to survey a comming fight, many can be resolved without violence (by giving up your wallet to an armed mugger for example) if you judge that your life is truely in danger and you see a clear opportunity with no alternatives, by all means attack, attack with fury and don't stop until they are either subdued or fled or you've escaped to safety. I'm not gonna go into some of the self defence teachings for the girls, some of those are kinda....yeah. But that is just a fraction of his fight philosophy teachings... they extend from body language before and during a fight, to legal implications and misconceptions.

One of the next things I learned was how to move effectively and efficiently; the traditional stances are only transitional, each representing only a fraction of a second of movement. My movements more akin to a boxer now.

He also made me do away with my Pheonix eye fist as it will not be a usefull combat tool until after many years of conditioning, my index and middle knuckles are ready now. Further, he refined my kicks, teaching me that as a combat tool they have very limited potential, I've wound up using them more for diversionary tactics than actual combat, kicking at ankles knees and shins to distract or take advantage of vulnerabilities such as a straightened leg.

Chi na or Seizing and Controlling, I can't stress how important this can be in a fight that degrades into a grapple. If you can take control of your opponent so that you can pummel him at your liesure, the fight is virtually over. However, one must understand that once a fight is engaged, all of your actions must follow the most direct no-nonsense approach to ending the fight.

Weapons vs unarmed. Yeah... right... If it comes down to this, it's because they were basically going to attack you no matter what. I personally haven't gotten this far so since I don't really know yet, I won't comment.

All in all, the reason Reality-Based Defense is so successful is because it's focus is simply to teach someone how to fight. This includes evaluating threats, environ and opportunities to leagal implications of the results. If such teachings are incorporated with a martial art there is no reason why it cannot become a useful and effective combat tool.

This is however my personal oppinion and I personally hope to never have to fight, thus I can enjoy my martial arts education as a healthy and active passed time.

 

great post canadaincrane...
I do agree with lot of points you make...
Qinna or seizing have lot to play in fights
-TkdWarrior-

 

Well, I agree with some of what the author has to say and disagree on other points he makes. This is my opinion about karate's value for self defense (which I posted in November in the karate forum):

"Karate is a complete martial art that covers every aspect of fighting. Stand-up, clinch, ground. Some karate dojos like Tiger Schulmann have produced grappling and MMA champions. Karate makes you a complete fighter.

I'm not going to say that karate is perfect. Mistakes were made in the past. Karate got a wake-up call when the UFC got started in 1993. Karatekas showed that they had no ground game and were easy prey for grapplers. The question to be asked is how did karate ever get into such bad shape? I think there were three major mistakes made by karate in the 20th century that hurt its reputation.

1) Sports or tournament karate has almost destroyed karate. WKF style sports karate where only striking techniques (closed fist punches and foot kicks) above the waste are allowed and the kumite is interrupted after one punch or kick stops short of the target does not develop practical combat habits. NASKA tournaments have made things even worse, and the karatekas that take part in those tournaments resemble dancers more than fighters.

2) Jiyu kumite or Iri kumi as is called in goju ryu, which is free-style sparring was not emphasized enough. Free-style sparring should be at the heart of any martial arts training. In addition free-style sparring has to include grappling. An art that neglects free-style sparring is a dead martial art with no practical application, it's a form of gymnastics.

3) The importance of kata has been over-emphasized in karate. The old masters used to train 1 or 2 kata in their whole life, today it's expected that karatekas know many kata. Kata is no substitute for free style kumite. The focus of any training should be on free-style fighting, with 1 or 2 kata being learned on the side. Some have said that karate without kata would be kickboxing, that is a mis-conception about karate. Kickboxing is not bare hand fighting (heavy gloves are used), is sports oriented with rules. Karate "the art of empty hand fighting" is a martial art that is different from kickboxing regardless whether the karateka practices kata or not. Choki Motobu was a great karateka, not a kickboxer, despite knowing only one kata."