Why Traditional Karate is Not Effective for Self Defence

Might be standng on a broken bridge (small one)?

 

I have just seen this thread and feel there are limited “good” traditional arts irrespective of which country it came from. There are too many bad teachers

A few people here will have trained with many bad martial artists that all have black belts, this will never change but does really affect us all - yes ALL!!!!

Mixed martial arts is a new thing (as far as hand to hand combat goes) in time I think there will be some charlatans turn up in this as in all styles. HOWEVER there are for the moment not many people into this form of training so the ones that are teaching it for the most are at a good level and this is many of the best techniques in most of the arts we all do – its nothing new just using the best of the practical moves about!

What we are doing by questioning what we do is to work towards martial arts being better for our students and indeed their students. We should be looking at this as a gift for other generations of martial artists who can learn from us that things can be done better now than they were back then. Some people cling to tradition like a comfort blanket.

We are all using the same techniques just some of us better than others - just be sure you are learning what you are told you are learning.

 

Do tell - enlighten me.

 

umm.... ithats what stance he went from, its not percieved as useful but it creates ALOT of power as a sudden attack from a stupid looking stance. Not only for a "training hall" Point is alot of "useless stuff" isnt so useless.

I dont understand why TMA's arent percieved as any good, when TMA's contain much of the same stuff strikes, even some grappling (which scarlet mist doing a CMA might now about.)

 

No the hip and arms create power a static stance adds almost nothing to power.

A moving stance is different - motion = power

Standing still does not - it means get hit.

 

Hang on! A glimmer, a glimmer of hope I see! Perhaps Matt has hit the proverbial nail on the head here?

If we all just stopped making assumptions about arts and styles and actually let Matt's comment soak into our skulls we may be able to agree on something here.

TMA with bad training methodology = ineffective
MMA with bad training metholology = ineffective

Anyone else see the link? I know TMA's who train in a very realistic manner and have been proven effective. I also know MMA's who train in realistic ways and are effective. And before you jump, I also know MMA's and TMA's who train so ridiculously and narrow mindedly that they would have a hard time beating up my 70 year old mother.

Labelling does not the art make.

 

What MMA's Mrs Owt are bad?

Perhaps a more accurate reflection would be as I posted earlier

"A few people here will have trained with many bad martial artists that all have black belts, this will never change but does really affect us all - yes ALL!!!!

Mixed martial arts is a new thing (as far as hand to hand combat goes) in time I think there will be some charlatans turn up in this as in all styles. HOWEVER there are for the moment not many people into this form of training so the ones that are teaching it for the most are at a good level and this is many of the best techniques in most of the arts we all do – its nothing new just using the best of the practical moves about!

What we are doing by questioning what we do is to work towards martial arts being better for our students and indeed their students. We should be looking at this as a gift for other generations of martial artists who can learn from us that things can be done better now than they were back then. Some people cling to tradition like a comfort blanket.

We are all using the same techniques just some of us better than others - just be sure you are learning what you are told you are learning."

 

Sonshu, I appreciate that you would like to defend ALL MMA's just as many of the karate people and TMA people have leapt to the defence of their styles. But you asserting that because not many people are training in that form that most are good is ridiculous! What about new makes it impervious to frauds, charlatans, ego maniacs like any other art? Is this its' secret techinique? We train so effectively only honest, nice people who know what they are doing claim to teach MMA? Pshaw!

 

The article does raise some important points. It does tend to generalise way too much.

When addressing the issue of self defence it is important to remember that no style/system/art will have all the answers, all the time. This is more because not every school will necassarily teach in the same way, nor is each teaching style suitable for every individual.

I recall a fight between myself and a boxer. I was studying Shotokan at the time and had spent time 1-step sparring with the black belts. The boxer never touched me (nor I him). This could be a reflection on his ability, but it could also be that these BBs moved damn quick, so I quickly learnt to get out of the way and block, not stand there like a lemon and try it. In hindsight I can honestly say that it would have taken me years to learn how to fight (at this particular club) and then I would have needed to adapt my fighting, and attitude, for self defence. I liked the art (at the time) and it suited me. On the other hand I could have gotten envolved in a more "sportive" style and learnt to fight quicker, this wouldn't have necassarily have taught me good self defence though.

IMO, if you want quick self defence then fine, go to a good RBSD style. If you want to learn to fight quickly, then do a good "sportive" style. If you want self defence, fighting ability and a sport, then do a good TMA (or "sportive" style).

In short people need to realise what it is that they really want and structure their expectations in a balanced way. After all, would you buy a family car on the say so of a stranger without looking at it? No, you would take a look at it and do your research. Do your research, not only in the style, but also the particular teaching style of the school you are wanting to train at. If it doesn't meet your requirements either move on or train with them to see if you can learn something and bolster your abilities by *gasp* cross training.

*Sets up a stall selling Flak jackets (I could do with the money)*

 

Perhaps my post was not clear enough - I will break it down.

I am defending ALL ARTS not just MMA. I am saying that were all here because the term "Martial Art" is a thing we are all interested in and or care about. There are more frauds in other arts as there are more instructors its a simple numbers game.

I have however said that MMA will have some of the frauds in it and these will grow as the numbers do - again basic maths.

The pressure testing gives the chance to see how good people are rather than saying I have killer death moves. Mrs Owt you said there are crap MMA people - where?

 

Judderman

As I said it is fine to train in any style so long as it does what it says on the label. Trad is trad, RBSD is RBSD, sport is sport

Its when a school or style says it does things it does not. I love Ninjitsu but it is not the best RBSD style its a good trad style - well it was for me anyhow.

I like when it does what it says on the tin "Ronseal" styles as I call them. Uk people will get that, problem is when a (STYLE) does not deliver.

 

Well I think (I know little about MMA) that if you have a crap instructor, you get crap students. Just using the words in the thread mind you. No different in MMA as it is in TKD or karate or kickboxing or tae bo or ballet. Bad instructor = bad students.

 

True - do you know any bad MMA instructors?

There are not many doing it in the UK still and the ones whom are and advertise are good - better than many other styles irrespective of what country it came from.

 

Sorry for being so thick.

Sorry, misunderstood you. You say 'simple maths' like it is an easy thing!

I agree pressure testing is a good thing and not exclusive to MMA. So basically we agree. Do you honestly believe there aren't substandard teachers of MMA out there? Perhaps what I would consider a "crap" MMA teacher would be sufficient for others purposes, so who am I to judge, right?

 

What do you consider a crap MMA teacher - can you give some examples please?

 

This I would agree with.

So if, as Matt has suggested, we're looking at method Vs method, is it possible for a style, any style, to incorperate the elements required for effective self defence? Granted, some will have a head start on others, but this:

although being your experience of the style, does not mean that there might be a school that does incorperate these elements?

Style is a broad umbrella that will show you its techniques. The school and teacher should show you how they employ those techniques. For instance, if I wanted grappling and striking I might not go for Shotokan as, typically, it does not teach grappling. Therefore I might take up BJJ. I might go along to a BJJ school and think "Ok, I like the techniques, but the teacher is talking crap when it comes to self defence, I'm going to look for another school or style"

 

I suppose a crap MMA teacher is very similar to a crap TMA teacher or a crap anything teacher.

Poor interspersonal skills, sketchy training background, misrepresentation of materials learnt, etc., etc. It really doesn't matter that they are a "crap MMA" teacher but that they are a "crap" teacher. Kapeesh? Not an attack on MMA teachers, but I guess I just find it unusual that you find it hard to believe that perhaps, just maybe, MMA instructors are human too and that teaching a certain art doesn't make them any less fallible than any other instructor. There is nothing magical about instructing MMA that makes them resistant to these type of people getting into their ranks.

 

My experience in this has been more with BJJ than with vale tudo style MMA folks. The schools where I've seen this occuring typically only train for tourney's within their own program. That's always a red flag for me as it keeps things nice and incestuous.

The only other instance as been one case where a person declaired themselves an MMA teacher with what appeared to be a bit of high school wreslting and boxing in thier background. The students were brawlers and had zero ground work. Unforuntely they were also brusers and got by on strength in many cases above technique. That was until they ran into good people.

- Matt

 

It also doesn't mean that they are any good at teaching self defence. Doesn't make them crap, just ignorant.

Which probably makes them crap

 

Never said there was.

However in MMA you would be expected to roll with other people and be able to beat the majority of the class. Same could not be said with many other schools.

Also the people I have trained with who teach MMA would not get so defensive about being beaten - MMA has lowered my own oppinion of myself ability. At a MMA club you never hear "the black belts would just slaughter you in sparing" Its just muck in with all.

You soon get found out.