Kata or sparring.

[seasoned]

Which has more relevance over the other.

[terryl965]

I o not beliece either one does but they must be used together for the understanding of one style. Kata, poomsae of form has a great purpose for those that understandthe important to them and sparring is the best way of building reflexs. Great question, should be interesting on the comments since alot of folk do not like kata's.

[MJS]

Which has more relevance over the other.


IMHO, I would say that they are both important, but I place sparring before kata. Now again, this isn't to say that kata are useless, despite what some may say. I feel that kata should be understood, and not just something that is done for the sake of doing it. Why would anyone want to just go thru the motions, without knowing what they're doing?

Of course, knowing what you're doing, means that you need a teacher to show some examples of applications, as well as the student being able to dig and think on their own.

I don't use kata to fight, so that is why I feel that sparring is important. You need to get in and mix it up with someone, someone who is moving, resisting, etc.

[seasoned]

I o not beliece either one does but they must be used together for the understanding of one style. Kata, poomsae of form has a great purpose for those that understandthe important to them and sparring is the best way of building reflexs. Great question, should be interesting on the comments since alot of folk do not like kata's.

I also feel that sparring is important, but not to a default. You are very correct that reflexes are greatly enhanced.

[seasoned]

I o not beliece either one does but they must be used together for the understanding of one style. Kata, poomsae of form has a great purpose for those that understandthe important to them and sparring is the best way of building reflexs. Great question, should be interesting on the comments since alot of folk do not like kata's.


IMHO, I would say that they are both important, but I place sparring before kata. Now again, this isn't to say that kata are useless, despite what some may say. I feel that kata should be understood, and not just something that is done for the sake of doing it. Why would anyone want to just go thru the motions, without knowing what they're doing?

Of course, knowing what you're doing, means that you need a teacher to show some examples of applications, as well as the student being able to dig and think on their own.

I don't use kata to fight, so that is why I feel that sparring is important. You need to get in and mix it up with someone, someone who is moving, resisting, etc.

All forms of sparring and SD are broken down into segments of movement, which is what kata does for us. Once we have practiced these segments, and through accompanying drills, we begin to feel a flow that can be transmitted into our SD. Kata alone allow us a follow through of techniques, to a finish that sparring with it’s rules won’t.
:asian:

[chrispillertkd]

An interesting question. I would have to say that they are equally important. I would also say, coming from a Taekwon-Do background, that there are three other aspects of training that cannot be ignored. Taekwon-Do is composed of the following aspects:

Fundamental Movements
Forging (Dallyon)
Patterns (Tul)
Sparring (Matsogi)
Self-Defense (Ho Sin Sul)

In Gen. Choi's encyclopedia there is an illustration of the relationship between these five aspects. It is a circle with one leading to the next leading to the next, etc. so, for example, patterns lead to sparring which leads to self-defense, which leads back to fundamental movements, etc. It is possible to separate each aspect out for training purposes but focusing on just one to the exclusion of the others is detrimental in the long run.

The following explanation is taken from Gen. Choi's Encyclopedia of Taekwon-Do:


Taekwon-Do is composed of fundamental movements, patterns, dallyon, sparring and self-defence techniques that are so closely related that it is impossible to segregate one phase of instruction from another. Fundamental movements are necessary for sparring and patterns, while both patterns and sparring are indispensable for perfection of fundamental movements.

In the illustration [referenced above], one can see it is difficult to distinguish the beginning of the cycle from the end. There is, in fact, like the Deity, no beginning or end. A student will find that he will have to return time and time again to the beginning fundamental movements to perfect his advanced sparring and self-defence techniques.

Each fundamental movement, in most cases, represents and attack or defence against a particular target area or definite action of an imaginary opponent or opponents. It is necessary to learn as many fundamental movements as possible and fit them into complete proficiency so the student can meet any situation in actual combat with confidence. The pattern actually places the student in a hypothetical situtaion where he must avail himself to defence, counterattack, and attact motions, against several opponents. Through constant practice of these patterns, the attack and defence become a conditioned reflex movement. Power and speed must be developed to such a high degree that only one single blow is needed to stop an opponent, so the student can shift stance and block or attack another opponent. Each pattern is different from the other in order to develop reaction against changing circumstances.

Once the basic patterns are mastered, the student then begins to physically apply the skill obtained from fundamental patterns and movements to sparring against actual moving opponents.

Collaterally with sparring, the student must begin to develop his body and toughen his attacking and blocking tools so he is able to deliver maximum damage in actual combat. Once a student has applied himself to fundamental movements, patterns, sparring and dallyon, then the time has arrived for the student to test his coordination, speed, balance, and concentration against spontaneous attacks: ie. self-defence. The student will constantly find himself retruning, however, to his fundamentals even when he has achieved the highest possible degree of self-defence techniques. As in military training, Taekwon-Do progression follows a certain parallel:
1. Fundamental Movements = Individual soldiers's basic training
2. Dallyon = Maintenance of equipment
3. Patterns = Platoon tactics
4. Sparring = Field exercises in simulated combat conditions
5. Self-defence = Actual Combat

As you can see, breaking is not actually a part of Taekwon-Do per se but is, rather, a way to test the power you generate from the individual techniques.

In any event, I think Gen. Choi did a great job of explaining the relationship between the various aspects of Taekwon-Do (and Martial Arts in general). I would also note that "sparring" actually covers a variety of things: Pre-Arranged Sparring (i.e., 3-, 2-, and 1-step sparring), semi-free sparring (brief exchange of techniques flexible in its composition but ending with a decisive counter-attack), free-sparring, pre-arranged free sparring and model sparring (both used for demonstrating techniques), and foot-sparring.

Pax,

Chris

[seasoned]

IMHO, I would say that they are both important, but I place sparring before kata. Now again, this isn't to say that kata are useless, despite what some may say. I feel that kata should be understood, and not just something that is done for the sake of doing it. Why would anyone want to just go thru the motions, without knowing what they're doing?

Of course, knowing what you're doing, means that you need a teacher to show some examples of applications, as well as the student being able to dig and think on their own.

I don't use kata to fight, so that is why I feel that sparring is important. You need to get in and mix it up with someone, someone who is moving, resisting, etc.

There are two distinct trains of thought here, one being the importance of one over the other, and the other, the practical benefits of doing kata. Maybe we can dissect both. Bunkai, when properly understood can open up a whole new world. The problem, as you stated, is having a teacher to point us in the right direction. This coupled with some old fashioned cross training with open many doors. Back with combining kata and sparring, I feel one is sport and the other (kata) is pure SD. Do they intermingle well??

[Sukerkin]

Whilst it is fairly obvious that we cannot really 'spar' when practsing iai, there are partner forms within the ryu that allow us to work with another swordsman and gain a practical understanding of distance and timing. Similarly, we can work through the bunkai of a kata using a partner to fulfil the role of the attacker and thus illustrate just what it is that the kata embodies.

However, kata and bunkai are vital, in my opinion, to learning any martial art. Armed arts particularly require it but the empty-handed arts too need that foundation of the instinctive understanding of techniques.

Sparring is a useful adjunct to that foundation, provided that those sparring concentrate on using the techniques of the art they are learning. If they don't then it's play-fighting without a teaching purpose (other than the confidence of giving and taking physical attacks).

If I had to pick which was the more 'important' element, then I'd say kata. Without a proper foundation then the whole house falls down. The caveat is that kata have to be performed with an understanding of the bunkai inherent to them and a strong mental 'imaging' of what is going on - otherwise it just becomes dancing.

[seasoned]

Whilst it is fairly obvious that we cannot really 'spar' when practsing iai, there are partner forms within the ryu that allow us to work with another swordsman and gain a practical understanding of distance and timing. Similarly, we can work through the bunkai of a kata using a partner to fulfil the role of the attacker and thus illustrate just what it is that the kata embodies.

However, kata and bunkai are vital, in my opinion, to learning any martial art. Armed arts particularly require it but the empty-handed arts too need that foundation of the instinctive understanding of techniques.

Sparring is a useful adjunct to that foundation, provided that those sparring concentrate on using the techniques of the art they are learning. If they don't then it's play-fighting without a teaching purpose (other than the confidence of giving and taking physical attacks).

If I had to pick which was the more 'important' element, then I'd say kata. Without a proper foundation then the whole house falls down. The caveat is that kata have to be performed with an understanding of the bunkai inherent to them and a strong mental 'imaging' of what is going on - otherwise it just becomes dancing.
Thank you, Sukerkin, your input is valued. If I were to pick kata, my feelings are the same as yours, some could derive sparring techniques from them, and others down and dirty SD techniques. At face value, I see punches kicks and blocks, that translate into rudimentary sparring moves. But on a deeper evaluation I see a storeroom of vital finishing techniques, that far exceed what I could accomplish in sparring. I pose a very hard question, only answered individually, depending on your understanding of your particular art. If an art is sparring based with some kata is it SD? If it is kata based with some sparring is it more SD based? What is SD? Sparring by it’s very nature implies winner or loser. Kata by it’s very nature implies life and death. Interchangeable? What say you??

[Sukerkin]

That is a hard question, Seasoned, as it cuts to the psychological rammifications of 'training to miss'.

To be honest, with my limited experience of putting into practise my training, I wouldn't like to make too cut-and-dried a response to it.

My instinctive feel is that, if sparring is perfromed in the same spirit as kata, then it can come quite close to allowing the artist to execute techniques fully. With an engagement of the imagination and the realisation that you stop just short with those techniques that can kill because you choose to do so, then it may be that the major criticism of sparring (that it's not 'real') can be ameliorated.

[Steve]

Kata seems like a good first step. My first thought when I read the OP was to wonder what we're talking about? Relevant to what? SD?

It seems to me that Kata is essentially the first part of internalizing technique. Kata is repetitive. I do solo drills at home that are specific to BJJ. We start classes often by partnering up and working technique. No resistance. Just getting the motion and conditioning our bodies in a very specific way.

I see Kata as the technique portion, and sparring as the timing portion. You can't, IMO, develop the timing necessary to execute a technique without attempting that technique time and again in a somewhat random setting against a variety of body types, attitudes and skill levels.

[seasoned]

That is a hard question, Seasoned, as it cuts to the psychological rammifications of 'training to miss'.

To be honest, with my limited experience of putting into practise my training, I wouldn't like to make too cut-and-dried a response to it.

My instinctive feel is that, if sparring is perfromed in the same spirit as kata, then it can come quite close to allowing the artist to execute techniques fully. With an engagement of the imagination and the realisation that you stop just short with those techniques that can kill because you choose to do so, then it may be that the major criticism of sparring (that it's not 'real') can be ameliorated.

Exactly, and quite to the point. In kata when I go in for that head grab, I can take it all the way to the twist, and neck break. Not so in sparring. I would think with that said, kata relevance would be established. As you have so nicely stated. J Anybody else, stepping up to the plate?

[seasoned]

Kata seems like a good first step. My first thought when I read the OP was to wonder what we're talking about? Relevant to what? SD?

It seems to me that Kata is essentially the first part of internalizing technique. Kata is repetitive. I do solo drills at home that are specific to BJJ. We start classes often by partnering up and working technique. No resistance. Just getting the motion and conditioning our bodies in a very specific way.

I see Kata as the technique portion, and sparring as the timing portion. You can't, IMO, develop the timing necessary to execute a technique without attempting that technique time and again in a somewhat random setting against a variety of body types, attitudes and skill levels.

Thanks for the post. In traditional arts, such as Okinawan GoJu, kata contain the essence of this SD based art. With a vivid imagination, you can depict the various hair grabs, eye gouges, and vital organ strikes within the minds eye. Much harder to apply in a sparring situation, for safety reasons. I have said this before and I will draw the parallel again, if I may. In LE, we shoot to kill, but only at targets. Then when expected too, this shoot to kill, we have practiced for, becomes a reality. How can this be? It comes from the minds eye, because when we were shooting at the targets, in our minds eye, they are the perpetrator. We can do this somewhat in sparring but only to a certain point. In sparring when I grab the head I have to simulate the full motion of the move, not so in kata. Both are valuable, but the question is which one is more important to understand, kata or sparring? Remember go back to the LE analogy above and go from there.

[searcher]

I am a firm believer that they feed each other. With the ultimate being that you can utilize the movements in a MARTIAL sense. I think a great many have forgotten that what we do is first and foremost for combative reasons. At least that is what it started as.

[SFC JeffJ]

In my class my instructor will have us use what ever kata we are working on for sparring. We include take down and various grappling moves. It causes a lot of bruising and sometimes a little blood. There still some rules like no grappling on the neck. But pulling hair is OK(I use to have long hair and that was a pain so now I'm high and tight). We have other rules as well. It really makes you combine your various.

So I'll say they are equally important.

[Cryozombie]

I think you need Kata to learn to perfect a technique.

Sparring or Randori to learn to Apply the technique on someone else.

IMO Kata by itself MAY work, but tends to leave you less than adaptable to changes your opponent makes. Sparring by itself may allow you to do some techniques, but your technical proficiency may be lacking, and result in fewer tools in the toolbox so to speak.

[seasoned]

I think you need Kata to learn to perfect a technique.

Sparring or Randori to learn to Apply the technique on someone else.

IMO Kata by itself MAY work, but tends to leave you less than adaptable to changes your opponent makes. Sparring by itself may allow you to do some techniques, but your technical proficiency may be lacking, and result in fewer tools in the toolbox so to speak.


Do you favor one over the other, and do you feel that to much of one, will hurt the other, Or do you give equal time?

[tellner]

The goal is to be able to perform effectively under pressure. To do that you need to have useful responses. You need to be able to choose them correctly at combat speed which means you don't have time to waste. You need to be able to perform them smoothly and efficiently without any wasted energy. And you need to be able to do it when someone who is at least your match in training and physicality is trying to keep you from doing it.

Solo practice gives trains the nervous system so that you have patterned movement. If the patterned movement can be invoked it will be precise and performed with with biomechanical efficiency to the limits of physical speed and strength. Solo exercises give you your own range of motion and teach you the boundaries of your own timing.

You can't be a good boxer without working the heavy bag, the speed bag, shadow boxing and general conditioning.

What they don't give you is combative distance and timing and the other part of the equation, making the right choices at speed and against resistance. For those you need other people, ones of many different sizes, strengths, speeds and levels of training.

To be a good boxer you also need to work focus mitts. You need to spar and every once in a while you need fights.

Which is more important? That's like saying "Which is more important, air or water?" The real question is how much you need of each of them right now.

[Sukerkin]

I like the encapsulation your last sentence gives there, tellner.

I have been weighing up which was more important in the equation of training for three decades now and that one phrase lays out why I've never been able to dismiss sparring type experience totally (even tho' it is clear to most here who know my views that I think kata is more important for learning the art).

[MJS]

All forms of sparring and SD are broken down into segments of movement, which is what kata does for us. Once we have practiced these segments, and through accompanying drills, we begin to feel a flow that can be transmitted into our SD. Kata alone allow us a follow through of techniques, to a finish that sparring with it’s rules won’t.
:asian:


I don't necessarily disagree with you, however, I wanted to comment on the last line of your post. Now, doing a kata in the air, yes, that allows us to follow through, just like any other technique. Of course, if we do those same techniques on a person, we can't follow thru with everything, due to the fact that we have to take the nature of the tech. in question, into consideration. If there is an arm break in the kata, we certainly can't follow thru when applying the move on someone. So like sparring with rules, even the techs have rules, so to speak.

[MJS]

There are two distinct trains of thought here, one being the importance of one over the other, and the other, the practical benefits of doing kata. Maybe we can dissect both. Bunkai, when properly understood can open up a whole new world. The problem, as you stated, is having a teacher to point us in the right direction. This coupled with some old fashioned cross training with open many doors. Back with combining kata and sparring, I feel one is sport and the other (kata) is pure SD. Do they intermingle well??


Yes, I agree, and that is one of my pet peeves when I see some people doing kata. Seems like they just move from one thing to the next, without knowing what they're doing. IMO, they're missing a big part of the puzzle.

As for combining both...I do Kenpo. Kenpo has kata. I also spar, however, I tend to stay away from the point type sparring, in favor of continuous, as well as more contact, adding in clinch work, ground work, etc.

I don't think, for me anyways, that it hinders anything I'm doing. :)

[jarrod]

Which has more relevance over the other.


the answer is somewhat relative. my kickboxing coach is a bigtime proponent of forms, & i recognize their value. however if i studied a forms-intensive style, i would quickly lose interest & probably quit. i just don't like doing forms, & no amout of argument about their value (which i accept) makes me like them.

so i think the one that you like doing more is more relevant to you. i will say however that i have met many people who sparred & did not train katas that were skilled fighters. but you can't say if someone who does kata only is a skilled fighter, because you never fight them. so i would say both is ideal, but if you only do one it should be sparring.

jf

[seasoned]

the answer is somewhat relative. my kickboxing coach is a bigtime proponent of forms, & i recognize their value. however if i studied a forms-intensive style, i would quickly lose interest & probably quit. i just don't like doing forms, & no amout of argument about their value (which i accept) makes me like them.

so i think the one that you like doing more is more relevant to you. i will say however that i have met many people who sparred & did not train katas that were skilled fighters. but you can't say if someone who does kata only is a skilled fighter, because you never fight them. so i would say both is ideal, but if you only do one it should be sparring.

jf
I can tell by reading your different posts, on many threads, that you are a doer, and relish a lot of hands on. This is what works for you, and I must admit, it did for me also, when I was younger. I came up through the ranks with two distinctly different Sensei. The first one was a stickler for correct technique (closer to my age) but lacked in the kata bunkai department. As was stated by another poster, we had perfect form with our kata, but didn’t have a clue what they meant. We more then made up for that though, because it was minimal gear, and fight to the ground sparring, almost every night. Those were definitely some of the most awesome times. Blood and guts, but friends to the end. 60s and 70s were hard times. Then my Sensei’s teacher took over the DoJo. Because of the military, our only contact with him was very slight, until he retired. What he brought to the plate was extensive bunkai knowledge, of the kata. At that time my first Sensei, because of medical issues, dropped out of MA. I was older now, and this change opened up a whole new door of knowledge. This was an established dojo made up of warrior types, so the first thing he did was cancelled all sparring for almost a year, while we went over all kata and drills extensively. When we did start sparring again it was with a whole new flavor. Now getting back to my original post, which has more relevance, kata or sparring? Mind you, I am now older, and looking at it from a different angle. But my take on it is, acquire a strong base, of hands on sparring, while learning the kata and bunkai. The drills which complement the kata, should be the focus for bunkai, with more sparring then kata. Over a period of time as kata bunkai knowledge expands, continue to spar but lean more toward kata. End result is a seasoned martial artist with a kata/bunkai base with a lesser focus on sparring. There is a definite transition from white belt to the higher black belt levels, but I feel this is what will usher a dedicated MA into old age and still be able to train. So it is not a cut and dry issue of which is better, but which is better at certain times within our training life. This is how I teach and bring someone through the ranks. At this point ask me which is more important, I will tell you kata, every time. J
:asian:

[jarrod]

i think you touched on an important point when you mentioned that you trained drills derived straight from bunkai. in my karate/tkd days, we would do the form, then drills & one steps which looked nothing like the kata, then spar, which also looked nothing like kata. this made it pretty hard for me to take kata seriously at the time (although i was pretty decent at them).

but i suspect you are right about it depending on the point in your life. i know that in 20 years i won't be training like i am now, & it seems likely i'll gravitate towards a style which includes forms training. i still have a soft spot for the various styles of karate.

this brings to mind an interesting question: what about styles that don't include kata? if katas are that important, are their training methods less effective?

jf

[seasoned]

i think you touched on an important point when you mentioned that you trained drills derived straight from bunkai. in my karate/tkd days, we would do the form, then drills & one steps which looked nothing like the kata, then spar, which also looked nothing like kata. this made it pretty hard for me to take kata seriously at the time (although i was pretty decent at them).

but i suspect you are right about it depending on the point in your life. i know that in 20 years i won't be training like i am now, & it seems likely i'll gravitate towards a style which includes forms training. i still have a soft spot for the various styles of karate.

this brings to mind an interesting question: what about styles that don't include kata? if katas are that important, are their training methods less effective?

jf
Maybe in later years, but I am at work so I will post later today. Thanks

[seasoned]

I don't necessarily disagree with you, however, I wanted to comment on the last line of your post. Now, doing a kata in the air, yes, that allows us to follow through, just like any other technique. Of course, if we do those same techniques on a person, we can't follow thru with everything, due to the fact that we have to take the nature of the tech. in question, into consideration. If there is an arm break in the kata, we certainly can't follow thru when applying the move on someone. So like sparring with rules, even the techs have rules, so to speak.

At work right now, I will post you later. Thanks for your response.

[seasoned]

I don't necessarily disagree with you, however, I wanted to comment on the last line of your post. Now, doing a kata in the air, yes, that allows us to follow through, just like any other technique. Of course, if we do those same techniques on a person, we can't follow thru with everything, due to the fact that we have to take the nature of the tech. in question, into consideration. If there is an arm break in the kata, we certainly can't follow thru when applying the move on someone. So like sparring with rules, even the techs have rules, so to speak.

Thank you MJS for posting.
You are definitely correct, and rules are what hamper our efforts, if we let them. If the sparring is just punches, kicks, blocks, sweeps, and take downs, we can still derive much from it. Such as timing, taking hits, and distancing. The old traditional kata contain what I would consider the essence, or heart of the art. Not the more modern styles, but the true old traditional ones. The techniques within the old kata are the close quarter techniques that contain the locks, breaks, and certain strikes that can’t be realized while sparring. You can get a little more of the feeling with the accompanying drills, but still not the follow through. The follow through can only be felt while doing kata. I guess as tellner eluded to when he said “The real question is how much you need of each of them right now”. Which is a excellent point. All is good, but to what degree.

[seasoned]

Yes, I agree, and that is one of my pet peeves when I see some people doing kata. Seems like they just move from one thing to the next, without knowing what they're doing. IMO, they'remissing a big part of the puzzle.

As for combining both...I do Kenpo. Kenpo has kata. I also spar, however, I tend to stay away from the point type sparring, in favor of continuous, as well as more contact, adding in clinch work, ground work, etc.

I don't think, for me anyways, that it hinders anything I'm doing. :)

You are correct in saying some people just don’t know the moves or bunkai. This is a big problem, and is what causes students to charge styles. When the kata were formed they, as you know, were meant to hide the moves, but there are ways with diligent training, to get a glimpse. Also, not to beat a dead horse from other threads, but this is where cross training plays a part, providing you maintain your base art while doing this.
I will venture To say that at some point in your training you will reach a cross road. You will teach what you feel the student needs and likes to do, but in your free training time kata is what will keep you involved into old age. Nice posting with you. http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif

[seasoned]

i think you touched on an important point when you mentioned that you trained drills derived straight from bunkai. in my karate/tkd days, we would do the form, then drills & one steps which looked nothing like the kata, then spar, which also looked nothing like kata. this made it pretty hard for me to take kata seriously at the time (although i was pretty decent at them).

but i suspect you are right about it depending on the point in your life. i know that in 20 years i won't be training like i am now, & it seems likely i'll gravitate towards a style which includes forms training. i still have a soft spot for the various styles of karate.

this brings to mind an interesting question: what about styles that don't include kata? if katas are that important, are their training methods less effective?

jf
I to, went through this same situation, where the kata, looked nothing like the moves. It seemed like we were training two different arts at once. The kata to their detriment, just weren’t meant to read very easily, because of all the secrecy, surrounding them, when they were formed. For those that want a quick fix with some moves they can learn, for SD, mixed with some sport, and some fun and seriousness, then there are definitely a lot of very good arts and styles out there. As you said, maybe at some point in time, 20 yr down the road, you may want to chill a little, and look into some kata based art. If and when you do, I think you will find, because of your background and knowledge base, that the kata of old will open themselves up to you, in a very meaningful way. J
:asian:

[just2kicku]

I feel they are equally important. I think there should be a balance between. I don't think one can just concentrate on kata or just on sparring and be balanced. I know if a kata is broken down there are alot of SD techniques. I think they compliment each other. Katas are good way when done slow for beginners to check stances, body position, if blocks are high enough, etc... Sparring is good for cardio, stamina, and timing.
So I honestly think one can't exist without the other. Just my 2cents.
Joe

[Steve]

Can someone tell me if they see a difference in benefit between a kata and a drill? I'm looking for a little background here. What does a kata give you? What are the benefits? Is there some mysticism involved that I'm unaware of?

I ask because on the surface of it, kata seems to be a ritualized, sport specific drill. What am I missing, in your opinions?

[seasoned]

Can someone tell me if they see a difference in benefit between a kata and a drill? I'm looking for a little background here. What does a kata give you? What are the benefits? Is there some mysticism involved that I'm unaware of?

I ask because on the surface of it, kata seems to be a ritualized, sport specific drill. What am I missing, in your opinions?


Kata is teaching you how to move as a martial artist. It is not just about the techniques within them. If the moves in kata are done right, you learn how to step, breath control, distribute weight properly, not over commit, get off center, follow through with technique, flow, rooting, grounding, uprooting. All of this begins with the way we use our bodies, before we begin to manipulate someone else. Once we have trained our self on how to move, we apply that to a partner, with drills, and then on to free sparring. Each art will have it’s own way of accomplishing this, this is how traditional karate does it. The problem is most karate
Instructors don’t present it this way. Everyone talks about the techniques of kata, and not so much the teaching tool it was meant to be. :asian:

[seasoned]

I feel they are equally important. I think there should be a balance between. I don't think one can just concentrate on kata or just on sparring and be balanced. I know if a kata is broken down there are alot of SD techniques. I think they compliment each other. Katas are good way when done slow for beginners to check stances, body position, if blocks are high enough, etc... Sparring is good for cardio, stamina, and timing.
So I honestly think one can't exist without the other. Just my 2cents.
Joe


Very good point. I always felt that kata could be referred to as moving basics. It is a good transition from stationary practice. http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif

[Himura Kenshin]

I my art the kata are a drill that takes about 3 seconds to perform, usually with a partner.

I think a kata is any choreographed (sp?) move set that should impart some sort of principle or strategy. Once you understand the kata you can use it in randori ( i don't like the term sparring because it makes me think mostly of sport martial arts, which i no longer train in). The two work together.

[Deaf Smith]

Which has more relevance over the other.


Relevance to what? The Martial or the Art?

If it's the Martial, the sparring is it. You don't get speed and aggresivness doing forms.

If it's the art, oh Kata for sure. You don't get beauty and control from the ring.

But they both have their place. The best martial artist can do both very well.

Deaf

[seasoned]

Relevance to what? The Martial or the Art?

If it's the Martial, the sparring is it. You don't get speed and aggresivness doing forms.

If it's the art, oh Kata for sure. You don't get beauty and control from the ring.

But they both have their place. The best martial artist can do both very well.

Deaf

:asian:

[chinto]

Kata is teaching you how to move as a martial artist. It is not just about the techniques within them. If the moves in kata are done right, you learn how to step, breath control, distribute weight properly, not over commit, get off center, follow through with technique, flow, rooting, grounding, uprooting. All of this begins with the way we use our bodies, before we begin to manipulate someone else. Once we have trained our self on how to move, we apply that to a partner, with drills, and then on to free sparring. Each art will have it’s own way of accomplishing this, this is how traditional karate does it. The problem is most karate
Instructors don’t present it this way. Everyone talks about the techniques of kata, and not so much the teaching tool it was meant to be. :asian:

I agree, kata teaches more then the surface first flush techniques as well. there is a great deal to learn from a kata over time. you revisit the kata and see other things as your knowledge increases, they were always there but you did not see it the first time becouse of your frame of refference.

I would argue that kata is more important then sparring. free style sparring is a thing that is only about 100 years old. not that it is not valuble, but kata has been tested over time to work at training you for the real thing. ( the testing being that of survival of the practioner to go on and teach what he learned and knew. men such as Bushi Matsumura and Itosu did not have the free sparing of todays student. and were very efficent in combat. the same can be said for many men of that time! )

[seasoned]

I agree, kata teaches more then the surface first flush techniques as well. there is a great deal to learn from a kata over time. you revisit the kata and see other things as your knowledge increases, they were always there but you did not see it the first time becouse of your frame of refference.

I would argue that kata is more important then sparring. free style sparring is a thing that is only about 100 years old. not that it is not valuble, but kata has been tested over time to work at training you for the real thing. ( the testing being that of survival of the practioner to go on and teach what he learned and knew. men such as Bushi Matsumura and Itosu did not have the free sparing of todays student. and were very efficent in combat. the same can be said for many men of that time! )
I think you make a good point. When you are young, you learn kata, get it out of the way, then spar. As you get old, or older, sparring does, and should, take second place to kata. They each serve a need during your training life. The heart of the traditional art lies in the kata, that sometimes only an older mind can appreciate. Or, maybe, just maybe, after years of banging, we decide to readdress this kata thing and, upon looking at it differently, discover a whole new outlook on something that was always there.
:asian:

[Daniel Sullivan]

Which has more relevance over the other.

For beginners, kata. Especially rank beginners who have no experience whatsoever (as opposed to if I went to start classes at a taijustu club; I'd be a beginner to their system, but not an MA beginner).

As has been mentioned, kata serve as drills to internalize techniques. With good bunkai, the kata help the student to not only internalize the techniques, but to intellectually understand their application. Without understanding of the application, the beginner only has part of the picture.

Sparring is vitall for developing realtime reflexes and for learning that those techniques don't just magically work.

Needless to say, I consider both equally important, but at different stages of one's advancement, one will take precedence over the other and visa-versa.

Daniel

[strikesubmit]

Kata is teaching you how to move as a martial artist. It is not just about the techniques within them. If the moves in kata are done right, you learn how to step, breath control, distribute weight properly, not over commit, get off center, follow through with technique, flow, rooting, grounding, uprooting. All of this begins with the way we use our bodies, before we begin to manipulate someone else. Once we have trained our self on how to move, we apply that to a partner, with drills, and then on to free sparring. Each art will have it’s own way of accomplishing this, this is how traditional karate does it. The problem is most karate
Instructors don’t present it this way. Everyone talks about the techniques of kata, and not so much the teaching tool it was meant to be. :asian:


i have to pose this question then...so, do those adept in say, Muay Thai--which have no kata--NOT "move" like martial artists in your mind?

you mention that kata teaches you how to step, distribute weight properly, not over commit, etc. i've trained under a couple Muay Thai instructors who seem to have all that down.

additionally, the "kata" that most people are discussing in this thread pertain to certain striking styles like karate, no?

so what do we do with a style like judo, which also has kata?

i mean the kata in judo usually involve two people executing moves...similar to the drills we have in bjj. they aren't attacking or defending against imaginary opponents. they are actually applying techniques on their partners. it kinda goes against the idea of what kata is in the minds of some on here.

i think your response to Stevebjj's question--while well thought out--kinda missed the mark because from what i've seen in judo, kata appears to look like drilling.

[jarrod]

i have to pose this question then...so, do those adept in say, Muay Thai--which have no kata--NOT "move" like martial artists in your mind?

you mention that kata teaches you how to step, distribute weight properly, not over commit, etc. i've trained under a couple Muay Thai instructors who seem to have all that down.

additionally, the "kata" that most people are discussing in this thread pertain to certain striking styles like karate, no?

so what do we do with a style like judo, which also has kata?

i mean the kata in judo usually involve two people executing moves...similar to the drills we have in bjj. they aren't attacking or defending against imaginary opponents. they are actually applying techniques on their partners. it kinda goes against the idea of what kata is in the minds of some on here.

i think your response to Stevebjj's question--while well thought out--kinda missed the mark because from what i've seen in judo, kata appears to look like drilling.

you know, i'm a shodan in judo & i've never even done a kata. maybe i should ask my coach about that.

jf

[seasoned]

i have to pose this question then...so, do those adept in say, Muay Thai--which have no kata--NOT "move" like martial artists in your mind?

you mention that kata teaches you how to step, distribute weight properly, not over commit, etc. i've trained under a couple Muay Thai instructors who seem to have all that down.

additionally, the "kata" that most people are discussing in this thread pertain to certain striking styles like karate, no?

so what do we do with a style like judo, which also has kata?

i mean the kata in judo usually involve two people executing moves...similar to the drills we have in bjj. they aren't attacking or defending against imaginary opponents. they are actually applying techniques on their partners. it kinda goes against the idea of what kata is in the minds of some on here.

i think your response to Stevebjj's question--while well thought out--kinda missed the mark because from what i've seen in judo, kata appears to look like drilling.
Thank you for your response to this thread. I believe you are comparing a sport oriented art or arts, against a self defense based one. In a sport based art, weight divisions are used, and for the most part, you are limited to certain rules, where winning is the goal, because of the competition atmosphere. In a self defense based art, the only rules are, survival of the fittest, and the outcome was not winning, but killing. These self defense based arts, were born out of a people, (China), where they were of slight build, and had to compensate. On the battle field, size was irrelevant, what was needed was a means of defeating someone much bigger and much stronger then yourself. What was needed, was a way to borrow, or utilize, from your enemy, his strength, and size, and then, use it in your favor, while at the same time applying certain techniques that would hasten their demise. This borrowing of his strength and size required body mechanics not found in everyday life. Generally speaking, physical movements for sports are based on those of daily life, such as walking, running, throwing, jumping, lifting, etc. This in turn created a competition mind set based on the fastest and the strongest winning. In the traditional art of Okinawan GoJu, with it’s Chinese influence, the training is different, based on what it’s original concept was, “to defeat, any and all. Let me use an example in hopes of making myself clear. Did you ever see someone that was very accomplished in certain sports, maybe weight lifting, that didn’t appear to be very muscular, but could out lift much bigger people. Or high jumpers, that possessed great spring in their legs. It could be said that they have great genes, but in reality, they posses great bone structure, along with very good tendon strength, along with great body mechanics. In traditional karate, the weirdest of stances, that are found in kata, are abandon by some, as useless, but are exactly what accomplish all of the above. The stances, in traditional kata, are training methods to build these body mechanics. Throw the stances out, and you have sport, work the old traditional kata along with their weird useless fighting stances, and you begin to understand the unique building process devised in those old antiquated days, when it was life and limb.

[jarrod]

Thank you for your response to this thread. I believe you are comparing a sport oriented art or arts, against a self defense based one. In a sport based art, weight divisions are used, and for the most part, you are limited to certain rules, where winning is the goal, because of the competition atmosphere. In a self defense based art, the only rules are, survival of the fittest, and the outcome was not winning, but killing. These self defense based arts, were born out of a people, (China), where they were of slight build, and had to compensate. On the battle field, size was irrelevant, what was needed was a means of defeating someone much bigger and much stronger then yourself. What was needed, was a way to borrow, or utilize, from your enemy, his strength, and size, and then, use it in your favor, while at the same time applying certain techniques that would hasten their demise. This borrowing of his strength and size required body mechanics not found in everyday life. Generally speaking, physical movements for sports are based on those of daily life, such as walking, running, throwing, jumping, lifting, etc. This in turn created a competition mind set based on the fastest and the strongest winning. In the traditional art of Okinawan GoJu, with it’s Chinese influence, the training is different, based on what it’s original concept was, “to defeat, any and all. Let me use an example in hopes of making myself clear. Did you ever see someone that was very accomplished in certain sports, maybe weight lifting, that didn’t appear to be very muscular, but could out lift much bigger people. Or high jumpers, that possessed great spring in their legs. It could be said that they have great genes, but in reality, they posses great bone structure, along with very good tendon strength, along with great body mechanics. In traditional karate, the weirdest of stances, that are found in kata, are abandon by some, as useless, but are exactly what accomplish all of the above. The stances, in traditional kata, are training methods to build these body mechanics. Throw the stances out, and you have sport, work the old traditional kata along with their weird useless fighting stances, and you begin to understand the unique building process devised in those old antiquated days, when it was life and limb.


weeelllllll now here is where i have to respectfully disagree with you sir. the fact that sports utilize weight classes doesn't mean that they require more strength. when you have two athletes trained in the proper technique, size & strength then become deciding factors. incidentally, judo didn't have weight classes in it's earliest days, & didn't adopt them until it appeared on the national scene. size is never irrelevent, whether on the battlefield or in the ring.

i really believe that far too much is made out of the differences between sport & self-defense. all martial arts have their roots in self-defense. i think strikeandsubmit point stands; so-called sport martial artists most definately move like martial artists.

besides, there are non-sport arts which don't use kata either. japanese jujitsu doesn't, nor does aikido i believe. there is at least one style of bagua that i've researched that doesn't use any forms. military sambo, mcmap, krav maga...i'd say most of the world's battlefield arts don't use forms training. in fact most of them use sport as a means of training.

jf

[jarrod]

"appeared on the national scene" should read "appeared on the international scene"

[seasoned]

weeelllllll now here is where i have to respectfully disagree with you sir. the fact that sports utilize weight classes doesn't mean that they require more strength. when you have two athletes trained in the proper technique, size & strength then become deciding factors. incidentally, judo didn't have weight classes in it's earliest days, & didn't adopt them until it appeared on the national scene. size is never irrelevent, whether on the battlefield or in the ring.

i really believe that far too much is made out of the differences between sport & self-defense. all martial arts have their roots in self-defense. i think strikeandsubmit point stands; so-called sport martial artists most definately move like martial artists.

besides, there are non-sport arts which don't use kata either. japanese jujitsu doesn't, nor does aikido i believe. there is at least one style of bagua that i've researched that doesn't use any forms. military sambo, mcmap, krav maga...i'd say most of the world's battlefield arts don't use forms training. in fact most of them use sport as a means of training.

jf
What came first the chicken or the egg. Did self defense turn into sport, or did sport turn into self defense? What Judo was, and is, is two different things. Yes, most arts have drills which superficially practice moves or techniques, and in a way could duplicate kata. Kata builds more then just moves and techniques and there in lies the difference in an old traditional art, versus a sport oriented one. There is nothing mystical about this whole thing. When kata is practice with the original intent in mind, the mind set is much different then just doing moves. When I spar, my mind set is a little different then kata because there can be no follow through. Also most people don’t like kata because they basically don’t understand it. With all due respect maybe you should explain what your interpretation of kata is, and maybe you will help in making my point. J

[seasoned]

weeelllllll now here is where i have to respectfully disagree with you sir. the fact that sports utilize weight classes doesn't mean that they require more strength. when you have two athletes trained in the proper technique, size & strength then become deciding factors. incidentally, judo didn't have weight classes in it's earliest days, & didn't adopt them until it appeared on the national scene. size is never irrelevent, whether on the battlefield or in the ring.
jf



Only when void of proper technique, of which traditional kata teaches.

I will concede this much in that traditional kata were born out of turbulent times much like the old west. The mind set of then was conducive for those times. Which have no place in our modern times. No laws then, many laws now.

[jarrod]

What came first the chicken or the egg. Did self defense turn into sport, or did sport turn into self defense?

i think that viewing self defense & sport as opposites is a flawed premise. every warrior class in every society throughout history has participated in some form of controlled contest. pankration, jousting, fencing, single stick, wrestling, jujitsu, lei tai, combat sambo...all practiced by military personel & self-defense enthusiasts. skill is the ability to apply technique. sport contests provide the opportunity to test skill. now i'm not saying that sport fighting is the sum total of self-defense, but it is an important component.



With all due respect maybe you should explain what your interpretation of kata is, and maybe you will help in making my point. J


admittedly, my understanding of kata is not deep. i have read & been told that kata were designed in part to disguise the movements since martial arts were prohibited at various times in japan. now i imagine that you can trace the lineage of many japanese kata to older chinese forms, which i have also been told were devised to hide the techniques from those outside of the family being taught. so i conceed that katas contain a myriad of techniques & teach proper movement. but i don't think they are the only way to do so.




Only when void of proper technique, of which traditional kata teaches.


maybe i didn't explain my position well. you have two fighters of equal technical ability, equal speed, equal determination...all else being equal, strength will of course decide the issue. if a 150lbs man performs a strike with perfect technique, & a 250lbs man performs the same strike with equally perfect technique, the larger man's strike will be harder. i don't think there is any denying that.

the importance of strength & conditioning is also supported by military history. it is not a substitute for proper technique, but it is a great asset.

jf

[seasoned]

i think that viewing self defense & sport as opposites is a flawed premise. every warrior class in every society throughout history has participated in some form of controlled contest. pankration, jousting, fencing, single stick, wrestling, jujitsu, lei tai, combat sambo...all practiced by military personel & self-defense enthusiasts. skill is the ability to apply technique. sport contests provide the opportunity to test skill. now i'm not saying that sport fighting is the sum total of self-defense, but it is an important component.



admittedly, my understanding of kata is not deep. i have read & been told that kata were designed in part to disguise the movements since martial arts were prohibited at various times in japan. now i imagine that you can trace the lineage of many japanese kata to older chinese forms, which i have also been told were devised to hide the techniques from those outside of the family being taught. so i conceed that katas contain a myriad of techniques & teach proper movement. but i don't think they are the only way to do so.



maybe i didn't explain my position well. you have two fighters of equal technical ability, equal speed, equal determination...all else being equal, strength will of course decide the issue. if a 150lbs man performs a strike with perfect technique, & a 250lbs man performs the same strike with equally perfect technique, the larger man's strike will be harder. i don't think there is any denying that.

the importance of strength & conditioning is also supported by military history. it is not a substitute for proper technique, but it is a great asset.

jf
If the 250lb man is uprooted, then his punch is that of a 100lb man. If the 150lb man uses proper kata principles of power manifestation, which is where we are not connecting, then he can punch like a 250lb person.
I believe that this same disconnect is the one you may be having with the W/C people. There have been many good post in this forum on the benefits of traditional kata. I suggest that rather then take a stand with me, punch kata into the search engine and have at it. :asian:

[strikesubmit]

you know, i'm a shodan in judo & i've never even done a kata. maybe i should ask my coach about that.

jf

hey jarrod, yes please do. a buddy of mine is currently taking up judo, and he maintains that his dojo seems to place more of an emphasis on "kata" for beginners. and by the way he described it, it seemed more like drilling.

perhaps it's more just a matter of terminology between different instructors? i dunno. i don't have any first-hand experience with judo.

but, i was curious about this, so i looked up some judo "kata" on Youtube, and it did kinda look like drilling.

[jarrod]

If the 250lb man is uprooted, then his punch is that of a 100lb man. If the 150lb man uses proper kata principles of power manifestation, which is where we are not connecting, then he can punch like a 250lb person.
I believe that this same disconnect is the one you may be having with the W/C people. There have been many good post in this forum on the benefits of traditional kata. I suggest that rather then take a stand with me, punch kata into the search engine and have at it. :asian:


well if the 250lbs man is uprooted, he isn't using proper technique is he?

i've never denied the benefits of kata training, or WC for that matter. my whole point of contention is with the belief that there is a hard & fast line drawn between sport training & self-defense. the two are not mutually exclusive, & in fact are beneficial to each other.

for instance, there are kata divisions in every karate tournament. is it self-defense training when you do it in the dojo, then just for sport when you do it in front of judges? i don't think so.


hey jarrod, yes please do. a buddy of mine is currently taking up judo, and he maintains that his dojo seems to place more of an emphasis on "kata" for beginners. and by the way he described it, it seemed more like drilling.

perhaps it's more just a matter of terminology between different instructors? i dunno. i don't have any first-hand experience with judo.

but, i was curious about this, so i looked up some judo "kata" on Youtube, and it did kinda look like drilling.

i forgot at class this afternoon, but i will ask.

my guess is that judo kata are seldom practiced anymore because there are hardly kata divisions in judo tournaments anymore. just like nobody practices judo leglocks, or gun disarms, or atemi-waza, even though it is all part of the system. imo, this is an example of over-emphasizing the sport aspect, though i suspect a good judo athlete could still handle himself in the most common situations.

jf