When the kata is applied to self defense

[Hanzou]

Thanks for the advice

what was incorrect ......well he is not active as such and guess what he has fallen from grace ..... now that is not hard to find out about if you know who and where to look ................and the vid you posted was for your info not taken in the Aikikai hombu ...and that means neither of the two training halls ok before you start saying and claiming that ........ research before booming of

I never argued whether or not he was active. I argued that he was teaching magical nonsense and some Aikidoka were believing and supporting it. Also if he's fallen from grace, why is he still listed on the Aikikkai federation's main site? He may not be active (dude is in his late 80s), but I see no evidence that he has "fallen from grace" in the world of Aikido.

 

[Hanzou]

Not entirely no ....and if you are posting sports vids then def no and your interpretation of said is well at times misguided

Challenge videos aren't sports either....

Eh no ...you were on about trad boys getting their asses kicked on roof tops and the Karate sensei saying things at the time of UFC ... and you refer to the vids etc now they seem mainly if you are talking UFC or what ever it is called ten is that not a sport???

Yeah, you're getting some things confused here...

I didn't say that traditional martial artists were getting stomped on roof tops. *I* said that there are videos of traditional martial artists fighting, and the actual fighting looks like two men slapping each other with little skill being displayed.

Clearly when you fight like that, you're going to be in quite a bit of trouble when you go up against an MMA fighter, a Muay Thai Kickboxer, a boxer or a wrestler. That result is precisely what we're seeing in the modern day.

The sensei was my karate instructor discussing how Karatekas don't fight on the ground.

Sorry I don't understand what you're trying to say in the last sentence.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I get that but it can and is esp in empty hand arts ...the for example need only be changed, A very basic example an overhead strike with a sword the sword can be replaced with an over head strike with a bottle or a stick or anything else bottle ....ok distances slightly diff but principles essentially the same

We should collect all the effective techniques used in UFC and create new forms.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That statement is somewhat misguided,

Are you now suggesting that Koryu did not produce advanced fighters? ...........again a little research may be in order

I think what he's saying is that there's no evidence the kata (assuming that was used extensively in koryu arts - I have no real knowledge in that area) was responsible for developing that fighting ability. In other words, we find good fighters (perhaps better fighters on average) from systems that don't rely on kata. Of course, that's correlation, so an assumption of causality has to be taken with a grain of salt given all the confounding factors involved.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Im curious. Is there any actual evidence that kata, or mitt training, or sparring, or any other specific part of training makes someone a better fighter? When i say evidence i dont just mean "oh its common sense" or "look at X fighter" i mean an actual scientific study to find out what training methods are more effective?

That question isnt just to you, im just replying to yours since thats what put the question in my mind.

There are so many confounding variables, we'd literally need a controlled experiment to tell. Any comparison "in the wild" also includes other variables in training, instructional quality, time commitment, effectiveness of techniques, fitness, etc.

 

[Hanzou]

We should collect all the effective techniques used in UFC and create new forms.

Indeed. Sanshou is doing precisely that, and is the better for it IMO.

 

[Hanzou]

I think what he's saying is that there's no evidence the kata (assuming that was used extensively in koryu arts - I have no real knowledge in that area) was responsible for developing that fighting ability. In other words, we find good fighters (perhaps better fighters on average) from systems that don't rely on kata. Of course, that's correlation, so an assumption of causality has to be taken with a grain of salt given all the confounding factors involved.

The problem with the Koryu arts is that they were only tested a few times after the installation of the Edo period. They were tested in the Satsuma Rebellion in 1877, and by the Kodakan at the turn of the century. In both cases they failed spectacularly. The majority of them died out shortly after Judo's rise to prominence in the early 20th century.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Challenge videos aren't sports either....



Yeah, you're getting some things confused here...

I didn't say that traditional martial artists were getting stomped on roof tops. *I* said that there are videos of traditional martial artists fighting, and the actual fighting looks like two men slapping each other with little skill being displayed.

Clearly when you fight like that, you're going to be in quite a bit of trouble when you go up against an MMA fighter, a Muay Thai Kickboxer, a boxer or a wrestler. That result is precisely what we're seeing in the modern day.

The sensei was my karate instructor discussing how Karatekas don't fight on the ground.

Sorry I don't understand what you're trying to say in the last sentence.

I have to say I loved that they added the sound effects to the first clip. It made all those old kung fu movies seem more real.

 

[now disabled]

The problem with the Koryu arts is that they were only tested a few times after the installation of the Edo period. They were tested in the Satsuma Rebellion in 1877, and by the Kodakan at the turn of the century. In both cases they failed spectacularly. The majority of them died out shortly after Judo's rise to prominence in the early 20th century.

Ok you have lost me on the Kodakan testing things so could you enlighten me there please

 

[now disabled]

I think what he's saying is that there's no evidence the kata (assuming that was used extensively in koryu arts - I have no real knowledge in that area) was responsible for developing that fighting ability. In other words, we find good fighters (perhaps better fighters on average) from systems that don't rely on kata. Of course, that's correlation, so an assumption of causality has to be taken with a grain of salt given all the confounding factors involved.

I don't agree with you there sorry

 

[Steve]

You seem to be confusing "[your] personal opinion" with "evidence."

I wasn't going to respond but I clicked the disagree button and before you retaliate, which you always do, I figured I need to explain why I disagree with you. There is plenty of evidence that koryu arts do not produce capable fighters (which we all agree is synonmous with self defense). That's not an opinion. You may suggest that there is contrary evidence and you might also challenge the conclusion, but thats not nearly as condescending and dismissive as your snarky comment about opinions.

If you want to contribute constructively, perhaps you could offee contrary evidence or in a substantive way challenge the conclusion. @gpseymour is pretty good at doing this . Maybe take a cue from him.

 

[now disabled]

The problem with the Koryu arts is that they were only tested a few times after the installation of the Edo period. They were tested in the Satsuma Rebellion in 1877, and by the Kodakan at the turn of the century. In both cases they failed spectacularly. The majority of them died out shortly after Judo's rise to prominence in the early 20th century.

You are saying that the majority of the Koryu died out due to the rise of Judo ? ....ummmmm ok

The satsuma rebellion wasn't in the Edo period btw the Boshin war was are we getting the two mixed up?

 

[now disabled]

I wasn't going to respond but I clicked the disagree button and before you retaliate, which you always do, I figured I need to explain why I disagree with you. There is plenty of evidence that koryu arts do not produce capable fighters (which we all agree is synonmous with self defense). That's not an opinion. You may suggest that there is contrary evidence and you might also challenge the conclusion, but thats not nearly as condescending and dismissive as your snarky comment about opinions.

If you want to contribute constructively, perhaps you could offee contrary evidence or in a substantive way challenge the conclusion. @gpseymour is pretty good at doing this . Maybe take a cue from him.

Where is the evidence? and what are you basing that on ?

 

[Hanzou]

Ok you have lost me on the Kodakan testing things so could you enlighten me there please

In 1886, the Tokyo police held exhibitions to see what martial art would be used for their personal self defense system. Judo overwhelmingly beat out the Koryu arts and became the preeminent Jujitsu school in Japan. On July 24, 1905, representatives of the leading jujitsu schools (ryu) of Japan, gathered at the Butokukai Institute in Kyoto to agree upon the forms of Kodokan Judo and to continue the development of the technical forms of the sport. The ancient jujitsu techniques of each particular school were to be preserved in kata (pre-arranged form) for posterity. Here's a photo of that meeting:

You are saying that the majority of the Koryu died out due to the rise of Judo ? ....ummmmm ok

Yes.There's far more Japanese Jujitsu schools outside of Japan than inside Japan. I've heard that Japanese JJ is so rare in Japan that when you bring up Jujitsu, many think you're talking about Bjj.

The satsuma rebellion wasn't in the Edo period btw the Boshin war was are we getting the two mixed up?

I didn't say it did. I said it occurred after the installation of the Edo period. I'm well aware that the rebellion occurred during the Meiji restoration.

 

[now disabled]

Challenge videos aren't sports either....



Yeah, you're getting some things confused here...

I didn't say that traditional martial artists were getting stomped on roof tops. *I* said that there are videos of traditional martial artists fighting, and the actual fighting looks like two men slapping each other with little skill being displayed.

Clearly when you fight like that, you're going to be in quite a bit of trouble when you go up against an MMA fighter, a Muay Thai Kickboxer, a boxer or a wrestler. That result is precisely what we're seeing in the modern day.

The sensei was my karate instructor discussing how Karatekas don't fight on the ground.

Sorry I don't understand what you're trying to say in the last sentence.

Ok is your view that MMA is the king of all ?

 

[now disabled]

In 1886, the Tokyo police held exhibitions to see what martial art would be used for their personal self defense system. Judo overwhelmingly beat out the Koryu arts and became the preeminent Jujitsu school in Japan. On July 24, 1905, representatives of the leading jujitsu schools (ryu) of Japan, gathered at the Butokukai Institute in Kyoto to agree upon the forms of Kodokan Judo and to continue the development of the technical forms of the sport. The ancient jujitsu techniques of each particular school were to be preserved in kata (pre-arranged form) for posterity. Here's a photo of that meeting:


Ok ..... now where does that say they died out etc and that was due to Judo .... ?

 

[Steve]

I think what he's saying is that there's no evidence the kata (assuming that was used extensively in koryu arts - I have no real knowledge in that area) was responsible for developing that fighting ability. In other words, we find good fighters (perhaps better fighters on average) from systems that don't rely on kata. Of course, that's correlation, so an assumption of causality has to be taken with a grain of salt given all the confounding factors involved.

I took it to mean that the combat (I.e., application) produced the competent fighters. Someone earlier brought up basic training. The military training model is grounded in a training/application/training cycle . You learn it, you do it, you learn some more and then do some more . When I got to my first duty station, I was fully trained, but wrnt through 6 more months of ojt before I was able to even look at ordnance with direct supervision.

 

[Hanzou]

Ok is your view that MMA is the king of all ?

I would say that MMA has proven itself to be highly effective, but it isn't the king. MMA is a combination of very effective martial arts (typically Bjj, MT Kickboxing, wrestling, boxing, etc.) which makes it a very effective system in of itself.

As a Bjj practitioner, I appreciate the existence of MMA because it keeps my style honest. Anytime we veer off into Berimbolo land, MMA is there to punch us in the face and bring us back to reality.

 

[JR 137]

And that's the other side of what I was getting at. Used properly, the exercises in the OP video serve as a situational drill. That are covering a potential sequence, rather than a guaranteed or assumed one. I'm not convinced that's how they are used in that video .

It’s all in the mindset/approach/whatever you call it. And we don’t know exactly what was said before and/or after the video was rolling. But I agree that the teacher in the initial video was most likely teaching it as stuff that’ll definitely happen and not situation drills. But early on he did pause and have the other guy throw a counter punch to explain why certain postures and hand positions were used. But definitely not enough of it. But we’re not his students and seeing the whole picture; we’re seeing a few minute snapshot of training. When you’re first learning stuff, training this way is acceptable. You’re learning a strategy. If you’re being countered right off the bat, you’re not going to get a solid grasp of how to apply it. A great example of a technique that’s known to be effective is a single leg takedown. If I’m teaching you it and sprawl every single time you try it, from the very first time you try it, you’re going to have a real difficult time learning it. If I let you take me down a couple dozen times before I start countering it, you’ll get it a lot quicker and more effectively.

What the guy in the video is essentially doing is teaching the single leg takedown and not addressing the sprawl. Perhaps not until after they’ve got it down, or perhaps he never will. We really have no way of knowing. However many of us have been in a school that doesn’t address the sprawl and assumes the takedown will always work and goes right into the follow up and pin.

Maybe this explains it better:
Instead of MA, picture this being wrestling. The coach says shoot a single leg takedown. The opponent will fall to his side, landing on his stomach and put his left hand on the mat to push off and get up. You then half Nelson that arm sticking up and turn him and pin him. That can definitely work and go exactly as planned (I’ve done it countless times in free practice and matches), but there’s a ton of things that the opponent can and will do. He can sprawl, throw a cross-face, and get behind you. He can sprawl and use a spladle to pin you. He can sprawl and turn you with an overhook, he can... and on and on.

Guys like the in video have the mentality that the single leg takedown to half Nelson will and do work every time. They don’t train it against a guy who’s not going to let it happen. They don’t teach what to do when it doesn’t work. They don’t teach “ok he just sprawled, what do you do now?” They just keep on teaching single leg takedown-half Nelson-pin-game over without any other thought.

That’s what gives kata training and the like a bad name. Not everyone trains it like that, but that’s who’s getting the overwhelming share of ribbing here. And the videos of it are far too easy to find.

 

[oftheherd1]

He's definitely had cross-training in Bjj. He even uses Bjj terminology in the video. I did Karate for a long time, and we never did any ground fighting. The idea that ground fighting is hidden in the kata is laughable, and nothing more than a sales gimmick.

Just curious, is there anything you know of hidden in kata, or no longer know in the kata?