Indian girl uses Karate to defend herself. Is Karate an effective martial art for self defense?

[lklawson]

if you feel its bullcrap you know your free to not read it right?

You're missing the point. For years now there's been an argument, "Karate doesn't have 'grappling' in it." And Karateka always reply, "Oh yes it does!" That's what's bullcrap. The incessant argument. I want it to go away and replace "Yuh-huh!" "Nuh-ugh" with actual facts.

Now, my personal experience is that the Karateka I've encountered & trained with have limited or no grappling, but maybe I just haven't met the right ones. Maybe there are lots and tons of Karate styles which include all kinds of grappling. I'd love for that to be true. But show me.

Just saying, "feel free to not read" is the same thing as saying, "your experience is indicative of Karate as a whole." Instead, try answering the question. Say, "The Sokitume style I study has a list of 12 throws, 10 joint locks, 8 chokes, and 9 ground holding techniques. We practice them regularly and are required to know and demonstrate an increasing number for each belt-grade test. We are free to use them after X belt-grade in sparring and people regularly do so."

I'd love to hear that.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Hanzou]

Then why did you bring it up?

I didn't bring it up, YOU did. I said that throat strikes have been legal in older NHB fights, and that never changed the outcome of what the dominant styles turned out to be.

Your questions are silly. Why weren't they used more? Maybe because they weren't effective?

That is only two possibilities. On the other hand maybe they were viewed as too effective and that is why they were not used. If they weren't viewed as effective then there would be no need to ban them. If I put a guy down in a self defense situation and I do not stomp my foot through his head is it because I don't think it will be effective or because I don't want to kill him?

They were banned when the sport was seeking to expand and become a profitable business. The UFC did the exact same thing since throat shots were perfectly legal in the first UFCs as well. Again, banned because they are dangerous and can lead to some pretty nasty injuries, not banned because they're some super-awesome instant-win technique.

One situation's dirty tricks is another situation's survival techniques.

It only becomes a survival technique because you lacked the skill to avoid getting placed in that predicament in the first place. If you need to resort to bite, gouge, or claw your way out of a bad situation, you messed up a long time ago.

In any case you are dodging the question; When Did Jon Jones use throat strikes and eye gouges? You are a stickler for wanting evidence that is not just anecdotal after all.

Jon Jones wouldn't be outwardly using either since the UFC bans both.

 

[Balrog]

It is sometimes said that karate is not the best martial art for self-defense.

The martial art that works best for self defense is the one that you are proficient in.

*All* martial arts have a foundation in self-defense. That is why they originally came into being in the first place. And if we practice with that concept of self-defense in our minds at all times, then stories like that of the young lady will not be uncommon.

 

[ballen0351]

You're missing the point. For years now there's been an argument, "Karate doesn't have 'grappling' in it." And Karateka always reply, "Oh yes it does!" That's what's bullcrap. The incessant argument. I want it to go away and replace "Yuh-huh!" "Nuh-ugh" with actual facts.

Now, my personal experience is that the Karateka I've encountered & trained with have limited or no grappling, but maybe I just haven't met the right ones. Maybe there are lots and tons of Karate styles which include all kinds of grappling. I'd love for that to be true. But show me.

Just saying, "feel free to not read" is the same thing as saying, "your experience is indicative of Karate as a whole." Instead, try answering the question. Say, "The Sokitume style I study has a list of 12 throws, 10 joint locks, 8 chokes, and 9 ground holding techniques. We practice them regularly and are required to know and demonstrate an increasing number for each belt-grade test. We are free to use them after X belt-grade in sparring and people regularly do so."

I'd love to hear that.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

why should we? I train in Karate it has grappling. Why do I need to prove to you that 2+2=4 it's a basic fact. And for The little fanboys running around here facts don't matter. They say in the same post "I've seen arm bars" and "there is no grappling" when pointed out to them an arm bar is grappling then the goal line moves to well it's not advanced grappling.
There are several people here that actually train in Karate and say yes we learn grappling, the ones saying it's not don't even train in Karate. So I don't care if you find it to be bull crap as i said nobody forces you to be here

 

[RTKDCMB]

I didn't bring it up, YOU did.

Technically it was Kempoguy123 who brought it up.

I said that throat strikes have been legal in older NHB fights, and that never changed the outcome of what the dominant styles turned out to be.

So we are stuck at anecdotal evidence then.

Your questions are silly. Why weren't they used more? Maybe because they weren't effective?

The UFC did the exact same thing since throat shots were perfectly legal in the first UFCs as well. Again, banned because they are dangerous and can lead to some pretty nasty injuries,

So they weren't effective but they were dangerous and can lead to some pretty nasty injuries,? You are contradicting yourself.

not banned because they're some super-awesome instant-win technique.

No one said they were instant win.

It only becomes a survival technique because you lacked the skill to avoid getting placed in that predicament in the first place. If you need to resort to bite, gouge, or claw your way out of a bad situation, you messed up a long time ago.

This is true if you have to resort to ANY physical techniques to get out of a bad situation.

Jon Jones wouldn't be outwardly using either since the UFC bans both.

So then how could he have been 'using them effectively'?

John Jones used them pretty effectively.

 

[lklawson]

why should we?

Because you're the one making the claim. It should be easy. Just post the curriculum and the techniques list. That's often available online now or in a handout.

The little fanboys running around here facts don't matter. They say in the same post "I've seen arm bars" and "there is no grappling" when pointed out to them an arm bar is grappling then the goal line moves to well it's not advanced grappling.

Don't confuse me with someone else. I'm Kirk, not any other person. You got a beef with them, take it to them.

There are several people here that actually train in Karate and say yes we learn grappling, the ones saying it's not don't even train in Karate.

That's nice. Please give me the details.

So I don't care if you find it to be bull crap as i said nobody forces you to be here

I'm just asking for evidence to back up the claim. That's not such a wild thing to ask for.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Buka]

Sandwiches.

Son of a gun, you got me. (they were good, too.)

 

[drop bear]

Technically it was Kempoguy123 who brought it up.



So we are stuck at anecdotal evidence then.



So they weren't effective but they were dangerous and can lead to some pretty nasty injuries,? You are contradicting yourself.



No one said they were instant win.



This is true if you have to resort to ANY physical techniques to get out of a bad situation.



So then how could he have been 'using them effectively'?

I don't think eye gouges and throat punches would have changed the outcome of a ufc fight. Except for the odd time someone just gets caught. (Think Connor McGregor jose Aldo )

Otherwise the dominant fighter generally would have won anyway.

All the setups are the same as striking. All the defences are the same as striking. So you would be hard pressed to be a good striker and a crap throat puncher.

So you would be busting people up for no reason.

 

[ballen0351]

Because you're the one making the claim. It should be easy. Just post the curriculum and the techniques list. That's often available online now or in a handout.

not making a claim I'm stating a fact. You go look for it yourself.

Don't confuse me with someone else. I'm Kirk, not any other person. You got a beef with them, take it to them.

right, your just the one calling it bullcrap......but you keep coming back

That's nice. Please give me the details.

I'm just asking for evidence to back up the claim. That's not such a wild thing to ask for.

show me the evidence it doesn't exist.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I don't have a sword

 

[JP3]

Seasoned said, "This of course is your opinion.

Martial Talk is very well monitored. Members are allowed to have their opinion on a wide variety of topics as long as they stay within the site rules.

Even though you can have an opinion whether good or bad the fact is you have not been here long enough to render the statement you did, "just sayin"

Actually, I've been here plenty long enough to point this out, yes. I did not say it was truth, I said it was my opinion.

My thrust was to point out that, in my opinion, this sounds just like tens of thousands of other threads which have no resolution, those about "X art is better than Y style." As some of your more experienced practitioners in the thread seemed to have indicated, it is the person, the practitioner, that makes the difference. I grant you, that, too, is my opinion, but I have met 85 year old great grandfathers who have done the movie scene Tai Chi in the park each morning, and they can put the whomp on a body. I've met olt fat guys with knees so bad that they can hardly step onto the mat, but you don't really want to get in range. I could go on, but I expect the point would be lost.

I believe that my actual "point" has been made simply by checking when the initial post in this thread was made, and the pages (7 at current count) is only a few days later. What is it... 3 days. 7 pages? Over a debate about if Karate has grappling included? Really? Of course it does, If the instructor wants it to be there.

Is such karate-taught grappling effective? Oh boy, there we go again into one of the great black holes of martial arts debate. Simply, I would say that yes, if the instructor had a background in grappling, then the instructor would/could teach grappling inside a karate curriculum. Would it then be "karate?" I have no idea, I only spent 4 years in karate school, and the style I was in did not do groundwork, or grappling, though there was some throws involved, I would assert that we did not study "grappling" as there was no organized randori, as one experiences in a judo school, but there was some exposure tot he concepts involved. I can easily see where an instructor could carve out some time each class, or each week, for some ongoing groundwork training. Why not?

But do they? I've no idea. I went to judo and BJJ to get mine. But that does not indicate that it doesn't exist.

But to say that I have not been "here" long enough to have an opinion? Hubris, anyone?

 

[ballen0351]

In this extract from his book, “The History of Karate: Okinawan Goju” (May 1996), Morio Hiagonna tells us the tale of a meeting in the 1930s where Jigoro Kano (founder of Judo) and Chojun Miyagi (founder of Goju-Ryu karate) discussed grappling and groundwork in karate:

“When they spoke later Kano Sensei asked, "Are there ne-waza (ground fighting techniques) in karate?" Miyagi explained that there are, along with nage waza (throwing techniques), shime waza (choking techniques) and gyaku waza (joint locking techniques). He then demonstrated some examples explaining the continual importance of harmonizing and focusing the breath. Kano was surprised to find that karate was much more than just punching and kicking techniques, but that it encompassed the depth of a complete martial art." – The History of Karate, Okinawan Goju-Ryu, Morio Hiagonna

 

[Buka]

In my time in Martial Arts it has morphed greatly. I think it will continue to do so exponentially. There are so many Martial Artists who have experience in so many aspects of fighting arts it blows my mind. You can just look at the people on this forum. Combined, they're like an encyclopedia. And it doesn't matter if they're traditional Artists or not, their knowledge is vast.

My guess is their long time students will have even more knowledge, more experience and be more talented than they are. As will those who train under them as well.

I think a time will come when there isn't an art that doesn't cover everything.
I think Martial Arts are just getting better, all of them. And I think it's fantastic.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

right, your just the one calling it bullcrap......but you keep coming back

I don't think Kirk was calling the claim that Karate has grappling bullcrap. I think he was saying that it's bullcrap to keep arguing about it when we can't agree on what counts as grappling or what karate we're talking about. It's hard to have a discussion when people aren't using the same terms to mean the same thing.

Rather than going back and forth on whether this or that counts as grappling or how many years you have to train in karate to see the grappling, it makes more sense to say something like:

"Karate style A as it is commonly trained includes a systematic approach to close range grabbing/trapping limbs which may be used to set up strikes or standing armlocks. It also contains about a half-dozen throws and takedowns. It does not include any significant ground grappling. The stand-up grappling is intended for civilian self-defense against an untrained attacker. Most of the grappling is not used in free-sparring, although the foot sweeps may be used. The grappling techniques may be trained cooperatively or in a more free form manner from a "sticky hands" sort of set up."

"Karate style B as I learned it contained significant amounts of standing and ground grappling. However my instructor was also a 4th dan in Judo and may have added methods from Judo into the curriculum."

"Karate style C historically contains an official syllabus which includes 7 throws and 5 standing joint locks. However these methods are commonly neglected and usually not taught until after black belt."

"Karate style D contains a full syllabus of standing arm and wrist locks. However these are always practiced cooperatively and are not used in any form of sparring."

Once we've established basic information like that, then people can argue if they want to about whether these approaches constitute an effective approach to grappling training, but at least we won't be going around in circles about the definition of grappling or arguing about whether you can make generalizations about "Karate" as a whole, given the huge range of arts which fall under that umbrella.

 

[lklawson]

not making a claim I'm stating a fact. You go look for it yourself.

How can I? You've refused to give me any information.

right, your just the one calling it bullcrap......but you keep coming back

You're still confusing me with someone else. Again, what I called BS to is the ARGUMENT itself; the whole he-said-she-said thing. It's BS because it doesn't need to exist. Just post the curriculum and a few easy details and the whole argument goes away. It's really that simple.

show me the evidence it doesn't exist.

Prove a negative? Did you really just say that? <boggle>

Look, you made a claim. I want to believe the claim. Just, please, post the details as I asked and end the bullcrap from the supposed "little fanboys" you're complaining about.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

In this extract from his book, “The History of Karate: Okinawan Goju” (May 1996), Morio Hiagonna tells us the tale of a meeting in the 1930s where Jigoro Kano (founder of Judo) and Chojun Miyagi (founder of Goju-Ryu karate) discussed grappling and groundwork in karate:

“When they spoke later Kano Sensei asked, "Are there ne-waza (ground fighting techniques) in karate?" Miyagi explained that there are, along with nage waza (throwing techniques), shime waza (choking techniques) and gyaku waza (joint locking techniques). He then demonstrated some examples explaining the continual importance of harmonizing and focusing the breath. Kano was surprised to find that karate was much more than just punching and kicking techniques, but that it encompassed the depth of a complete martial art." – The History of Karate, Okinawan Goju-Ryu, Morio Hiagonna

That's nice, but the quote is light on the details I requested. It's nothing more than someone famous saying, "sure it does." It doesn't actually give useful information. Which is exactly like every other post in this thread.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[ballen0351]

That's nice, but the quote is light on the details I requested. It's nothing more than someone famous saying, "sure it does." It doesn't actually give useful information. Which is exactly like every other post in this thread.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

so your calling 3 of the top Martial Artists of the last 100 years liars......cool

 

[ballen0351]

I don't think Kirk was calling the claim that Karate has grappling bullcrap. I think he was saying that it's bullcrap to keep arguing about it when we can't agree on what counts as grappling or what karate we're talking about. It's hard to have a discussion when people aren't using the same terms to mean the same thing.

Rather than going back and forth on whether this or that counts as grappling or how many years you have to train in karate to see the grappling, it makes more sense to say something like:

"Karate style A as it is commonly trained includes a systematic approach to close range grabbing/trapping limbs which may be used to set up strikes or standing armlocks. It also contains about a half-dozen throws and takedowns. It does not include any significant ground grappling. The stand-up grappling is intended for civilian self-defense against an untrained attacker. Most of the grappling is not used in free-sparring, although the foot sweeps may be used. The grappling techniques may be trained cooperatively or in a more free form manner from a "sticky hands" sort of set up."

"Karate style B as I learned it contained significant amounts of standing and ground grappling. However my instructor was also a 4th dan in Judo and may have added methods from Judo into the curriculum."

"Karate style C historically contains an official syllabus which includes 7 throws and 5 standing joint locks. However these methods are commonly neglected and usually not taught until after black belt."

"Karate style D contains a full syllabus of standing arm and wrist locks. However these are always practiced cooperatively and are not used in any form of sparring."

Once we've established basic information like that, then people can argue if they want to about whether these approaches constitute an effective approach to grappling training, but at least we won't be going around in circles about the definition of grappling or arguing about whether you can make generalizations about "Karate" as a whole, given the huge range of arts which fall under that umbrella.

great except the people that actually DO train in Karate say it's there I study Goju Ryu we have grappling case closed I know we have it beacause I have done it. I don't care if Kirk believes it or not.

 

[Koshiki]

You're missing the point. For years now there's been an argument, "Karate doesn't have 'grappling' in it." And Karateka always reply, "Oh yes it does!" That's what's bullcrap. The incessant argument. I want it to go away and replace "Yuh-huh!" "Nuh-ugh" with actual facts.

Now, my personal experience is that the Karateka I've encountered & trained with have limited or no grappling, but maybe I just haven't met the right ones. Maybe there are lots and tons of Karate styles which include all kinds of grappling. I'd love for that to be true. But show me.

Just saying, "feel free to not read" is the same thing as saying, "your experience is indicative of Karate as a whole." Instead, try answering the question. Say, "The Sokitume style I study has a list of 12 throws, 10 joint locks, 8 chokes, and 9 ground holding techniques. We practice them regularly and are required to know and demonstrate an increasing number for each belt-grade test. We are free to use them after X belt-grade in sparring and people regularly do so."

I'd love to hear that.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Honestly, I come from a Korean Karate background, and I'm somewhat familiar with the repertoire of many of the karate and karate-based schools in the area. All of them have grappling. None of them have comprehensive grappling, unless you count schools that also teach a separate grappling art as part of the curriculum.

In my own style, as in most kata based styles, the art is, to a certain extent, what you make it, so I'll take the set of 100 applied techniques that everyone is required to learn and practice and test on, rather than the 381713847183 applied techniques that various individuals in my system practice and train, because otherwise, well, that's just chaos.

Out of one hundred formal applied techniques, the grappling versus striking, and standing versus ground fighting counts are as follows, as offense, as defense, and as an offense to which you are to learn to defend. The count will be extremely rough, and will likely exceed 100, since most of the drills have two or three parts, often with multiple possible classifications. The techniques which involve going to the ground begin at green belt (out of white, yellow, green, red). A swift moving, dedicated adult student should be able to easily reach green belt within the first year and a half:

Standing strikes and parries/blocks/traps/etc:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-|||- FINAL COUNT - 29
Standing kicks and parries/blocks/traps/etc:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 25
Ground fighting strikes and parries/blocks/traps/etc: ||||-||||-|||| FINAL COUNT - 14
Ground fighting kicks and parries/blocks/traps/etc: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Standing armbars/locks: ||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 32
Ground fighting armbars/locks: ||||-||| FINAL COUNT - 8
Standing head controls/chokes (RNC, Guillotine, reverse guillotine, Full nelson, etc.): ||||-||| FINAL COUNT - 8
Grounded head controls/chokes: |||| FINAL COUNT - 4
Standing sweeps/throws:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-| FINAL COUNT - 26
Ground fighting sweeps: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Standing leg locks/bars: || FINAL COUNT - 2
Ground fighting leg locks/bars: || FINAL COUNT - 2
Ground positions (Mount/Guard/Side-Control): ||||-||||-|||| FINAL COUNT - 14
Tackles/bearhugs, etc: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Chair-based striking: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Chair-based grappling: ||||-| FINAL COUNT - 6
Grappling against a wall: ||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 10
Mixed Grappling and striking in a car: ||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 10
Techniques while being dragged: ||||-| FINAL COUNT - 6

I suddenly realize, thinking that this sounds more grappling/ground heavy than I expected, that part way through counting, I switched from classifying entire drills to classifying the requisite pieces, but I'm too lazy to re-do it all.

So, at a very, very rough count, I find that 97 out 100 techniques include some form of striking, so obviously striking plays a large role. However, I also counted, roughly, 137 grappling techniques, both standing and grounded. I counted 129 instances of standing technique, versus only 69 instances of grounded techniques.

Anyway, by this rough count, over half the drills end with at least one partner on the ground, and exactly 1/8th of the drills begin and end with both partners on the ground.

The primary teachers in the style come from entirely karate backgrounds, with the exception of a little Tai Shing Pekwar in one, and some Taiji Chuan and Bagua in another. I can't say if this level of grappling is typical of many karate schools, but it certainly isn't out of the ordinary around here. I personally haven't worked with anyone who teaches applications mainly of a punch/block nature, with the exception of a Shoalin Kempo Karate place I attended briefly.

I know chair-defenses extend back to early Japanese Karate with the original Shotokan. I'm assuming the car-stuff is slightly newer...

So again, my system is not terribly traditional, (I mean, it's American from Korea from Japan from Okinawa), but it's also not terribly mixed. When I've visited other schools, or otherwise interacted, I never feel like my school is more grapple-heavy, generally speaking.

And yes, it's apparent that we're more strikers than grapplers, and also that we are much more stand-up than ground, and that our ground is mainly anti-ground. But I think it's also fair to say that we do grapple, and that we don't ignore the ground.

Be interesting to see some other Karate-ka TKDers give some rough breakdowns.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

great except the people that actually DO train in Karate say it's there I study Goju Ryu we have grappling case closed I know we have it beacause I have done it.

I don't even train karate and I agree that Goju Ryu has grappling, based on what I've seen of it.

The problem is that people are using "grappling" to mean different things and that's where a lot of the arguments are coming from*. My definition of grappling is fairly broad. Other people have more restrictive definitions. Rather than going around in circles debating definitions of very broad terms, it makes sense to communicate more specifically what sort of training we're talking about.

*(Much of the rest probably comes from the broadness of the umbrella term "karate", which covers a multitude of different practices.)

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Honestly, I come from a Korean Karate background, and I'm somewhat familiar with the repertoire of many of the karate and karate-based schools in the area. All of them have grappling. None of them have comprehensive grappling, unless you count schools that also teach a separate grappling art as part of the curriculum.

In my own style, as in most kata based styles, the art is, to a certain extent, what you make it, so I'll take the set of 100 applied techniques that everyone is required to learn and practice and test on, rather than the 381713847183 applied techniques that various individuals in my system practice and train, because otherwise, well, that's just chaos.

Out of one hundred formal applied techniques, the grappling versus striking, and standing versus ground fighting counts are as follows, as offense, as defense, and as an offense to which you are to learn to defend. The count will be extremely rough, and will likely exceed 100, since most of the drills have two or three parts, often with multiple possible classifications. The techniques which involve going to the ground begin at green belt (out of white, yellow, green, red). A swift moving, dedicated adult student should be able to easily reach green belt within the first year and a half:

Standing strikes and parries/blocks/traps/etc:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-|||- FINAL COUNT - 29
Standing kicks and parries/blocks/traps/etc:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 25
Ground fighting strikes and parries/blocks/traps/etc: ||||-||||-|||| FINAL COUNT - 14
Ground fighting kicks and parries/blocks/traps/etc: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Standing armbars/locks: ||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 32
Ground fighting armbars/locks: ||||-||| FINAL COUNT - 8
Standing head controls/chokes (RNC, Guillotine, reverse guillotine, Full nelson, etc.): ||||-||| FINAL COUNT - 8
Grounded head controls/chokes: |||| FINAL COUNT - 4
Standing sweeps/throws:||||-||||-||||-||||-||||-| FINAL COUNT - 26
Ground fighting sweeps: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Standing leg locks/bars: || FINAL COUNT - 2
Ground fighting leg locks/bars: || FINAL COUNT - 2
Ground positions (Mount/Guard/Side-Control): ||||-||||-|||| FINAL COUNT - 14
Tackles/bearhugs, etc: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Chair-based striking: ||||-|| FINAL COUNT - 7
Chair-based grappling: ||||-| FINAL COUNT - 6
Grappling against a wall: ||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 10
Mixed Grappling and striking in a car: ||||-||||- FINAL COUNT - 10
Techniques while being dragged: ||||-| FINAL COUNT - 6

I suddenly realize, thinking that this sounds more grappling/ground heavy than I expected, that part way through counting, I switched from classifying entire drills to classifying the requisite pieces, but I'm too lazy to re-do it all.

So, at a very, very rough count, I find that 97 out 100 techniques include some form of striking, so obviously striking plays a large role. However, I also counted, roughly, 137 grappling techniques, both standing and grounded. I counted 129 instances of standing technique, versus only 69 instances of grounded techniques.

Anyway, by this rough count, over half the drills end with at least one partner on the ground, and exactly 1/8th of the drills begin and end with both partners on the ground.

The primary teachers in the style come from entirely karate backgrounds, with the exception of a little Tai Shing Pekwar in one, and some Taiji Chuan and Bagua in another. I can't say if this level of grappling is typical of many karate schools, but it certainly isn't out of the ordinary around here. I personally haven't worked with anyone who teaches applications mainly of a punch/block nature, with the exception of a Shoalin Kempo Karate place I attended briefly.

I know chair-defenses extend back to early Japanese Karate with the original Shotokan. I'm assuming the car-stuff is slightly newer...

So again, my system is not terribly traditional, (I mean, it's American from Korea from Japan from Okinawa), but it's also not terribly mixed. When I've visited other schools, or otherwise interacted, I never feel like my school is more grapple-heavy, generally speaking.

And yes, it's apparent that we're more strikers than grapplers, and also that we are much more stand-up than ground, and that our ground is mainly anti-ground. But I think it's also fair to say that we do grapple, and that we don't ignore the ground.

Be interesting to see some other Karate-ka TKDers give some rough breakdowns.

Thanks for the detailed info.

I wonder how much that curriculum has evolved over the last two decades, since the advent of the UFC. Prior to that time I had seen (in books, demos, videos, and from visiting classes) plenty of stand-up grappling (throws, armlocks, and wristlocks) from practitioners of Karate and TKD, but exactly zero ground grappling. No mount/side mount/guard. No leglocks on the ground. None of that. The closest would be techniques where the karateka would be standing or kneeling over a downed opponent while applying a submission.