Karate without KATA

[#ROOT]

Just throwing this out there for open opinion...

I took up Shotokan 13 years ago and currently hold a Shodan 1st Dan grade. Throughout the syllabus I had to learn all the Heian/Pinan Katas as well as Tekki and Empi or Bassai-Dai or both.

From attending lots of Seminars breaking down Bunkai (Applications) which is all good I can only see this as ones interpretation of the moves of Kata. I would sooner train hard Kion basics, Bag work and sparring.

However my question is this.....

Is Kata Necessary for people to learn effective Martial Arts??

With the introduction of MMA into clubs around the country I don't believe Kata is regularly trained and it's all about pure application and endurance training.

I still teach Kata purely for other benefits. but I believe the student can learn awesome skills without the necessity of knowing every Kata that was ever invented.

I recently attended a seminar where the Instructor Insisted my grade wasn't worthy unless I bought his Bassai-Sho DVD.

Go Figure.......

Look forward to all comments

 

[Flying Crane]

Ok, are you really asking a question, or are you looking to just have a discussion? Either way, this topic has been repeatedly over-discussed here in the forums. I suspect you already have your own answer and don't really need to ask.

Quick answer: no you do not need to practice kata/forms, in order to be a very effective fighter. And no you do not need to apologize if you don't want to do kata, and you don't need our approval if you decide to train without forms. If kata-less training is what you want, and you are happy with the results, then do it.

That, however, is not the same answer to the question is kata useful in developing fighting/martial skills.

 

[geezer]

However my question is this.....

Is Kata Necessary for people to learn effective Martial Arts??

Of course "kata" or forms aren't necessary to be an effective martial artist and fighter, but they are necessary to be proficient in a number of particular martial arts.

In other words, whether or not I can fight, I couldn't claim proficiency in the particular martial art that I train without also knowing it's essential forms. I suspect this is also true of Shotokan.

 

[geezer]

I recently attended a seminar where the Instructor Insisted my grade wasn't worthy unless I bought his Bassai-Sho DVD.

That's all? Just his DVD? Heck my old instructor would try to sell us everything. Good thing he had to fly all the way from Hong Kong to train us or he probably would have sold us his used car, some property in Kowloon, and his old girlfriend.

 

[hoshin1600]

That's all? Just his DVD? Heck my old instructor would try to sell us everything. Good thing he had to fly all the way from Hong Kong to train us or he probably would have sold us his used car, some property in Kowloon, and his old girlfriend.

I'm not advocating human trafficking but was she pretty?

 

[Koshiki]

I'm not advocating human trafficking but was she pretty?

For some reason the thread loaded from the bottom, and this was the first post I saw. So glad to have some context...

 

[#ROOT]

For some reason the thread loaded from the bottom, and this was the first post I saw. So glad to have some context...

Just throwing this out there for open opinion...

I took up Shotokan 13 years ago and currently hold a Shodan 1st Dan grade. Throughout the syllabus I had to learn all the Heian/Pinan Katas as well as Tekki and Empi or Bassai-Dai or both.

From attending lots of Seminars breaking down Bunkai (Applications) which is all good I can only see this as ones interpretation of the moves of Kata. I would sooner train hard Kion basics, Bag work and sparring.

However my question is this.....

Is Kata Necessary for people to learn effective Martial Arts??

With the introduction of MMA into clubs around the country I don't believe Kata is regularly trained and it's all about pure application and endurance training.

I still teach Kata purely for other benefits. but I believe the student can learn awesome skills without the necessity of knowing every Kata that was ever invented.

I recently attended a seminar where the Instructor Insisted my grade wasn't worthy unless I bought his Bassai-Sho DVD.

Go Figure.......

Look forward to all comments

 

[crazydiamond]

No kata is not necessary to learn effective marital arts. I train in JKD/Kali. Maybe one kata in the entire system and most dislike it. My first day in martial arts class was knife sparing and knife attack simulations - get to it. That said if you choose a certain martial art that is based on kata - that's what that art is, and it can be just effective.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Is Kata Necessary for people to learn effective Martial Arts??

No. You can learn 'effective' martial arts with or without kata (my opinion).

Kata is required to understand karate (opinion).

I still teach Kata purely for other benefits. but I believe the student can learn awesome skills without the necessity of knowing every Kata that was ever invented.

If that's all you want, then yes. There is so much more (opinion).

I recently attended a seminar where the Instructor Insisted my grade wasn't worthy unless I bought his Bassai-Sho DVD.

I believe you have your answer to that one.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Systems such as:

- Judo,
- wrestling,
- Aikido,
- boxing,
- MT,
- BJJ,
- ...

don't have form/Kata. It still be nice to have at least one form/Kata that can record all

- Judo throws,
- wrestling take downs,
- Aikido take downs,
- boxing punching skill,
- MT kick/punch skill.
- BJJ ground skill.
- ....

If such form/Kata exists, I'm sure those guys will use that form/Kata just for "record keeping" purpose and not for "training" purpose.

 

[Dong xiao hu]

Judo and aikido do have kata. I learned a boxing trainer I had arranged the punches in to a sequence that would teach you to use your hips when you punched but it wasn't called a kata or form or anything. Just what he taught people to start.

Sent from my Z797C using Tapatalk

 

[Paul_D]

Is Kata Necessary for people to learn effective Martial Arts??

What criteria are you using to decide effectiveness?

Running away is effective in terms of self defence, but ineffective in terms of fighting as it will get you qualified for failing to engage with your opponent. Similarly groin strikes, 12-6 elbow strikes, strikes to the neck, effective for SD, but you lose a fight due to DQ. The techniques haven't changed, neither has their effectiveness. The only thing that has changed is the criteria you have used judge them.

So what are effective marital arts, effective for what purpose, fighting, self defence, point scoring?

 

[donald1]

Is kata necessary? I think so. But its not mandatory. I like how kata can be broken down I to steps and can take couple techniques in the form and see how the techniques used effectively and possibly finding alternative reasons for using the techniques.
But you can still practice the techniques without the forms

 

[Dirty Dog]

Is kata necessary? I think so. But its not mandatory. I like how kata can be broken down I to steps and can take couple techniques in the form and see how the techniques used effectively and possibly finding alternative reasons for using the techniques.
But you can still practice the techniques without the forms

In this context, necessary and mandatory would be synonyms...

Kata is USEFUL but not mandatory.

Forms are a great tool for teaching groups and allowing them to practice techniques, balance, movement, etc alone.
If I were teaching one person and one person only, every day, with the goal being teaching them to fight, then forms wouldn't likely play a major part.
If, on the other (and more realistic) hand, I'm teaching a group of people, a few hours per week, with the goal of teaching them not only to fight, but to be able to pass on the entire system themselves, forms have a larger role to play.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Form can be used for

- teaching,
- learning,

but it should not be used for "training". In "training", you will need your partner to give you:

- timing,
- opportunity,
- angle.

 

[Flying Crane]

Form can be used for

- teaching,
- learning,

but it should not be used for "training". In "training", you will need your partner to give you:

- timing,
- opportunity,
- angle.

Of course kata can be used for training. Geezuz man.

As can your examples too.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Of course kata can be used for training.

Let's assume a "form" is like a "book". Let's also assume a book has the following content:

"This is a book."

In this book, besides you can learn words such as this, is, a, book, you can also learn the grammar:

this - subject,
is - verb,
a - article,
book - object,

By using this grammar, you can create as many similar sentences as you like.

Let's assume a form has "front kick, jab, cross."

In this form, besides you can learn front kick, jab, cross, you can also learn the strategy:

- use a kick to set up a punch,
- use a punch to set up another punch.

So when you train, you don't just train "front kick, jab, cross", you should also train:

- side kick, back fist, hook punch,
- roundhouse kick, hook punch, upper cut,
- ...

Also let's assume a book has 2 sentences, "This is a book. I love you."

Please notice that if you reverse there 2 sentence as "I love you. This is a book.", nothing will be changed since these 2 sentences has no relationship between each other. If you repeat

- "This is a book. I love you." 100 times,
- "I love you. This is a book" 100 times,
- "This is a book." 100 times and "I love you." 100 times,

you will get the same learning.

So in your form training, if you break your form at the logic connection points and train each partial forms separately, you will get much better training result.

 

[Chris Parker]

Also, let us assume you are only applying your own limited, small take on what a "form" is, which bears little resemblance to the usage of both the concept and term in many, many arts.

Kay?

 

[Flying Crane]

Let's assume a "form" is like a "book". Let's also assume a book has the following content:

"This is a book."

In this book, besides you can learn words such as this, is, a, book, you can also learn the grammar:

this - subject,
is - verb,
a - article,
book - object,

By using this grammar, you can create as many similar sentences as you like.

Let's assume a form has "front kick, jab, cross."

In this form, besides you can learn front kick, jab, cross, you can also learn the strategy:

- use a kick to set up a punch,
- use a punch to set up another punch.

So when you train, you don't just train "front kick, jab, cross", you should also train:

- side kick, back fist, hook punch,
- roundhouse kick, hook punch, upper cut,
- ...

Also let's assume a book has 2 sentences, "This is a book. I love you."

Please notice that if you reverse there 2 sentence as "I love you. This is a book.", nothing will be changed since these 2 sentences has no relationship between each other. If you repeat

- "This is a book. I love you." 100 times,
- "I love you. This is a book" 100 times,
- "This is a book." 100 times and "I love you." 100 times,

you will get the same learning.

So in your form training, if you break your form at the logic connection points and train each partial forms separately, you will get much better training result.

Let's not make any such assumptions. At all.

 

[TSDTexan]

This is preserved within bassai/passai... it is when a kick is actually a throw.

Doing the kata intentionally, reapeatedly... drills the movements until they are moved from consciousness into subconscious of the brain.


The brain forms neurological synaptic connections to perform the task faster and with less conscious effort, which will help you actually get it off without freezing under pressure.
And with the consciousness freed from the additional burden of remembering and doing, more processing and bandwidth can go into things like observation for exposed openings, threat assessment of others in the background, terrain.

Then the kick or the strike becomes a function of pure will and even reflex.

Can you become an effective fighter without kata forms... yes.
Can you understand karate, and be an effective karateka without kata? No. Absolutely not.

If you take away kata, it is karate in name only.

You lose karate tactics, karate strategy, proper karate ranging, karate breathing, karate structure.

This is only one man's opinion.
Kata speaks to "why to"... but drilling isolated technique will only teach "how to".

The ones who gave us the art of karate told us long ago
"karate is kata & kata is karate", when we discard what they instructed while keeping the name of karate we dishonor their legacy.