Kata w/o Bunkai?

[Tez3]

I've just got our 15 year old MMA student into doing kata and Bunkai....and he wants to grade TSD now. Why? because he's seen what we do and believes it will help make him a better fighter. You know, I do too. It's all in the enthuisasm and the presentation. Show them how it works, every technique should produce an ouch from the Uke. Make each of them Uke in turn. Nothing like a bit of realism for the light bulb to light up in their heads.

 

[Sukerkin]

I have never understood why this has slowly become an issue in martial arts.

Without bunkai, as I think has been said in this thread already, all a martial arts student is doing is a form of rhythmic gymnastics. If you don't understand the 'why' of something then you cannot effectively apply it.

For myself, I have ever been delighted by those moments when the connection is made between a sequence of movements and you understand what it can be used for.

As my avatar makes clear {}, I train in iai these days and the intricacy with which the technques interweave with each other is wonderful. It's almost as if swordsmen have spent centuries honing the principles of how to use the weapon and encapsulating them within kata ... oh, wait ... :lol:.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

My eye-opening experience in the dojo last night helped to solidify my opinion on this - kata requires bunkai to reach maximum potential:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=73843

I could not have learned in a book or on a DVD what I learned last night in one three-hour class. Truly jaw-dropping in terms of seeing the potential practical application of a simple technique - just one technique!

Sensei said that in his opinion, many people are technically proficient, and have good, clean, kata - very snappy, very pretty, and not at all useful in actual self-defense. He referred to it as 'surface karate' and said that in his opinion, you must 'live inside the kata' and do good bunkai to 'get it'.

After last night, I have to agree.

 

[RoninSoul]

You are on it Bill! We do bunkai weekly. Sometimes Sensei will be demonstrating a technique and someone will reference something taught in bunkai weeks prior. Bunkai is not just Kata applications, it is, for me, just practicing Karate. Why is it that people seem to be at odds with tradition? Are these the people who are destined for a set of fatiques learning an "Ear Bar" or "Pinky Lock" at the "Lion's Den or "Dog Pound" or whatever it's called?

 

[dancingalone]

The key, I think, is in (i) demonstrating the kata by itself; (ii) doing the CQ combat contact with uki and tori along the lines I was sketching, and (iii) repeating the relevant part of the kata, so that they see the connection. If the light is ever gonna come on, that, I think, is the way to get it to happen.

I'll be the Devil's advocate. Why the need for kata at all then if this becomes our teaching model? Teaching specific combinations in response to certain scenarios is more in line with how the combatives people do it, like Krav Maga or even certain strains of Hawaiian MA.

 

[jks9199]

I'll be the Devil's advocate. Why the need for kata at all then if this becomes our teaching model? Teaching specific combinations in response to certain scenarios is more in line with how the combatives people do it, like Krav Maga or even certain strains of Hawaiian MA.

Because the kata serves as a catalog -- and also can teach rhythms and strategies, as well as collections of techniques. And can be a useful way to practice alone.

 

[exile]

Because the kata serves as a catalog -- and also can teach rhythms and strategies, as well as collections of techniques. And can be a useful way to practice alone.

That's it in a nutshell.

This is the way I think of it. It's a cliché (but only because it's true!) that for each movement in the kata, there are several different plausible SD moves, depending on the interpretation of what moves the preceding and/or following movements are given. Let's say that each movement corresponds, on average, to any of 3 alternative moves. Then for any given three movement sequence in a kata, we have on average 3^3=27 different combat scenarios. High quality bunkai—the kind of stuff that Abernethy or Bill Burgar or some of the other people writing about the Pinan/Heian set and Naihanchi have published, or our own Stuart Anslow and Simon O'Neil in TKD —indicate that the way to look at forms is as a collection of short combat scenarios, possibly related by 'theme' (the way Abernethy sees the Pinans), but each involving a different attack/defense scenario. Let's say the average length of each such segment of a kata is three. That means that in a 30-movement kata, we have 10 3-movement subsequences. But since each such subsequence has 27 different interpretations in principle, it means that the kata is a summary—a catalogue, as jks put it—of 270 possible attack/defense scenarios. Let's be conservative and say that half of the combinations turn out to make no sense. That still leaves us with 135 possible attack/defense scenarios—more than enough to meet just about all of the 'habitual acts of violence' that Patrick McCarthy and others after him have identified as the statistically most typical attack initiators in street violence. So that means that each 30 move kata you've learns amounts to a collection of 135 short stories, each of which has someone attacking you in the first paragraph and you walking away unscathed in the story's conclusion—them, not so much! :EG:

I know that this is an idealization. But it gives you an idea of the order of magnitude of the information contained in a single kata. I've been to Hapkido seminars of one kind or another, and the combat techniques are many, varied and brilliant; but there is so damned much to keep track of... not easy! But HKD doesn't have kata. And once you learn a kata, it's like a portable mini-encyclopædia that you can always dip into for new insights and fighting techniques. Not surprising that Funakoshi and Motobu are said to have relied primarily on the Naihanchi set alone for their theory of combat techniques, eh?

That's what I think the great advantage of kata is in practical terms. It's not that difficult to learn a single kata or hyung, in terms of time invested. But the technical depth of those forms is great. So, for a relatively little bit of time, a very, very efficient yield in terms of results. The original karate masters were above all else practical—that's why kata were important to them, and should be to us too.

 

[Makalakumu]

I think that the practice of kata all by itself has some benefit in the martial arts. There are breathing, strengthening, and visualization exercises that can be extremely beneficial. Without bunkai, however, this practice is over shadowed by the loss you experience.

 

[seasoned]

That's it in a nutshell.

This is the way I think of it. It's a cliché (but only because it's true!) that for each movement in the kata, there are several different plausible SD moves, depending on the interpretation of what moves the preceding and/or following movements are given. Let's say that each movement corresponds, on average, to 3 moves. Then for any given three move sequence in a kata, we have on average 3^3=27 different combat scenarios. High quality bunkai—the kind of stuff that Abernethy or Bill Burgar or some of the other people writing about the Pinan/Heian set and Naihanchi have published, or our own Stuart Anslow and Simon O'Neil in TKD —indicate that the way to look at forms is as a collection of short combat scenarios, possibly related by 'theme' (the way Abernethy sees the Pinans), but each involving a different attack/defense scenario. Let's say the average length of each such segment of a kata is three. That means that in a 30-movement kata, we have 10 3-movement subsequences. But since each such subsequence has 27 different interpretations in principle, it means that the kata is a summary—a catalogue, as jks put it—of 270 possible attack/defense scenarios. Let's be conservative and say that half of the combinations turn out to make no sense. That still leaves us with 135 possible attack/defense scenarios—more than enough to meet just about all of the 'habitual acts of violence' that Patrick McCarthy and others after him have identified as the statistically most typical attack initiators in street violence. So that means that each 30 move kata you've learns amounts to a collection of 135 short stories, each of which has someone attacking you in the first paragraph and you walking away unscathed in the story's conclusion—them, not so much! :EG:

I know that this is an idealization. But it gives you an idea of the order of magnitude of the information contained in a single kata. I've been to Hapkido seminars of one kind or another, and the combat techniques are many, varied and brilliant; but there is so damned much to keep track of... not easy! But HKD doesn't have kata. And once you learn a kata, it's like a portable mini-encyclopædia that you can always dip into for new insights and fighting techniques. Not surprising that Funakoshi and Motobu are said to have relied primarily on the Naihanchi set alone for their theory of combat techniques, eh?

That's what I think the great advantage of kata is in practical terms. It's not that difficult to learn a single kata or hyung, in terms of time invested. But the technical depth of those forms is great. So, for a relatively little bit of time, a very, very efficient yield in terms of results. The original karate masters were above all else practical—that's why kata were important to them, and should be to us too.

Yes indeed, principles are multi faceted.

 

[Haze]

The whole problem has been on the rise for the last few years. When I first started teacking 15+ years ago students did not mind learning the application, but now I feel it has slid so far off that I can't get them interested.

Is anyone else having problems with their students? I think the bunkai is important, can't seem to get the newer students, and some intermediates, to have an interest.

This problem is solved by making the bunkai a requirement for grading. Learn the kata, learn the bunkai, demonstrate the kata, demonstrate the bunkai against various attacks. Don't know what the kata applications/movements are used for you really do not know that kata and can not be promoted.

 

[exile]

This problem is solved by making the bunkai a requirement for grading. Learn the kata, learn the bunkai, demonstrate the kata, demonstrate the bunkai against various attacks. Don't know what the kata applications/movements are used for you really do not know that kata and can not be promoted.

I agree heartily, Haze. But you realize that this is already a very radical, gonzo approach to promotion, eh? As soon as you make practical applicability a criterion for advancement, what you're saying is, artificial sport competition rules based on arbitrary point awards unconnected to actual street violence should not be the basis for assessing technical competence in karate. Boy, is that going to upset a lot of Very Important People!

The problem we're talking about is a complete Black Death plague in Taekwondo... but the situation is very similar, maybe indistinguishable even, in katate. I just finished a very grim article in issue #12 (2007) of Classical Fighting Arts by Harry Cook, the pre-emininent historian of the karate-based arts, 'The history and evolution of Karate-do kata, part 2', which makes it clear just how little relationship there between karate and combat use in the minds of the JKA, and many very high-ranked senior karate-ka. There's a gap in world view between what you and many of us are thinking, on the one hand, and what the Karate Establishment (whose idea of progress in the art is replacing TKD with Karate in the Olympics, lol) is thinking.

Just two altogether irreconcilable points of view here. In the end, I'm willing to bet, the KMAs and JMAs will both split into completely different activities: revived combat-effective fighting arts on the one hand, and acrobatic/gymnastic display sports on the other. And never the twain shall meet again...

 

[Makalakumu]

The problem we're talking about is a complete Black Death plague in Taekwondo... but the situation is very similar, maybe indistinguishable even, in katate. I just finished a very grim article in issue #12 (2007) of Classical Fighting Arts by Harry Cook, the pre-emininent historian of the karate-based arts, 'The history and evolution of Karate-do kata, part 2', which makes it clear just how little relationship there between karate and combat use in the minds of the JKA, and many very high-ranked senior karate-ka. There's a gap in world view between what you and many of us are thinking, on the one hand, and what the Karate Establishment (whose idea of progress in the art is replacing TKD with Karate in the Olympics, lol) is thinking.

I'd like to add to this by saying that right now, I have been training with two of the highest ranking karateka in the Shotokan. Both are students of Kanazawa Sensei and both have over a century of karate experience between them. While I hold both of these kindly old gentlemen in the highest regard, I must say that the tradition that they carry forth, is certainly not the highly practical self defense tradition that was originally present in the initial export of karate from Okinawa.

On the very first day I could see this when the "stacked hands" movement in Heian Godan was reinterpretted as a kind of punch and the turning pulling down movement in the same kata was interpretted as an elbow to the rear. Later when I asked Sensei and demonstrated the grabbing applications, I was told that they were familiar with that, but Kanazawa Sensei's karate is this so that is what they teach.

At the end of June, I will have a chance to train with Kanazawa sensei. It is my hope that I will have a chance to question him about these applications to see what he says.

 

[dancingalone]

Truthfully, Shotokan isn't the best style if you're into bunkai analysis. But you know that. I'd start off with learning an Okinawan style with as traditional of a teacher as possible and then if you feel like there are some gaps you need to fill, you'd need to cross train with some jujutsu/aikijutsu people.

 

[exile]

Truthfully, Shotokan isn't the best style if you're into bunkai analysis. But you know that. I'd start off with learning an Okinawan style with as traditional of a teacher as possible and then if you feel like there are some gaps you need to fill, you'd need to cross train with some jujutsu/aikijutsu people.

I agree, the best way to get a feel for the analysis would be to get as close to the Okinawan originals and way of thinking about the kata that Shotokan has increasingly come to reject. It's even more of a problem starting with Koreanized versions of the kata; the hyungs relentless translate foot techs into mid/high kicks across the board, regardless of their suitability. They also do a lot of embellishment that seems designed more for spectating than combat (e.g., the version of Rohai that I learned vs. the old Okinawan versions).

But I think it's also a good idea to teach people how to peel off the various layers of basically decorative (but combat-meaningless) motion, so that they can learn how to 'see' the original under the more prettified later versions. If I could find a suitable example, I think it would be a very informative thing for students to show them, first the Korean version, then the Shotokan version, and finally the 'original' Okinawan version, analyzing some of the combat content of the latter and then rolling forward in time again, indicating how the successive generations of later changes have camouflaged the combat intent of the Okinawan prototype. I've never heard of anyone doing this, but I think it would have a big impact on people who don't really see what the point of forms is. In a sense, it would help vindicate their point about the lack of combat utility in the way kata are currently treated—but it would also show them that the deeper fighting techs are still there, if you can figure out how to strip the modern forms of their pointless elaborations.

 

[Makalakumu]

Truthfully, Shotokan isn't the best style if you're into bunkai analysis. But you know that. I'd start off with learning an Okinawan style with as traditional of a teacher as possible and then if you feel like there are some gaps you need to fill, you'd need to cross train with some jujutsu/aikijutsu people.

I'm exploring a curiosity right now. With so many high ranking people at my fingertips, I'm curious how much they know and what they actually teach. I have a jujutsu dojo in mind that I wouldn't mind visiting for further training. Also, I may have an opportunity to train with a direct student of Miyagi Sensei in Goju Ryu. We'll see how that turns out. The main thing is that all of this is part of how I am seeking to bring the bunkai out of the TSD forms I know. I want to give back to the community somehow and I am very excited about the book I am writing on the subject. Just finished another chapter last night!