kumite competition?

[opr1945]

As I understand it, a participant wins a competition by making points by making contact with the opponent by punch/kicking the opponent. correct?

and yet there is not first attack in Karate.

and Karate is for defense.

So should not points be awarded for defense, block, avoiding or counter strike?

 

[Same Trick]

Just signing up for a kumite tournament is a first attack.
The “There is no first attack” came about before there was karate tournament competitions., but still it can kind of be applied in such venues by your skill In out timing the opponent, it may look as “attack is best defense”

 

[Prince_Alarming]

I found this thread enlightening on the subject There Is No Advantage in Striking First in Karate

 

[opr1945]

I just read the thread you referred to above. I thought it was very interesting. I might have been to narrow in my above thinking about first attack. here is what I posted there. If I had researched better I would not have started this thread! My error.

"Very interesting thread. A lawyer friend once told me "I don't care what the answer is as long as I can choose the what the question is."

Another told me "I don't care what words are used as long as I get to choose the definition."

And " if you want to change the meaning of the document, don't try to change the words in the document. The other side will challenge it. Just change the definition of the words."

I was raised in the central northern part of the United States. In that region the general rule in state laws was the fight begins with the first punch. An English northern European concept. You were expected to endure everything else before striking. The guy who threw the first punch was legally the aggressor and would likely face legal ramifications.

Later, I moved to the antebellum southern part of the United States where one's honor was highly valued. French and Spanish traditions. Dueling was a respected response to a verbal insult. One was expected to respond with violence to the least insult. Killing someone in a duel was not a criminal act but was justified. The concept was included the the criminal code of the state in which I had moved. It was called the "fighting words" statue. If you insulted someone and they punched you, the punch was considered self defense, even if thrown as the first punch. The belief was the insult was the start of the fight because the expected response was violence. I no longer live in the south and my understanding is the fighting words statutes have been repealed.

Anyway, the issue in no first attack is what is the first attack? Is it the first physically violent act or perhaps the act that the justifies the the physical response? e.g. I am 5'7" when I was much younger I pissed of a violent street gang member who had several trips to prison and was about 6'4" tall. (It was an accident on my part.) any way he was about 6" away yelling he was going to rip my head off. I believed him. If I had thrown a punch. When did the fight start with his actions or my punch? In societies that value honor as justifying violent responses, the answer may be different than in societies that believe violence is less acceptable.

Perhaps the first punch is not the first act of the fight.

[a typical lawyer's response? A few years ago we here in the US had a President, who was a lawyer by training, and accused of sexual abuse of a young woman. His defense included "it depends on the meaning of the word "is."]

I now see that There is no first attack in Karate is not as simple as I first though.

Thanks all."

 

[OnlineChunner]

As I understand it, a participant wins a competition by making points by making contact with the opponent by punch/kicking the opponent. correct?

and yet there is not first attack in Karate.


View attachment 32952


and Karate is for defense.

So should not points be awarded for defense, block, avoiding or counter strike?

Okay. There are a lot of things to unpack here. First off, There's no First Strike in Karate is a Shotokan thing. There's nothing like that in Goju Ryu, Meibukan or not.

Sports Karate basically is winning points. You attack, you hit, you get points. You defend, you counter, you hit, you get points. It's basically like fencing but karate moves, you know. Kinda like a game of tag.

The competition part of karate today is more of a way to get it into the competitional stage, olympics, etc. But if we talk about preserving the whole nature of Karate, sports isn't really included in there.

Also, the Karate Kid movie had a lot of errors. Mr. Miyagi was a Goju Ryu master yet, he is teaching precepts of Shotokan, not Meibukan Goju Ryu.

 

[Same Trick]

Okay. There are a lot of things to unpack here. First off, There's no First Strike in Karate is a Shotokan thing. There's nothing like that in Goju Ryu, Meibukan or not.



Also, the Karate Kid movie had a lot of errors. Mr. Miyagi was a Goju Ryu master yet, he is teaching precepts of Shotokan, not Meibukan Goju Ryu.

No, Mr.Miyagi taught Miyagi-do….
Fumio Demura karate master of the Shito-ryu branch was Noriyuki Morita’s double in the movie, so Mr Miyagi’s style would be considered as Shito-ryu.
And Shito-ryu founder Kenwa Mabuni was close associate with Gichin Funakoshi, “there’s no first strike in karate” philosophy could very well have slipped into the Shito-rtyu mindset….and then to Miyagi-Do.

Anyway, the “there’s no first strike” thing probably derives from Jigen-ryu sword school of which Anko Asato the teacher of Funakoshi was a master of.

Here’s some more insight into it -

“one must avoid the reckless use of weapons”


The Intended Meaning of Karate Ni Sente Nashi

 

[opr1945]

Also, the Karate Kid movie had a lot of errors. Mr. Miyagi was a Goju Ryu master yet, he is teaching precepts of Shotokan, not Meibukan Goju Ryu.

Actually, it was just a movie, not a documentary.