Questioning the efficacy of Kata

[Tez3]

In the context

If you wanted to learn you have to risk loosing. Otherwise it is boxersise.

One trains so that one doesn't lose when it matters, in training it doesn't matter. You don't lose when you train in the nets, you lose when your team is run out in under two hours roflmao.

 

[DaveB]

I agree with Tez3.

Winning and loosing are distractionso of emotion. Training is about developing skills. If you are always trying to win then you won't let yourself get hit over and over to practice a technique or tactic.

It also leads to people dismissing things as ineffective because they can't get them to work straight away (e.g. Every mma junkie ever to discuss kata, wing chun or even head kicks back in the sport's early days).

 

[Tez3]

I agree with Tez3.

Winning and loosing are distractionso of emotion. Training is about developing skills. If you are always trying to win then you won't let yourself get hit over and over to practice a technique or tactic.

It also leads to people dismissing things as ineffective because they can't get them to work straight away (e.g. Every mma junkie ever to discuss kata, wing chun or even head kicks back in the sport's early days).

However, in the early days of MMA the practitioners were TMA people, tends to be only the fanboys who smack talk, the rest of us don't. I know several very good MMA fighters who still stay in touch with their karate roots and indeed still do kata and bunkai. I'm karate and MMA and have been in both more years than I care to say lol!

 

[drop bear]

One trains so that one doesn't lose when it matters, in training it doesn't matter. You don't lose when you train in the nets, you lose when your team is run out in under two hours roflmao.

So you don't train to win or be competitive. Where do people develop a winning mind set?

And cricket is a girls sport.

 

[drop bear]

I agree with Tez3.

Winning and loosing are distractionso of emotion. Training is about developing skills. If you are always trying to win then you won't let yourself get hit over and over to practice a technique or tactic.

It also leads to people dismissing things as ineffective because they can't get them to work straight away (e.g. Every mma junkie ever to discuss kata, wing chun or even head kicks back in the sport's early days).

You won't get hit if the other guy is not trying to hit you. Then you both loose. And you develop poor skills.

You find someone good enough to hit you over and over again so that you can try to stop him.

At some point you need to train with intent or you do not progress as a fighter.

 

[Tez3]

So you don't train to win or be competitive. Where do people develop a winning mind set?

And cricket is a girls sport.

Many people don't train martial arts to compete, they train to survive. Not everyone wants to compete. Trying to hit each other has absolutely nothing to do with being competitive, we train hard, we hit, kick and punch each other, that's how I lost a tooth but it has nothing to do with being competitive.
Of course cricket is a girls sport and we are very good at it, women invented overarm bowling after all but we still have the Ashes lol. Australia totally collapsed, no competitive spirit perhaps?

 

[RTKDCMB]

And cricket is a girls sport.

And that is an outdated attitude.

 

[Tez3]

Cricket is a competitive sport, martial arts can be but isn't necessarily. A winning competitive attitude is needed in cricket, it isn't needed in martial arts if you don't intend to compete. I have trained with people who didn't intend to compete but insisted on being competitive when training, it's not a good attitude. It makes them difficult to teach because they want to outdo their partners and makes them very bad ukes. Sometimes that competitive attitudes spills over into them thinking they know better than their instructors, they also rush to learn things, cut corners and don't listen.
Even in MMA there isn't a competitive attitude towards training, there should be an intense attitude, one of striving to be the best and to work hard and smart but not one where you beat up the guy holding pads for you or who is helping you learn and practice techniques. The competitive attitude is kept for the competition ie the fight.
Work hard and work smart should be the mantra not 'compete'.

 

[drop bear]

Many people don't train martial arts to compete, they train to survive. Not everyone wants to compete. Trying to hit each other has absolutely nothing to do with being competitive, we train hard, we hit, kick and punch each other, that's how I lost a tooth but it has nothing to do with being competitive.
Of course cricket is a girls sport and we are very good at it, women invented overarm bowling after all but we still have the Ashes lol. Australia totally collapsed, no competitive spirit perhaps?

So someone tries to hit me vs me trying to stop them is not competitive?

Fighting to win would help people survive.

Live Cricket Scores News International Cricket Council ICC
.

 

[drop bear]

And that is an outdated attitude.

Outdated game.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Following on from this, sparring becomes about practicing the skills taught, not working out what those skills are through trial and error.

This is why so many people who do kung fu tend fall back on basic kicks and hits in sparring competitions. They aren't working out skills through trial and error. Forms will only take you so far. There is no such thing as error free learning.

 

[Tez3]

So someone tries to hit me vs me trying to stop them is not competitive?

Fighting to win would help people survive.

Live Cricket Scores News International Cricket Council ICC
.

No, it's not competitive, that can get you killed. Fighting to win doesn't help people to survive, they will be focusing on the wrong thing, it's not a game, being competitive is game playing, nothing more.

 

[JowGaWolf]

If you are training only one kata with a defined and finite list of non overlapping applications, and nothing else, then this might be true, but mostly it's a myth.

Think of all the times fighters say that boxing is like chess. They say that because of the thoughtful tactical element of fighting. If they were just reacting this wouldn't be the case.

I don't do kata I do kung fu Forms. The beginner form has more than 50 strikes. The bow alone has 12 unique techniques each of those 12 techniques have a minimum of 2 unique applications that can be used as a defense, an offense, or counter.

Boxing has how many unique strikes? If I have to think about what type of punch I need to throw then I'm not going to be a good fighter. I don't have time to sit and try to think of what block, punch, kick, or technique I should use when some ones is punching at my face. This is how I use kung fu. If I see that you want to guard your stomach then I'm going to attack your head or legs. The type of attack to your head or legs depends on how you leave those areas open. I don't sit there thinking about what type of punch or kick I'm going to do.

 

[DaveB]

You won't get hit if the other guy is not trying to hit you. Then you both loose. And you develop poor skills.

You find someone good enough to hit you over and over again so that you can try to stop him.

At some point you need to train with intent or you do not progress as a fighter.

You are confusing intent/intensity with competitiveness. They are not the same thing.

The person good enough to hit you over and over should be someone you try to learn from not out-do. If they beat you through attributes alone (e.g they are faster) then they have shown you where you need to develop, but the challenge to get faster is a competition against yourself, not the classmate.

 

[DaveB]

This is why so many people who do kung fu tend fall back on basic kicks and hits in sparring competitions. They aren't working out skills through trial and error. Forms will only take you so far. There is no such thing as error free learning.

I'm not really sure what you are getting at here or how it relates to my post.

I don't do kata I do kung fu Forms. The beginner form has more than 50 strikes. The bow alone has 12 unique techniques each of those 12 techniques have a minimum of 2 unique applications that can be used as a defense, an offense, or counter.

Boxing has how many unique strikes? If I have to think about what type of punch I need to throw then I'm not going to be a good fighter. I don't have time to sit and try to think of what block, punch, kick, or technique I should use when some ones is punching at my face. This is how I use kung fu. If I see that you want to guard your stomach then I'm going to attack your head or legs. The type of attack to your head or legs depends on how you leave those areas open. I don't sit there thinking about what type of punch or kick I'm going to do.

Hmm, I think you and I must have rather different definitions of "unique" in regards to striking. Even so what you describe shouldnt to pose a problem because between a defined system strategy and approved supporting tactics you should have enough guidance to know what to use in a given moment. Otherwise such a vast system is pointless. I've found that CMA is generally far better for retaining this systematic approach.

Just being told "here's 50 strikes, try and hit the other guy!" is a hugely inefficient way to learn fighting. Such a wide range of unique strikes must have very well defined tactical uses and conditions for their deployment, reducing considerably the shot selection issue in any given circumstance. However, I think it's more likely that all those techniques fit neatly into 4 or 5 groupings that each have similar rules governing their use.

Lastly I can only disagree and say that the good fighters are the ones who can think about which punch or kick they will use.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The person good enough to hit you over and over should be someone you try to learn from not out-do. If they beat you through attributes alone (e.g they are faster) then they have shown you where you need to develop, but the challenge to get faster is a competition against yourself, not the classmate.

I think this way too. If I can't be faster than my classmate, then I need to figure out a different strategy to deal with his speed with the understanding that I won't always be the guy with the fastest hands or feet.

I think people can view the same activity with a different focus where one see's training as learning to survive and the other seeing the training as being the best or better than the person they might fight against. For me kung fu is survival, I don't care about winning for the glory. I tell younger people (15 - 30) that I don't care about street credit anymore. I'm at an age where not fighting or finishing a fight quickly is the priority. My definition of a win in a real self-defense situation is different than a sport win.

 

[drop bear]

No, it's not competitive, that can get you killed. Fighting to win doesn't help people to survive, they will be focusing on the wrong thing, it's not a game, being competitive is game playing, nothing more.

Fighting to win dosent help people survive?

Come on seriously?

They will be focusing on winning. In your example earlier that was hitting someone with a 2by 4 rather than do a drill properly.

The idea of a competitive mindset and a survival mindset being different is a fabrication to make self defence people feel more comfortable with training that is just not as effective.

When you do a resisted drill you need the other person to use every tool in his disposal to win at the task at hand. You use every tool to resist him.

This way you get an idea of what it takes to resist a person who really wants to beat you rather than someone who is just trying to help you look good and feel nice.

 

[drop bear]

The problem is that after years of training, I see a lot of black belts standing there with no clue what to do in response to the attack. I've had my moments of confusion too. One-steps seem too rote and impractical and I never see anyone using a one-step as a defense in our randori. I am just not convinced of the street defense effectiveness of the teaching methods. Kata has most always been a frustration to me in that I have always questioned how practical it is. I mean, unless a school is continuously practicing bunkai for each specific kata, then it seems little more than a dance which doesn't translate into anything practical.

And that way you avoid this.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Hmm, I think you and I must have rather different definitions of "unique" in regards to striking.

. When I say that the strikes are unique, I mean that each one is different and does not repeat. Sorry about the confusion with that.

ust being told "here's 50 strikes, try and hit the other guy!" is a hugely inefficient way to learn fighting.

I agree completely with that. In my school we do like many Kung Fu schools where they teach form and application. The problem with form training is that it was never designed to teach how to fight. Learning the application of a technique is always done in a demo like manner that is easy to understand the concept of the technique. Actual fighting and using a technique is totally different because people rarely throw attacks in a similar manner as shown in the demo. The instructor may use a 1,2 jab punch combination and then a kick. Or a person may fake a 1,2 jab combination and then actually hook on the second punch. This is were sparring comes in so that the person will learn how to deal with the variety of attacks and apply the technique to the attacks. Some techniques can be applied in whole while some are applied in part. There's no way for a Sifu to train students for every type of punch combination, but sparring and actually using the technique during sparring helps build up the sensitivity and deeper understanding of the technique in a real-self defense situation. Some techniques are determined by what that attacker does, while other may be determined on the position and type of stance you are in when you see the opening or on a weakness. This is what I mean by figuring things out in sparring. How the Martial arts technique fits within the person capability and abilities.

"As for the 50 punch combo" I've seen plenty of Wing Chun practitioners in competitive sparring try to overwhelm their opponent this by throwing a bunch of punches and many of them pay for doing so because they are over committed to the punch. I don't do Wing Chun, but from what I know about fighting I would think this is a more realistic attack combination where a couple of punches are thrown and then the fighter resets.

I don't see this guy's combination as being the suggested combo. The longer his combinations get the more I can see counters to, from grabbing to sweeping, to catching that front kick and sweeping the standing leg. Even the non-grappling karate guy saw the opportunity to grab.

 

[DaveB]

Fighting to win dosent help people survive?

Come on seriously?

They will be focusing on winning. In your example earlier that was hitting someone with a 2by 4 rather than do a drill properly.

The idea of a competitive mindset and a survival mindset being different is a fabrication to make self defence people feel more comfortable with training that is just not as effective.

When you do a resisted drill you need the other person to use every tool in his disposal to win at the task at hand. You use every tool to resist him.

This way you get an idea of what it takes to resist a person who really wants to beat you rather than someone who is just trying to help you look good and feel nice.

What you are describing is only one aspect of training. This wasn't a conversations about only free all in sparring, it was about training. Wanting to win in that type of sparring is fine, but it is the culmination of everything else you do in training where wanting to win is just a distraction.

Tez3 and I have both pointed out numerous problems with a competitive mindset in training and I've not seen one counter to all those downsides.

What I believe Tez3 was trying to get across was that if you are faced with life or death, thinking about winning the fight is not the same as thinking about surviving. Fighting might not even be the best option but the bravado of competition might lead you to feel otherwise.

Also this juvenile nonsense about how all SD martial artists think just lowers the tone of the whole thread.
Actually what happened is a number of people with many years of experience with real life or death violence, from bouncers to prison guards, saw how their own experience matched against what they had learned in martial arts and combat sports and were kind enough to share that.knowledge.

Sport is sport, from boxing to Shobu ippon kumite, you can be competitive in all but if real life throws something unfamiliar, like a knife, or a gang, then the mindset you need to get a trophy might not necessarily be the one you need to walk away.

But as I said, the discussion was around training so we're going off topic...