Shadow Boxing vs Kata fallacy argument.

[Graywalker]

Huh? Sounds exactly like the principle of Point Karate. Regardless you don't use the same footwork in Kata

Yes, you do. Not in sport Karate no. But, yes you do, I have and have used them successfully.

As for the point comment, you are speaking of sport. But, in actual karate the objective is to put them down hard to the ground. That is the true purpose of
In the principle of "enter, counter and close" the close part, means slamming them to the ground or into a brick wall.

Curious, what Karate do you train in or have trained in?

 

[Flying Crane]

There was a side by side of katas on Youtube a few years ago and it looked very different from todays Karate

That may be true, and I never claimed it was identical. In fact, I believe it is unlikely that my particular method had any direct influence on Okinawan Karate. But Chinese methods often rely heavily on forms as a training and transmission method. In English we call them forms but Mandarin I believe the term is “taolu”. That is the Chinese version of what Karate calls “kata”.

You might notice that in my previous post I said I can only comment to my own experience.

There is a lesson in that for you: When you are tempted to say “Karate is...” or “kata is...” well, don’t. You have only your own experiences. You do not know what everyone else is doing. You can only say “in my experience Karate/kata is...”

Find something that does not use kata. It is clear you don’t like kata. So don’t do it. There are plenty of other ways.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The only reason I'm this low is because my training partner is short.
View attachment 23067

I sparred against a tall guy with this kind of low stance before. After that sparring, he refused to spar with me again. When I asked him why, he told me that my low stance made all his favor high kicks meaningless.

 

[drop bear]

That may be true, and I never claimed it was identical. In fact, I believe it is unlikely that my particular method had any direct influence on Okinawan Karate. But Chinese methods often rely heavily on forms as a training and transmission method. In English we call them forms but Mandarin I believe the term is “taolu”. That is the Chinese version of what Karate calls “kata”.

You might notice that in my previous post I said I can only comment to my own experience.

There is a lesson in that for you: When you are tempted to say “Karate is...” or “kata is...” well, don’t. You have only your own experiences. You do not know what everyone else is doing. You can only say “in my experience Karate/kata is...”

Find something that does not use kata. It is clear you don’t like kata. So don’t do it. There are plenty of other ways.

Yeah but then you have to qualify your method or your statement doesn't really count.

I mean it is all well and good to say you have this method. But we don't know if the method works in any appreciable way.

 

[drop bear]

Imagining an opponent attacking you, is a pre-set thought, in shadow boxing by the individual, using their own imagination.
In a set pattern, planned by the individual...pre arranged.

I think the difference is, one original to individual thought, the other based on what is believed to have been a tested progression of techniques.

Maybe I am confused by your statement and possibly reading to much into it.

At some point you are going to think before you act making fighting, or any action a pre set thought.

But it is not comparable to the way in which Kata is pre set.

 

[Steve]

Yes, you do. Not in sport Karate no. But, yes you do, I have and have used them successfully.

As for the point comment, you are speaking of sport. But, in actual karate the objective is to put them down hard to the ground. That is the true purpose of
In the principle of "enter, counter and close" the close part, means slamming them to the ground or into a brick wall.

Curious, what Karate do you train in or have trained in?

Sport karate isn't actual karate? Do they do kata wrong? In all my years on this forum, this is the first time anyone that I can recall has asserted that some karate is not actual karate.

 

[wab25]

Another thing is that you fight out if the same stances that you shadow box. You don't fight out of the same stances that you do kata. Whatever it is that you are trying to ingrain, it's all artificial and contextually bound to the kata practise

Jumping rope is a useful way to train for boxing. But, you don't jump rope in the ring. You don't box in the same stance that you use to jump rope. You could train jumping rope exclusively at your boxing gym. You could even enter jump rope competitions. Those competitions take a lot of skill to win. What you would find is that jumping rope exclusively is not very good training for a boxing match. However true that may be, jumping rope will always have a place in boxing training. There is a part that jumping rope teaches you, and ways it conditions you... that when used in context with the rest of your boxing training method, is very effective.

Unfortunately, too many TMA schools got stuck on the jump roping (kata) part... and exclusively train that. Taken out of context, doing kata exclusively will make you no better of a fighter than jumping rope exclusively will. My point in bringing up the Shu-Ha-Ri method was to show that kata was literally the beginning tip of the ice burg. It is a part of a greater method and was never meant to be an exclusive form of training. TMA schools did it to themselves.

If you want to train in a school that does kata, make sure that they understand what kata is. If kata is used to define what you can and cannot do in the art... if kata is all that they study... it might not be the place to learn to be a fighter. It would be the same as going to a boxing gym, to learn to box... where all they did was jump rope. Even if they have tons of trophies for jump roping competitions.

If you find a school that understands kata, and uses kata in the proper place, along with the rest of the training method... they can make you into a great fighter, even using kata to do it.

At the end of the day, if kata is not your thing... train a different way. Just because some schools don't understand it and just because you don't understand it... does not mean that other people also don't understand it. There are people and schools out there that understand it, and use it very effectively.

 

[Buka]

Sport karate isn't actual karate? Do they do kata wrong? In all my years on this forum, this is the first time anyone that I can recall has asserted that some karate is not actual karate.

I don't remember running into much of it here over the years, but welcome to my world of the seventies and eighties in New England. Because we practice American Karate, which obviously wasn't real and does not have Kata. And despite the fact that we all behaved like ladies and gentlemen with proper Martial dignity and protocol, we were considered heathens who had the gall to say we were actual Karateka.

Years later they all had me as a guest instructor at their schools. I'd always ask them, "You guys wan't to practice some of that make believe Karate?" They did.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It directly contradicts what you are saying.

"You're practicing a specific progression/combo,"

No. You are not. You are making it up as you go. Especially unlike Kata. In that you are not making it up as you go.

I didn't say you were practicing a pre-arranged progression/combo. Just that it's a specific one each time. If you happen to do a jab-cross-step progression, that may be a very good progression, but in any given conflict, it may not apply (the other guy's input may not lead from one to the next).

If I decide to throw out a cart wheel in the middle of shadow boxing I can.

"and you can't know that's what your opponent will do next."

Also no.

You are reacting to an imaginary oponant as you are making it up as you go. As if you had a real oponant there. Contradictory to Kata that presets the oponants movements.

Yeah. But any given opponent may not react that way. That's the point they make. Whether the movements are pre-set (coach says "shadow box fitting in this combo") or not is not relevant to the argument they make.

"You're trying really hard to argue,"

And no again as these contradictions are pretty easily evident.

The point is so far the comparison between Kata and shadow boxing as an argument to support Kata. Is not a very good one.

I never said it was a good comparison. I simply pointed out the point folks are usually arguing when they bring up shadow boxing in that argument.

As the points you made against Kata. Are not really able to be made against shadow boxing.

I haven't actually made any points against kata. You don't seem to get that I'm just relaying arguments, clarifying something. I've rather lost track of why I dropped in that clarification in the first place, because you went completely off the rails trying to argue with me. You seem to think I'm presenting my viewpoint in any of this, perhaps because you didn't bother to read my first post in this with any intent to understand.

 

[isshinryuronin]

Late to the game, read almost all the post. Got lost.


If the purpose of Kata is this below, Then your Kata will be good. However. If this is your understanding of it facing an opponent then your shadow boxing will be useless. For those who don't know. This is the most dangerous way to enter this technique. So many things can go wrong here and the result is all the same when it goes wrong. You'll end up eating that left reverse punch. If you miss the first punch then you'll get hit with 2 punches instead of 1. The picture below is not a realistic visualization for shadow boxing.
View attachment 23064

Re: the photo (which I'm not sure got included in this reply), there are 5 points to make this seemingly ridiculous position actually be effective and prevent the follow up reverse.
1. That stance is WAY too stretched out, making any further maneuvering close to impossible. That rear foot has to be slid up. Then the following are possible.
2. The blocking hand can grab the arm and the blocker's left foot can sweep the opponent's right, thus nullifying a quick reverse as he is off balance.
3. The blocker can grab the opponent's arm, immediately pull him in and off balance, thus nullifying a second attack, and set up his own reverse.
4. The blocker can simultaneously strike with his right hand so his block and attack are done on the same beat, again preventing a follow up attack.
5. The blocker can extend his left blocking arm into the opponent's eyes or throat in a continuous movement, also nullifying the opponent's chance to attack.

These methods depend on quickly breaking the opponent's balance, or hitting him on the half-beat, before any further follow up can occur. Of course, as noted in #1, a balanced mobile stance is required. These points are part of Okinawan karate and most (or all) can be found in kata.

 

[Buka]

I've been shadow boxing for a long time, do it pretty much all the time, even now. The funny thing is I never picture an opponent when I do it, I just do it because I like to, and as a warm up. I don't think of a heavy bag as an opponent either, or focus mitts.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I've been shadow boxing for a long time, do it pretty much all the time, even now. The funny thing is I never picture an opponent when I do it, I just do it because I like to, and as a warm up. I don't think of a heavy bag as an opponent either, or focus mitts.

One training that I like very much is to punch on a heavy bag as fast and as powerful as I can until I get totally exhausted (about 120 punches). If I have to fight someone, my 120 crazy punches (like a mad man) can scare him to death.

I don't like to punch into the thin air. I prefer to punch on my heavy bag.

 

[JowGaWolf]

There was a side by side of katas on Youtube a few years ago and it looked very different from todays Karate

This is true. With older kata and forms people were less about competition and looking good and more about function. Same kata but trained with different purpose. This is a fighting stance straight out of kata. It looks very functional compared to what we see from some of today's practitioners. Here you can see the weight distribution that Wang spoke of in an earlier post. There are many ways that one can train kata.

 

[Graywalker]

Sport karate isn't actual karate? Do they do kata wrong? In all my years on this forum, this is the first time anyone that I can recall has asserted that some karate is not actual karate.

It is yes. Maybe a poor choice, in my wording.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I've been shadow boxing for a long time, do it pretty much all the time, even now. The funny thing is I never picture an opponent when I do it, I just do it because I like to, and as a warm up. I don't think of a heavy bag as an opponent either, or focus mitts.

I was late to the game with shadow boxing, as such, but I have been "shadow grappling" for a long time. When I shadow box, I don't imagine an opponent, but I do when shadow grappling. Not sure I can explain that difference.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I was late to the game with shadow boxing, as such, but I have been "shadow grappling" for a long time. When I shadow box, I don't imagine an opponent, but I do when shadow grappling. Not sure I can explain that difference.

When I shadow box, I throw a hook punch, I can image my opponent dodges under my arm, I then change my hook punch into a back fist on top of his head. I can then image my opponent blocks my back fist. I then use an uppercut to punch under his chin.

If my imaginary opponent is a guy, I will follow by a groin kick. If my imaginary opponent is a girl, I won't.

 

[isshinryuronin]

When I shadow box, I throw a hook punch, I can image my opponent dodges under my arm, I then change my hook punch into a back fist on top of his head. I can then image my opponent blocks my back fist. I then use an uppercut to punch under his chin.

If my imaginary opponent is a guy, I will follow by a groin kick. If my imaginary opponent is a girl, I won't.

So, to an imaginary girl you have no problem hooking, backfisting and uppercutting her, but you draw the line at kicking her in the hooha?
I'm sure she would appreciate what a gentleman you are and ask you out for a drink after she recovers from her imaginary concussion.

 

[JowGaWolf]

When I shadow box, I throw a hook punch, I can image my opponent dodges under my arm, I then change my hook punch into a back fist on top of his head. I can then image my opponent blocks my back fist. I then use an uppercut to punch under his chin.

If my imaginary opponent is a guy, I will follow by a groin kick. If my imaginary opponent is a girl, I won't.

I think it's important to visualize because then you can start building the skill of guiding your opponent where you want them to be for the next strike. If I can my my opponent back up with a jab then I can use that to my advantage. I already know how he or she may respond which makes it easier to know what the follow up action should be.
If my opponent wants me to throw a punch for them to go under to take me down, Then I know I have something to bait him with. If I roundhouse my opponent then I know that there are a few things he may do.
1. Move back
2. Cover up
3. Catch my leg
4. Leg block me.
5 Rush forward.

It's very limited so all I need to know is which type of round house kicks trigger the reaction. If I can figure that out then I can throw a round house that's looks high enough to catch but in reality is too low to try. Then maybe my opponent will chase my leg and will leave himself open. knowing which way a body may move is also important as well, but all of this is high level stuff. Most people don't think beyond the first punch.

 

[Graywalker]

At some point you are going to think before you act making fighting, or any action a pre set thought.

But it is not comparable to the way in which Kata is pre set.

The pre set is the difference yes. But, in both you imagine an opponent.

But I don't think it really matters. Both can be beneficial to training, in my personal experience.

 

[drop bear]

The pre set is the difference yes. But, in both you imagine an opponent.

But I don't think it really matters. Both can be beneficial to training, in my personal experience.

Yeah but imaginary opponent was never brought up as an argument against.

I added that from memory.