"The Taikyoku Problem"

[ThatOneCanadian]

(This is a TMA issue which primarily concerns Karate and Taekwondo).

I have been doing Karate for 6 years and teaching for almost half a year. I have also done some Taekwondo and similar Korean arts. One common theme between all of these arts is that beginner students learn a very simple kata/form when they first start. In Shotokan this is the Taikyoku kata and in Taekwondo this is either Taegeuk 1 or Chon Ji. These forms are very basic patterns involving stepping and performing either a low block or a punch in a very basic sequence.

The idea behind this is that they are very basic patterns to help the student become acquainted with the art. However, in my experience, these forms are confusing and boring, and the 270-degree spin takes months for some trainees to get right.

The spin in question: (0:46)

I have seen students quit Karate/Taekwondo before progressing beyond white belt. I do not want to make any wild assumptions here but I guarantee that at least a few of them quit because of this damn kata. The basic pattern is uninteresting with limited practical application, and the footwork is, again, near-impossible for some people to get right. The footwork itself is also impractical, as nobody in their right mind would walk like that during a physical altercation. And the mundane, limited nature of these forms, in my opinion, does not encourage the mindset that one would have during a physical altercation in the same way a more complex kata would. This confusion and mundaneness is especially bad for younger practitioners who a.) have less cognitive ability and b.) have a lower attention span for boring, rudimentary things. And from what I have seen, many of these same students love watching high-level competitors perform kata like Unsu, Gankaku, Empi, etc. and sometimes excitedly ask the instructor if they can learn them. But I have never seen a student who enjoys doing Taikyoku. In other words, these students are interested in Karate, just not Taikyoku or anything to do with it.

Some would argue that before doing more complex kata, a student must have a solid foundation in basics. This is very true, but at the same time, aren't there more interesting kata that can be used to teach one basic techniques? Tekki Shodan and Hangetsu immediately come to mind (and, to my knowledge, both Naihanchi and Seisan were starting katas at one point due to their simplicity). Yes, their hand techniques are more complicated, but their footwork is far simpler and are overall more interesting and applicable katas.

My second argument against the "basics before advanced stuff" argument: some styles do teach rather sophisticated patterns to beginners. ATA Taekwondo's first form, Songahm 1, comes to mind:

Above, you see a form that has simpler footwork and more interesting techniques/combos yet is still basic enough for a beginner. Even Wushu and other Chinese arts have rather elegant patterns to teach basic techniques:

Why are these basic forms so interesting but Karate has to stick with a mundane step-block-step-punch routine?

In a nutshell, I think Taikyoku, Taegeuk 1, and Chon Ji are uninteresting, impractical kata that do not encourage a fighting mindset and do little more than confuse new Karateka. I think they feel weird to practice, have little to no relation to any following kata (except maybe Meikyo?), look quite silly, and make Karate look silly to laymen. I personally believe that nothing will be lost if, instead of teaching Taikyoku, new students were taught something like Tekki Shodan, i.e. a kata that is simple, teaches them proper lower body mechanics, gives them some practical self-defense ideas to build off of, feels more natural, and looks a lot better. I think the trend of teaching new students block-punch-block-punch-block-punch-punch-punch-weirdspin-block-punch-etc is counterintuitive.

I would like to hear what more experienced martial artists have to say about this.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

To keep beginners can be an issue.

The long fist system used to use Tan Tui as the 1st basic form. It was boring and many students quitted.

Teachers started to use Lian Bu Quan as the 1st basic form instead.

 

[Yokozuna514]

(This is a TMA issue which primarily concerns Karate and Taekwondo).

I have been doing Karate for 6 years and teaching for almost half a year. I have also done some Taekwondo and similar Korean arts. One common theme between all of these arts is that beginner students learn a very simple kata/form when they first start. In Shotokan this is the Taikyoku kata and in Taekwondo this is either Taegeuk 1 or Chon Ji. These forms are very basic patterns involving stepping and performing either a low block or a punch in a very basic sequence.

The idea behind this is that they are very basic patterns to help the student become acquainted with the art. However, in my experience, these forms are confusing and boring, and the 270-degree spin takes months for some trainees to get right.

The spin in question: (0:46)

I have seen students quit Karate/Taekwondo before progressing beyond white belt. I do not want to make any wild assumptions here but I guarantee that at least a few of them quit because of this damn kata. The basic pattern is uninteresting with limited practical application, and the footwork is, again, near-impossible for some people to get right. The footwork itself is also impractical, as nobody in their right mind would walk like that during a physical altercation. And the mundane, limited nature of these forms, in my opinion, does not encourage the mindset that one would have during a physical altercation in the same way a more complex kata would. This confusion and mundaneness is especially bad for younger practitioners who a.) have less cognitive ability and b.) have a lower attention span for boring, rudimentary things. And from what I have seen, many of these same students love watching high-level competitors perform kata like Unsu, Gankaku, Empi, etc. and sometimes excitedly ask the instructor if they can learn them. But I have never seen a student who enjoys doing Taikyoku. In other words, these students are interested in Karate, just not Taikyoku or anything to do with it.

Some would argue that before doing more complex kata, a student must have a solid foundation in basics. This is very true, but at the same time, aren't there more interesting kata that can be used to teach one basic techniques? Tekki Shodan and Hangetsu immediately come to mind (and, to my knowledge, both Naihanchi and Seisan were starting katas at one point due to their simplicity). Yes, their hand techniques are more complicated, but their footwork is far simpler and are overall more interesting and applicable katas.

My second argument against the "basics before advanced stuff" argument: some styles do teach rather sophisticated patterns to beginners. ATA Taekwondo's first form, Songahm 1, comes to mind:

Above, you see a form that has simpler footwork and more interesting techniques/combos yet is still basic enough for a beginner. Even Wushu and other Chinese arts have rather elegant patterns to teach basic techniques:

Why are these basic forms so interesting but Karate has to stick with a mundane step-block-step-punch routine?

In a nutshell, I think Taikyoku, Taegeuk 1, and Chon Ji are uninteresting, impractical kata that do not encourage a fighting mindset and do little more than confuse new Karateka. I think they feel weird to practice, have little to no relation to any following kata (except maybe Meikyo?), look quite silly, and make Karate look silly to laymen. I personally believe that nothing will be lost if, instead of teaching Taikyoku, new students were taught something like Tekki Shodan, i.e. a kata that is simple, teaches them proper lower body mechanics, gives them some practical self-defense ideas to build off of, feels more natural, and looks a lot better. I think the trend of teaching new students block-punch-block-punch-block-punch-punch-punch-weirdspin-block-punch-etc is counterintuitive.

I would like to hear what more experienced martial artists have to say about this.

Osu, you have already stated that you think "Taikyoku, Taegeuk 1 and Chon Ji are uninteresting, impractical that do not encourage a fighting mindset and do little more than confuse new karateka". You don't feel anything would be lost if you taught Tekki Shodan in it's place. I understand that these are your personal feelings. Are you looking for more experience MA to convince you otherwise ?

I could give you several reasons as to why I think these katas are required learning in the beginning of many systems but would that change your opinion about it ? The problem you see with the katas may also have to do with what your ideas are for 'encouraging a fighting mindset'. What do you mean by 'fighting mindset' and why does Tekki Shodan encourage this better ?

There are many systems that do not use kata to teach their basic techniques. They've dispensed with this idea all together. Would you consider these systems 'encouraging a fighting mindset' more or less because of their lack of katas.

Ultimately, I am asking you what your ideas are concerning kata and fighting or fighting mindset. The answer to your question more than likely lays there.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I would like to hear what more experienced martial artists have to say about this.

There is a big difference between teaching fighters and teaching the general public. When you teach a fighter, you want him to repeat the same skill over and over for a long time. To teach the general public, you want to teach him many skills so they won't feel boring.

Unfortunately, a MA school just cannot survive by training fighter only. You have to keep general public interest.

 

[wab25]

Lets first look at what Funakoshi says about his Kata. (he created the Taikyoku Kata for Shotokan):

KARATE-DO KYOHAN

The Master Text Nineteen kata ("forms") of karate-the art of self-defense without weapons-are presented here in complete detail. They are the ones selected by the great master and teacher, Gichin Funakoshi, to give comprehensive training in

www.academia.edu

TAIKYOKU (FIRST CAUSE)
This is in fact three kata, numbered Shodan, Nidan, and Sandan. Since this form is the easiest of the kata to learn and consists of those blocks and attacks that are the most helpful in practicing basic techniques, it should be the form with which beginners start. This kata and the Ten no Kata to be described below are the product of my many years of research into the art of karate. If they are practiced regularly, they will result in an even development of the body and in a sound ability to bear the body correctly. Moreover, the student who has gained proficiency in basic techniques and understands the essence of the Taikyoku Kata will appreciate the real meaning of the maxim, In karate, there is no advantage in the first attack. It is for these reasons that I have given them the name Taikyoku.

These are the things he wanted the student to learn from these kata and why he put this kata at the beginning.

I have been practicing Karate now for almost 10 years. I still practice this kata most often. There is a lot to it, once you get past step, block, punch... repeat. I will say that if that is all you get from it... you are missing a lot.

Funakoshi talks about "bearing the body correctly." This kata is great for learning front stance and karate style movement. This requires body unification. To be able to step forward in that stance requires you to use your body differently than many people normally do. The front leg pulls, then transitions into a push... most people forget the pull part... they are losing both power and speed. You also get to study your balance... can you start suddenly, and stop suddenly without losing balance or control? You even get to learn some turns and spins. (I find it interesting that someone would think this kata too simple to start with because the turns are too hard to master...) As you learn to unify your body in your movements, you are learning the basis for power generation in karate.

Going deeper... a punch is not just a punch and a block is not just a block. Read through the text I linked above... Uke Te is not "blocking hand" it is "receiving hand." (Note that Funakoshi barely mentions using Uke Te to block a strike... except as an alternate to using Uke Te to strike a vital point... he gives 6 or 7 other definitions of Uke Te before this...) That down block thing that gets repeated....

Lyoto Machida: Old-School Karate

I've written plenty about Lyoto Machida 's karate over the past two years, but I thought we would try something different...

bleacherreport.com

Funakoshi actually taught that as a throw or take down. As a matter of fact, Funakoshi encouraged students to practice the throws and locks found within the kata. Taikyoku is no different and also contains throws and locks.

Memorizing the moves of the kata is step one in learning. But only step one. Its like learning how to spell words (without spell check) is the first step in writing a novel. First you learn letters and words.... then sentences, then paragraphs....

Is this style of training the best? No. Is this style of training for everyone? No. Can you learn the same things in other ways? Sure/maybe. (I add maybe, as I have been practicing martial arts for 25 years... my main art is Danzan Ryu Jujitsu, then Shotokan, but I have spent time training BJJ, MMA, Boxing, Aikido, and Daito Ryu.... Karate kata have taught me things I did not and would not have picked up any other way... but maybe I am just different...)

Look at it this way.... now that you have memorized the set of moves, so that you can do them without thinking about the order... now you can begin to study them. You can't study them when your mind is busy trying to recall the next movement.

 

[hoshin1600]

To steal thunder from @drop bear ;
Do MMA.
If you don't like kata, dont.

 

[ThatOneCanadian]

Osu, you have already stated that you think "Taikyoku, Taegeuk 1 and Chon Ji are uninteresting, impractical that do not encourage a fighting mindset and do little more than confuse new karateka". You don't feel anything would be lost if you taught Tekki Shodan in it's place. I understand that these are your personal feelings. Are you looking for more experience MA to convince you otherwise ?

I could give you several reasons as to why I think these katas are required learning in the beginning of many systems but would that change your opinion about it ? The problem you see with the katas may also have to do with what your ideas are for 'encouraging a fighting mindset'. What do you mean by 'fighting mindset' and why does Tekki Shodan encourage this better ?

There are many systems that do not use kata to teach their basic techniques. They've dispensed with this idea all together. Would you consider these systems 'encouraging a fighting mindset' more or less because of their lack of katas.

Ultimately, I am asking you what your ideas are concerning kata and fighting or fighting mindset. The answer to your question more than likely lays there.

What I mean regarding this "fighting mindset" is that - at least for me - a kata like Unsu or Gankaku or Bassai-Dai is intense enough that it comes close to replicating the "feeling" of sparring with someone, whereas Taikyoku does not give this feeling. Taikyoku feel so basic that I might as well just spend that time doing kihon up and down the floor.

 

[skribs]

I see forms as a way of working physical and mental conditioning. The basic forms are very useful to return to when you want to work on something basic. If you want to focus on your basic stances, there's no reason to do a form that has mostly fancier stances. Same for basic blocks, punches, and kicks.

There are a couple of different ways you can approach a beginner form:

1. Simple techniques, simple footwork. This really serves as an "Intro to Forms" form, and is even less interesting.
2. Complex techniques or complex footwork (at least, complex for a white belt). This is what I think is a typical beginner form, especially in Taekwondo. The fact that in Taikyoku 1 (which is commonly used as Kibon 1 in TKD) only has down blocks and punches means that you are more able to focus on the footwork.
3. Complex techniques and complex footwork. You'll see this in a more Chinese style of form than Japanese or Korean. These forms are designed to be taught over a longer period of time.

I am going to disagree with a few points made by the OP.

First, while it is indeed true that some students do struggle with the 270 step when they are first learning it, I disagree that it is common to struggle for months with it. At least for students older than 5 years old.

Second, I disagree that the footwork in basic forms is the reason people quit at white belt. Students 13+ need Kibon 1 to test from white to yellow, but kids 12 and under don't need it until testing from yellow to purple belt. We have plenty of kids drop out at white belt. Of those, we have kids that struggle to keep up at white belt who eventually get their black belt, and we have kids who do absolutely amazing right off the bat, and only stay for a month before deciding they don't enjoy it. We also have students that start strong and quickly get their black belt, and students that struggle early on and give up.

The only point at which I believe people quit because something is too hard is actually at purple belt. Yellow belts in the white-and-yellow class think they know everything. Then they get a reality check when they go to the purple belt class, and realize there's new forms to memorize, and a ton of new kicks (step-behind kicks, back kick, jumping kick). They go from top of the class to completely overwhelmed. For most kids, it wears off after a week or so, as they get over the shock and start picking up the new techniques. As the counterpoint to OPs post, it is the more complicated techniques in Kibon 2 and Kibon 3 that puts them off, and not the more complicated footwork that exists since Kibon 1.

Third, I disagree that the 270 footwork has no place in a real fight. I will agree that I wouldn't use that footwork when striking. However, a 270-degree turn is very common in our throws in the self-defense curriculum. This includes various wrist locks, arm locks, and hip throws.

Fourth, I disagree that the more complicated forms are more practically sound. Block and punch makes sense. Block, kick, and punch makes sense. Block two strikes from different sides at the same time doesn't make sense; it would make more sense to move away from one attack and block the other by itself. Two-hand strikes don't make a whole lot of sense; you have double the striking surface (less penetration) and you can't get your body rotation into both arms. In my opinion, beginner forms are aesthetic versions of basic techniques, while advanced poomsae are more complicated body movements that increase aesthetics while reducing practicality.

This isn't to say that I think even the beginner forms are perfect. I don't like when forms have a line that ends with a block. You see this in Palgwe 1 or Taegeuk 2. I don't like forms that don't end on the starting spot. You see this in Palgwe 1 or Taegeuk 1. Specifically for Taekwondo, I don't like how few kicks there are for an art that's supposed to be the kicking art. The first back kick in a Kukkiwon form is in Pyongwon, which is supposed to be learned after 4th degree (already Master rank).

I'm personally going to use the Taegeuk forms in my curriculum. Not because I like them, but because that's what the organization requires. If I were to make my own, it would depend on whether I wanted the forms to be an aesthetic version of TKD sparring, an aesthetic version of TKD self-defense, or if I wanted to create my own versions of a TKD-style poomsae set.

 

[ThatOneCanadian]

Lets first look at what Funakoshi says about his Kata. (he created the Taikyoku Kata for Shotokan):

KARATE-DO KYOHAN

The Master Text Nineteen kata ("forms") of karate-the art of self-defense without weapons-are presented here in complete detail. They are the ones selected by the great master and teacher, Gichin Funakoshi, to give comprehensive training in

www.academia.edu

These are the things he wanted the student to learn from these kata and why he put this kata at the beginning.

I have been practicing Karate now for almost 10 years. I still practice this kata most often. There is a lot to it, once you get past step, block, punch... repeat. I will say that if that is all you get from it... you are missing a lot.

Funakoshi talks about "bearing the body correctly." This kata is great for learning front stance and karate style movement. This requires body unification. To be able to step forward in that stance requires you to use your body differently than many people normally do. The front leg pulls, then transitions into a push... most people forget the pull part... they are losing both power and speed. You also get to study your balance... can you start suddenly, and stop suddenly without losing balance or control? You even get to learn some turns and spins. (I find it interesting that someone would think this kata too simple to start with because the turns are too hard to master...) As you learn to unify your body in your movements, you are learning the basis for power generation in karate.

Going deeper... a punch is not just a punch and a block is not just a block. Read through the text I linked above... Uke Te is not "blocking hand" it is "receiving hand." (Note that Funakoshi barely mentions using Uke Te to block a strike... except as an alternate to using Uke Te to strike a vital point... he gives 6 or 7 other definitions of Uke Te before this...) That down block thing that gets repeated....

Lyoto Machida: Old-School Karate

I've written plenty about Lyoto Machida 's karate over the past two years, but I thought we would try something different...

bleacherreport.com

Funakoshi actually taught that as a throw or take down. As a matter of fact, Funakoshi encouraged students to practice the throws and locks found within the kata. Taikyoku is no different and also contains throws and locks.

Memorizing the moves of the kata is step one in learning. But only step one. Its like learning how to spell words (without spell check) is the first step in writing a novel. First you learn letters and words.... then sentences, then paragraphs....

Is this style of training the best? No. Is this style of training for everyone? No. Can you learn the same things in other ways? Sure/maybe. (I add maybe, as I have been practicing martial arts for 25 years... my main art is Danzan Ryu Jujitsu, then Shotokan, but I have spent time training BJJ, MMA, Boxing, Aikido, and Daito Ryu.... Karate kata have taught me things I did not and would not have picked up any other way... but maybe I am just different...)

Look at it this way.... now that you have memorized the set of moves, so that you can do them without thinking about the order... now you can begin to study them. You can't study them when your mind is busy trying to recall the next movement.

Your last point summarized my feelings in a nutshell. All to often do I see a student doing a kata, missing a movement, and saying "Sorry, can I start over?" They're too preoccupied with getting the pattern right that they can't do it with any spirit.

Adding what Kung Fu Wang mentioned, though, the benefits one can get from Taikyoku only appear if are willing to put in the work. Unfortunately, not all new students are willing to repeat Taikyoku several hundred times until they develop strong basics.

Another thing I need to mention is that if you want to strengthen your basics, kihon is the best thing you can do. As per my previous reply, it might be a better use of one's time to do pure kihon rather than a basic kata.

Going by your novel analogy, Taikyoku would be the equivalent of learning two words and being asked to write a long sentence with them: yes, it is possible, but not really practical. With Tekki Shodan, you are given several techniques and asked to write a short, concise sentence with them.

 

[ThatOneCanadian]

I see forms as a way of working physical and mental conditioning. The basic forms are very useful to return to when you want to work on something basic. If you want to focus on your basic stances, there's no reason to do a form that has mostly fancier stances. Same for basic blocks, punches, and kicks.

There are a couple of different ways you can approach a beginner form:

1. Simple techniques, simple footwork. This really serves as an "Intro to Forms" form, and is even less interesting.
2. Complex techniques or complex footwork (at least, complex for a white belt). This is what I think is a typical beginner form, especially in Taekwondo. The fact that in Taikyoku 1 (which is commonly used as Kibon 1 in TKD) only has down blocks and punches means that you are more able to focus on the footwork.
3. Complex techniques and complex footwork. You'll see this in a more Chinese style of form than Japanese or Korean. These forms are designed to be taught over a longer period of time.

I am going to disagree with a few points made by the OP.

First, while it is indeed true that some students do struggle with the 270 step when they are first learning it, I disagree that it is common to struggle for months with it. At least for students older than 5 years old.

Second, I disagree that the footwork in basic forms is the reason people quit at white belt. Students 13+ need Kibon 1 to test from white to yellow, but kids 12 and under don't need it until testing from yellow to purple belt. We have plenty of kids drop out at white belt. Of those, we have kids that struggle to keep up at white belt who eventually get their black belt, and we have kids who do absolutely amazing right off the bat, and only stay for a month before deciding they don't enjoy it. We also have students that start strong and quickly get their black belt, and students that struggle early on and give up.

The only point at which I believe people quit because something is too hard is actually at purple belt. Yellow belts in the white-and-yellow class think they know everything. Then they get a reality check when they go to the purple belt class, and realize there's new forms to memorize, and a ton of new kicks (step-behind kicks, back kick, jumping kick). They go from top of the class to completely overwhelmed. For most kids, it wears off after a week or so, as they get over the shock and start picking up the new techniques. As the counterpoint to OPs post, it is the more complicated techniques in Kibon 2 and Kibon 3 that puts them off, and not the more complicated footwork that exists since Kibon 1.

Third, I disagree that the 270 footwork has no place in a real fight. I will agree that I wouldn't use that footwork when striking. However, a 270-degree turn is very common in our throws in the self-defense curriculum. This includes various wrist locks, arm locks, and hip throws.

Fourth, I disagree that the more complicated forms are more practically sound. Block and punch makes sense. Block, kick, and punch makes sense. Block two strikes from different sides at the same time doesn't make sense; it would make more sense to move away from one attack and block the other by itself. Two-hand strikes don't make a whole lot of sense; you have double the striking surface (less penetration) and you can't get your body rotation into both arms. In my opinion, beginner forms are aesthetic versions of basic techniques, while advanced poomsae are more complicated body movements that increase aesthetics while reducing practicality.

This isn't to say that I think even the beginner forms are perfect. I don't like when forms have a line that ends with a block. You see this in Palgwe 1 or Taegeuk 2. I don't like forms that don't end on the starting spot. You see this in Palgwe 1 or Taegeuk 1. Specifically for Taekwondo, I don't like how few kicks there are for an art that's supposed to be the kicking art. The first back kick in a Kukkiwon form is in Pyongwon, which is supposed to be learned after 4th degree (already Master rank).

I'm personally going to use the Taegeuk forms in my curriculum. Not because I like them, but because that's what the organization requires. If I were to make my own, it would depend on whether I wanted the forms to be an aesthetic version of TKD sparring, an aesthetic version of TKD self-defense, or if I wanted to create my own versions of a TKD-style poomsae set.

Allow me to clarify one thing that I said: when I was referring to impracticality, I was not referring to the 270 spin but rather the step-punch. The 270 spin is practical, I was simply calling it a hard thing for new students to do.
The step, punch, on the other hand, is easy but impractical. Block+punch makes sense if they are executed very quickly one after the other, but I see little utility in blocking, stepping, and then punching. In fact, this is why I like Heian Godan so much; it features a block+punch without a step and it feels more natural.
I take it you are from a WT Taekwondo background? I was hesitant to say this in my initial post but the WT curriculum seems a lot more rigid than a Karate curriculum, leaving very little room for replacing basic forms like I suggest be done with Karate. I must admit that it would be hard to apply my suggestion to this style.

 

[skribs]

Allow me to clarify one thing that I said: when I was referring to impracticality, I was not referring to the 270 spin but rather the step-punch. The 270 spin is practical, I was simply calling it a hard thing for new students to do.
The step, punch, on the other hand, is easy but impractical. Block+punch makes sense if they are executed very quickly one after the other, but I see little utility in blocking, stepping, and then punching. In fact, this is why I like Heian Godan so much; it features a block+punch without a step and it feels more natural.
I take it you are from a WT Taekwondo background? I was hesitant to say this in my initial post but the WT curriculum seems a lot more rigid than a Karate curriculum, leaving very little room for replacing basic forms like I suggest be done with Karate. I must admit that it would be hard to apply my suggestion to this style.

WT is both rigid and incredibly open. You must have students learn the 8 Taegeuks before black belt. You can do the Taegeuks and only those. Or you can add in 50 other forms if you want.

My experience is not really with the Taegeuks. My first school (age 7-11) had a lot of different forms. We had tons of Exercises, which were like mini-forms. There were quite a few of them. After that, we had the Kibon, Palgwe, and Taegeuk forms, but I didn't get very far into the Taegeuks before I quit.

My current school only recently started doing the Taegeuks. We had 5 Kibon and 8 Palgwe forms. We added the Taegeuks on top of that only recently, and are still in the process of phasing them in. The school I'm looking at joining in a few months is 2 "Tiger Forms" (Kibon) and 8 Taegeuks. I'm not sure if I want to do 2 Kibons and the 8 Taegeuks, or just the 8 Taegeuks. I've also considered going unaffiliated and creating my own.

As to the step-and-punch, I've tested different punches on a StrikeMeter (attachment for a BOB or Wavemaster that measures the relative impact of different strikes). The step-and-punch was actually one of the strongest punches, because your whole weight is behind it. I'll use it in sparring as a counter-punch against a kick. If you want to get more abstract, it's a similar motion to a reap in Judo.

 

[wab25]

the benefits one can get from Taikyoku only appear if are willing to put in the work. Unfortunately, not all new students are willing to repeat Taikyoku several hundred times until they develop strong basics.

Well... this is up to the instructor. Do you want your students to get what Funakoshi put into the Taikyoku kata? If so, then they need to repeat it... even after they have moved on deeper into the system. (moving deeper into the system and then coming back to do Taikyoku should make it look different....) The down side here is that as westerners... we want to move on, we have no patience. So, do you want your students to understand what they are doing and get something from it or do you want them to simply memorize some line dance and move on? You probably want both... but then it becomes a balance, because if you make them actually learn and grow from Taikyoku, you will lose many students... but if you pass them on to the higher kata, they will never learn what is in this kata... which is only the basis for the art...

Even Funakoshi said to mix Taikyoku with Ten No Kata teaching. One to learn the basis of karate and get all those other things he mentioned. The other was to be more prepared for a fight... (Ten No Kata is much like just practicing kihon...)

Whats interesting is that your students will get much of what you get out of it. If you think it is a waste of time and rush through it... so will they. They will take from it less than you do. If you approach it as something to study, with very useful concepts and things to work on... so will they. They will find more than you do.

But, if this style of training is not to your liking, find another art.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

To steal thunder from @drop bear ;
Do MMA.
If you don't like kata, dont.

What will MMA guys do when they get to their 80?

It's boring to

- kick/punch on a heavy bag
- jump rope.
- shadow boxing.
- lift weight.
- ...

everyday.

It's more fun to drill side kick, back fist, hook punch. front kick combo instead.

 

[jks9199]

Our fundamentals are taught in a few types of exercises. We have drills that consist of a "catalogue" of basic techniques by type, such as our Blocking Drill that has 9 blocks, or Stance Drill that has our primary 3 stances done. These drills are done on both sides of the body, and initially from a basic, balanced stance (we call it H, and it's much the same as a classical horse stance). They allow you learn the core concepts and elements of the technique category in question. We can combine, stack, or "scramble" the drills. We can take the elements of the drills, and move them into applications and exercises. I tend to make the analogy that drills are like a musician practicing scales, or someone learning to write on that 3 lined paper to help match letter heights...

We also have forms, which are prearranged sequences based on practical applications and (in the basics) tending to teach certain principles in their execution. Forms stack elements of the drills together -- a stance, a step, a block or strke -- to illustrate principles or tactics. Our first form, the Point Form, is (depending on how you count it; this is the way I teach it) 4 sets of 2 counts, done on each side of the body or done twice. Each set is a step, block, and punch, done as in response to an attack. So, the first set is a forward step, an upward block, and a counter strike as if defending against a strike to the face. You can fight that form, exactly as is. (I've done it.)

So... the question becomes "what is this form designed to teach." Lots of folks above have shared insights into these so-called useless basic forms. Sometimes, if you don't know what they're teaching, it's a clue that you don't understand the form and what it's teaching yet. You might be able to perform it perfectly -- but that doesn't mean you actually understand what it's teaching. It may be teaching you how to find the point of balance, or how to move your body in the way your style generates power. A couple of directions to maybe look... Does that form show up "hidden" in more advanced forms? In other words, does that "awkward" step pattern turn out to make sense if done with something else down the road? Or do the motions facilliate something else?

 

[WaterGal]

WT is both rigid and incredibly open. You must have students learn the 8 Taegeuks before black belt. You can do the Taegeuks and only those. Or you can add in 50 other forms if you want.

This.

Kukkiwon's requirements for 1st dan are the minimum requirements, and they are pretty minimal. Taegeuk 1-8, WT sparring, and break a board. You're not even required to teach Taegeuk 1-8 sequentially. We use a rotating curriculum (where the whole beginner class works on the same material at the same time, and once they've learned all the beginner material they can move up to the intermediate class), so it's entirely possible for students to learn Taegeuk 2 before they've seen Taegeuk 1, or 4 before they've seen 3. We don't teach any other form set, but we have a lot of other elements to our curriculum as well. Forms applications, footwork drills, one-steps, kicking drills, HKD self-defense techniques, etc.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

This is ridiculous. People who don't understand kata explaining how useless kata is.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

This is ridiculous. People who don't understand kata explaining how useless kata is.

I don’t think anyone in this thread has expressed anti-kata sentiments or claimed that kata is useless. The OP was just expressing their opinion that one particular kata might not be the ideal starting kata for beginners and suggested some alternatives. Many of the other commenters argue that the particular kata in question does have value both for beginners and more advanced students. Where are you seeing anyone in this thread suggesting that kata (in general) is useless?

 

[JowGaWolf]

There is a big difference between teaching fighters and teaching the general public. When you teach a fighter, you want him to repeat the same skill over and over for a long time. To teach the general public, you want to teach him many skills so they won't feel boring.

Unfortunately, a MA school just cannot survive by training fighter only. You have to keep general public interest.

Most people who train TMA like forms and have no interest in being fighters. I have no interest in being a fighter. I just want to be functional with what I train.

 

[Yokozuna514]

What I mean regarding this "fighting mindset" is that - at least for me - a kata like Unsu or Gankaku or Bassai-Dai is intense enough that it comes close to replicating the "feeling" of sparring with someone, whereas Taikyoku does not give this feeling. Taikyoku feel so basic that I might as well just spend that time doing kihon up and down the floor.

Ok, I think I understand what you are trying to say. Unsu, Gankaku and Bassi-Dai are more complicated kata that have more variety of movement and make you at least 'feel' as if you are sparring. They are certainly more interesting and challenging however they are not quite sparring at all. Not continuous sparring at least.

Sparring is the opportunity to apply the techniques your learned and practice against an opponent who is simultaneously doing the same. Sparring can be cooperative and rigid in the beginning so that students are encouraged to apply their lessons but as experience and opportunity increase, cooperation decreases to mimic more realistic situations. Sparring is the practical testing of our study by ultimately using what we have learned against an uncooperative opponent.

Kata, regardless of which one you do, does not have this 'practical testing' element so I am not quite sure I can see your point about 'encouraging a fighting mindset' per se. Wab25 and Skibs have already written lengthy responses of what kata does do so there is no point to reiterate that again. I basically agree with what they are saying. Of course you can spend your time doing kihon and that is important as well. I would add that kata is simply kihon in movement. Basically another facet to work on techniques.

What I also hear you saying is that you personally find Taikyoku katas boring. The fact that you have to teach them probably brings you no joy. That will certainly rub off on your students which is probably why they are not having the best time learning it. Teaching beginners is not always easy, even if the material we are teaching is basic and easy to understand. I'm sure we all have had 'good' teachers and 'bad' teachers so think back on your own experiences and ask yourself, what made a particular teacher good. Was it the material they were teaching or was it the way they approached the subject ? If YOU can find a way to make it interesting, they will respond even if it is just turn, block, step punch…..etc. It's all in the delivery. Good luck.

 

[JowGaWolf]

What will MMA guys do when they get to their 80?

Train less and at a slower pace lol

I don’t think anyone in this thread has expressed anti-kata sentiments or claimed that kata is useless. The OP was just expressing their opinion that one particular kata might not be the ideal starting kata for beginners and suggested some alternatives. Many of the other commenters argue that the particular kata in question does have value both for beginners and more advanced students. Where are you seeing anyone in this thread suggesting that kata (in general) is useless?

The thing about Kata and forms when it comes to beginners is that it should always be easy enough where complete beginners can start developing the skill sets needed. It's a way to get beginners on the same skill level and helps to ensure they aren't trying to do too much to soon.