What Do You Think Are The Most Effective Karate Styles?

L

Littledragon

Guest
What Do You Think Are The Most Effective Karate Styles?

We are taking an over 3,000 year old art and applying it to reality. Which traditional Karate systems do you think would hold up in a street NHB self-defense situation?


Personally in my opinion I believe the most lethal and effictive Karate styles are Kyokoshin Karate and Shoto-Kan Karate due to the full contact kumite aspects of the art it trains the artist to be aggressive and feel what real contact is.

The only thing I think is a negative about Karate and all other traiditional styles is they are one dimentional and lack ALL the tools you need in order to survive in a street situation.

But in terms of this case which traditional Karate style do you think will hold up best in the street?
 
OP
C

cas

Guest
This is likely to spark a "my karate is better then your karate" discussion. If you want to discuss selfdefence and karate it might be better to ask opinions on a specific technique or strategy.

just a thought,

Casper
 
OP
L

Littledragon

Guest
cas said:
This is likely to spark a "my karate is better then your karate" discussion. If you want to discuss selfdefence and karate it might be better to ask opinions on a specific technique or strategy.

just a thought,

Casper
I am basically asking what style is the best for self defense not what style is better than another. But we have to leap out of the traditional shell and face reality and say well which style is indeed better to hold up in the street?

;)
 

hedgehogey

Green Belt
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
192
Reaction score
13
Kyokushin-kai and it's offshoots (esp. shidokan) by far. The full contact tournaments are a huge advantage, though they dissalow punches to the face.

Shotokan doesn't hold full contact tourneys.
 
OP
L

Littledragon

Guest
hedgehogey said:
Kyokushin-kai and it's offshoots (esp. shidokan) by far. The full contact tournaments are a huge advantage, though they dissalow punches to the face.

Shotokan doesn't hold full contact tourneys.
Yes the reason I think Kyokushin is so effective as a traditional Karate system is because they are so exposed to that full contact atmosphere and actually challenge themselves by testing what tradition really can do.

I agree with you. ;)

Tarek

My Master was a full contact Shotokan champion in Egypt so I believe they do have full contact events. ;)
 
OP
S

Scout_379

Guest
Personally, I dislike Kyokushin, and I cannot beleive that their tournaments are full contact. In most of the traditional forms, the concept is "one punch, one kill", and if the tournament were "full contact", there should be only one person left standing, IMO.

Also, the tournament atmosphere is very different from the actual thing. In a streetfight, there is no time to prepare, no time to choose your shots, and often involve multiple opponents. You would want to get the hell outta there b4 taking them all on. (but if you are cornered, it would be much more discouraging to the group if you knocked out one guy with one hit {which is a technique available to most karateka, regardless of experience}, rather than pissing them off more by attacking for the sake of attacking. Which would make a dangerous situition worse)
But I think that you cannot judge what Karate(s) is(are) best suited to streetfights because it has never been tested, and hopefully will never have to be. It would be best to keep out of those situations in the first place
 
OP
H

hippy

Guest
A full wado-ryu syllabus will contain techniques for all fighting distances.
even though it is karate (primarily regarded as punching and kicking) the founder (otsuka) was a well known jujitsu master before he studied under funakoshi (shotokan founder), which means that the majority of syllabus' for wado will start with striking techniques, u will progress onto grappling + throwing in higher grades.
 

DeLamar.J

3rd Black Belt
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Messages
910
Reaction score
22
Location
Barberton, Ohio, USA
Littledragon said:
What Do You Think Are The Most Effective Karate Styles?

We are taking an over 3,000 year old art and applying it to reality. Which traditional Karate systems do you think would hold up in a street NHB self-defense situation?


Personally in my opinion I believe the most lethal and effictive Karate styles are Kyokoshin Karate and Shoto-Kan Karate due to the full contact kumite aspects of the art it trains the artist to be aggressive and feel what real contact is.

The only thing I think is a negative about Karate and all other traiditional styles is they are one dimentional and lack ALL the tools you need in order to survive in a street situation.

But in terms of this case which traditional Karate style do you think will hold up best in the street?
I would say Goju Ryu.
 
OP
O

OC Kid

Guest
personal preferance, if you like to kick take a korean style, if you like to punch take a japanese style if you want 50/50 then take one which practices that. All styles are different. All styles are good. If we were all the same then we would all be driving dodges like me.
 
OP
I

Ippon Ken

Guest
How would anyone know the answer to this question unless they practiced all the styles of karate there are? In my teachers organization he has Kyokushinkai, Shotokan, TSD, Shito Ryu, all the branches of the Shorin tree (except Matsubayashi), Okinawan Kempo, Matsumura Kenpo, Uechi Ryu stylists, Freestyle karate-ka, Eclectic Karate/Ju Jutsu and Goju guys. When we have seminars we all get together and train the old Okinawan way, one oreinted to real fighting. The Japanese and Korean karate-ka look like they need a lot of work, and the really tense full-contact stylists and Okinawan Kempo-ka seem to need the most work when it is all said and done.

So is it the style or the stylist? Both, with some styles being more street oriented, like Kobayashi, Uechi Ryu and Matsumura Seito, and others more ring oriented, like Shotokan and Kickboxing (freestyle karate). Depends on what you're training for.
 

Andrew Green

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 1, 2004
Messages
8,627
Reaction score
452
Location
Winnipeg MB
Scout_379 said:
Personally, I dislike Kyokushin, and I cannot beleive that their tournaments are full contact. In most of the traditional forms, the concept is "one punch, one kill", and if the tournament were "full contact", there should be only one person left standing, IMO.
Then either no one that enters full contact competition knows how to hit, or that theory is mistaken.

That concept is flawed, and an ideal rather then a reality, one borrowed from Kendo, as well as a few others. In the early 1900's karate went to Japan and the Dai Nippon Budokai required modifications to fit with the existing Japanese ideals on what martial arts should be like. Some ideas where borrowed from Judo (rank, Uniforms, etc.) some where borrowed from Kendo (sparring philosophy being one)

Anyways as too which has the best shot. Funny question, the answer is on which uses the most realistic sparring methods. In general I guess you could say Kyokushin, due to the full contact. But even it is severly limited under modern rules.
 

Shogun

Master Black Belt
Joined
Apr 14, 2004
Messages
1,067
Reaction score
21
Location
Snohomish county, Washington state
Borrowed Ideas, and misguided concepts of "newer" martial arts leaves students with a false sense of security. however, do beleive the right types of Traditional MA (usually Koryu, or those tested in combat) can be extremely effective, both for mental and physical purposes. Bujinkan Taijutsu was tested out in Bareknuckle combat in the early 1900's by Takamatsu, 33rd inheritor of Ninjutsu.
 

Andrew Green

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 1, 2004
Messages
8,627
Reaction score
452
Location
Winnipeg MB
Shogun said:
Borrowed Ideas, and misguided concepts of "newer" martial arts leaves students with a false sense of security. however, do beleive the right types of Traditional MA (usually Koryu, or those tested in combat) can be extremely effective, both for mental and physical purposes. Bujinkan Taijutsu was tested out in Bareknuckle combat in the early 1900's by Takamatsu, 33rd inheritor of Ninjutsu.
Perhaps a misguided concept is thinking that after how many generations of no one actually testing it or questioning it it will remain functional.

Many of the newer style are perhaps misguided, but some are not. Some are based on people testing it out and finding out what works for them, not for some asian guy 100 years ago on the other side of the world.

Of course others are more impressed with long lineages, fantastic stories, and cool titles.
 

Pale Rider

Green Belt
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
174
Reaction score
3
OC Kid said:
personal preferance, if you like to kick take a korean style, if you like to punch take a japanese style if you want 50/50 then take one which practices that. All styles are different. All styles are good. If we were all the same then we would all be driving dodges like me.
I agree with this statement 100%. How can one say that one style would be more effective in situations over any other style. There are only differences in techniques - just like the quote above...

In my opinion, I believe that a style like Tae Kwon Do utilizes more kicking techniques and granted they train their legs to be just as fast as the hands, so can I say that because I believe in more of a 50/50 that TKD is wrong? No! There will be things that they will be able to do more so then I, and as long as it works that is the main objective.

There are close range fighting techniques like Wing Chun which in my opinion works just as effective as the distance fighting like Tae Kwon Do or the style that I am in Tang Soo Do.

Let's look at the simple basics - a punch is still a punch. The only way that it differs is the way it is delivered. Whether 1/2 twist, 3/4 twist or the full rotation.

What about what we call blocks: they are still "blocks". Whether or not they are deliver closer to the body as in Japanese/Okinawan styles or farther away like in the Korean arts - they are still basically the same techniques. Each style will have their own bunkais to dictate what the techniques are designed for, and in their eyes they are right. For who's to say which one is right and which one is wrong?

That is like saying which is more effective in a real life street technique - a kick compared to a joint lock?

How can anyone really compare? If the martial arts that you are in serves you well and if or when the time comes and it saves you from harm - then that is what is most important.

Wouldn't you agree?
 
OP
M

Mark Weiser

Guest
Okay here it goes any MA that is simple and effective, easy to teach and learn is the best.

Remember if you are going to teach self defense you have to be able to teach
  • Children
  • Adults
  • Seniors
  • Disabled
Effective and simple to use movements that use one to a max of three movements are ideal for most people. Stun and Run type training. Remember the difference in study of MA for Ranking and Self Defense are often different to most people.
 

Shogun

Master Black Belt
Joined
Apr 14, 2004
Messages
1,067
Reaction score
21
Location
Snohomish county, Washington state
IMO, Fighting is engaging an opponent, whether intentional or not. Self defense is protecting yourself, and maybe others (depends if ya like em,lol) but as a method of escape.
here is how Webster's defines Fighting:

Main Entry: 1fight
Pronunciation: 'fIt
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): fought /'fot/; fight·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English feohtan; akin to Old High German fehtan to fight and perhaps to Latin pectere to comb -- more at [size=-1]PECTINATE[/size]
intransitive senses
1 a : to contend in battle or physical combat; especially : to strive to overcome a person by blows or weapons b : to engage in boxing
2 : to put forth a determined effort
transitive senses
1 a (1) : to contend against in or as if in battle or physical combat (2) : to box against in the ring b (1) : to attempt to prevent the success or effectiveness of <the company fought the takeover attempt> (2) : to oppose the passage or development of <fight a bill in Congress>
2 a : [size=-1]WAGE[/size], [size=-1]CARRY ON[/size] <fight a battle> b : to take part in (as a boxing match)
3 : to struggle to endure or surmount <fight a cold>
4 a : to gain by struggle <fights his way through> b : to resolve by struggle <fought out their differences in court>
5 a : to manage (a ship) in a battle or storm b : to cause to struggle or contend c : to manage in an unnecessarily rough or awkward manner
- fight shy of : to avoid facing or meeting


Now with that, any type of physical contact could be interpeted as fighting, but in today's society, fighting is how I described it.
 

hardheadjarhead

Senior Master
Joined
Aug 25, 2003
Messages
2,602
Reaction score
71
Location
Bloomington, Indiana
Littledragon said:
What Do You Think Are The Most Effective Karate Styles?

We are taking an over 3,000 year old art and applying it to reality. Which traditional Karate systems do you think would hold up in a street NHB self-defense situation?


Personally in my opinion I believe the most lethal and effictive Karate styles are Kyokoshin Karate and Shoto-Kan Karate due to the full contact kumite aspects of the art it trains the artist to be aggressive and feel what real contact is.


3,000 year old art? That's a new one on me. I never heard it dated back that far before.

When I was in Shotokan it was light or no contact. I haven't heard of too many Shotokan schools that do full contact kumite. That whole notion of "full contact" is a misnomer. Even Kyokushin guys don't typically try to kill their sparring parnters with each shot. At least not the ones I've known.

Regards,


Steve
 

Latest Discussions

Top