When the kata is applied to self defense

[drop bear]

I'd consider this training method (not the techniques, but the training) similar to the focus mitts. There is an assumption of response/situation in that. The trainer provides a set of targets and responses that's repetitive (in repetitive drills - obviously, mitts don't have to be repetitive). The issue - and I think it's what you're getting at - is if there's no sparring, they'll never know if any of these transitions are actually likely. Whereas, because they spar so often, boxers are pretty aware the combinations they train are responding to things that actually happen from time to time.

So, let me be clear, I think this fills the same function as one part of how a boxer learns a combo. There are some reasonable arguments to be made about the advantages of mitts (speed, using some power, etc.) and the advantages of using a person (can see what your block would actually contact, etc.) and whether the trade-off is worth it.

Boxers don't fake the outcome of a punch successfully. So you don't go from win to win which is nice but not very useful. As learning to towel up a guy who is getting rocked isn't high percentage.

So what they do is fake the defence. You punch, they slip and counter. Then you counter off that. Because, well that is handier to know.

 

[drop bear]

Our opinions differ there ... and we will have to agree to disagree

There are consistencies. These accepted martial dogma that doesn't work very well but people seem to do.

Hinging reality off kata is one. So a persons point of reference is the kata rather than any link to fighting or practical application.

The stuff you do hast to work first and foremost. And it has to work consistently in a definable and observable way.

This is why magic when consistently tested doesn't work.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

The difference being that extensive kata practice has yet to yield any verifiable evidence of more advanced fighting ability. In fact, the evidence would show the opposite to be true.



Mainly because of tradition. That isn't always the best reason to do something.





Neither. Nice guess though




Kata and Bunkai isn't the focus of Judo training, which was the point I was making in the OP.

Not regarding fighting, but there is minor evidence of kata, and 'traditional' martial arts being more beneficial for preventing 'delinquent'/aggressive/impulsive behavior than 'combat-oriented' martial arts.
Side note: that may have veen the most quotations I've ever had to use in a sentence.

 

[JR 137]

Boxers don't fake the outcome of a punch successfully. So you don't go from win to win which is nice but not very useful. As learning to towel up a guy who is getting rocked isn't high percentage.

So what they do is fake the defence. You punch, they slip and counter. Then you counter off that. Because, well that is handier to know.

Wrestling works much the same way. “You do this, he tries to avoid it with that, then you transition to this.”

Although there are some common responses you train to spot and take advantage of. For instance in folk style, when a guy is flat on his stomach, he’ll typically put a hand flat on the mat to push back up to his base. Half-Nelson time. Or throw a bar in there. All day, every day. And we would train that, but I realize that’s more of a situational drill as I type it out loud.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Why do you always have to wait for your opponent's attack? In training, if you always initiate the attack, the training will be in more realistic speed.

IMO, instead of "You do ..., I'll do ...", it's better to "I'll do ..., if you respond as ..., I'll do ...".

 

[drop bear]

Wrestling works much the same way. “You do this, he tries to avoid it with that, then you transition to this.”

Although there are some common responses you train to spot and take advantage of. For instance in folk style, when a guy is flat on his stomach, he’ll typically put a hand flat on the mat to push back up to his base. Half-Nelson time. Or throw a bar in there. All day, every day. And we would train that, but I realize that’s more of a situational drill as I type it out loud.

Yet quite often we see martial arts restomping the groin. Which is silly follow up.

I did that a lot doing RSBD. and it creates a lot of wasted time learning to do what. Follow up on a guy that is rocked? That isnt the trick to fighting.

 

[JR 137]

Yet quite often we see martial arts restomping the groin. Which is silly follow up.

I did that a lot doing RSBD. and it creates a lot of wasted time learning to do what. Follow up on a guy that is rocked? That isnt the trick to fighting.

Restomping the groin has its advantages - you’ll have a better chance of the guy not getting up as you’re getting out of there.

But yeah, I completely agree.

 

[drop bear]

There are consistencies. These accepted martial dogma that doesn't work very well but people seem to do.

Hinging reality off kata is one. So a persons point of reference is the kata rather than any link to fighting or practical application.

The stuff you do hast to work first and foremost. And it has to work consistently in a definable and observable way.

This is why magic when consistently tested doesn't work.

Magic is a good analogy here. The reason we would think it works is anecdotal. But the reason we know it doesnt is scientific testing.

It is important to separate waht should work and what does.

 

[drop bear]

Restomping the groin has its advantages - you’ll have a better chance of the guy not getting up as you’re getting out of there.

But yeah, I completely agree.

I am a fan of doing it. I am not a fan of spending my time and money paying someone to teach it to me.

I can come up with that on my own.

It depends how you address a fight. So if you are trained to hit someone then move because you expect a shot back. And they suprise you by falling on the ground crying. So what?

If you were expecting them to fall down crying and they hit you back. That is a bigger issue.

 

[drop bear]

It is good to see schools like this begin to advertise what they teach on the web. I think it is also good to see what they teach so that I can avoid these schools like the plague.

Clearly they're applying some sort of kata to a self defense sequence. One of the reasons I've never liked this form of teaching is because the supposed reaction to the strike or technique is almost never realistic. In one part of this video, the instructor blocks and grabs the student's wrist, pulls them forward, side kicks him, causing the target to double over, which then supposedly sets up a takedown. Well, what if the person doesn't double over? What if the person pulls his hand back and clocks you with his other hand? What if you're not strong enough to pull the person forward to set up the side kick?

I see women in the video, and I just shudder to think of a woman attempting this stuff against a larger person trying to take advantage of them.

This is why sparring and communicating with other styles is important. It would be great if places like this allowed a wrestler or boxer into their ranks to pressure test what they are doing. Such pressure testing would shed away the nonsense, and improve the style overall.

By the way. If you want to stretch a concept. Try this.

 

[paitingman]

I think @JowGaWolf has given some good perspective in the past about properly taking form to function and keeping true to both. He's also given clips of his and others' approach to this I just dk where they are.

 

[drop bear]

I think @JowGaWolf has given some good perspective in the past about properly taking form to function and keeping true to both. He's also given clips of his and others' approach to this I just dk where they are.

I think he was getting pressure for duing video. secrets or something.

 

[paitingman]

By the way. If you want to stretch a concept. Try this.

Standing grappling is def part of Bunkai in traditional karate, but sweeps and armbars... nah.

On the plus side it did look some good training goes on with the guys in the video

 

[drop bear]

Standing grappling is def part of Bunkai in traditional karate, but sweeps and armbars... nah.

On the plus side it did look some good training goes on with the guys in the video

Yeah it was really weird cos the guy was good.

Probably a bit more than kata there though.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Boxers don't fake the outcome of a punch successfully. So you don't go from win to win which is nice but not very useful. As learning to towel up a guy who is getting rocked isn't high percentage.

So what they do is fake the defence. You punch, they slip and counter. Then you counter off that. Because, well that is handier to know.

Thanks. That's clearer than what I said.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Wrestling works much the same way. “You do this, he tries to avoid it with that, then you transition to this.”

Although there are some common responses you train to spot and take advantage of. For instance in folk style, when a guy is flat on his stomach, he’ll typically put a hand flat on the mat to push back up to his base. Half-Nelson time. Or throw a bar in there. All day, every day. And we would train that, but I realize that’s more of a situational drill as I type it out loud.

And that's the other side of what I was getting at. Used properly, the exercises in the OP video serve as a situational drill. That are covering a potential sequence, rather than a guaranteed or assumed one. I'm not convinced that's how they are used in that video .

 

[TaiChiTJ]

What you are saying is that the video clip represents just one training mode. Making a correct judgement on the entire system from one exercise is faulty.

 

[now disabled]

The difference being that extensive kata practice has yet to yield any verifiable evidence of more advanced fighting ability. In fact, the evidence would show the opposite to be true.

That statement is somewhat misguided,

Are you now suggesting that Koryu did not produce advanced fighters? ...........again a little research may be in order

 

[now disabled]

Kata and Bunkai isn't the focus of Judo training, which was the point I was making in the OP.

I am going to ask you straight ....what do those terms mean to you as that statement again is somewhat misguided as ...oh jut go look it up lol

 

[now disabled]

Neither. Nice guess though

It is your opinion as you are stating that any use of extensive kata et al ....does not produce verifiable evidence, if that is not your opinion then whose is it?

What are you basing that statement on vids on you tube or lack of them?


I really do think that you are not grasping what Kata are firstly and are using terms that are not altogether correct


As for verifiable what are you actually meaning by that?