why do people hate kata

[TaiChiTJ]

I am still mulling over comments Tony Annesi
makes on his site:

Shihan Tony Annesi reveals how kata is misunderstood by most practitioners, both modern eclecticists and traditionalists. There are two ideographs for kata. One implies a rigid mold, the other suggests a general shape --"the mold filled with gelatin." As a beginner you were instructed to follow the rigid mold, but did you learn how that rigidity becomes softened by interpretation and personal sensibilities in more senior practice?

I like the applications he gives. You can see alot of clips of applicaitons of Karate on his site:

http://www.bushido-kai.net/budoya/video_karate_list.html

:ultracool

 

[exile]

My only issue with Kata is the reinforcement of the "one hit, one kill" methodology. That's a VERY large gamble with a VERY large downside if you bet wrong.

Hi Steve---good to see this thread still has some life in it! So my question (obviously, there has to be one! :wink1: ) is, what should a striking art take as its guiding strategic principle if one one strike/one kill is too extreme a position---how would you modify it so as to be more combat-useful?

 

[Hand Sword]

I would like to point out that the one strike/one kill was valid back when the Kata were created, and practiced in the early days. The Karateka of the time constantly trained and conditioned the body parts, and their skill to accomplish that skill. Not so much anymore, while the same kata are practiced. So, maybe it is a good question about changes needed to make them more effective for today's practioners.

 

[eyebeams]

As I've mentioned before. ikken hisatsu "one strike one kill" is not traditional in Okinawan karate. Japanese karate borrows it from kendo.

 

[Rook]

"One strike kill" is an ideal, and it was never consistantly achieved. (It might also have been borrowed from kendo, as Eyebeams has pointed out - I've heard that before.)

 

[exile]

I would like to point out that the one strike/one kill was valid back when the Kata were created, and practiced in the early days. The Karateka of the time constantly trained and conditioned the body parts, and their skill to accomplish that skill. Not so much anymore, while the same kata are practiced. So, maybe it is a good question about changes needed to make them more effective for today's practioners.

As I've mentioned before. ikken hisatsu "one strike one kill" is not traditional in Okinawan karate. Japanese karate borrows it from kendo.

OK. The idea in kendo was that the ideal the swordsman was aiming at was a literal kill with the first strike of the blade. Given what a katana can do if properly handled, the idea of `kill' in `one strike, one kill' is literal. But it doesn't have to be interpreted that way. In The Way of Kata, Kane & Wilder paraphrase the idea as their second principle of kata application as `Every technique should be able to end the fight immediately'. Given a set of interpretations for a kata move, pick the one which has the greatest odds of putting the attacker out of action. In last month's Black Belt , there's a long article on the `modern' sense of one strike/one kill which pretty much comes to the same conclusions. Given what is described as a `block-block-punch' sequence, look for the interpretation of the moves which has the most damaging effect on the attacker.

Now, if you say that you don't accept one strike/one kill on that interpretation of the saying, what would you suggest to make the kata applications `more effective for today's practitioners'? The ethic of 1S/1K already seems to be, find the most destructive application you can. If you give up 1S/1K, it seems as though you'd be taking the position that you shouldn't seek the kata interpretation which caused, or allowed you to set up as soon as possible, the most damaging interpretation. Wouldn't this then be a retreat from maximum effectiveness?

I can imagine that two people could disagree over what the most damaging application was. But if 1S/1K means, use the technique which is most likely to disable the attacker most severely, then the two people who are arguing are both accepting 1S/1K; they just have different ideas about which way of implementing is the best in practical terms. That's not the same as rejecting it in favor of a different strategic approach to the fight.

The question of body conditioning is relevent here, because a kareteka who's done a lot of that sort of thing may be in a position to make a given move (not necessarily a strike) `lethal' in the 1S/1K sense, whereas practitioners who haven't might not. For the latter, a different move might be more effective. But again, the question wouldn't be 1S/1K itself, but how best to implement it given the capabilities of the fighter in question. For both the conditioned and unconditioned fighter, 1S/1K means that those two `blocks' in sequence had better not correspond to a sequence of defensive deflections in a fight---there is presumably a better, more destructive interpretation of the motions described as `block-block', and your job in working out the bunkai is to find it (or several, and decide which is the most damaging one in terms of your own physical capabilities and fighting strengths)...

 

[exile]

"One strike kill" is an ideal, and it was never consistantly achieved. (It might also have been borrowed from kendo, as Eyebeams has pointed out - I've heard that before.)

Rook---I think what I've said in my previous post speaks to your point here.
The strategy of the karate-based MAs seeks out the move that in any given situation has the best chance of terminating the fight in your favor, right then, right there. Of course things may not go as planned; you need backup strategies, and on some people's interpretation of the kata, these are supplied as well. It's this intention that guides the interpretation of kata on the 1S/1K view---take advantage of openings to strike, of muchimi to impose locks and controlling moves that force a striking opening, of sweeps that take your opponent to the ground while you stay upright and strike from above to disable him.

So far as the relevance of Okinawan kenjutsu that Eyebeams mentioned is concerned, the case may not be as clear as all that. Abernethy's observation in Bunkai Jutsu is relevant here:

The bujitsu of the Minamoto samurai had a large influence on the
fighting methods employed by the Okinawan nobles. One part of
Minamoto bujitsu that had an influence on the development of kar-
ate was the idea that all motion is essentially the same. Whether
striking, grappling or wielding a weaponn, the Minamoto samurai
taught that all combative methods relied upon similar physical
movements. An individual would be taught a particular physical
movement and then shown how that movement could be adapted to
achieve varying goals.

This strongly suggests that strategies for use of the katana and those of the body limbs were not, in the aftermath of the 19th c. Japanse overlordship of the Okinawan islands, radically separated, which would naturally lead to the extension of 1K/1S from kenjutsu to Okinawa-te, and then on to the Japanese and Korean developments of the Okinawan arts. One might be skeptical in advance that the Satsuma would share their fighting systems with Okinawans, except for the fact that, as Abernethy further notes, `many of the Minamoto samurai took Okinawan wives and remained upon the island for the rest of their days'. It seems plausible then that the Satsuma's kenjutsu technique, incorporating 1K/1S at its core, did diffuse into the practice of empty-hand combat in the Okinawan aristocracy, from whose ranks the bodyguards of the King of Okinawa---including Matsumura and Itosu themselves---were recruited. So I'm not convinced that1K/1S to Japanese swordsmanship was really restricted to Japanese swordsmanship...

 

[chinto]

I too, love to watch my instructor (5th dan) do form. And I have seen some teens do it really well. But most of the guys that I have seen in tournaments do Karate forms and its seems powerful but not as artistic. I have never been impressed as a judge by all the hissing and gutteral noises. I am more impressed by balance and lightness as you said, power shown with high held kicks, jumping and landing perfectly etc. But again, those are the few guys who obviously love it and put their all into perfecting it. I was speaking generally, of course. I hear alot of guys grumble but no women. As you said, whether its a man or a woman, the hours and work shows in properly executed form. :asian:

I like kata, and am a male.
I have seen kata done well by men and women, just as done badly. but the hissing and butteral noises if done right are like the kiai about tensioning the body and gerneration of focious as well. not all people realize what its for or are not tought about tensioning the body and things that are part of kata and a very real part of combat when if you loose you die. kata was developed to teach you the art and save your life! its all there if you are willing to put the effort and time and practice into it and use your mind to see what is under the serfice.

 

[chinto]

Kata would be my favourite aspect of my karate.

It is a conditioning tool for the body as well as the mind. Because it takes a long time "learn" a kata, I find it a great "place" to put your mind. All the basics of karate in the kata, so by focusing your mind on either the whole kata or one part is a great training tool. :asian:

the basics are there yes, and so very much more if you put the effort into looking into the 'hidden' techniques and principles there to be found.

 

[chinto]

Why do people hate Kata was the topic of this thread...

Two reasons for two types of people:

1) Martial Artists who do Kata and hate Kata feel that way because... they have to spend time memorizing and practicing preset movements which have nothing to do with sparring, self-defense, or combat. People not interested in actual combat do not mind practicing these preset moves and do not hate Kata.

2) Fighters who do not practice kata and hate Kata feel that way because...they realize that practicing movements in a preset fashion does not preapre a person for sparring, combat or self-defense and they are embarrassed to be classified as "Martial Artists" along with those who learn Katas. Fighters who understand the difference between training to fight and training for health/self-improvement do not hate Kata--they just know it won't help them meet their goals.

I have to disigree with your premiss. I study for self defence and becouse i enjoy it. but if you are interested in real ability in combat, as in when its not in a ring but on the street, then kata does teach reality combat!

The kata were developed by men who fought for thier survival, as in the looser of a fight usualy was dead. they included in the kata the lessons of life and death combat that they learned the hard way. they didnt want to just hand even their students and especialy their enemys all their techniques, besides which for hundreds of years it was illegal to study any martial art on okinawa (where karate originaly came from). so to some how say to study the kata is useless, or does not help with your ability to fight is ludicriss!
Yes sparring helps with some things like timeing and distance, but if you study and really look deeply at what the kata is trying to teach you, a month of hard work on kata will improve your ability as much as the same amount of sparring, and often more.

I find myself laughing at the idea that some how Karate is not a system for realistic combat.

 

[cstanley]

People who do not like kata do not understand it and probably had instructors that did not like or understand kata, either. You cannot study traditional karate and not like or practice kata. It is like being in the army and not wanting to march. If you find yourself in a traditional karate class and you are not comfortable with kata as the basis for everything, get out now and find an art that fits you better. If you are mainly interested in learning to fight quickly, then I would suggest boxing or Brazilian Jujutsu or some kind of MMA. If you like competition fighting, those same arts are good for that, as well.

 

[chinto]

Good point!!! However, as I stated in a past post regarding kata, and some of my exp. with them, I've found very few who actually understand what the moves are. Simply saying, "Well, its done that way...........well, because it is." is not a very good answer IMO.


Mike[/quote]

Yes that is a lousy answer, and some people who do not know about kata will give that answer. but a knowledgeble and properly trained instructor will show you 3 or 5 or perhaps more aplications for that movement in the kata. that comes down to an instructor who does not understand the kata and was not trained in bunkai. and some times you do kata bunkai by having others attack you as you do the kata ( from the directions used in the kata) and they you aply first the kihon aplications, and as you attain skill and rank the more advanced responses to the initial techniques and others that are used at that point. so there is 'alive' training as you called it traditiolnaly used in TMA. please remember that the systems that have survived for centurys are systems that have been tried and used in real combat. Combat that was to the death, and not for points or for a title, or a belt. so to some how say that a tool that has been used for centurys to train for life and death combat is some how not effective or even usless is rediculess and usualy the product of ignorance about kata.

 

[chinto]

My appologies Sir, I should have been more specific. I was making a ref. to kata as you'd see done in TKD, Shotokan, Kenpo, etc. Thanks for posting the links! :asian: That being said, we could even say that boxing has 'kata'. The combos that are thrown, jab cross, jab cross hook, etc. are preset moves or combos that are put together in a certain way. However, when stepping into the ring, they are not always put together in that way..hence, being able to have an understanding of whats being done.

Mike

OK, so do you expect if you attack me that I will begain to preform a kata to defend myself?? if so you have no clue at all, even less then most who know nothing about kata. kata teaches you a lot of things, but when you are attacked, if you have practiced and trained hard in kata and all, and your instructor was compatent, you will find yourself reacting with out thought really. the block just seems to happen as does the evasion and trap, or throw, or brake or strike or lock. that is what kata helps to teach. but you do not some how become a robot that can not do the techniques in any order other then in that of the kata!

 

[chinto]

Exactly!
Kata in Karate are the same. In a kata techniques are "strung" together for the sake of memory.....not because that is the way they will happen in a real fight. Nobody knows what will happen in a real fight.
Basically I think the problem with kata is that most non-Japanese users of the word don't know what the word “kata” really means and therefore don't understand what they think they dislike or like as the case may be.

I agree !!!

 

[chinto]

The reason I personally don't like kata is that I believe that I can spend that time on activities more beneficial to my fighting ability. I do think that doing kata does improve my ability to fight but nowhere near to what some other activities can (sparring, conditioning, etc...). My primary purpose in doing martial arts from the beginning has been to improve conditioning, and learn how to fight (not just a brawler). The kata just doesn't help me advance towards my goals.

I will say it again, Look beyond the very obvouse use of each movement in a kata. think about how it might be modified slightly and what that would result in agenst a jab, or a hook or a reverse punch or a kick. think about what the men who put together that kata were trying to teach you! put some effert into that annalisses ( called bunkai) and you will find it will do wonders for your ability in sparring or in a real world altercation.

but remember, the best defence, and the best fighting ability is to not be there.

 

[chinto]

As I've mentioned before. ikken hisatsu "one strike one kill" is not traditional in Okinawan karate. Japanese karate borrows it from kendo.

Yep that is true.

 

[TheOriginalName]

I'm just going to throw my 2cents in here.

I'm a newbie to the art - only been training for a couple of weeks now.
So i've been spending a lot of time working on my individual moves, mainly a number of blocks and punches.
Once a week i get to train with the higher belts - and as such i usually end up getting a bit of a lesson in either some "basic" kata or in a new "advanced" one they are learning.

My opinion is the kata are extremely important - mainly they teach how your body works and how the individual motions can be combined. From my time learning a "basic" blocking kata my blocks have become 10 times better - each motion now has a purpose that is clear and well defined.

I also think that learning how to "fight" without kata is also highly valuable - it is important to know how to use our skills in a real world situation.

Well i'm not sure if that all makes sense but thats what i think so far - i love my kata - learn them, get forms right and then the real world will be easier to combat.

Cheers all

Remember: Practice makes permanent - not perfect. So get those forms right!!

 

[Chizikunbo]

i am a blue belt in go-ju ryu and i always read articles that are so anti-kata.What is with you people kata have been preformed since the begining and they trained for real combat not like us who mostly do it for sport .What makes these so called reality based martial arts think they have it figured out .Kata are not preformed to teach self defense,but are used as a conditioning tool.Also to fine tune technique,teach accuracy and control.After all these methods have been used for hunderds of years and we dismiss them because we think we know it all.I think its a shame to see a black who does not teach kata ,but a guess i am a traditionalist . please fell free to give tour thoughts

Kata is widely misunderstood, and misinterpreted. It has been this way since the first westerners began learning oriental martial arts. The interesting part is that so called REALITY martial practicioner use kata, any drill, striking combination, disarms etc. are all Kata.
As far as traditional kata, the efforts of such men as Seiyu Oyata Taika, have really brought a group of practicioners into the light about the subject, and as wel learn more and progress it is natural that our understanding will increase with continued study and research...
Our society has a problem with the HERE and NOW, they want to develop pugilism in a quick manner, but in reality you only develop skill through long hours of dedicated practice, research, and study. Effective technique comes from effective training...Kata was the ancient way of to transmit the knowledge of the ancient warriors to future generations, they were not meant to be easily understood, as to give the inner secrets of jutsu to anyone, but only to those with the correct mindset and will to learn and develop the knowledge with the right purpose. So when you look at people downtalking kata, just remember you need to train harder, and try to understand and preserve the knowledge, because the folks who avoid it, talk down about it simply dont understand it, and are thus being weeded out of the access to the ancients knowledge, just as planned ;-)
On a closing note, look at the words Gongfu, a common term for CMA's, it actually means "skill developed through time and effort" ;-) Interesting, yes?
--josh

 

[Em MacIntosh]

Kata is good for the mind, but without bunkai, you're left with your own imagination as to what to do. I feel that bunkai adds more of a self-defense aspect to the kata, however, I feel that the attacker would not use oi-zuki, mae geri or san-ren zuki. More likely to be deceptive or overpowering like a fake or a tackle. I'd like to see more realistic bunkai. I think it would add to the self defense aspect. In order for kata to be effective you gotta have proper frame of mind, kime and sanchin. I can see how many people just won't have it (practice kata). They are also good at defending themselves. What works for one might not work for another. I, for one, love kata.

 

[MMAfighter]

i don't have anything against kata...but i find it useless when it comes to training for self defense and whatnot....i mean if you wanna do it for forms and stuff, go right ahead , nothing wrong with that...but if your goal is to compete in a full contact sport or self defense, then what you need to do is more pad/bagwork and sparring and less forms and kata....i mean it sure is good for working your technique, but worthless if you wanna be ready to defend yourself fomr some punk who's gonna come swinging at you...I don't mind kata...but it really depends what your goal is..