Grappling in Karate article

SorGan · 20-07-2006 11:33AM

Mola.mola wrote:

Never say MMA guys can be conditioned for fights they can no longer make decisions on the fly - It makes JK very angry.

( imagines jk at home, steam whistling out of his ears, trying to choke out the computer)

weemate · 20-07-2006 11:53AM

kenpo_dave wrote:

Although drilling technique is very important, its not enough. You must put those techniques into sparring to be able to use them properly when the time comes.

OSU,

Dave.

obviously you need to spar the techniques in a real environment or the movements will not become natural nor will you find what works and what doesnt.Lets face facts,regardless of anyones main reason for starting in martial arts,be it for fitness,self defence or whatever we still would like to think that if we where attacked the stuff we learn at the gym will be of some use however minimal.Now would you like in such an event,hopefully it will never happen but if you were attacked,that you wouldnt need to have to take the time to think about what you needed to do and that your natural instincts and movements would be enough to help you out and that the strikes etc that you were taught were in fact now a natural movement and instinct?

john kavanagh · 20-07-2006 11:59AM

dont take it so seriously 'weemate'

Millionaire · 20-07-2006 12:14PM

john kavanagh wrote:

i think its lines like these

"In a competition match the strategy may well be: A, Take the fight to the floor. B, Keep the fight on the floor. C, Weaken and tire the opponent. D, Get the opponent to submit using the techniques allowed in the rules."

it implies an MMA athlete is such an idiot that he would not be able to change the strategy to 'quick finish standing' - he'll have the proven delivery systems and functional training methods behind him to make that happen.

.

Common guys, the writer did not say that for a sec.

I think yis are reading into it a bit too much?

FiannaGym.com · 20-07-2006 12:18PM

MMA homework:

Print off picture/photofit of baddie (fun tip: why not draw your own!)
Stick to wall in office
Throw 20 "eyepokes" at this target

You now have trained eye pokes as much as most Karate guys, good luck in the big bad world.

Peace

weemate · 20-07-2006 12:20PM

john kavanagh wrote:

dont take it so seriously 'weemate'

it's this fookin heat!!!!!
I cant take no more of it :eek:

Roper · 20-07-2006 12:30PM

People are ignoring Funk Dancing as a form of self defence, as per Moe Sislak from the Simpsons. Don't know if it has eye gouges in it though...

"Now say someones dissing your fly girl...."

john kavanagh · 20-07-2006 12:32PM

Millionaire wrote:

Common guys, the writer did not say that for a sec.

I think yis are reading into it a bit too much?

but why bother writing what the strategy may be?? why not write out Silva's strategy (or any of the many other striker orientated MMA guys)

A. punch him in the head lots B. grab and knee his face C. when he falls stamp on head

and rave about how great a strategy this is for SD? obviously because he stills has the WRONG idea that MMA = grappling, get the fight to the ground as quick as possible and lay there while friends jump on your head?

also what is the difference between a 'brutual street armlock' as opposed to a sport armlock anybody??

i love the fact he mentions UFC too! LOL at the idea of ANY fighter in the UFC not having enough stand-up to deal with the average drunk punk in a bar (where most senseless violence occurs).

kenpo_dave · 20-07-2006 12:34PM

FiannaGym.com wrote:

MMA homework:
Print off picture/photofit of baddie (fun tip: why not draw your own!)

Stick to wall in office

Throw 20 "eyepokes" at this target

You now have trained eye pokes as much as most Karate guys, good luck in the big bad world.

Peace

LOL

john kavanagh · 20-07-2006 12:42PM

sorry damo just seeing your reply now. my review never made it in the final edit but it basically said what i'm saying here.

Damo W wrote:

'Kata teaches you nothing that you should not already have learned'

'It is a memonic tool'

not sure what that means but i think if you have a partner and want to improve performance in grappling then grapple - simple really. if you're looking for solo training to improve performance in grappling/fighting then lift, run etc.

Damo W wrote:

and by all means its part of the trad. and if you follow the trad. then it should be preserved.

agreed!:)

Millionaire · 20-07-2006 12:51PM

I like Baz Rutten strategy for the street...

"kick him in the groin that will do the trick"!

http://www.realfighting.com/0102/basrutint.htm

who cares what people write or think about what you train or do.

Whats important is that you train hard, and you know yourself you got your bases well covered, in a calm and confident way. Thats what matters!

just a bit of trivia , found this on the same site as Baz inteview. I trained with this dude, actuall both of them...
http://www.realfighting.com/0102/yigal.htm

john kavanagh · 20-07-2006 01:20PM

Millionaire wrote:

who cares what people write or think about what you train or do.

lol although thats true if someone came on here saying they thought you were a lunatic or slightly unbalanced because you talk to punch bags you may care enough to reply;)

Millionaire · 20-07-2006 01:46PM

I never ever claimed to be a pillar of sanity!!! LOL!! life would just be too boring!!!

Anyway punch bags are great to talk to, they don't contradict what you say! ; -)

Right, got to get back to work! I am going to explore way up North Thailand and cross Lao for the weekend... should be interesting!

MartinC2006 · 21-07-2006 09:59AM

Just FYI guys,

I sent the thread to Iain via is website and he replied with.

"Hi Martin,

Thanks for letting me know about the discussion – seems like a good one! I think
yourself and others have communicated what I meant by that paragraph – I
couldn’t say it better myself!

The point, as you and others have pointed out, is that the strategy that may be
used very effectively in one scenario, may not be the strategy you’d want to use
in another scenario. So how you’d approach “a ground fight” would depend upon
where that ground fight was taking place. I think all the people involved in the
discussion agree with me on that - regardless of what style you are: you'd fight
differently in the street than you might on the mat.

My comment, as has been pointed out, is certainly not a slight on MMA - anyone
who knows me knows I’m a big fan MMA. I can see how it could be taken that way
though if people read just that one paragraph and take it out of context.
Nothing wrong with that though as it makes for exciting discussions

.
Thanks for the message and all your support – I really appreciate it.

All the best,

Iain"

Martin.

ShaneT · 21-07-2006 11:41AM

Damo W wrote:

'Kata teaches you nothing that you should not already have learned... ...It is a memonic tool'

Kata is the first (isolation of techniques, without partner or resistence) stage of what is intended to be a progression into full resistence and total non-compliant combat with a partner. There are many stages in between a la "aliveness".

Unforunately, over the years, people became a little obsessed with the whole kata deal and failed to notice that it was step ONE of the process. Step two being the "Bunkai" (application) promoted by Iain A. with multiple progressive steps thereafter leading to non-compliant practise (equally promoted by Iain A.).

Where a sufficient stage of ability has been reached in Kata to move on (progress), one should move on. Where a partner is not available, kata can be used as a tool to "tidy up poor technique without resistance". Additionally, it can be used as a tool to keep the techniques clean and ensures the body has the movement necessary to allow instant access to any known technique when under duress.

However, it's tool - not an art.

Learning Kata and only kata would be like shrimping and bridging all day alone and believing that makes us a grappler.

However, dismissing kata would be like rolling regularly and solely under pressure, with poor or zero techinique, bypassing the isolation (early learning) phase and never returning to it in situations where "this armbar just doesn't seem to work for me". Usually, the armbar is just being incorrectly applied.

Naturally, in such a situation, one would return to total compliance, figure out where the error in technique is coming from, subsequently returning to an appropriate level of non-compliance.

Kata is the "striking" form of such progression and allows us to return to the FUNDAMENTALS of a technique when it's just not working in a fight.

Sadly, 90% of people that practise kata just haven't figured this out yet... ....and likely never will.

john kavanagh · 21-07-2006 12:00PM

ShaneT wrote:

Kata is the "striking" form of such progression and allows us to return to the FUNDAMENTALS of a technique when it's just not working in a fight.

why don't boxers use kata? i would imagine millions and millions of dollars are spent on research into better coaching methods for this sport which still probably generates more money than all other combat sports together. i'm guessing any training method which would give them significant gains in performance would be used.

would a better progression not be drills on the focus pads with coach to improve technique then limited sparring with progressive resistance (jab only etc) then moving onto free sparring.

if i was on my own, personally i think time is better spent on attribute development (lifting, running etc) but if i did want to work on technique then i'd slowly shadow box in front of mirror to check form - making sure it didnt become a 'dead pattern', good shadow boxing should be random.

ShaneT · 21-07-2006 01:39PM

john kavanagh wrote:

why don't boxers use kata?

They do. It's called shadow boxing. Dead kata is dead pattern. Good kata is shadow boxing and "alive". Good shadow boxing is not random. It would typically involve the use of combinations. The combinations themselves however, may be strung together randomly.

Tim_Murphy · 21-07-2006 01:45PM

Good kata is shadow boxing and "alive".

can't see how this can be true.
As John said, good shadow boxing is random, katas on the other hand have fixed movements, in a set order.

When shadow boxing one should be doing the techniques as they want to in the ring, in kata one generally does abstract versions of techniques (i.e. a traditional punch in a long stance)

kata and shadow boxing are two completely different things.

ShaneT · 21-07-2006 01:47PM

Tim_Murphy wrote:

can't see how this can be true.
As John said, good shadow boxing is random, katas on the other hand have fixed movements, in a set order.

When shadow boxing one should be doing the techniques as they want to in the ring, in kata one generally does abstract versions of techniques (i.e. a traditional punch in a long stance)

All things in context Tim. I mentioned a progression and a "use at the appropriate time for the appropriate reasons". And Kata being "step 1". Shadow boxing is hardly step 1. However, falling back to basics to get technique right is the way to go in grappling and striking.

Incidentally, I haven't done a kata in about 14 months... :-)

Tim_Murphy · 21-07-2006 01:54PM

However, falling back to basics to get technique right is the way to go in grappling and striking.

Indeed it is, but using kata as Step 1 with regards to either is essentially counter-productive. There are much better methods out there.

ShaneT · 21-07-2006 01:56PM

Tim_Murphy wrote:

Indeed it is, but using kata as Step 1 with regards to either is essentially counter-productive. There are much better methods out there.

So, I guess you teach armbars, the correct movement, correct application, correct form with a fully resisting partner and no "dead" moments of learning as Step 1? :rolleyes:

We don't need to agree.

It's simple, those that need to work things through and alone in their own minds to aquire great technique, should use kata and then move on.

Those that don't need it - shouldn't do it.

Tim_Murphy · 21-07-2006 02:16PM

So, I guess you teach armbars, the correct movement, correct application, correct form with a fully resisting partner and no "dead" moments of learning as Step 1?

Step 1 is always practising with no resistance. That's the way I'd coach anyone anyway. But I would never want to make it into a kata or a step sparring.

It's simple, those that need to work things through and alone in their own minds to aquire great technique, should use kata and then move on.

No they shouldn't. They would practise their techniques with a compliant partner, or do shadow boxing.

Damo W · 21-07-2006 02:37PM

ShaneT wrote:

Kata is the first (isolation of techniques, without partner or resistence) stage of what is intended to be a progression into full resistence and total non-compliant combat with a partner. There are many stages in between a la "aliveness".

Unforunately, over the years, people became a little obsessed with the whole kata deal and failed to notice that it was step ONE of the process. Step two being the "Bunkai" (application) promoted by Iain A. with multiple progressive steps thereafter leading to non-compliant practise (equally promoted by Iain A.).

Where a sufficient stage of ability has been reached in Kata to move on (progress), one should move on. Where a partner is not available, kata can be used as a tool to "tidy up poor technique without resistance". Additionally, it can be used as a tool to keep the techniques clean and ensures the body has the movement necessary to allow instant access to any known technique when under duress.

However, it's tool - not an art.

Learning Kata and only kata would be like shrimping and bridging all day alone and believing that makes us a grappler.

However, dismissing kata would be like rolling regularly and solely under pressure, with poor or zero techinique, bypassing the isolation (early learning) phase and never returning to it in situations where "this armbar just doesn't seem to work for me". Usually, the armbar is just being incorrectly applied.

Naturally, in such a situation, one would return to total compliance, figure out where the error in technique is coming from, subsequently returning to an appropriate level of non-compliance.

Kata is the "striking" form of such progression and allows us to return to the FUNDAMENTALS of a technique when it's just not working in a fight.

Sadly, 90% of people that practise kata just haven't figured this out yet... ....and likely never will.

Hi Shane,

Just to let you know I’m a shotokan stylist.

I practice kata, shotokan kata, some goju kata and some sh1to kata (from time to time).

Always we were taught kata first, bunkai and oyo later (if at all), does that seem right to you?

Do you notice that some ‘movements’ are repeated in different kata’s, why do you think that is?

Why do some ‘styles’ have 30 plus kata in syllabus?

I stand by my earlier comments and suggest to you that kata is not the first step but the last, I would agree with the following,

kata, when learned by itself was never meant to impart self-defense instruction, but rather, to culminate the important lessons already learned

Therefore that would make it the final step.

Lets have a look at what kata is, it’s a solo re-enactment, I think all would agree on that, but before it became a solo tool (mnemonic tool) there was a partner.

What did this partner do, recreate an attack and train this together using progressive resistance, depending on skill level etc.

Now take the partner away and put that solo re-enactment together with other solo re-enactments into a geometrical configuration and viola you have kata.

Because there is a limit to how many things you can do with the human body (many variations though) you will see the same movements in different kata.

In fact different styles sometimes look similar due to the above but have been stylised because of the following factors…

individual preferences, personal understanding, varying interpretations and political power struggles.

Supplementary training (hojo undo) has always been encouraged; stone weights, makiwara, now; weights, bag work etc.

If kata provided for this then hojo undo would not exist.

So why does kata exist, some of the reasons might be...

1 Mnemonic Tool
2 To allow early pioneers to assemble their tactical strategies
3 To display an individual interpretation
4 To solidify a syllabus
5 And possibly to improve physical, mental, and holistic conditioning

There may be other but it was never intended to impart instruction!

Cheers

Damien

john kavanagh · 21-07-2006 05:05PM

ShaneT wrote:

So, I guess you teach armbars, the correct movement, correct application, correct form with a fully resisting partner and no "dead" moments of learning as Step 1? :rolleyes:

Tim's pretty much covered my replies but just to reiterate OBVIOUSLY there is an introduction stage where you go back and forward with zero resistance then you move onto isolation stage where you work that specific technique against progressive resistance. finally the isolation stage where you put that back into the 'whole'
besides ive never seen a kata where anything resembling an arm bar from the guard (of any ground technique for that matter) was displayed??

ShaneT wrote:

They do. It's called shadow boxing....Good shadow boxing is not random.

negative. good shadow boxing is random, ask any good boxing coach and they'll tell you that you should be mixing up the combinations. also the hand positioning (hands up, chin down), head movement, foot work etc all DIRECTLY translate to fighting compared with the unrealistic movement in kate (zero head movement, hand-on-the-hip, poor footwork etc).

PS we should try and keep sarcastic rolling of the eyes :rolleyes: off this thread - it'd be nice to have just one conversation on a topic like this without it getting emotional, we are just discussing a training method afterall:)

edited to add this

i would consider this a form of BJJ 'shadow boxing' shadow rolling

obviously Jacare is giving absolute minimum resistance but he's helping the kid run through his repetoire of techniques - beautiful way to warm up if both players have their egos in check!

Tim_Murphy · 21-07-2006 06:12PM

PS we should try and keep sarcastic rolling of the eyes off this thread - it'd be nice to have just one conversation on a topic like this without it getting emotional,

:rolleyes: ya like that's going to happen.

besides ive never seen a kata where anything resembling an arm bar from the guard

That's because the LUMA ground fighting Kata DVD is still in the post-production stage :cool:

i would consider this a form of BJJ 'shadow boxing' shadow rolling

cool

Cake Fiend · 21-07-2006 07:04PM

john kavanagh wrote:

compared with the unrealistic movement in kate (zero head movement, hand-on-the-hip, poor footwork etc)

Where does it say that kata has to be like this?

Nobody ever told me i wasn't allowed move my head during a kata, I must have been out sick for that class.

I'm fairly certain it's not against the law to dodge and feint during a kata if you like, or to incorporate some nifty footwork. Hell, you could even make up your own kata on the spot from bits of other kata (if you dared!!!!).

Noone has ever shot me in the head for taking my hand off my hip when I did some kata in my living room anyway.

Michael O Leary · 21-07-2006 07:53PM

Roper wrote:

Going to ground in a self defence encounter is SO obviously a bad idea. Nobody disputes that, not even the best BJJ practitioners.

Matt Thornton does!

Regards,

Michael O'Leary
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

john kavanagh · 21-07-2006 09:44PM

Sico wrote:

Where does it say that kata has to be like this?

Nobody ever told me i wasn't allowed move my head during a kata, I must have been out sick for that class.

I'm fairly certain it's not against the law to dodge and feint during a kata if you like, or to incorporate some nifty footwork. Hell, you could even make up your own kata on the spot from bits of other kata (if you dared!!!!).

Noone has ever shot me in the head for taking my hand off my hip when I did some kata in my living room anyway.

so you basically freestyle your own kata...until it becomes similar to shadow boxing. hmmmm, and would you pass your grading or win a comp by completely mixing up the moves and doing your own thing?

john kavanagh · 21-07-2006 09:47PM

Michael O Leary wrote:

Matt Thornton does!

Regards,

Michael O'Leary
www.wingtsun-escrima.ie

yeah and i saw this WT dude beat up an older WT guy and his strategy was to take it to the ground straight away

i guess it depends on the situation....who'd have guessed!!!

MartinC2006 · 22-07-2006 12:09AM

That video is heavily edited.

The 'Old' guy got a few knees landed in the clinch before Boztepe took him down :P Didn't see to much fence or WT there tbh. Saying that with the advent of mma etc Embas version of WT has incorporated some very basic ground work although I think he claims it was there all the time

By the way your opinion on kata is way out, its allot more than you actually give it credit for. You need to understand someone displaying a Kata in a sporting enviroment, as aposed someone breaking down the kata into real life drills and techniques.

Martin.

Grappling in Karate article

Comments