Is the correct use of Shotokan Karate Kata as a demonstration technique, for simple show? Or is it an aerobic exercise, a little like windsprints? Or is the Shotokan Kata Syllabus a complete library of multiple systems of self defense techniques, kept intact as an encoded memory device to help keep multiple generations of karate teachers aware of the techniques that formed the core of their system? Is it's proper use similar to shadowboxing in boxing? Or is the kata most properly used as a series of health exercises, a little like Tai Chi, but friskier? Or are the kata spiritual exercises that can be performed to change your internal state, like a cross between Tai Chi and seated meditation?
Well, yes.
This is Monsoon Season in Phoenix, and if your gi doesn't wick, that's a bad thing.
On the other hand, just down the street at 20th Street and Camelback Road, there's a place that teaches "Hot Yoga"; there, you play extra for the heat, you know?
Enjoy yourselves; it'll be fun!
31st Annual Summer Camp 2010
2010 Western Region Summer Camp Payson, AZ
Friday, July 16, 2010 Please download -- > 31ST ANNUAL WESTERN REGION SUMMER CAMP.pdf
We are holding our Annual Summer Camp again this year in Payson from July 16-18. As you know, Payson’s beautiful scenery has much to offer, especially the breathtaking views from its Mogollon Rim. Our training this year will take place at the Tonto Recreational Center near the Casino on the Indian reservation, the same as last year.
What is the difference between regular training and Summer Camp? In the Dojo, standard classes are one hour per class. Training at Summer Camp is normally two hours each class, morning and afternoon.
We begin each day by meeting at 4:30 a.m. for a session of meditation at a random beautiful location just outside of Payson. This activity, although not mandatory, is well-worth your participation, as it teaches mental and physical self-control in addition to time management. It helps you find that peaceful place inside you. There are so many personal benefits; you must experience at least once to know what you may be missing.
After a day’s exercise, students can drive back to their accommodations on a road that can be rather tricky to navigate. Therefore, after each session of training you will need to recover your strength. Rebounding from fatigue is an important subject of the camp; I will teach you how to rebuild your strength as well as how to breathe with a technique of Chinese origin called Kiko.
As in our Winter and Spring camps, some students from Mexico want to join us, and are returning for Summer Camp because they are interested in its program. Our itinerary includes both a Kyu and a Dan Exam. So by all means, please attend and enjoy this training.
I will see you there.
Shojiro Koyama
SPONSORED BY:
SENSEI SHOJIRO KOYAMA &
THE ARIZONA KARATE ASSOC.
JULY 16 - 18, 2010
TONTO APACHE RECREATION
CENTER
PAYSON, ARIZONA
2010 SUMMER CAMP SCHEDULE.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people know more than you do. Listen to them.
So says the "Most Interesting Man in the World" beer commercial, which make me laugh uncontrollably; in fact, the Most Interesting Man in the World also has a comment about appropriate techniques for use in self-defense.
Well, if anybody knew a lot about fighting, and sorted through techniques that worked and didn't work, that would have been Captain W.E. Fairbairn, who assembled the techniques and the syllabus sometimes referred to as the system of "World War II Combatives".
As an aside, the Germans pooped in their pants when they became aware that the good guys were training in the Fairbairn combatives techniques, and they gave Fairbairn the supreme compliment of publishing a book of counters to the Fairbairn syllabus.
Captain Fairbairn was given a task that was simple. But not easy. His job, if he agreed to accept it, was to turn everyone in Great Britain, starting with the Commandos, and then the various armed forces, and then the civilian population, into trained and brutally effective hand-to-hand combatants.
In about an hour. Maybe a week or two, if it was the commandos.
Now, that's not a project that would be given to just anybody. And Captain Fairbairn wasn't just anybody.
His flyleaf biography points out that he was the first foreigner (their word, not mine) to be awarded the "Black Belt Degree" from the Kodokan. And was then awarded Second Dan.
You think that took moxie in 1931?
Uh, yeah.
He also studied Chinese Boxing. And everything else.
He also assembled and trained and managed the first Swat Teams, called "Riot Squads", in Shanghai, where he had been beaten and left for dead by a gang of Triads; I think that was a motivating factor for him in studying various forms of unarmed and armed offense and defense.
Still, even if you know every variety of attack and defense (and there's nothing new under the sun, kiddies), the real challenge is how to decide what to teach troops going into harm's way in World War II.
And the decision making project is a huge one, primarily because they needed to be very effective at killing their opponents during World War II because, well, it was war, not cricket!
Apparently it was somewhat difficult to get the British past the whole "fair fight" kind of mentality, and into the "killing by attacking the attacker" point of view.
Recap: Captain William Fairbairn, after thirty years service with the Riot Squads of the Shanghai Municipal Police, which he trained and organized, was tasked with turning farmboys into professional killers, with their hands, knives, sticks and firearms.
And then with turning the postman back home into a professional killer; and the milkman, and the waitress.
World War II was special; read about it sometime.
So the obvious difference between Shotokan Karate and Defendu, the Fairbairn system, was the syllabus, which in the case of Shotokan Karate is gigantic, and in the case of Defendu in its most refined form a maximum of thirty-one unarmed techniques, and in all about forty-five techniques, because unlike modern Shotokan Karate, it did teach the use of weapons (including the Smatchet and the F-S Fighting Knife, which was really more of a killing knife than a fighting knife), and the use of sticks or even umbrellas as weapons.
But Fairbairn went further, and suggested that instead of learning the thirty or so unarmed techniques adequately, the combatant learn about ten very, very well.
He did not teach breakfalls or groundfighting to troops going to war, for reasons that seem well thought-out to me. He understood breakfalls and groundfighting very well, thank you, because he was a second-dan Judoka, of course.
But here's the primary difference between the Fairbairn Syllabus and fighting system, and the Shotokan Syllabus: the philosophy and purpose of the discipline.
In Japanese terms, Fairbairn taught a Jutsu, and Shotokan teaches a Do.
And Shotokan has developed as a martial art with a defensive philosophy over the years, based partly on the translation of the one of the maxims known as "The Dojo Kun", which includes "Refrain From Violent Behavior".
And Defendu is certainly violent behavior, which advocates pre-emptive attacks upon an opponent when you believe yourself in danger. The Fairbairn fighting system is almost the definition of violent behavior!
And that, as you certainly noticed, is the other massive philosophical difference between "There is no first strike in karate" Shotokan, and "do unto others first and fast and worst, then get out" philosophy of Defendu.
As an aside, note that Fairbairn wrote several books. They included a book of self defense for women, a book about self defense in wartime, a book primarily aimed at policemen and civilians in moderately safe environments (that book includes more defensive and restraining techniques, which Fairbairn thought had less place in wartime).
Fairbairn points out, as to restraining techniques, that if you try to take an enemy combatant captive, he will resist to the fullest of his ability, and that you will first need to soften him up with blows to make him decide that capture beats the alternatives (in the same way that getting older beats the alternatives).
So there you have two bodies of fighting technique that are close to endpoints on a line.
Shotokan takes a very long time to achieve competent performance of the syllabus, and there are a lot of exams along the way to test proficiency, with judges. Defendu takes very little time to become proficient, and the only test of your performance is whether you come back home with your shield or on it.
Shotokan, as a traditional style of karate, teaches kata as a part of its syllabus, and a lot of kata at that. The Fairbairn fighting system and syllabus teaches exactly zero kata, and instead teaches only the handful of offensive techniques chosen by Fairbairn (note that his choice of most favorite techniques changed over time, because he had the luxury over 30 years with his Riot Squads to teach and find out what worked well and what didn't work. The "Rock Crusher" Technique, for instance, didn't make the cut in his more mature work).
Note, again, that I said "offensive techniques" when I addressed the Fairbairn fighting system; there are no defensive techniques to speak of, because the entire orientation of the system is to attack the attacker.
Shotokan is a Do, and wants to make you a better person in some ways, although Rob Redmond contests that assertion, and Rob Redmond is very smart; Defendu, as a Jutsu, wants to make you a more effective offensive fighter during war, and to do so as quickly as possible.
Shotokan has warm-ups, strength exercises, and techniques for self-defense. Defendu has techniques that you are instructed to use without warning when you are being questioned by Germans and need to escape, and no warm-ups, strength exercises, or stretching exercises.
Shotokan is primarily designed as a discipline for a settled, well-lit, controlled environment with referees and rules and uniforms. Defendu is designed for chaotic, unpredictable environments and broken ground, not polished dojo floors and bare feet.
And Shotokan gave up the practice of weapons (wisely) when it became clear that General MacArthur thought that subject populations like the Japanese shouldn't practice with weapons on his watch. Defendu takes the overall position that if you are empty-handed and unarmed during a violent confrontation, something has gone very, very wrong indeed.
The path of Shotokan Karate, which has give rise to many competing systems, all of which are quite similar to it, and Defendu, which has given rise to competing systems and complementary systems, are parallel paths that do not converge.
Both have similar and sometimes identical techniques, and both involve physical conflict.
But one is for practice in civilian life, and is designed to make you healthy, strong and flexible, with good wind, based on practice over your lifetime, and generally to teach participants to avoid actual fights.
The other, Defendu, is designed to permit you to survive behind enemy lines, and if you happen to kill an enemy combatant in the process, good on you!
And the syllabus of Shotokan Karate includes many of the techniques of Defendu, which makes sense.
But Shotokan doesn't use most of them in free-sparring exercises, for a simple reason: somebody would get seriously dead if those techniques were used in Shotokan sporting contests, which is why they are not.
There is an interesting variation in the uses of the Shuto (knife hand) in Defendu; Fairbairn advocates that it be used in a downward stroke, and an outward stroke, but never to strike with the palm-up edge-of-hand.
I don't know why he advocates as he does, but I'll try to find out when I get a Round Tuit, and I'll get back to you on that.
I have embedded a few videos of Defendu being taught both by modern instructors and also in ancient military training films. The ancient military classes on film will look funny to you, I suspect, and they look a little funny to me, as well.
But that doesn't mean I'd want to get in a fight with the guys in the funny looking black and white videos below, back when they were saving the world for real, as opposed to talking about saving the world, which some people apparently like to do.
And, seriously, while one of the videos involves guys in fatigues wearing masks, understand that espionage was one of the weapons of war during the Big One. And since they were training guys for behind the lines work, they didn't want to advertise who they were training.
And here's a U.S. Training Film showing similar approaches to hand-to-hand combatives:
The "Chin Jab", favored by Fairbairn, is taught by modern combatives instructors who know their stuff. Here's Kelly McCann, who discusses Fairbairn's version of the technique:
Here's the late, great Carl Cestari, who knew more about World War II Combatives than anyone else after Applegate passed; sadly, he's teaching now in a dojo in the sky. If you can get all of the old Carl Cestari dvds, you really, really want to do that; while the production values of the old school Carl Cestari DVDs is lousey, the information is incomparable. His later seminars on DVD are also very useful:
And here you see Carl Cestari, again, teaching a variation of the chin jab:
And here's Carl Cestari teaching the "Tigerclaw" technique, also a Fairbairn favorite:
Here's a pretty decent example: there are people who clearly know better, who criticize the stances of traditional Shotokan karate, suggesting that people can't fight or spar well from such low stances.
Now, that's just a silly argument, although it's a true statement of fact.
Because when you look at videos of Shotokan Karate Tournaments, you'll see that nobody is using one of those very low stances, because they're not fighting stances!
They are stances for training, not fighting!
Remember, Shotokan Karate is a carefully graduated sequence of exercises that produces a predictable result, which is a martial artist who is flexible enough, and strong enough, and can move freely enough, to execute techniques in the syllabus of Shotokan (which includes just about everything!) easily and without, you know, falling down!
So now you know what a straw man argument is, and you know that it's being used whenever somebody (who usually knows better) suggests that Shotokan stances are too low for sparring and fighting.
Because that's not what they're for!
And, yes, every now and then somebody makes that argument, and even causes it to show up in print. On the internet.
Oh, well. People do what they do for the reasons they do 'em, and they keep doing 'em, and no amount of fact can dissuade somebody who wants to believe that his style is the only true way!
Myself, I kinda like Shotokan Karate because it's easy to see (from the other students in class) about what I'll be able to do in another ten years or so, and that works for me!
Now, if you want to watch a Shotokan stylist discussing stances for purposes of fighting or sparring, here is Lyoto Machida doing exactly that!
I finally figured out how to plug in videos, and there is a wealth of video material about karate and martial arts, so I get to have guest instructors like Sensei Nakayama appear at this virtual dojo, and Sensei Nakayama is available to teach 24/7/365, which is very good indeed.
I also have a platform for my opinions about traditional karate, Shotokan karate, supplemental training exercises, and my opinions about the efficacy of Shotokan karate, Tai Chi and Aikido and boxing and MMA and wrestling and the Fairbairn techniques as self-defense.
And that's fun, particularly when I remember the mere five books (six, if you count the two-volume set twice) that were available to me when I started my martial arts travels after a rough year in 5th Grade at Emerson Grade School in Phoenix, AZ.
But don't think that mere knowledge can help you in a situation requiring self-defense skills; you are going to need practice of some kind, and the more the better, because your mind may remember pictures you see on the internet, but your body remembers what it has practiced.
One of my next projects is to contrast short learning-curve technique sets with Shotokan, which has a technique-rich syllabus, and a very long learning curve.
Critics of Shotokan karate suggest that it takes too long to learn the syllabus.
I agree that it takes a long time to learn the syllabus in Shotokan; I'm still working on it, and I will be for the next twenty years or so.
Since I enjoy the training, the extended and extensive syllabus is a feature to me, not a flaw.
But for no other reason than fun, I plan to discuss some short-learning curve technique sets, including the Fairbairn Syllabus, and a version of Prison Fighting Techniques on DVD that impressed me (actually, about half of the techniques impressed me), and the LINE System used for a while by U.S. Marines, the combatives systems (similar to Fairbairn's) taught by the great, late Carl Cestari and five or six other shorter-learning-curve self-defense systems, and contrast them with Shotokan.
And I'm interested in the current version of Krav Maga being taught in Israel, so I'll take a look at what's out there, because it gets field tested on a daily basis in a way similar to, but far more extreme than, mixed martial arts.
So there's more to come, and we haven't scratched the surface of Shotokan, at that!
Once I get my dvds, I will screen them, and I will tell you how well I liked them in this very karate blog.
This much, however, is clear.
Not everyone who studies Shotokan Karate is going to be a world-class competitor and tough guy, anymore than a young lady who takes a year of ballet will be a ballerina starring in Swan Lake in a professional ballet company.
Not everyone who studies Shotokan Karate will have the abilities of Sensei Nakayama or Sensei Funakoshi or or Sensei Tanaka or Sensei Koyama (I got to watch Tanaka demonstrate when Sensei Nakayama brought him to our class with Sensei Koyama at Arizona State University; Tanaka's a pretty serious guy. And that was a more interesting class than the usual class. Kinda like a visit from the Pope, if you're Catholic).
And that's just common sense.
If you are a serious practitioner of any martial art, you spend a huge amount of time in training, conditioning and practice; waaaaaaaaaaay more than a recreational practitioner.
One reason boxers are such effective fighters, in general, is that they are filtered at the both the front end and the tail end; those who are not tough enough to endure the training because they have glass jaws and low pain tolerances are shaken out. At the other end, those who want to have what we generally refer to as normal lives, with a predictable paycheck, drop out.
That leave very highly motivated guys with high pain tolerances and cast-iron jaws and guts who run five miles a day and lift weights and do a million sit ups and hit themselves in the face, and you can teach techniques to guys like that, or not, and they'll still be very tough guys.
But if you take a wimpy little guy who weighs 135 soaking wet, and he trains twice a week in any traditional martial art whatsoever for a period of twenty years, and you toss him in a ring with Mike Tyson or Mourad Oumakhanov, he will become a floor ornament very quickly.
Big, tough guys tend to beat little fragile guys, all other things being equal.
Martial arts in any context are about trying to make things more equal than physics and biology would otherwise dictate.
And you get out of a martial art what you put into it.
So if you practice an esthetically pleasing martial art (Tai Chi as taught most places in the United States) from a non-combative oriented instructor in a Parks and Recreations Class, and you take one class per week for five years, and you become pretty good at the long set, you probably ought not expect to be able to hold your own against a Golden Gloves boxer, who has bled and sweated and suffered several hours a day over a decade for his art.
Getting used to having somebody trying to knock your head off is probably pretty good preparation for a situation where somebody is trying to knock your head off, you know?
In that context, it's also good to recall that in the good old days, formerly known as "these trying times", kumite in Shotokan Karate was essentially without rules-that is, one guy said "hajime", two guys fought like crazy, then everybody went to the hospital. Ditto with matches between Universities in Japan. Made the Japanese hospitals very busy after University Clubs had their gentlemanly matches.
In any case, Lyoto Machida has studied Shotokan Karate for almost the entirety of his life, and he indicates that he worked hard at that, as well as his grappling study. I'll be interested in what he has to say about karate as an effective martial art.
Because in his hands, it clearly is an effective martial art, you know? And he says that's because of his discipline. I tend to believe him:
He doesn't think a lot of it, but he's very smart, and he's very experienced, and he writes very well; and therefore his thoughts deserve attention.
One of the dozen or so criticisms of karate he argues is that practicing traditional karate can make you stiff and rigid.
I certainly agree that it can.
Huh?
Well, I've already written about the thing that all martial practices have in common, that being trying to teach the correct balance between tension and relaxation.
So one traditional style of karate, Goju-ryu, is famous for working to make you so stiff and hard that you can barely move, in the practice of the first Goju-ryu kata, Sanchin.
But ultimately, if you persevere in your study of Goju-ryu, you turn into Morio Higaonna, and you hit like a cannon and move smoothly and with relaxation when you are no longer young.
The reason I use Goju-ryu as an example of traditional karate and stiffness is the syllabus of Goju-ryu tries to make you stiff in the beginning, and then builds the correct balance from there; and in exactly the same way, Tai-chi Chuan builds excessive relaxation in the beginning, and then puts some starch in the techniques when you become a little more advanced.
And how about my instructor in traditional Shotokan Karate, JKA 8th Dan Shojiro Koyama?
Well, now we're moving in an area where I have both knowledge of facts, and preconceived ideas and prejudices, and they work like this: Sensei Shojiro Koyama is a very smart guy. He realized early in his practice that he wanted to be a little faster than most folks, so he's always emphasized speed and "whipping" movements in his practice and his teaching. That is, relaxation in technique is a special interest in his dojo.
The good news here is that my opinion isn't evidence, but the magic of motion pictures means that I don't need to be a good witness!
So please take a look at Sensei Koyama, and you can judge for yourself whether karate makes you flexible, strong, coordinated and healthy. At 73 or so, when this film was made:
There are differences between karate styles, but karate is a graduated series of exercises that are designed to produce students who can defend themselves, using either techniques associated with sparring (if the attack is at distance) or techniques embedded in the kata (if the attack is up-close and personal, or if it involves weapons).
Does karate contain the most effective series of graduated exercises for unarmed self-defense?
On that issue, opinions differ.
As a matter of fact, on that issue, tempers flare!
Now, I know some guys who could use karate techniques to defend themselves against Sherman Tanks.
But some folks believe that only mixed martial artists, or boxers, or wrestlers, or Gracie guys can fight, and that karate guys can't.
Now, I know that some karate guys can fight, and they fight well. Both at distance, and up close and personal.
But I ran into some well-written articles that takes the position, roughly speaking, that the study of karate is a waste of time.
For now, here are the articles: and remember, I disagree with them!
And remember, the core of the argument that's being made below is the definition of "traditional karate". I'll be talking about the arguments in them one, by one, by one, over the next few weeks.
But the guy writes well, you gotta give him that, even if you disagree with his conclusions!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Traditional Karate Is Not Effective For Self-Defense
By WR Mann
As a preface to this article, let me state that, yes -- anything can work sometimes, but some things work much better, most of the time! This article focuses on traditional (old-style karate), not modern variations that involve extensive cross-training.
The underlining motivation in studying any type of martial activity is to protect ourselves (or others) in a real fighting situation. At first glance karate seems to provide a solution, until you look more closely at its underpinnings; then you realize it's not fully equipped to handle violence in the 21st Century. I often refer to karate (and other traditional Asian martial arts) as the Potemkim Village of the martial arts -- a grand facade offering significantly less in the way of substantive tactics and defensive measures than any of the reality-based defense systems.
The reason I dissuade people from getting into karate (and other traditional martial arts) is because I don't want them misinformed like I was, studying retrograde theories and techniques that no longer have any relevance to the way we live and need to respond to. Let's be honest, all things being equal, some fighting styles are vastly superior to others. I'm not saying karate is completely ineffective. Karate, like many other fighting styles, has the potential of stopping an attacker, however, the degree of efficiency is far less than muaythai, Brazilian jujitsu, boxing, and especially reality-based systems. Using a metaphor, the flintlock is certainly capable of stopping someone, but the M16 has a far greater degree of efficiency. (Again, the exception is when student's of karate update their fighting skills to deal with modern situations in their environment.)
"If you're up against someone who doesn't know how to fight -- yes, old-style karate can work, but if you fight an experienced streetfighter or a trained fighter, no way!" - Jon Bluming
To properly put this question into perspective (why karate is not the most effective form of self-defense system) we must first discuss four topics:
1) Conditions of violence in the world today
2) Constituents of effective self-defense in the 21St-Century?
3) What are people looking for [in their self-defense training]?
4) A differentiation and clarification of fighting categories in 2009
Conditions of violence in the world today
Although terrorism has been around for years, its most dramatic impact was felt on September 11, 2001, after the destruction of the World Trade Center. From this point on, the world realized that there were no safe havens left. For the first time in history, Americans were scrambling for gas masks, anthrax remedies, survival and first-aid kits. Suddenly, self-defense was no longer only someone trying to rob or punch you, it now extended to potentially surviving large-scale violence, such as nuclear attacks, bombings, poison gas and snipers. Levels of common violence have also grown and laws against defending yourself have been initiated by several governments in the past few years.
Constituents of effective self-defense in the 21St-Century?
Nowadays, physical violence can happen to anyone, anytime, anywhere and under any conditions. Therefore it's paramount that modern self-defense must encompass the whole range of possible situational and environmental scenarios. That includes surviving a bomb attack, gas and chemical attacks, a mob, snipers, muggings, and more. In general, no fighting style will totally prepare us for these scenarios; some reality-based schools at least provide some awareness, avoidance and escape options.
Karate (as well as other traditional styles) have been slow to add realistic elements to their training. They just go on about their business, ignoring the way today's criminals conduct themselves, or if they have, they are stuck in a time warp, as if they've never heard of home invasions, car jackings, firearms attacks and terrorists.
Not only is it necessary to practice under a wide variety of conditions and circumstances but you need to be intimately familiar with all three phases of the attack cycle (pre-conflict, the conflict, and post conflict), adrenaline-dump, the use-of-force, self-triage and more. Unless this holistic approach is practiced in simulated environments, expect you or your loved ones to become potential victims.
What are people looking for [in their self-defense training]?
With the exception of individuals interested in spiritual martial endeavors, most people are busy with full time careers, school, family or other interests. They are disinclined to spend many years studying martial arts; the only time they seek out a protective-measures course is when something happens close to home.
I can tell you for a fact, most busy people nowadays are not looking for "a way of life," a new religion, or grueling years of pushups and sit-ups interspersed with kata (a pattern of techniques). They "are" however looking for a set of effective and efficient techniques and tactics they can employ to escape a violent attack -- now! (not years from now).
Not only do you need to train in the conflict stage of an attack but you need to add pre-and post-conflict training as well. Karate (as well as most traditional martial arts) ignores the pre and post conflict stages, and their methodology of teaching is of the "spoon-fed" variety. They don't for the most part attempt to approach defensive tactics against firearms, hostage taking, store/bank robberies and multiple armed opponents; but these are very real potential situations today.
A clarification and differentiation of fighting categories
When you mention the term "martial arts," today, everyone immediately knows what you mean. The term has become the generic moniker for all fighting styles. What most people don't realize is there are three distinct categories. 1) Traditional-based, 2) Sports-based, and 3) Reality-based defense.
Traditional-Based
Traditional "arts" are historical styles originating in Asia. They include karate, jujitsu, aikido, taekwondo, numerous schools of kung fu, and much more. These styles are what the general public refers to when the term "martial art" is used; this is what we see in the movies. They incorporate the use of traditional-based apparel and employ some form of philosophical or pseudo-religious component. Although many of these systems claim to be a thousand years or older, truth be told, most of them have been around for only a hundred years or so, (with the exception of a few Chinese styles and Okinawan karate, which is about 250 years old). Generally traditional "martial arts" are the least street effective styles in this era and take the longest time to learn. However, I am not saying a highly skilled practitioner is not effective.
Sports-Based
The second group, "sports-based fighting," originate from older styles but have been modified and updated to be effective in the ring and conform strictly to specific rules. They can be adapted for the street (in a weaponless environment). Wrestling and boxing are updated versions of their ancient Greek and Roman counterparts, Brazilian jujitsu is a western version of Japanese jujitsu and muaythai is the modernized style of Thailand's fighting systems from the 14th Century. It takes several years to become proficient in "sports-based fighting." In most cases, practitioners easily prevail over their traditional martial art cousins. This is due to in great part to "live-training."
Reality-Based Defense
Reality-based defense (an offshoot of police and military defensive tactics) are the most street realistic of the three groups, and emphasize simple but effective techniques for both weapons and unarmed attacks. This is also the only group that trains you in all three stages of an attack: the pre-conflict stage (threat assessment, conflict conditioning), the conflict stage (first strike, weapon awareness) and the post-conflict stage (do you run or wait for police, what do you say to the authorities, self medical triage and legal issues).
Much of the reality-based "conflict stage" comes to us from combatives. Combatives originally came to us from 1930's Shanghai, and WWII; British commandos and US Marines developed it over the years to be a simple but effective method of fighting. Reality-based defense concepts such as fighting under stress, situational and environmental awareness and living an avoidance lifestyle, are more recent developments and came about as many individuals realized they couldn't solely depend on traditional arts.
A good reality-defense program today incorporates not only defensive tactics against physical violence by individuals or groups but also incorporates defense for all types of modern attacks from conventional to unconventional weapons conducted in situational scenario form.
Summary
Karate (and similar traditional martial arts) look great in the movies; they take a very long time to learn but don't provide efficient solutions for violent confrontations in the 21st century. They're centered on the conflict phase and ignore (if by fiat) situational and environmental circumstances. Sports-based fighting provides great skills, i.e., development of speed, power, timing etc., however it takes several years to develop these skills; and -- they still may not work in real street circumstances, this is due to their sportive nature. Many of today's reality-based systems train you in situational / environmental conditions and address all three stages of the attack stages (with and without weapons). Most important of all, reality systems provide practitioners with the proper aggressive mind-set. Basic defensive skills can be readily implemented after a short period of training (the same way police officers and combat military personnel are trained).
A Brief look at Karate's Origins and Development
Karate as we know it today originated in Okinawa circa 1750 AD, 141 years after Tokugawa Ieyasu ordered the Shimizu clan to invade and occupy it. Contrary to popular myth, karate had no effect on Japan's invaders -- Okinawa still belongs to Japan after 259 years.
Pre-WWII
Karate was introduced into Japan in the 1920's and has evolved into additional sub-styles. Major contributors to Japanese karate were Gichen Funakoshi (Shotokan), considered to be the father of modern karate, and was the first to systematize karate with the purpose and intent of mass instruction. Gogen Yamaguchi (Goju Ryu) devised modern day free-style sparring in 1936 and recognized a link between ancient Yoga and karate. He was also responsible for the founding the All Japan Karate-do Federation.
Post-WWII
Modern breakthroughs in karate came with Mas Oyama (Kyokushinkai), and Kazuyoshi Ishii (Seidokan). Influenced by observing muaythai, Mas Oyama started incorporating hard contact during sparing sessions. I remember meeting him years ago Japan [as a teen], and he asked me where I was studying, I replied "with Gogen" (Yamaguchi), he laughed and said Goju practitioners were all ballerinas, and invited me to train at his school.
Kazuyoshi Ishii is known as the creator of K-1, it's the extreme style of karate and one of the most popular fighting sports today. The "K" comes from the first letter of the various styles of martial arts that make up K-1. Karate, Kickboxing, kung fu, kakutogi, and Korean styles.
The 12 Immutable Reasons Why Traditional Karate Is Not Effective For Self-Defense
1. The One-Strike Kill
The biggest cliché of karate is the one-strike kill. This of course does not exist, but has fooled so many for years. Shigeru Egami (one of Funakoshi's top students) freely admitted there was no such thing. At one point in his career, Egami admits going into a deep depression after concluding a personal study about which martial style had the most powerful tsuki (punches). He found that karate had the least powerful tsuki, and boxing the strongest. Betting everything on one punch can get you killed.
2. Waiting for The Attack
Karate philosophy states, "wait for the attack." Remember Funakoshi's maxim, "Never attack first?" This is suicidal. In real situations, the first person to strike usually walks away. The untrained public, (influenced by Hollywood) erroneously thinks you have to eat the first punch, but you give up your lawful right to protect yourself by letting someone strike you first. Criminals take advantage of this civilized mindset. If you feel that violence is about to break out, strike first.
3. On Stances
Karate, (along with several hard Chinese styles) employs some of the most ineffective stances in martial arts. Deep, low karate stances make you completely immobile; they plant you in one spot, making quick movements extremely difficult. This is great for working your muscles but not for active conflicts. You may as well hang a sign around your neck saying "strike me at will, I can't move." If you recall early kickboxing, the first thing they got rid of were those static stances.
4. Karate as a Way Of Life
Years ago while in Japan, Gogen (Yamaguchi) once came up to me and asked, "I never see you practice kata, why?" I replied that I thought it was an exercise in futility, having no functional value. He grew upset and chastised me by saying, without kata, we're just animals, like boxers or wrestlers, I replied, "that's OK, I just want the skills." More than anything else, some karate practitioners have a fear about being labeled as "killers." Their reply is always, "I follow the path, karate is a way of life." I guess they feel absolved from their inner conflicts or sociological guilt when they say that, sort of like what confession does for a Catholic. There is nothing wrong with the spiritual side of karate, but you have to understand there's a time to fight and a time to meditate.
5. Spirituality and Meditation
For many Japanese karateka, religion and martial arts are inseparably linked. Japanese spirituality and meditation are not a function of karate; they're emblematic of the culture that developed it. Westerners really buy into this big time. It's actually a direct affront to your personal beliefs. What if a Japanese boxer wanted to train in the U.S. with a Baptist coach, would he have to join the church, sing out loud, clap his hands, dance and get down? Changing your spiritual identity in order to learn self-defense doesn't make sense! Mas Oyama once asked me how much time I meditate per day. I told him -- I don't, I have my own religion; I don't need to replace it with another.
Meditation does not necessarily benefit any martial activity. For example, if you recall, in the 1983 Olympics in Korea, the Koreans had the strongest archery team in the world. They attributed their secret of success to their late night meditation practices in cemeteries. Did it help the men's team win - no, an American walked away with the gold. Did he meditate? No, before each match he was listening to Van Halen!
6. Breaking Objects can Break You!
Karate, more than any other martial art is renowned for its breaking demonstrations; but anyone can break inanimate objects, it's easy and you don't have to study karate to do so. Do breaking boards and bricks translate into fighting ability? Again Egami comments that breaking objects is very different than striking a human body, humans are resilient. He goes farther, saying that even "makiwara" training is harmful to the body, and stopped doing it already in the late '50's. Robert Smith, in his book "Martial Musings" notes that Mas Oyama damaged his hands so much he couldn't even place a blanket on top of them when he went to sleep. Continued breaking over a period of years brings with it such delights as arthritis and other degenerative diseases.
7. The Kata Crutch
A major part of karate practice focuses on kata. I've never understood why so many people defend it so vehemently. There's almost a cult-like obsession about doing it. Perhaps karateka feel it grants them a special kind of spiritual dispensation, allowing them to indulge in the study of fighting. Kata however is nothing more than several techniques strung together; a tool to help beginners understand how techniques flow. For advanced practitioners, it constrains your progress and adds no functional value to your fighting skills. Jon Bluming said it best, something to the effect of, "it takes up time, and the money rolls in."
8. Karate Doesn't Prepare You for the Street
Unlike a sparring match, there are no rules on the street, no time-outs, no referees to separate you; there's no sanctity of life. Street fights don't start at sparring distance; many times they suddenly erupt chest-to-chest, many times from behind without warning. Your attacker won't necessarily stop if you scream in pain. Unlike the smooth floor of the dojo, the street and pavement can be uneven, broken and contain dangerous objects you can fall over.
In all the years I spent in karate, there was never a word about fighting under adrenaline stress conditions, the use-of-force, gross motor skills, and absolutely no legal considerations. Karate is primarily concerned with the attack stage of the encounter; no mention is made about the pre and post-conflict stages. Environmental and situational awareness, preemptive strikes, what to do if you're hurt, do you run away, or make a citizen's arrest - these important elements have not been added to the karate curriculum.
Many karate techniques employ fine motor skills; under stress these are the first skills that abandon you. To work under excited conditions, techniques must be simple and based on gross motor skills. If you've been in fights, you know that after a few seconds of wild striking, many people start grabbing each other and quite often fall to the ground. How is your ground game? Do you know how to fight in a parking lot at midnight, on sand, gravel, on ice on a winter's day? Training barefoot in a dojo doesn't prepare you for any of these scenarios.
9. Karate can make you Stiff and Rigid
For years people have avoided weight training for fear that they would become stiff. If they only knew the truth -- weight training actually makes you flexible and supple; karate can make you stiff! I've spoken at length to many boxing, kali, Brazilian Jujitsu and muaythai instructors and they all agree, karate produces a tenseness and rigidity that seems almost irreversible. I believe it's all those hard air punches and kicks, tense kata and deep immovable stances contributing to this condition. You see this state most pronounced when karate students take up reality-based defense.
10. Karate is Ineffective Against Modern Weapons
The term Empty-Hand says it all; the main focus of karate is on unarmed combat. They do practice traditional weapons however, but what use is sai, tonfa, sickle, and bo practice when you can't carry them. This is unrealistic in 2009, where attacks are mainly carried out with guns, knives and impact weapons. When you typically hear of karateka being hurt in an attack, it usually involves a knife or gun. Whenever we do seminars employing weapons scenarios, it's usually the most advanced karateka that get killed the quickest.
11. Karate Takes Too Long to Learn, and You Still Can't Fight!
In terms of effort spent, to proportion of effectiveness gained, traditional karate is one of the least efficient systems of any fighting style. Too much time is spent on the inanities of rituals and form. Most karate schools spend countless hours on kata or mindless sparring, as if this will prepare students for a real fight, but it doesn't. Free sparring in karate only teaches you to fight other (barefoot) karateka's in a dojo (school) environment. Kata practice is a primitive form of shadow boxing. There usually is no counter-knife, counter-firearms training, if it is taught all, it's usually presented in a rigid step-by-step process, having no relation to what a real attack looks like.
12. The Apotheosis of the Master
I've always felt uncomfortable with the semi-deification of the so-called martial arts master. It just goes against the grain of my western upbringing. My goal in learning fighting was not to become a supplicant of an old man with a tough reputation. I believe that's another reason why mixed martial arts (i.e., BJJ, muaythai, boxing, and Filipino martial arts) have become so popular. There's no groveling involved just mutual respect. In the west, a coach doesn't demand a special status, over and beyond his normal duties. A coach guides athletes in their respective sports. His goal is to encourage, goad and train his charges to success. He is the father, the friend and the teacher; athletes trust him and his judgment.
Bringing karate into the 21st-Century
To bring karate up to date I suggest the following: Besides the regular training practice add 1-day of reality based concepts and techniques. Engage in realistic simulations for your training. Consider the pre-conflict and post-conflict phases of the engagement. Learn how to speak to police and prosecutors, learn first-aid and how to do a self-triage. Learn to to adapt traditional techniques to the modern world. Learn awareness and how to live a lifestyle of avoidance.
Why study karate at all?
I have no problem with people practicing traditional karate. If you love the art then it's your responsibility to add realistic street training to your program. As I said, I am not against karate, in fact more and more I am consulting with karate schools on how to add and implement reality-based concepts into their programs.
Note:
I spoke with Jon Bluming a few years ago about this particular article (he was awarded a 10th Dan by Mas Oyama himself) and he said he agreed with me completely. Read his comments below.
Comments from Jon Bluming
"In my opinion the old fashioned way of karate is not that effective anymore because to many now in the world have seen it, and done it. Just learning a good defence against the high kick, low kick and a straight fist waza and you find yourself in a bad spot. Also against a good streetfighter especially when the man knows a few good throws and some groundwork."
"Never do groundwork when there are many opponents. Even a worldchamp in the K-1, like Ernesto Hoost 4-times worldchamp and Peter Aerts 3-times worldchamp (all from my students Pan Plas and Johan Vos of the Budokai before) have no chance when you jump them and drag then to the ground, where they become babies."
"Now, the all around system that I introduced to Oyama's Kyokushinkai Honbu in 1966 is really the best and there are some real good fighters now with those ideas coming from Brazil and the Netherlands. Sem Schilt who decked Hoost several times."
"Ordinary and simple karate like shotokan, wado-ryu and shito-ryu is overrated for real self-defence. Kyokushin is a little better but all around fighting (mixed martial arts) like Kickboxing combined with karate and throws and followed up with groundwork is still MUCH better."
"In 1994 Matsui refused to take my challange to fight me in a boxing ring, me against him. The witness was Akira Maeda the former Ring champion and 8th dan in the Int. Budokaikan. I was than 61 years old. Now I am almost 71 and stopped fighting since 1961. The injuries are just getting me, but I still really love to teach the young fighters what you can do."
Keep up the good work [WR]. OSU . Jon Bluming . Kancho of the IBK .
About Jon Bluming:
Jon Bluming was among the first wave of westerners (after WWII) to study martial arts in Japan and Korea. He was officially awarded a 10th dan in Kyokushinkai karate by Mas Oyama, and a 9th dan in judo from the Kodokan. He was also instrumental in introducing and developing these arts in Europe. Since his early training, he always felt that karate and judo by themselves were incomplete. His idea, (back in the 1950's) was to incorporate striking, throwing, and groundwork; what would later be called mixed martial arts.
To contact the author email: info@realfighting.com
Check out Jon Bluming's sites: www.kyokushin-budokai.com
www.jonbluming.nl
Why would I even ask the question?
Well, because a lot of other folks have said it, and published it.
I have to respond initially that any reports of the death of karate have been greatly exaggerated.
Now, is karate today exactly the same as karate in Okinawa two hundred years ago?
Probably not, exactly. Except some places.
But living things grow and change.
In Okinawa, teaching karate was done in secret, and typically in very, very small classes. Of one student, for instance.
But in order to teach karate to large numbers of people who had never seen it before, new strategies were in order.
Remember, neither Sensei Funakoshi nor Sensei Nakayama had the internet as a tool.
So the strategy of sending real, live instructors to many countries to teach large classes was about the only game in town.
And it worked beyond the wildest imagining of anyone in Okinawa two hundred years ago.
Was the entire body of knowledge transmitted to the entire world?
I doubt it; but that process continues today.
