As I've begun to learn or at least watch some kata from other styles i'm noticing patterns of movements emerging that are either very simialr or are an exact copy from one kata to the next...

This leads me to believe some kata are either related to each other, are a step up from the next or are originally from a series of kata brought out by one instructor...


Bassai Dai and Kanku Dai for example have similar movements and/or similar applications brought out... One is harder to perform and is longer than the other...
So with the two kata being so similar why in GKR do they come so far apart in the syllabus?

Also I noticed at least one exact copy of a set of movements that matches from Kanku Dai to Naifanchi Shodan. But there isnt much else similar in the kata... Does this mean the kata are somewhat related but not of the same set? Or am I just reaching now?

I can't comment on Kanku Dai or some of the other Kata you've mentioned, the Bassai I know is different to the GKR Bassai, but...

The 5 Heians and 5 Pinans started out (so I'm told) as one Kata. One student started a style doing the Kata one way, one student did it another.
Both styles though they were too difficult in their current form, and split the single Kata into 5 smaller Katas, giving us the 5 Heians and the 5 Pinans we have today.

I haven't seen Bassai Sho (Little Bassai) to compare it to Bassai Dai (Big Bassai), but perhaps Sho was the first step to learning Dai.

Maybe some of the Kata look and feel similar because they are either steps to learning a more complex version, or because they may have originally been one single Kata that has been split.

Someone's been feeding you a line here. It may be that once upon a time in the 19th century the Pinans were derived from one kata (known as Channan), which was modified and split up into 5 sections. On the other hand I've never seen any convincing evidence that Channan kata actually existed. What is certain is that the Pinans were put together in the late 19th / early 20th century by Ankoh Itosu, possibly with some influence by one of his teachers, Sokon Matsumura, possibly with influences from other sources.

Heian is merely the name that Funakoshi chose for the Pinan kata when he 'Japanified' them, along with many other kata. As well as changing the name Funakoshi and his students also made significant changes to the manner in which the kata were practiced.



My understanding, rightly or wrongly, is that Dai came first and was used as a template for producing the shorter Sho. As to why I couldn't say. Personally I find both Passai Dai and Passai Sho useful kata to practice. I believe a similar thing happened with Kusanka, resulting in the Shotokan kata Kanku Dai and Kanku Sho. I've never done the Sho version so I couldn't comment on it.

In answer to Susan's question about similar sequences in kata, there are many Okinawan kata that have similar sequences. But when you think about it this makes sense. Presumably each person who made up one of the classical kata was attempting to catalogue techniques or principles that he thought were of value. A kata, or at least a small group of kata, may be considered to represent the techniques of a self-contained self-defence system. So it makes sense that you will see some of the same themes in different kata. Different people made up different kata but considered some of the ideas to be important - so you'll see those same ideas expressed in different people's kata.

Mike

Thank you mike.....

It does make sense.....

that part about a series of kata being a 'self contained self defence system' sounds intersting....

is there a group of kata you could use to support this theory?

like the pinan series.... would this be a system of it's own?? with out the need or necessity for further kata? and if one of these kata didnt apeal to you could it be easily replaced with a different one to include the parts of the system that would now be mising?

Interesting idea... just learnt the Pinan kata in depth... would you need any other kata? They collectively contain enough application that this might be the case.

I'm not convinced that the Pinan were derived from some other kata, aside from the similarity in elements from Bassai/Passai and Kanku/Kusanku/Kosokun. There are references (as Mike said) that they originated from a kata called Channan, or maybe there was a kata called Channan which might have been a first attempt at building what became the Pinan. But Pinan I, II and IV have a different feel to III and V (IMO at least).

There is no concrete evidence either way, apart from the relative certainty that Pinan are modern kata formulated for teaching to children...


Mick

Well I've heard the theory that the Pinans are meant to be such a self contained set of kata. There is no definite evidence of that though, as far as I'm aware.

And we do know that most Okinawan karateka of the 19th century only practiced a handful of kata. And there is plenty of anecdotal evidence of how effective their art was. So I think that supports the idea.

In the Shorin traditional Naihanchi (1 and/or 2 and/or 3) was considered fundamental in terms of teaching mechanics and dynamics (like Sanchin in Goju Ryu). Other kata might be considered more focussed on actual applications. So a typical practitioner might practice Naihanchi plus 2 or 3 other kata. Of course, that is just one idea and I'm sure there are plenty of people in the Okinawan Karate world who might have a different view. Personally, for example, I consider Naihanchi not only to be fundamental but also to be rich in potential application.



Is it a question of a kata 'not appealing' though? They're not meant to be fun, they're meant to teach important lessons. But I take your point though, you might find that another kata more pertinent in addressing certain issues, in which case I think it would seem sensible to add that to your syllabus.

In the series of kata I teach I have added kata to the curriculum or rearranged the order, never just on a whim, but for a specific reason (usually because a particular might be particularly useful in teaching particular ideas).

Not sure if that fully answers your question...

Mike

I'm not even sure of that any more Mick. I don't doubt that they were formulated in part for teaching to children. But I do suspect they were meant to have a dual function. They could be used for teaching basic stuff to children in an easy to remember format, but they could also be used for teaching pragmatic self-defence to adults if and when the instructor chose to do so. Rightly or wrongly, that's the purpose I put them to anyway.

Mike

Hi mike.... sorry. that was a little misleading...

by not appealing i meant along the lines of perhaps a kata was not suited to a certain body type... for example a kata such as empi is fairly acrobatic and someone who is not agile or quick on their feet would not be able to practise the kata effectively...

in this case would there be a kata that could replace it, offering the same applications and principles, without it being just as acrobatic??? or would there be something missing that would need to be followed up with another kata???

I suspect that if the replacement offered the same applications and principles then it would probably be similarly acrobatic. You make a very relevant point I think though. My understanding of the Goju tradition is very limited. However, one thing I've read in several places before now is that (I think) Chojun Miyagi didn't teach everyone the same kata. All students would learn Sanchin (and possibly Tensho?) but then they would go on to learn different kata based on their body type and/or temperament. So you might not actually focus on exactly the same principles and techniques as I might, simply owing to our different physiques.

You don't seem to get the same idea in the Shorin systems. There seems to be a fixed number of kata and students are required, over time, to learn them all. And this is how I teach, but I think its entirely appropriate that any individual should have particular kata that they specialise in. And this is something I would leave up to the individual student to decide - which kata suit them and which deserve focussed in-depth study.

Mike

It does appear they (Pinan) were formulated as easier patterns to be used as an introduction before teaching Bassai or Kanku kata seeing as there are common elements between them. And since there are common elements it also stands to reason they could be used for teaching the same applications as might be taught for those same portions in other kata. I did not mean to imply otherwise.

Perhaps the Pinan could be used as a fighting system in their own right. Certainly though if they're just used as 5 more patterns to learn for gradings and nothing more, then all they are is 5 more patterns to learn for gradings.


Mick

Yeah! I've noticed that in the shotokan syllubus, one kata leads on to the other, whilst adding a new movement all at the same time, a case of concentrating well, but can get very confusing!

As my sensei says our brains are getting hot, because we are using our heads!