We learn applications after the kata has been somewhat perfected. This often means we are learning a new kata as well. ie learning applications for Shisochin while learning Sanseru. I dont know if this is so the applications make more sense as we have better understanding of a kata after a few months or longer, or so when we start the new kata we dont forget to train the previous one?

I guess part of the question is would it help you learn kata quicker if you knew what the applications/ techniques were for or is this too much information at once, just get the basic pattern right and then move on to applications.


ideas?

Cheers
Freek

I'm going to vote for "at the same time".

While some more "esoteric" applications may just confuse students who are still learning the patten, basic applications can give them a feel for what they're doing.

By this I mean working some apps with a partner so they can actually feel it - rather than just having to imagine they can imagine and remember having an opponent.

With one instructor I've trained with it doesn't satisfy him that you say you understand. He is of the opinion that you have to experience it [the pain] at least once so that you really know..


Mick

In the past Ive learnt the kata then (sometimes) the application later, but I can definately see merits in learning both as you go. Im not sure one way is better than another, and Im beating Brodius to the punch here by saying "You're not sure of a lot of things Matt"

Meh. Beaten to the punch... >>

I like to learn the kata and get the basic know how of what I'm doing in said kata at the same time. Whenever I'm going through kata with Sensei watching, competent ones anyway, I'll always ask what this move or that can be used for. At least then when I go through the kata, I can picture the grievous bodily harm I'm doing to the imaginary foe.

Hmm... I've just learnt Hangetsu. Must learn bunkai... <<

well yeah, i like to learn basic application as i'm learning the kata, it helps to understand it...

BUT i like to learn BASIC application...

once i have some kind of grasp of the kata i then work to find out the more difficult or hidden applications...

I teach the purpose of the basic movements that comprise kata. I teach Taikyokyu Shodan first to get the students used to following a geometrical pattern and then move them onto Pinan Nidan. They are shown the applications as they learn the sequence of the kata and practise them to various degrees as they are working on the performance of the kata.

I then teach Pinan Godan and teach the purpose of new techniques that come up in the kata. When the students have a good grasp of the basic techniques I am usually only teaching the purpose of unique sequences found in new kata. In my school we practise some kata for karate and other modern kata for competition and I teach limited applications to those.. just enough to help with performance!

Cheers,
Boz

HI Guys,

I prefer to learn with application as it helps me visualise the kata in my head, and makes learning and remembering it easier, however, I do find it difficult when I am teaching to combine teaching the moves and the application and keeping the lesson flowing...

A tough one..

I agree.

You have to know very basicly what you are doing when learning, but I prefer to consider application once I am aware of the pattern, etc, and then am able to build on that...

We learn them side by side.

We may do a number of drills as pairs work, with the partner steadily becoming less compliant. Once we've done a few such paired drills (switching partners so we get to try techniques against opponents of differing build), we'll then do the 'live' drills, in which you may attack any other person in the dojo and they have to counter using any of the forms studied that evening. The defender then gets to attack whomever they choose etc. (Having a gurning sandan running at you with a tanto is quite daunting!)

Once thats done, we'll study a kata. Funnily enough, we'll find the drills done in the class all correspond in some manner to the kata being studied - which I found a great way to help with remembering the patterns as well as with the timing. We'll also only look at one kata in a given class.

I voted for "at the same time", although I have found more often, bunkai is shown mostly after the kata is "somewhat learned". With some people however, learning bunkai means they are learning the same kata all over again!

I'd like to learn it at the same time but only a very basic bunkai, at least at first. Any more complex and I think my head would leap off my shoulders in protest. Havent done too much bunkai though, apart from the first sequence of saifa

Excellent point - I really do feel like Ive learned a whole new kata having gone into more detailed bunkai.

There is no reason you can't teach two-person drills and/or restraint & escape techniques and show (or not) the link to the relevant kata. Assuming the lesson has been planned with such a link in mind.

What I mean is, you could do some kata followed by some two-person activities or vice-versa. The drills could be easily linked to the kata, whether or not the link is pointed out or if it is left to see who makes the connection by themself. Such drills can range from attack/defence to escapes and restraints.


Mick

I voted "after perfection"

Which means that I never want to learn applications for my kata Bassai Dai, since it would only benefit me if I was battling in a mze of little red targets and boxing gloves on springs...

Yet a version of Gekaisai I learned once at senior training was very self explanatory in its most basic application.

Teaching the applications is not something that I have ever seen in practice, beyond "now you're turning around and blocking two strikes coming at your stomach using soto uke then uchi uke." Duh...

And the day someone tosses an opponent over their head and then jumps over them to land in kokutsu dachi is the day pigs will fly and I will never post and opinion on this board again.

Wouldn't practical applications be of some use to you though if you were assaulted on your way home from the pub on Saturday night?




Clearly these sorts of applications are the kind of drivel taught by people who have no concept of what violence is actually like. But that doesn't mean that those kata don't have a wealth of practical and useful applications. You just have to go to the right teachers to learn it.

Mike

I wouldn't bother 'learning' (read wasting my time) stuff like that either. Unfortunately students are silly enough to 'learn' rom such teachers and organisations.

boz

I not so sure about that, I have a good imagination and I struggle to think of an attack sequence that would befit the opening few moves of bassai dai (GKR version).

Was/is there a version of Bassai Dai that makes sense?

Matsumura Passai, Oyadomari Passai plus others are rich in application.
Boz

Well, like I said, you obviously haven't been to the right teachers then.



Oh there certainly is, more than one in fact. But the GKR version is a corrupted version of a corrupted version, the corruptions being done by a succession of people who didn't understand the intent of the kata. So it can give you some idea of good bunkai, but its far from the best place to start from.

Mike

So Basically, my situation is this: I live in a city where I just cannot get access to these uncorrupted kata, and the kata I'm learning are so corrupted that the applications are pointless anyway.

The kata you're learning are not entirely corrupted, although they are well their way in that direction. You would find slightly less corrupted kata if you studied Shotokan. Even less corrupted if you practiced Goju-Ryu or Wado-Ryu. But I'll wager that you'll actually find older kata not that far away from you. You'll also need someone to help you interpret them, although you can go some way in that direction by using books/videos as a resource.

Its just a question of finding out who's teaching what in your area.

Mike

The applications proposed by GKR are pretty pointless, and if you have only ever done GKR it is hard to see applications that work. Even with a good imagination! Taking a look at some other versions can help enormously - you can find downloads of videos online.

What do you mean? That I might be living down the road from Mr Miyagi? Or do you mean I should hit the local library for some literature.

---

I just had a thought (yeah, I'm scared too). What is the purpose of kata? I read your AKA site, Boz, and you seem to use kata to:

So kata do not define the way in which we should apply our karate?
Lets say they do. I look at three of the goju kata that are taught by GKR, saifa, sepai and seiunchin. There is a lot of flow in the footwork, and the body rises and falls from tall stances to sumo stances, a constant presence of circular movements etc. Without these kata I would not know that in Goju there is an emphasis an such flow, and even in the bastardised GKR versions it is quite graceful, and many movements just feel RIGHT, even when I can't picture an application.
How about Taigyoku Shodan, Bassai Dai and Empi? Now I don't know where TS came from, but these three kata dictate the same type of body movement, a BANG BANG BANG SMASH feel to it with lots of linear movement, sharp staccato movement, and an emphasis on longer (stronger?) stances.

What I'm getting at is maybe literal applications are not necessary. Maybe the kata are there to ensure that that when punches, blocks and kicks are put together they are done so which a certain flow or strength that the teacher intends. the founder of shotkan karate seemed to intend his karate to be executed in a very linear fashion with deep stances etc. and this is probably what the range of techniques found in Shotokan karate are best intended for.

Anyway, that's all that I gain from kata ATM (oh...and trophies )

I was thinking of Mr Miyagi living down the road, although perhaps not literally.

I don't really know what its like in Oz, but here in the UK there are many more people around nowadays who have at least some insight into the practical uses of kata. There are good and not so good admittedly. But at least the number of teachers and clubs interested in the subject is far greater than say 10 years ago. What they teach might not always be fantastic, but its probably better than just marching up and down mindlessly.

So, if you dig around enough then you may find somebody who can offer greater insights than you're getting at the moment.



I can't speak for anyone else, but to me kata is the embodiment of principles of movement. Practice the movements and understand the principles and you should be able to apply them in many different ways.

Mike

Cheers,
Boz

Now that I thinka bout it I realise I was actually referring to the athletic side of kata in a way.



I gather you don't see any merit for using long stances? I can fully understand why short and sharp is essential, part of the reason why I don't appreciate the usefulness of some of GKR's advanced blocks.



I don't even try, to be honest.

So if I saw a demonstration of an older kata, would I be able to watch and say, "yep, I know hat that's all for"?

I think some it would be more obvious, but much of it would be no more obvious to the casual observer than the modern kata are. You would need to do a good amount of study to really get into it.

Mike

Hi Bradt,
In modern kumite I see a place for a deep stance when countering with a reverse punch.
It is useful to brace the body and allow the attackiing opponent to impale themselves.

If you saw older versions of a number of kata such as Gojushiho and Jion, the applications of many of the moves are very clear. Some other kata, as Mike said, are only obvious to the experienced.

I should mention they often look ugly and nowhere near as pleasing to the eye as modern kata.

Cheers,
Bob

I guess that's why NAS forms competitions are a complete joke, and why the acrobatic kung-fu styles do so well.

In regards to NAS, some of the other styles I've seen at the state and national tournaments are even flashier (and look even more pointless) than GKR kata, so I guess on the scale of useful to useless, GKR still has a fair way to slide .

Quote from Danny Green in this months Ralph - P32 (hey its a great read on the toilet )

"If your legs are too far apart you're going to lose power and you wont be able to move as fast"

That was a basic fundamental he was taught as a beginner at boxing. Hearing a professional boxer say it it seems so damned obvious - so why didnt I question it all those times I was told to get lower/deeper in kata?

I got a funny email this morning off a goju list. Some twit saying the exact opposite... probably a blue belt...


Mick

Having a large or deep stance can improve power generation, but not generally with regard to punching at jodan or chudan level.

Such stances have their uses, but not usually with regard to the techniques applied in most karate dojo. A throw for example - look up the Judo technique uki-goshi. The stance used is shiko-dachi, its used to lower your hips for the throw whilst maintaining stability. You can also lever the opponent over your thigh if your stance is correct.

Mike

But a long, low zenkutso dachi followed by an oi tsuki?

Hi Matt,
A long low zenkutsu dachi is useful for landing in oi zuki in snapshot kata displays but not much good for take off.. if it were, would not sprinters start their races that way? Instead they seek a way to power out of the blocks on their front foot.
Cheers,
Boz

One application I teach for this is as follows:

1. The attacker grabs both of your upper arms.
2. Jab your fingertips towards their eyes with your palms up. By a combination of your upper arms pressing on their hands and their reflexive flinch away from your fingertips this makes them overbalance backwards slightly.
3. Step forwards with whichever foot is closest to their lead leg so that your foot lands parallel to but outside of their lead foot. As you do this roll your arms palm down and use them both to press the opponent: the hand on your leading side scoops their upper arm close to the elbow and presses down, the other forearm rubs across the base of their neck (pressing in with the radius bone) - the purpose of all this is to ensure their balance remains broken.
4. With the other foot step around (with a 'c-step') the opponent's front foot into a forward stance, making sure that your hip is in contact with the opponent. At the same time 'punch': the hand at the elbow pulls down and back (hikite) while the other arm extends, applying pressure to the base of the neck. The only real difference to a normal oi-tsuki punch is that your punching arm rotates past the normal end point with the fist square on, and actually ends up with the little finger knuckle uppermost - this ensures that your radius bone continue to cut into the soft tissues at the base of the neck. The attacker will now fall backwards and you can, if you wish, capture the arm that you were holding with your 'reaction' hand.

Of course, it isn't really broken into 4 steps, it all happens as one smooth motion.

I should point out that while I would use what I describe as a 'deep' forward stance to do this, by comparison with the GKR or Shotokan forward stance its actually quite shallow.

If it all goes all wrong, or if you want to bring the opponent under control at your feet, instead of pushing them down and away you can - once they're already arching backwards - find inspiration in the next technique in the kata Pinan Nidan. After the third punch in a row (similar to GKR's Taikyoku Shodan) you turn 225 degrees into a straddle stance with a low knife-hand 'block'. Add this movement onto the application above and instead of throwing the opponent away you can drop them at your feet well under control and easily strike and/or joint-lock them.

Mike

Hi Mike,

Why would you do all that in response to a grab of the upper arms? I think that is one of the problems of reverse-engineering, i.e. trying to bolt on unnecessary options. Lunge punch is an attacking punch that utilises momentum and is not applied the way it is performed in kata. One lunges and hits before the front foot lands. If one is grabbed by both upper arms one uses their close-quarter techniques IMO.
Cheers,
Boz

Hi Boz

Just to clarify, when I say lunge punch I am specifically thinking of the move from the kata, eg. Pinan Nidan etc. So the technique involves punching as the foot is landing (or even later in some systems) and also uses hikite. As you say, the use you're putting the technique to isn't enhanced by either of these two features - you want to impact before your foot lands and I'm not sure you're not advocating pulling back the other hand to the hip when its not got hold of anything.

So why practice the technique the way it is in the kata? I'm extracting from it what I see as the relevant principles - generating power by stepping forwards (with stability), and generating power by simultaneously pushing and pulling with the arms - augmented by the rotation of the forearms. In this case I'm using the power generated to unbalance the attacker and ultimately take them down, whilst maintaining my own balance.

The technique is similar to Judo's osoto-gari (large outer reap) but the main difference is that I'm not using my balance dynamically in the way a Judoka would, as this involves compromising my balance at certain points during the technique. Rather, I'm using a karate stance to maintain my balance so that I can get the same effect - but without the disruption to my balance.

I'll confess that its not necessarily a technique I'll go looking for, ie. I won't try to deliberately set it up unless I'm actually teaching it. But I will take it opportunistically if the opponent sets it up for me. So, for me, it is a close quarter technique - it starts from some form of clinch - and I have no doubt of its effectiveness. There are lots of other things I could do, but if I'm offered this by an aggressor then I'll happily take it.

Does that convince you at all?

Mike

Hi Mike,

If you can make it work for you and yours then that is terrific. But (you knew that was coming), that is not an application for Pinan Nidan rather it is your own interpretation or henka (variation) if you prefer that terminology.

Pinan Nidan was created for the new karate and specifically as a training exercise for the karate students, ie karate vs karate. This was explained to me by Mitani Kazuya who is a student of Kinjo Hiroshi, 9th Dan, who was a student of Chojo Oshiro and others in the karate program at Okinawan schools in the 1920s and/or 1930s.

He taught me how to teach modern competition kumite utilizing the techniques found in that kata. His junior students are the top juniors in the JKF. Oi Zuki can be used to teach momentum punches, specifically front fist, reverse punch, and lunge punch in single and multiple technique application. The 'blocks' are used to teach blocking (sweeping and deflecting) and I teach a complete defensive system from this kata.

I learned enough about early karate from Mitani to drop the reverse engineering model and focus on understanding the basics. This allows one to avoid the trap of both redundancy and 1001 ones to apply downward block. Its not that you can't create a multitude of applications from moves in kata it just makes no sense to do so when one realises that less is more. All in my opinion and what would a bloody Aussie know anyway

Cheers,
Boz

Of course....:-)



Does he really know that for sure though? I know of an alternative history handed down through some of Hohan Soken's students. This history states that Matsumura created Pinan 1 & 2, the others being created later by Itosu.

Which is right? I really don't know. But this particular movement is found in other kata, so its by no means unique to Pinan Nidan. As for henka, bunkai etc., my understanding is that these terms are Japanese in origin, not Okinawan, so I don't really worry about such terminology. It still seems though that my 'application' fits the actual performance of the kata better than the stated bunkai.

For me, if a technique fits the principles demonstrated by a movement in a kata, then the technique can be considered an application of that movement. Of course, this is a personal viewpoint and I wouldn't dream of trying to impose it on anyone else. Is this particular 'application' authentic? I don't know. I certainly haven't learnt it as such from a reliable link to historical Okinawan Karate. By no means do I try to convince anyone that ANY applications that I teach have that direct historical link - my apologies if I ever give that impression. All I'm really bothered is whether a technique works, ie. does it measure well against my personal list of 'principles of combat'. If it works and if it embodies principles that can be readily practiced via the kata techniques then that's good enough for me.

Cheers,

Mike

I'm not convinced either, but I don't consider it beyond the realms of possibility. It does demonstrate to me though how little we really do know about the late 19th century.




Indeed, I quite agree with that. Would or Could? There's lots of stuff I've been forced to throw away, even if I did quite like it. But if I really could do something then, in the right circumstances, I would do it. If I don't feel I would do it its usually because, at the back of my mind, for whatever reason I doubt that I could. Therefore the two are synomymous for me in reality.

Cheers,

Mike

Boz and Mike, i think the two of you have just exhibited the reason for Sandan and up instructors with Shodans minimum as Sempais. You have both given logical thought out reasoning for your ideas. They are both based on some understanding of history and some practical experience. Lets face it Karate or Martial Arts is like religion 5% difference can start a war. But the point is not just teaching Kata and Applications but explaining this Kata does X for fitness, and this application is very practical however Y application is a link into Q kata but has little practical use etc etc.

Now try having the same debate with a 8th kyu B/W instructor.

cheers
Freek

Thanks,
Someone unkindly described us as two roosters strutting their stuff Of course that person meant well and I nearly peed myself laughing when I read the comment. I aadmit to not being as PC as I could be but at my age.. shrug

Boz McBadboy

Well I've been called many things before now, but never a rooster. I'll take it as a complement.

Mike

Because people learn in different ways I think it is important to teach in different ways. Sometimes the students needs to know the kata well first in order to receptive to seeing the applications, other people like to understand the kata and applications as a complete whole, yet others need to see the applications and then one day when performing the kata will suddenly think "Wow, this move is a lot like that application we worked on last week!".

Sometimes we train pure kata.

Sometimes we train kata and then ask if people need applications.

Sometimes we train kata and then ask the students to come up with their own applications.

Sometimes we train applications, and if people are ready to see the kata within the application all good - if not they still get the self-defence benefits of the application.

Different ways of teaching, and I also think different stages along the Competance Model.