PDA

View Full Version : A "controversial" article on kata



ZachZinn
9th December 2007, 04:19
http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2007/11/25/the-relationship-between-kata-and-kumite/

Wasn't sure whether or not to include this in the bunkai thread. I wholeheartedly disagree with the gist of this article, in fact I think (with all due respect to the writer) that it showcases exactly where the shortcomings are in the modern understanding of kata.

While I don't agree with it's conclusions I do applaud the author for being honest about his experiences with kata vs. kumite.

What do you guys think?

Trevor Johnson
9th December 2007, 06:03
It's Shotokan. Their understanding of kata and kumite is different from many others. For one thing, ranges are longer, and Japanese aesthetics tend more towards more exaggerated gestures and stances. For another, there's a lot of incomplete transmission problems.

When the kata are changed, the original bunkai forgotten(WWII had a lot to do with that), and then new bunkai invented to explain the kata, then indeed, kata and kumite have nothing to do with each other. Which is why a lot of people who started in Shotokan are looking back at the older okinawan kata to help reforge the link.

And, btw, 24fc prides himself on stirring controversy, so take some of the article as hyperbole.

Jeff Cook
9th December 2007, 12:01
I think the author of that article is not only biased, but ignorant (pretty much what Trevor has stated). So much so that I do not even feel like going into details, and refuting point by point. The entire premise of the article is a$$ed-up.

Karate kata and karate "sparring" were not created for tournament competition. They were created to teach effective fighting skills in a self-defense context. It is invalid to compare tournament fighting success to self-defense success.

Jeff Cook

Mark Tankosich
9th December 2007, 13:15
I think he's correct, but not in the way he thinks he is: Kata and "sparring" are unrelated, in that the first is about fighting, and the latter about playing a sport.

TonyU
9th December 2007, 16:33
Again, an article written by someone who never "got" it, so it must not be there.

Simon Keegan
10th December 2007, 08:31
I have my own opinions of Shotokan's approach to Kata versus Kumite*, but those who remember the original 24 Fighting Chickens website will remember it as one of the most useful Karate websites on the net.

The author is extremely knowledgeable however he presents his views.

* In my opinion the Shotokan movement arranged their Kumite in order to fill a niche in Japan. There was already Judo (in it's competition form an art centred around throws and locks) so Shotokan filled a niche - a sporting art based on punching, kicking and blocking. We can argue til the cows come home that Itosu never taught Funakoshi the true Bunkai but whether he knew the applications or not, Funakoshi saw a niche and he filled it.

Duanew
10th December 2007, 13:51
I would tend to agree with the author. Kata bunkai doesn't make you any good at sparring. It does however make you good at fighting. If you look at most of the bunkai that is taught most of the techniques would not be allowed in a sparring match-low kicks, knees, elbows, eye gouges, arm bars, takedowns, neck snaps, etc.
Competitive karate is not karate- it is about 5% of karate. So I agree that kata bunkai is NOT a good preparation for SPORT competition. It would be like studying combat techniques from the Middle Ages and then trying to use them in a fencing match.
Kata bunkai is only as good as the source it comes from. Some have traveled so far from the source-changes in kata with resulting bunkai problems-that there is little left.
I have seen several examples of reverse engineered bunkai made to fit the kata that are implausible. Several years ago on another forum I had one of the "big names" in kata bunkai and pressure points (one went so far as to say that he understood the bunkai of the kata I do better than the head of my system) say that the turns in the kata were of no importance-that they were there only for a change of direction.
Like everyone else I struggle with understanding the kata-let alone all the bunkai. I stopped pretending to know it all a long time ago.
As a side note- there is a move in Okinawa among some of the instructors to change the name of what they teach from karate to tode-to differentiate between the sport and the native defensive art.
SO to recap-Bunkai is useless for sport competition, spear fighting techniques are worthless for javelin competitions, Biathlon techniques won't work in Iraq, etc.

Duane Wolfe

cxt
10th December 2007, 15:51
Modern open tournament sparring?

No, the kata don't do much for that.......nor IMO should it...nor should that really be viewed as a "bad" thing.

Good site with well thought out opinions and ideas that make you think.....people may disagree, but it does make you think.

Trevor Johnson
10th December 2007, 16:11
24FC likes to play the gadfly, and can overstate things. But yes, he does know a lot. Most of his background comes from Shotokan karate, and he tends to address his remarks to people who train in that style, or those derived from it. And he loves to argue, and start arguments.

Then again, he's always willing to defend his remarks and can see when he's wrong, so I wouldn't just go dishing him as someone who hasn't "got it." If you've "got it" you're probably not his target audience.

TonyU
10th December 2007, 17:01
It's been my experience that there are many schools that do not teach the direct correlation between kata and fighting, whether it's sparring or self defense. So in essence those students lost out and never got that integral part of training. I've been a victim of it myself.
While I agree that sparring is not self defense and I also agree that there are some techniques not designed nor applicable in a one on one dual sparring, there are many techniques that are.
So I stand by my statement, written by someone who never got it.

Chris McLean
10th December 2007, 19:41
I read one paragraph and did not bother to waste any more time than that dont think I will be returning to 24 chicken anymore either. Nijushiho

Trevor Johnson
10th December 2007, 20:22
It's been my experience that there are many schools that do not teach the direct correlation between kata and fighting, whether it's sparring or self defense. So in essence those students lost out and never got that integral part of training. I've been a victim of it myself.
While I agree that sparring is not self defense and I also agree that there are some techniques not designed nor applicable in a one on one dual sparring, there are many techniques that are.
So I stand by my statement, written by someone who never got it.

Actually, what's worse is those who state that there is a connection, but who have mangled kata. That tends to frustrate students. I don't know how many of you have seen Kenneth Funakoshi's videos of the "bunkai" for the Shotokan Heian kata, and other Shotokan kata. They're horrible, because they take the kata and really put the bunk in bunkai. Turning around after having blocked someone so they can kick out your kidneys, never dealing with distance properly, etc. No idea what he was doing.

Now, my understanding of those kata's very different, and I have some nice things I've gotten out of them, including close-in knees, grabbing, throws, etc. But all that comes because my teachers actually know the kata and aren't just parroting the form, and parroting the empty assurance that these things somehow lead to better fighting.

I remember sparring this one guy who threw himself into a ridiculously long front-stance and hit me in the ribs with a lunge punch. Very weak punch. I rolled it off, sucked up a little, and took advantage of his lovely hikite to punch him in his completely unguarded head. He was indignant. I pointed out that his punch was unable to hurt me, and that I'd trade a gentle tickle in the ribs for the chance to take his head off any day of the week. In the discussion that followed, he gave me the following argument, which I treasure to this day: "Mas Oyama could break ribs with his punch. He trained in karate. I train in karate. Therefore, if I hit you in the ribs, you must treat my punch as if I've broken your ribs."

I think something similar goes on in some schools. The student is assured that the connection between kata and kumite is there, and either not shown it, or shown something ridiculous. The student then assumes, if they don't understand fighting or kata, that the connection is somewhat mystical. That if they practice their kata like faithful little robots, the repetition will forge a connection between them and all the others who did kata, like Mas Oyama, and they will somehow transcendentally learn how to fight better.

The connection between kata and fighting, or course, is not mystical, but visceral, and is based on deep understanding of the kata. Comprehension of the bunkai at a level where you don't need to think about them, you are just able to apply them, a kneestrike here, a headbutt, a punch, a throw, a choke, a break, flowing from one to the next as the situation demands. That requires far more than mere robotic practice of kata. But, many people and schools don't understand that.

TonyU
10th December 2007, 20:38
Actually, what's worse is those who state that there is a connection, but who have mangled kata. That tends to frustrate students. I don't know how many of you have seen Kenneth Funakoshi's videos of the "bunkai" for the Shotokan Heian kata, and other Shotokan kata. They're horrible, because they take the kata and really put the bunk in bunkai. Turning around after having blocked someone so they can kick out your kidneys, never dealing with distance properly, etc. No idea what he was doing.

Now, my understanding of those kata's very different, and I have some nice things I've gotten out of them, including close-in knees, grabbing, throws, etc. But all that comes because my teachers actually know the kata and aren't just parroting the form, and parroting the empty assurance that these things somehow lead to better fighting.

I remember sparring this one guy who threw himself into a ridiculously long front-stance and hit me in the ribs with a lunge punch. Very weak punch. I rolled it off, sucked up a little, and took advantage of his lovely hikite to punch him in his completely unguarded head. He was indignant. I pointed out that his punch was unable to hurt me, and that I'd trade a gentle tickle in the ribs for the chance to take his head off any day of the week. In the discussion that followed, he gave me the following argument, which I treasure to this day: "Mas Oyama could break ribs with his punch. He trained in karate. I train in karate. Therefore, if I hit you in the ribs, you must treat my punch as if I've broken your ribs."

I think something similar goes on in some schools. The student is assured that the connection between kata and kumite is there, and either not shown it, or shown something ridiculous. The student then assumes, if they don't understand fighting or kata, that the connection is somewhat mystical. That if they practice their kata like faithful little robots, the repetition will forge a connection between them and all the others who did kata, like Mas Oyama, and they will somehow transcendentally learn how to fight better.

The connection between kata and fighting, or course, is not mystical, but visceral, and is based on deep understanding of the kata. Comprehension of the bunkai at a level where you don't need to think about them, you are just able to apply them, a kneestrike here, a headbutt, a punch, a throw, a choke, a break, flowing from one to the next as the situation demands. That requires far more than mere robotic practice of kata. But, many people and schools don't understand that.

Mr. Johnson,
You and I are in agreement and are on point with the same things. You just express things better than I do. ;)

Dick Mineo
11th December 2007, 02:43
Lets look at it this way - just for fun.
A karate teacher starts a class and (this time) most of the students are new or have little experience.
He begins the class with some rules and basic explinations along with 3 or 4 basic moves - high block, high punch and some basic foot work to keep them from extending too far and keeping their bodys upright.
Then he teaches them their first kata. He makes sure they do not lift that rear heel off of the ground while doing their punches. He explains how keeping that heel down in kata while still reaching his target gives him maximum power and extra extension to use if needed. He teaches them to do the high blocks with proper angles of deflection, without wasting movement or creating another opening. All of the things that are taught in the details of a kata -ARE- usefull in sparring.

If he were to just show them the block, punch and some foot work, then set them free to start sparring.....he would have lots of injuries, lots of students getting carried away with their explosive - out of control moods and tempers, along with lots of law suits.

I do not believe kata is necessasary for all styles for sure but I do believe it is a good way to get students geared toward controled physical movements and additudes.
This can even go to the advanced students because kata does have many aspects that are not realised right away, beyond those basic blocks and punches.
Kata should never be done by simply going through the moves. The mind should always be involved as if there were someone attacking. This too does aid the student when actual sparring begins.

Trevor Johnson
11th December 2007, 06:56
I do not believe kata is necessasary for all styles for sure but I do believe it is a good way to get students geared toward controled physical movements and additudes.
This can even go to the advanced students because kata does have many aspects that are not realised right away, beyond those basic blocks and punches.
Kata should never be done by simply going through the moves. The mind should always be involved as if there were someone attacking. This too does aid the student when actual sparring begins.

For me, it's not just for controlled movements, though that certainly is true for beginners. If you're just doing one-step, 3-step, 5-step type sparring, then this holds true as well.

Where it breaks down is in semi-free to free, where you wouldn't generally throw a picture-perfect rising block, or at least I wouldn't. I'd use the rising block to punch into someone, or to deflect and grab their arm, or what have you, not just to block someone's arm, since I know that their other fist'll be in my face if I do such a large and forceful movement without using it to mess with their body in some way.

That's where the kata analysis comes in. Saying ok, we're pulling our hands back now, because we may have something in them, like uke's hand, or hair. Otherwise we'd leave them up to protect ourselves. Adding some layer of sophistication beyond just marching up and down the floor punching in the air, thinking that it has any relevance at all to what happens as soon as another body enters the equation. Or saying, well, nice, you hit him, now what?

One fun exercise to do, if you have a dojo-mate who's got a good sense of humor, is to make them play your helpless little baby. Do kumite, light at first, except that your opponent's job is to get past you and grab your kid, say as a hostage. (If your friend has a REALLY good sense of humor, give them a rattle and bib, just for versimilitude, of course :D) So now, your goal is to push your opponent back, aggressively, and not let him past you. If they get past you, of course, now you have to grab them and pull them. It also makes throwing fun, because you really have to watch yourself. No good doing a really nice throw and having uke land on your kid!

Now, reverse the situation, and try a scenario where you're trying to get past an opponent to a goal, say the door. Now you're not pushing them, you're pulling them, possibly retreating, circling around them, backing up while fighting, launching back-kicks, avoiding tackles and grabs, just to reach your goal.

What does this have to do with kata? Well, for one thing, this is where some of the tricks contained in kata become useful. If you're just sparring as a sport, you miss most of the context. When is it appropriate to grab someone's lapel, choke them, and kick them in the groin? When is it a really BAD idea? When do you headbutt? Can you throw someone so they land where you need them to be? IMO, THAT's what kata's there to teach, in the end.

EddieK
11th December 2007, 12:59
Trevor is exactly right and on point! - Kata and Karate, have very little to do with the "monkey bouncing" tournament style fighting of today. In order for Karate to be used as a sport, it must be watered down to the point of not being even remotely related to the original. Karate stategy is not "stand toe-to-toe and trade blows with each other" - It is; close distance, disrupt the enemy, and end the confrontation as quickly and efficiently as possible - (and live to fight another day!). THIS is what kata and the resulting bunkai teach you.

Shorin Ryuu
11th December 2007, 14:56
Kata is for fighting, but you can't blame 24fightingchickens for feeling the way he does. There are plenty of those in karate who are "enlightened" with kata that couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag. I go so far as to say these are a majority.

trevorg
11th December 2007, 22:57
Trevor is exactly right and on point! - Kata and Karate, have very little to do with the "monkey bouncing" tournament style fighting of today. In order for Karate to be used as a sport, it must be watered down to the point of not being even remotely related to the original. Karate stategy is not "stand toe-to-toe and trade blows with each other" - It is; close distance, disrupt the enemy, and end the confrontation as quickly and efficiently as possible - (and live to fight another day!). THIS is what kata and the resulting bunkai teach you.


Exactly Stevie Morris's view:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2dd3ivYBv4&feature=related

Usu
Trevor

Jay Vail
12th December 2007, 11:47
It's Shotokan. Their understanding of kata and kumite is different from many others. For one thing, ranges are longer, and Japanese aesthetics tend more towards more exaggerated gestures and stances. For another, there's a lot of incomplete transmission problems.

When the kata are changed, the original bunkai forgotten(WWII had a lot to do with that), and then new bunkai invented to explain the kata, then indeed, kata and kumite have nothing to do with each other. Which is why a lot of people who started in Shotokan are looking back at the older okinawan kata to help reforge the link.

And, btw, 24fc prides himself on stirring controversy, so take some of the article as hyperbole.


How do you know me so well, Trevor? ;)

Trevor Johnson
12th December 2007, 22:20
How do you know me so well, Trevor? ;)

You are saying you're 24FC, or you're saying you do Shotokan?

Dick Mineo
13th December 2007, 00:41
http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2007/11/25/the-relationship-between-kata-and-kumite/

Wasn't sure whether or not to include this in the bunkai thread. I wholeheartedly disagree with the gist of this article, in fact I think (with all due respect to the writer) that it showcases exactly where the shortcomings are in the modern understanding of kata.

While I don't agree with it's conclusions I do applaud the author for being honest about his experiences with kata vs. kumite.

What do you guys think?

If any of you haven't read the JUDAN story in the 24fightingchickens sight....you better go back and do that.
This tells it all for me.
It also explains how kata does help ones sparring if you ask me.
The judge's methods of grading these shotokan men is what traditional martial arts is all about - self discipline as well as fighting skills.
It does not take a master to see when one is a master.

Dick Mineo
14th December 2007, 04:42
http://www/youthtube.com/watch?v=3zKtuHOYmng

Please allow me to correct my earlier comment a bit.
After listening to Mr. Morris discussing - being in the zone with kata, compared to with full contact sparring or fighting - I feel a need to clarify my statement about how I believe kata could help one when it comes to a real fight, where someone is totally intending to harm or even kill you.

My explination came from my own experience which did consist of thousands of hours ofkata and sparring. I have never done competition fighting, street fighting or MMA type fighting, so I can not comment on such drastic situations as these.
However - I did find that after working kata, its bunkai and sparring in depth, one can discover and even control (to a degree) - getting into the zone.
It is something that became so familiar to me that (often but not always) it could be accomplished at will. I think the practice of kata did help to find this zone and once there.... it was much easier to know what the opponent is going to do, as well as being more able to foil thier intent, for my advantage.

Still though - I can not comment honestly how it would work for me if I was in that "emergency mode".
Hopefully I never need to find out.

TonyU
14th December 2007, 12:21
Still though - I can not comment honestly how it would work for me if I was in that "emergency mode".
Hopefully I never need to find out.

I can. Unfortunately it's inherent in my profession. Before I describe what happened let me first preface that even as traditionalist I do believe in god hard sparring. Or fighting is based on the old Okinawan style fighting. In other words if we were to award points it would be as a KO or knockdown. Similar in some respects to Kyoshinkai.
I also practice a lot of different drills and self defense in a realistic, live, and resistant manner as safely as possible.
On that note, without getting into too much specifics, I've been training this particular kata for over 20 years (23 to be exact).
I came across a suspect who decided to take a swing at me. I instinctively defended myself from the opening move of the kata. I never practiced that particular bunkai. I never performed it nor trained in it in a realistic, resistant, and live manner.
I was able to arrest the suspect without injury to him nor myself.
This is only one of many. I understand people's mileage may vary and it's not for everyone. But kata in it's right context can and will work.

Dick Mineo
14th December 2007, 19:06
I agree Tony.
Kata does train the body to respond instantly and the body-memory will stay with you in a time of need. Repetition with complex moves is just as good of training as useing a punch bag to tune the body to get the most out of a punch or kick.
If one is in the arts to compete or to be the toughest guy on the block then it is necessasary to practice with every possability of injury that a real fight would bring. But....if one just wants to be fit and more able to defend against an attack than the average thug....it is not totally necessasary to risk the injury that comes from full contact training.
No matter how hard one trains - there will always be someone that can beat him.
I guess it just depends on what one is in the arts for.

TonyU
14th December 2007, 19:27
Please excuse my disjointed and misspelled post as I was hurrying prior to heading to work.

Dick Mineo
15th December 2007, 04:40
http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2007/11/25/the-relationship-between-kata-and-kumite/

Wasn't sure whether or not to include this in the bunkai thread. I wholeheartedly disagree with the gist of this article, in fact I think (with all due respect to the writer) that it showcases exactly where the shortcomings are in the modern understanding of kata.

While I don't agree with it's conclusions I do applaud the author for being honest about his experiences with kata vs. kumite.

What do you guys think?

You mention here - "exactly where the shortcomings are in modern understanding of kata".
This has been a thing I have tried several times to get people talking about. I have used several topic headings like - visualization and the arts, meditation and the arts, getting into the zone and others. So far I have not gotten anyone to want to get into the topic from this angle.
Give me a hand here please.
What can we discuss that goes deeper into the meanings of kata or into the only slightly mentioned subjects in most classes ?
For example - Some Chinese styles use words like "tongue of the dragon" or Shotokan"s "bending of trees"
These things have only been mentioned but not gone deeply into in any of the classes I have taken (besides Ki Aikido -with - sack of potatos or water over the waterfall....) and I believe they are getting less mention these days than in the past.
Visualization in general is getting less explination and work than going nuts with overwhelming force.

Jay Vail
25th December 2007, 12:50
Actually, what's worse is those who state that there is a connection, but who have mangled kata. That tends to frustrate students. I don't know how many of you have seen Kenneth Funakoshi's videos of the "bunkai" for the Shotokan Heian kata, and other Shotokan kata. They're horrible, because they take the kata and really put the bunk in bunkai. Turning around after having blocked someone so they can kick out your kidneys, never dealing with distance properly, etc. No idea what he was doing.

Now, my understanding of those kata's very different, and I have some nice things I've gotten out of them, including close-in knees, grabbing, throws, etc. But all that comes because my teachers actually know the kata and aren't just parroting the form, and parroting the empty assurance that these things somehow lead to better fighting.

I remember sparring this one guy who threw himself into a ridiculously long front-stance and hit me in the ribs with a lunge punch. Very weak punch. I rolled it off, sucked up a little, and took advantage of his lovely hikite to punch him in his completely unguarded head. He was indignant. I pointed out that his punch was unable to hurt me, and that I'd trade a gentle tickle in the ribs for the chance to take his head off any day of the week. In the discussion that followed, he gave me the following argument, which I treasure to this day: "Mas Oyama could break ribs with his punch. He trained in karate. I train in karate. Therefore, if I hit you in the ribs, you must treat my punch as if I've broken your ribs."

I think something similar goes on in some schools. The student is assured that the connection between kata and kumite is there, and either not shown it, or shown something ridiculous. The student then assumes, if they don't understand fighting or kata, that the connection is somewhat mystical. That if they practice their kata like faithful little robots, the repetition will forge a connection between them and all the others who did kata, like Mas Oyama, and they will somehow transcendentally learn how to fight better.

The connection between kata and fighting, or course, is not mystical, but visceral, and is based on deep understanding of the kata. Comprehension of the bunkai at a level where you don't need to think about them, you are just able to apply them, a kneestrike here, a headbutt, a punch, a throw, a choke, a break, flowing from one to the next as the situation demands. That requires far more than mere robotic practice of kata. But, many people and schools don't understand that.

I have thought for some time that the manner in which "traditional" karate practitioners do the "lunge" punch is wrong.

Jay Vail
25th December 2007, 12:52
You are saying you're 24FC, or you're saying you do Shotokan?

Shotokan/TKD once. Have moved away from them both.

drosera99
26th December 2007, 04:38
I really don't think that guy understood what kata is supposed to do or what kumite is about. Kata may not help specifically with tournament sparring but kumite and sparring without kata is not a way to learn or really grasp karate.

andy.m
18th January 2008, 22:35
An honest view of Shotokan pre 1990's,prior to the introduction of Bunkai to the style. Remember that the introduction of both long stances and free-sparring/ Ji-Yu Kumite , as this is what he means when talking of sparring are all developments of the mid-20th century. These fundamentally altered the way Karate was and is practised , and the source of these changes ; SHOTOKAN .
N.B. I studied Shotokan from 1973 to '76 with Billy Higgins and left to do J.K.D. and kickboxing because I thought the same and abandoned Kata.
1979 I came to realize that sparring was as flawed as any other training method . I then ended up doing Goju Ryu with Tony Christian. Still with him to this day as a 5th dan student, so I have an interesting prospective on this , and also some information form Shotokan Master M. HARADA , when I've more time- Andy Moorhouse.

Dick Mineo
22nd January 2008, 00:59
An honest view of Shotokan pre 1990's,prior to the introduction of Bunkai to the style. Remember that the introduction of both long stances and free-sparring/ Ji-Yu Kumite , as this is what he means when talking of sparring are all developments of the mid-20th century. These fundamentally altered the way Karate was and is practised , and the source of these changes ; SHOTOKAN .
N.B. I studied Shotokan from 1973 to '76 with Billy Higgins and left to do J.K.D. and kickboxing because I thought the same and abandoned Kata.
1979 I came to realize that sparring was as flawed as any other training method . I then ended up doing Goju Ryu with Tony Christian. Still with him to this day as a 5th dan student, so I have an interesting prospective on this , and also some information form Shotokan Master M. HARADA , when I've more time- Andy Moorhouse.

Seems to me that you have a well rounded background of experience.
Do you think you would have understood Goju's advantage over Shotokan's if you had not taken some Shotokan lessons ?

My experience of 32+ years now started a bit like yours. That is - I did Goju for 6 years before trying Shotokan for 3 years. The Shotokan classes were very useful to me for seeing the differences in styles and this helped my Goju in the long run. Shotokan kata was harder for me. Their emphasis on balance and long wide stacnes was quite difficult but when it came to sparring I had no problem, even with the highest rank students. When starting everything they did from that wide stacne, Goju's training for closer distance was a great advantage.
Funny thing though. After Shotokan I did 4 years of Ki Aikido. One would not think that there would be a benefit to Goju with practice in Aikido but actually it was one of the best additions I found.

I am curious about your prospective and info from Master Harada.

andy.m
22nd January 2008, 20:00
In the late 1990's I took the opportunity to train with Master Harada , a truly great,master teacher of Karate-do. Over the weekend I was with him he told me the following tale as to how Shotokan developed and expanded it's syllabus of Kata either side of w.w.2. ; During the summer break from university, he set off for Okinawa by ferry with a letter of introduction to an old teacher on the island. It took almost a week to get there . He then spent a month learning the Kata that he'd been sent to collect. He then returned to the the J.K.A. , again another weeks travel . The next few weeks were spent demonstrating , teaching and "changing the Kata to conform". (This term sticks in my memory .) With all this to be done before he went back to university. Most importantly though, due to the demands of precision in learning the Kata , in such a limited time, it was impossible to learn any Bunkai. Thus post war Shotokan DID NOT practise or study Bunkai . Something Harada readily admitted.
This may or may not sound new to you and I don't know what things are like in the States, but over here in G.B. it's important. Here, Shotokan would have you believe that they have ALWAYS practised and studied Bunkai. For various reasons I feel it's important to counter this.
-Andy

Dick Mineo
24th January 2008, 05:09
AndyM.
Very interesting stroy and it is true that in the few years I was in Shotokan classes, we did no kata bunkai.
This must be why there was such emphasis on balance and wide stances to develope leg strength and hard kicks. There was much emphasis on different kicks within the kata - heel thrust kicks, ball of foot snap kicks, multiple kicks to all directions while on one foot, etc...
Thanks for that story.